I would imagine those people are conflating “asexuality” with “person who is not asexual but experiencing a lack of libido from something like an ssri”. These are distinct, obviously, and the latter can be treated. It is also generally easy to identify
But just like so many things stupid assholes will go “I cannot conceive of a life without ‘x’ so when you say you have a life without ‘x’ I will assume you are either lying or mistaken somehow”.
I would imagine those people are conflating “asexuality” with “person who is not asexual but experiencing a lack of libido
It’s correct that these are different things that are usually conflated, but the way society treats a lack of libido is rooted in the same norms that asexuals suffer under: the idea that people must have sex to be complete, live fulfilling lives and have healthy relationships.
That’s not to say people who genuinely suffer from a low libido shouldn’t find ways to fix that, but that doesn’t hold true for anybody who has a low libido and the automatic assumption that this has to be a problem worth fixing is absolutely part of why being ace is so widely stigmatized.
In the study they even asked participants what being ace means and 99% got it right. But yes, unfortunately they missed the low libido distinction.
Although the questions “Legislation should protect asexual people” and “Would you be comfortable if your child was asexual?” with 29% and 27% saying “No” make it pretty clear in my eyes that they’re just bigoted.
I would imagine those people are conflating “asexuality” with “person who is not asexual but experiencing a lack of libido from something like an ssri”. These are distinct, obviously, and the latter can be treated. It is also generally easy to identify
But just like so many things stupid assholes will go “I cannot conceive of a life without ‘x’ so when you say you have a life without ‘x’ I will assume you are either lying or mistaken somehow”.
It’s correct that these are different things that are usually conflated, but the way society treats a lack of libido is rooted in the same norms that asexuals suffer under: the idea that people must have sex to be complete, live fulfilling lives and have healthy relationships.
That’s not to say people who genuinely suffer from a low libido shouldn’t find ways to fix that, but that doesn’t hold true for anybody who has a low libido and the automatic assumption that this has to be a problem worth fixing is absolutely part of why being ace is so widely stigmatized.
There’s a book that calls this “compulsory sexuality”
I usually see the term allonormativity used to describe this, but that fits as well.
Yeah, but I think “compulsory sexuality” has a particular way of emphasizing that asexual people aren’t the only ones being pushed in this way
In the study they even asked participants what being ace means and 99% got it right. But yes, unfortunately they missed the low libido distinction.
Although the questions “Legislation should protect asexual people” and “Would you be comfortable if your child was asexual?” with 29% and 27% saying “No” make it pretty clear in my eyes that they’re just bigoted.
https://www.kcl.ac.uk/policy-institute/assets/asexuality-in-the-uk.pdf
It’s enough to be a “picky eater” for a lot of people to start second guessing your preferences and mental health.
Cum brains are cooked.