Ace of Hearts: Asexuality

Kayson Carlin

Bowling Green State University

August 5, 2017

 

Abstract

Asexuality is analyzed through a scientific and social lens to determine why it is so little known. Possible solutions are proposed to incorporate the asexual community into mainstream society with increased media visibility and education. The conclusion formed from various academic literature on asexuality, indicates a strong need for more attention from the general public.

Keywords: asexuality, sex, LGBT+, engagement

Ace of Hearts

In 2011, a coincidental Google search for funny YouTube videos resulted in one teenager’s self-discovery. For years, they felt somehow different from their peers, whose lives revolved around hook ups and break ups. Weren’t there more important things to worry about, like college admissions, refugees in the Middle East, or even alien life within our very own solar system? This teen felt like they were broken, physically, mentally, or both. They agonized over this, until the day they came across a term by pure chance; asexuality. It described someone who does not experience sexual attraction. There was even a community of these people whose experiences echoed the teen’s. Finally, they realized they weren’t broken, just different. And they were not alone. Only recently have sexologists begun to explore asexuality as an orientation. Had there been wider acknowledgement of such an orientation, perhaps the teen’s confusion could have been minimized. Unlike heterosexuality, which has major visibility, other orientations such as bisexuality, pansexuality, and especially asexuality, is scarcely known both to those who experience it, and those in the “outside”, sexual world. To have a more well-rounded and educated society, asexuality deserves the same attention from the public as other orientations.

 

The phenomenon of asexuality has been underreported for centuries. By default, a person is assumed to be heterosexual, believed to be “the norm”. Unless someone, like a historical figure, explicitly shows or states attraction to the same sex, they are often labeled by that default. This assumption however ignores other sexualities because they do not fit neatly into a binary of hetero/homo. With so little recognition, it’s no wonder why a majority of the public is unaware of the existence of asexuals. What’s more, it’s estimated only a small portion of the world’s population is asexual, much less than homosexuals, bisexuals, or pansexuals. As a result, asexuality does not garner attention from the general public because many believe it does not exist.

In 2004, psychologist Anthony Bogaert estimated that approximately 1% of the world’s population was asexual (Van Houdenhove, Gijs, T’Sjoen, & Enzlin, 2014 p.175). Compared to other sexual orientations, this is a minute number. But just because the prevelence is small, doesn’t mean that it is any less valid. While every other sexuality focuses on a certain type of sexual attraction as it’s main point, asexuality focuses on the lack thereof. For many sexual people, this is considered odd because sex is seen as an intristic part of life for all creatures. It’s believed that all animals have this innate urge to mate, including humans, as a way to keep the species alive. Some claim this is a basic desire dating back to our earliest ancestors. How could a human lack this primal instinct? As mentioned earlier, the occurance of asexuality is poorly recorded in history, which includes asexuality in animals. Until relatively recently, it was long thought that nearly all animals, especially mammals, were exclusively heterosexual. In a controlled experiment in 1997, researchers observed the sexual behavior of rams. “Most of the rams exhibit behaviors that evince heterosexual attraction. However, a significant minority of rams exhibit behaviors evincing marked attraction to the same sex (i.e., other rams) or both sexes (rams and ewes). There is also a significant minority of rams showing no interest or attraction for either rams or ewes” (Bogaert, 2015 p.363). This suggests that a small percentage indicate asexuality. Bogaert suggested “rams may provide an important animal model of human sexuality” (Bogaert, 2015 p.363). It can be concluded from such studies that asexuality has always existed in animals and humans, but is only now being discovered.

Another common misconception which leads to the invalidation of asexuality, is the idea that there must be something biologically wrong. Again, sex is considered a staple of life on earth and logically to not be interested signifies a possible medical problem. In fact, there is a term to describe such a medical abnormality; Hypoactive Sexual Desire Disorder, or HSDD. To test this theory, two Canadian researchers Brotto and Yule, conducted an experiment with women who self-identify as heterosexual and women who self-identify as asexual. Through genital sexual response testing the results showed that both groups of women had similar physical responses, however the asexual group reported no increased desire for sex (Brotto & Yule, 2015 p.621). This demonstrates that the body of an asexual, or at least the genitals, react appropriately to stimulation just as heterosexuals, potentially ruling out HSDD. Furthermore, “the distinction between asexuality and disorders of low sexual desire (as outlined in the DSM-5) hinges on clinically significant personal distress arising from the lack of sexual desire” (Cranny, 2017 p.638). For example, if you have a freckle or mole on your face, it’s only a problem if you feel self-conscious about it, or it’s interfering with daily life. Asexuals reported little to no distress in their daily lives over the lack of sex or attraction.

By making this information of the concept of asexuality available to the general public, the awareness of asexuals will increase, bringing attention to the community. And with proper scientific data of it’s validity, asexuality will have a place at the discussion table.

One proposed solution to this lack of visibility is more informative sexual education. In schools, some states only require a basic overview of heteronormative safe sex practices, while other teach complete abstinence to their students. To contribute to our changing society, education needs to address non-heteronormative sexual issues. This normally includes homosexuality, and sometimes bisexuality/pansexuality. It is through these classes that some youth discover who they are. But excluding the topic of asexuality can leave a gaping hole for some individuals who are not aware there is life without sex. This happens in not just sexual education settings in school, but in everyday life such as doctor’s offices, clinics, and counseling centers. By bringing asexuality into the limelight, it helps those who do not experience sexual attraction find themselves, and those in the sexual world to broaden their understanding of fellow humans.

Another solution proposed is the increase of positive asexual representation in media. It seems a staple of any television show, movie, or book nowadays is a romantic, sexual relationship. It pops up in romance novels such as Twilight (Meyer, 2005), and even super hero movies, like Deadpool (Miller, 2016). There has been an increase in non-heterosexual visibility in the most recent decade, however asexuals are widely underrepresented. In the comedy sitcom, The Big Bang Theory (Cendrowski, 2007), the character Sheldon displays explicit asexual characteristics. Yet his behavior is coined as neurotic and comical. “Apparent from such popular culture excerpts, however, is how mockery and humor are being used in ways that can derogate asexuals or those suspected of being asexual” (MacInnis & Hodson, 2012 p.725). As a result, those who come across asexual representation in this light, also view asexuals as neurotic. It becomes a dismissive topic. There is an advantage to media to paint asexuality in a positive light which will influence those who consume said media. As it becomes more prominent to have complex asexual characters, it will no longer be considered “crazy” or “weird” and will instead normalize the way people view actual asexuals.

General understanding reduces the alienation of asexuals in society. It may be difficult to plainly see, but those in the asexual community are indeed faced with prejudice . In a 2011 survey, participants were told to assign and rate positive and negative traits to certain sexual groups. Among those groups were heterosexuals, homosexuals, bisexuals, and asexuals. It was no surprise that heterosexuality received the most positive feedback. “Within sexual minorities, homosexuals were evaluated most positively, followed by bisexuals, with asexuals being evaluated most negatively of all groups” (MacInnis & Hodson, 2012 p.731). In this study, asexuals were commonly viewed as “inhuman, cold, and less valuable” than their counterparts. This of course is a misconception, because sexual orientation does not determine humanistic traits. But it does speak volumes about what others think of the community. Such negativities hurt the asexual community and makes it more difficult to be accepted. As stated above, education and positive representation can go far in making asexuals feel included, as well as teaching society acceptance and tolerance. People will begin to see that even though they do not experience sexual attraction, asexuals are just as human as everyone else, complete with emotions, dreams, and relationships.

There are many steps to be taken to ensure asexuality becomes viewed as normal in the spectrum of human sexuality. As many in the general public have misconceptions about asexuality, the first step may be to eradicate these notions that there is something wrong with asexuals. When doing research, it’s obvious that scientists, sexologists, and doctors have put a lot of thought into discussing asexuality from a non-biased standpoint. This research however, is not readily available to the average person. This is when accredited individuals in science-based fields need to come forward as one to properly address controversy. Without a public statement or stance by reliable sources, rumors will continue to leak into conversations and influence opinions, leaving asexuals to fend for themselves.

Support and education is also needed for those who identify as asexual. For so long, asexuals felt isolated and broken for simply being different. It’s time to support and encourage them in their lives, instead of ridiculing them. They need reassurance that there is nothing wrong with them and that they are not alone in their feelings. Education in daily life, whether it be a brochure or a poster, can help non-asexuals recognize and address the asexual community. They are going to always be around, they’re not going away. People need to understand this so they can work together to create a more diverse, accepting, and positive society.

Media is a major aspect of the modern world, influencing what we buy to even what we think of other groups of people. Such little asexual representation leaves so much room for stereotypes and falacies. There is a need for more representation in books, movies, and television to introduce people with differences. What people see reflects how they think, and their opinions of others. If all they know is distasteful jokes about asexuals, then those people in turn become a joke to them. By demonstrating the humanity and complexity that asexuals have, instead of misconceptions and character tropes, it spreads awareness that they too, are normal people. Incorporating positive portrayals of asexuality in the media, can go a long way in challanging misconstrued beliefs.

In conclusion, there is a serious lack of attention to people who do not experience sexual attraction. These people exist, and even though they are a minority, they deserve to be treated with respect. Misinformation of asexuality leads to prejiduce and confusion, creating a barrier between the asexual community and the sexual community. The ultimate goal is understanding between people with differences, which in turn will create a better world.

 

 

 

References

Bogaert, A. F. (2015). Asexuality: What it is and why it matters. Journal of Sex Research, 52(4), 362-379. doi:10.1080/00224499.2015.1015713

Brotto, Gorzalka, & Yule. (2017). Human Sexuality: What do we know about a lack of sexual attraction. Sexual Health Rep, 50-56. doi:10.1007/s11930-017-0100-y

Brotto, L. A., & Yule, M. (2015, June). Asexuality: Sexual Orientation, Paraphilia, Sexual Dysfunction, or None of the Above. Archive of Sexual Behaviors, 619-627. doi:10.1007/s10508-016-0802-7

Carrigan, M., Gupta, K., & Morrison, T. G. (2013, December). Asexuality Theme. Psychology & Sexuality, 4(2), 111-120. doi:10.1080/19419899.2013.774160

Cranny, S. (2017). Does Asexuality Meet the Stability Criterion for a Sexual Orientation. Archive of Sexual Behaviors, 46(3), 637-638. doi:doi:10.1007/s10508-016-0887-z

DeLuzio Chasin, C. (2011). Theoretical Issues in the Study of Asexuality. Archive of Sexual Behaviors, 40, 713-723. doi:10.1007/s10508-011-9757-x

Keleman, E. (2007). Asexuality. Encyclopedia of Sex and Gender, 103.

MacInnis, C. C., & Hodson, G. (2012, February 23). Asexuality bias. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 15(6), 725-743. doi:10.1177/1368430212442419

Van Houdenhove, E., Gijs, L., T’Sjoen, G., & Enzlin, P. (2014, May 1). Asexuality: Few Facts, Many Questions. Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy, 40(3), 175-192. doi:10.1080/0092623X.2012.751073

 

Asexuality: Real or Fiction?

Asexuality: Real or Fiction?

Kayson Carlin

Bowling Green State University

 

 

Abstract

A look into asexuality through eight different articles, debating the validity of asexuality as a sexual orientation. Alternate theories and explanations are provided to argue against the legitimacy of asexuals, along with documented support in favor.

Keywords: asexuality, LGBT, orientation, sex, inquiry

 

 

Asexuality: Real or Fiction?

In the study of human sexuality, a new term has been presented to describe someone who lacks sexual attraction: asexual. Unlike other sexual orientation, the main component of asexuality is the lack of desire and/or sexual attraction to others. As discussed in previous papers, there is currently a debate regarding asexuality as a valid orientation or whether it is the result of some disorder. From this debate comes research that both supports and argues against asexuality as real.

For those who identify as asexual, the experience is very real. They do not feel sexual attraction or desire, which is greatly different from those who are celibate or chaste. “Celibacy and chastity describe acts and choices, whereas asexuality describes desire or, rather, indifference” (Keleman, 2007 p.103). This difference is made distinct in nearly every scholarly article, which is important to remember as it is an observed and documented difference that should not be easily confused.

Asexuality is not limited to humans, as observed by Anthony Bogaert in “Asexuality: What it is and why it matters.” For example, rams were observed displaying non-heterosexual behavior including asexual tendencies (Bogaert, 2015 p.363). Although a minority, the fact is that it still exists which suggests more needs to be studied in regards to this phenomenon occuring in multiple species. The presence of asexual behavior in animals, suggests similarity to human sexuality. However the difficulty of research lies in the definition of asexuality, since the experienced is described in a wide variety of ways by many different people. As stated by scientists in Sex Health Rep, “asexuality is not currently a well-defined construct, at least not from a standpoint of scientific rigor, and definitions vary” (Brotto, Gorzalka, & Yule, 2017 p.51). Due to this fact, asexuals are often met with confusion, uncertainty, and resistence from not just the outside world but within themselves. ‘The emergence of the asexual community, combined with a lack of empirical data on asexuality, has led to much discussion and speculation, both within academic and non-academic communities, on how asexuality should be conceptualized” (Brotto, Gorzalka, & Yule, 2017 p.51). This contributes to the topic of the legitimacy of this as an orientation.

An argument often presented by those who do not consider asexuality as real, is that there is some sort of disorder that “makes” one asexual. These range from mental disorders, to sexual disorders, and hormonal disorders. Observations and studies have included these possibilities and explored them to account for such a phenomenon. One such study observed that those who self-identify as asexual “found small but statistically significant higher rates of depression and self esteem problems among the asexuals compared to the other sexual orientation groups” (Brotto & Yule, 2015 p.620). Furthermore, researchers found “that asexual individuals were more likely to report symptoms of anxiety, and to endorse more symptoms of suicidality compared to sexual participants” (Brotto & Yule, 2015 p.620). These findings suggest that there is a correlation between mental illnesses and sexuality, specifically the lack of sexual attraction. In addition, the continuation of that study revealed that asexuals display more characteristics of autism and aspergers, than any other sexual group (Brotto & Yule, 2015 p.621). Likewise, people with autism or aspergers tend to identify as asexual as opposed to other sexual orientations (Brotto & Yule, 2015 p.621). Using this information, there is a possible correlation between abnormalities in the brain and lack of sexual attraction.

Another related aspect is the possibility of a sexual dysfunction which contributes to someone’s identity as asexual. To explore this, Lori Brotto, a researcher of Obstetrics and Gynaecology at the University of British Columbia, conducted an experiment in which women were exposed to erotic videos and their bodily response was recorded. “Although the asexual

women self-reported no increase in desire for sex after viewing the erotic films, their genital response, as measured with a vaginal photoplethysmograph, did not significantly differ from the other sexual orientation groups” (Brotto & Yule, 2015 p.622). In other words, the physical response of the asexual women did not lead researchers to believe there was a sexual dysfunction that attributed to lack of sexual desire.

Conversely, Steven Cranney argues that while asexuality does occur, the supposed “cause” is unlike other sexual orientations. “The latter orientations [homosexuality/heterosexuality] never arise out of unhealthy conditions, whereas lack of sex drive can be a characteristic that accompanies clearly unhealthy conditions, even if no personal distress is caused by the lack of sexual desire in itself” (Cranney, 2017 p.638). He claims that while asexuality exists, it may not be considered part of a healthy individual.

Asexuality, like other phenomenon, don’t exist soley in a vaccuum. A variety of factors contribute to the overall identity of an individual such as state of mind and past lived experiences. “However, these categories are not mutually exclusive, and even if asexuality were best placed within a sexual orientation classification, this does not exclude the possibility that it can also overlap with the other categories” (Brotto & Yule, 2015 p.625).

 

 

 

References

Bogaert, A. F. (2015). Asexuality: What it is and Why it matters. Journal of Sex Research, 52(4), 362-379. doi:10.1080/00224499.2015.1015713

Brotto, Gorzalka, & Yule. (2017). Human Sexuality: What do we know about a lack of sexual attraction. Sexual Health Rep, 50-56. doi:10.1007/s11930-017-0100-y

Brotto, L. A., & Yule, M. (2015, June). Asexuality: Sexual Orientation, Paraphilia, Sexual Dysfunction, or None of the Above. Archive of Sexual Behaviors, 619-627. doi:10.1007/s10508-016-0802-7

Carrigan, M., Gupta, K., & Morrison, T. G. (2013, December). Asexuality Theme. Psychology & Sexuality, 4(2), 111-120. doi:10.1080/19419899.2013.774160

Cranney, S. (2017). Does Asexuality Meet the Stability Criterion for a Sexual Orientation. Archive of Sexual Behaviors, 46(3), 637-638. doi:doi:10.1007/s10508-016-0887-z

DeLuzio Chasin, C. (2011). Theoretical Issues in the Study of Asexuality. Archive of Sexual Behaviors, 40, 713-723. doi:10.1007/s10508-011-9757-x

MacInnis, C. C., & Hodson, G. (2012, February 23). Asexuality bias. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 15(6), 725-743. doi:10.1177/1368430212442419

Van Houdenhove, E., Gijs, L., T’Sjoen, G., & Enzlin, P. (2014, May 1). Asexuality: Few Facts, Many Questions. Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy, 40(3), 175-192. doi:10.1080/0092623X.2012.751073

 

 

Bogaert, A. F. (2015). Asexuality: What it is and why it matters. Journal of Sex Research, 52(4),  362-379. doi:10.1080/00224499.2015.1015713

Anthony Bogaert, a researcher at Brock University, inquires what the term “asexuality” means in social context, along with examining its validity, and issues that have arisen. Research was collected using the author’s past studies and papers, along with experiments conducted by scientists. Also included are very brief anecdotes from individual’s experience as an asexual. The conclusion was that despite being an underreported sexual minority, asexuality provided insight into the broad spectrum of human sexuality.

This sources uses a solid foundation of ethos, pathos and logos to get its point across, which was focused on earlier. It is most reliant on logos, or logic, to connect certain studies to asexuality. The author establishes a line of reasoning using past scientific observations to make conclusions as well. There is little room for an emotional argument however inclusion of more first-hand experience would help strengthen the article. The information in this source helps provide a foundation for asexuality as a concept, as well as prove its validity using experiments, both of which are needed in my thesis.

Brotto, Gorzalka, & Yule. (2017). Human Sexuality: What do we know about a lack of sexual      attraction. Sexual Health Rep, 50-56. doi:10.1007/s11930-017-0100-y

Three researchers from the University of British Columbia, Brotto, Gorzalka, and Yule, review recent literature on the topic of asexuality in humans. They investigate if asexuality is a possible physiological disorder, drawing upon previously published papers in the fields of gynecology, and psychiatry. It also explores the relation of community and self- identity in development. In conclusion, they stated that asexuality was best described as a normal variant of human sexuality.

This source relies on solid scientific observations in multiple fields such as gynecology and psychiatry to synthesize their ideas. By combining information from different expert perspectives, the conclusions are strengthened. The data also demonstrates differences between biological processes and internal identity, an advantage over papers that rely solely on self-reported experiences. This is relevant in my thesis to help disprove common misconceptions about asexuality in terms of a physiological malfunctions. While this source in similar to others in addressing the science behind sexuality, it goes into more detail via observational data.

Brotto, L. A., & Yule, M. (2015, June). Asexuality: Sexual Orientation, Paraphilia, Sexual           Dysfunction, or None of the Above. Archive of Sexual Behaviors, 619-627.         doi:10.1007/s10508-016-0802-7

Brotto, from the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology at the University of British Columbia, and Yule, from the Department of Psychology, inquire if the phenomenon of asexuality is a mental disorder, sexual dysfunction, paraphilia, community trend, or sexual orientation. Through genital sexual response testing in groups who consider themselves heterosexuals versus those who consider themselves asexual, conclusions were formed based on physiological data that was observed. The results showed that both groups had similar physical responses, however the asexual group reported no increased desire for sex. Asexuals also reported little to no distress in their daily lives over the lack of sex or attraction. It was concluded that asexuality, as a heterogeneous group, can be considered a sexual orientation.

This text addresses the two main issues surrounding asexuality in a scientific and non-biased approach. By using data to present their findings, ideas and statements are strongly supported. Also addressed are two social issues of asexuality, which adds to the well-roundedness of the paper. The findings of their observational studies support asexuality as a sexual orientation, contributing fact to my thesis. Previous sources seem to agree with these results, confirming it as a legitimate orientation.

Carrigan, M., Gupta, K., & Morrison, T. G. (2013, December). Asexuality Theme. Psychology & Sexuality, 4(2), 111-120. doi:10.1080/19419899.2013.774160

This text explores possible themes of asexuality and asexual identifying persons, to determine if this phenomenon is homogenous or heterogenous in nature. Information was collected via online surveys of 174 self-identified asexuals, and interviews of eight asexuals. While some aspects and experiences were reoccurring, there was insufficient data to link asexuality to religion, abuse, or health. The one significant find was that there was an increased correlation between people who reported having little to no sexual attraction and Aspergers.

Personal accounts of experiences concerning sexuality are useful but the authors rely a bit too much on this. Unlike previous sources, this one does not contribute its own experiments or observational data, making it a weakness. First-hand accounts do contribute though to my thesis in a social aspect, if not strictly scientific.

Cranny, S. (2017). Does Asexuality Meet the Stability Criterion for a Sexual Orientation. Archive of Sexual Behaviors, 46(3), 637-638. doi:10.1007/s10508-016-0887-z

Steven Cranney, a professor in the Department of Sociology at Baylor University discusses criteria that categorizes certain sexual attractions and behavior as an orientation. Asexuality is compared and contrasted against a “stability criteria” of verified sexual orientations in order to judge its legitimacy. Cranney concludes that some facets of asexuality or lack of sexual attraction do meet general criteria, however individual circumstances must be considered before making a definitive statement.

This text is only two pages which is extremely short compared to other previous sources. This can be considered both good and bad. The brevity makes it easier to read and digest but it’s also possible that there could be potential content missing that may have added to some ideas. Cranney provides counter-arguments to asexuality claims, pointing out potential fallacies which in turn help my thesis by addressing those issues. It is different in the tone of the text compared to other sources, as it almost seems like the author is against asexuality being considered a valid sexual orientation.

DeLuzio Chasin, C. (2011). Theoretical Issues in the Study of Asexuality. Archive of Sexual        Behaviors, 40, 713-723. doi:10.1007/s10508-011-9757-x

This article, published by CJ DeLuzio Chasin from the Department of Psychology at the University of Winsor, explores potential issues in the study of asexuality such as the inconsistencies reported among the self-identified. It also questions sexuality in relation to romantic attraction and gender. The author looks at a variety of past papers and articles to compile information and point out strengths and weaknesses and the overall consensus of scholars. In the conclusion, it was stated that self-identified asexuals display a spectrum of romantic attraction and gender identities that need to be taken seriously to investigate further. The author ends with a list of potential questions to help solidify future research.

This article does a good job at recognizing the diversity within the asexual community, including ideas of gender and romantic diversity. It acknowledges that while sexuality, romantic attraction, and gender are separate, they can and do often overlap and influence each other. The list of questions is helpful because they provide a step in the right direction moving forward and contributing to future studies. My thesis benefits from the inclusion of romantic/gender diversity and how it plays a part in sexuality or lack there-of. It includes those aspects which my other sources do not put much emphasis on.

MacInnis, C. C., & Hodson, G. (2012, February 23). Asexuality bias. Group Processes and          Intergroup Relations, 15(6), 725-743. doi:10.1177/1368430212442419

MacInnis and Hodson, two researchers from Brock University, question if asexuals experience bias from heterosexuals, akin to homosexuals. The authors look at surveys and observations from two different studies, ruling out confounding variables. In the end, it was discovered that asexuals face similar prejudice as homosexuals, being viewed in a negative light as “inhuman, cold, and less valuable”.

Included in this paper are charts that demonstrate reactions to sexual minority groups, including asexuals, separated by attributes such as gender, religion, and political affiliation. This makes it easier to comprehend data. Also included is an anecdote from a popular television show which helps put bias into perspective for someone who is unfamiliar. The authors take a different view, using a social approach of the “sexual world” looking in, instead of the scientific world looking in like previous articles. This gives my thesis more validity by paralleling other sexual minority experiences to asexual experiences.

Van Houdenhove, E., Gijs, L., T’Sjoen, G., & Enzlin, P. (2014, May 1). Asexuality: Few Facts,    Many Questions. Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy, 40(3), 175-192.        doi:10.1080/0092623X.2012.751073

Three scholars from two Belgium universities discuss the foundations of asexuality such as history, prevalence, and definition. Asexuality is compared to hypoactive sexual desire disorder (HSDD) to examine the possibility that the two are the same. It also explores common characteristics in self-identifying asexuals. The authors then state that asexuality is distinct from a disorder and is a fascinating topic that warrants future research.

This source is similar to some of my other sources in that it covers the basics of asexuality. Unfortunately, it doesn’t have a specific in depth research question. But it does corroborate previous published papers which solidifies the basic findings even more. It can be a little redundant, but overall adds more foundation to my thesis to help prove validity to asexuality.

Critique of Bogaert’s Asexuality

Critique: A Look at Bogaert’s Asexuality Article

Kayson Carlin

Bowling Green State University

 

 

Abstract

This paper examines the impact of Bogaert’s article Asexuality: What It Is and Why It Matters which was published in volume 52, issue 4 of the Journal of Sex Research. The content is analyzed in how it uses rhetoric methods such as ethos, pathos, and logos to supports its statements. The conclusion has found that the article has a solid foundation and succeeds in using previously mentioned rhetoric to reach its audience.

Keywords: asexuality, LGBT, rhetoric, critique

 

 

Critique: A Look at Bogaert’s Asexuality Article

As humans evolve in linguistics, new terms pop up all the time to describe groups of people with shared experiences. Such experiences or phenomenon may have existed for hundreds or thousands of years, but only recently have been given names. One such example is the term “asexual”, meaning non-sexual. Anthony Bogaert, a professor at Brock University in Canada, studies human sexuality and the origins of human orientation. Through a number of academic journals, he addresses the concept of asexuality, or people who do not identify with a sexual orientation. The main purpose of Asexuality: What It Is and Why It Matters is to persuade the audience that asexuality is a legitimate orientation that needs to be studied more depth in order to fully understand human sexuality as a whole. I believe the article accomplishes this by making use of scientific data, reliable academic sources, and a strong prevalence of logos mixed with ethos and pathos.

The word “asexual” is mostly used in biology related fields to refer to an organism that can sexually reproduce with itself. In more modern times, the term has come to refer to people who do not experience sexual attraction. Unlike heterosexuality or homosexuality, they feel no urge to form sexual relationships, and have little to no interest in males, females, or other genders. This does not mean however that they do not experience romantic attraction as some identify as hetero-romantic, homoromantic or biromantic. Still, some identify as “aromantic” in which they do not experience romantic attraction. Currently there is dissonance in whether asexuality is a “real” orientation and should be accepted just like homosexuality or bisexuality, especially in the Lesbian, Gay, Bi, and Trans+ (LGBT+) community. Very little scholarly work has been done on asexuality, but as awareness spreads, researchers are beginning to examine this phenomenon more closely.

The use of logic is abound in this scholarly text. One of the first uses is in reference to an observation of rams’ sexual preferences to explain that this phenomenon is not limited to humans or human society. “Most of the rams exhibit behaviors that evince heterosexual attraction. However, a significant minority of rams exhibit behaviors evincing marked attraction to the same sex (i.e., other rams) or both sexes (rams and ewes). There is also a significant minority of rams showing no interest or attraction for either rams or ewes” (Bogaert, 2015). This conclusion was based on a previous study researchers conducted in 2004. The author then links this behavior to humans by stating “Other atypical orientations—no sexual attraction—in rams may provide an important animal model of human asexuality. Thus, there may be similar brain and other developmental mechanisms giving rise to these atypical sexual attractions in both species” (Bogaert, 2015). By using this source the author establishes a line of reasoning using past scientific observations to make conclusions.

Used less often than logos is pathos; an appeal to the emotions. Given that Bogaert’s article is based on scientific evidence, there is little room for an emotional argument. When discussing the possibility that asexuality is caused by a medical condition that can be corrected, he asks the question “Does it matter what causes it?” by using an example: “if a man is attracted to other men because of an atypical biological process—including a biological process that is atypical for his sexual orientation and that process may be alterable—does this negate the lived experience of his (subjective) attraction to men? In short, he no longer has (or had) same-sex attraction; thus is not, or was not, homosexual? It is argued here—and likely most would agree—that, no, he is still homosexual because his subjective attraction is to men, regardless of the cause of that subjective experience, even if the cause potentially differs from the main processes underlying homosexuality for most individuals, and even if that process might be alterable at some point in time” (Bogaert, 2015). This example contains an emotional tone that suggests audiences should agree with Bogaert’s view that it does not matter what “caused” someone to be asexual to be considered valid, but that simply because it exists or existed at some point in their life that makes it valid.

The author, Anthony Bogaert Ph.D., does not explicitly bring up his credibility on this subject but instead frequently refers to and cites his own past work regarding human sexuality. From looking at his sources, we can see the extent of his research on not just asexuality but sexology as well. By digging deeper we can find qualifications and experience in this field through university achievements, advanced education, and previous journal publications. While not obviously apparent, such milestones contribute to his credibility, or ethos, on this particular subject.

An important facet to note is the context in which this article was published. As our society becomes more progressive and opens itself up to new ideas and ways of thinking, an increasing number of people voice their experiences. What was once thought of as a non-existent orientation now has researchers, scholars, and scientists’ attention. Perhaps 200 years ago, no one would take notice of this phenomenon because there was no term to describe it; the pressure from society to conform, and the limited understanding hid asexuality from even those who experienced it. However, when this article was published in 2015, an incredible amount of change had taken place in the world. The advent of the internet connected people, ideas, and movements to foster learning of those who were similar and those who were different. LGBT+ activism swept the nation, gays and lesbians were granted equal rights to marry, transgender people spoke up loud and clear, and sexual minorities were gaining recognition. These events are important in how audiences receive this article. Had this been published 30 years ago, it may not have had the relevance it has today. In fact, with gender and sexuality being a hot topic in the modern world, this article utilizes the full interest and impact when read by audiences.

In conclusion, Asexuality: What It Is and Why It Matters utilizes rhetorical techniques in all three main aspects; logos, pathos, and ethos. It relies mostly on logos and previous observations to convince readers of its claims, which can greatly support any argument in any article. This gives it a solid foundation. Perhaps an improvement in pathos would be to include experiences, thoughts, and opinions of asexual people themselves. Such rhetoric would be more appropriate however in a pop culture article instead of a scientific journal. The weakest of all three is ethos because there is no immediate or tell-tale way to assume credibility of Bogaert, unless outside research is done. It can be argued that Kairos is used in the timing of this publication to reach the most readers and have the greatest impact to the topic. Overall, Asexuality: What It Is and Why It Matters is well written with an understanding of rhetorical techniques that make good use of the information provided.

 

 

References

Bogaert, A. F. (2015). Asexuality: What it is and Why it matters. Journal of Sex Research, 52(4), 362-379. doi:10.1080/00224499.2015.1015713