WHEREIN pico decides to copypasta and explain some acey thoughts

[pico_the_great]

So. I just took this guy's survey on asexuality, and I'm finding some of my answers interesting. I'll copypasta 'em down here for the curious, and I'll note any commentary at the end.

~:~

THE QUESTION:
17. If you were explaining asexuality to someone, what things do you feel it is most important to distinguish asexuality from? (list up to 10

Comments

[historicula]

I did this also! Though it was some months ago.

From what I actually remember of it, my policy was to write as little and as concisely as possible.

Also, I don't remember my answer to 21, but I know it was very different from yours. Possibly b/c I interpreted the question differently.

[pico_the_great]

Then you did it before the survey came out! Because apparently this was only back in May, not too long ago. I didn't see it when it came out, so now was the time :D

Ugh, you're no fun.

And now I'm curious - how would you interpret it differently? I figure it's sort of common sense, that the brain is still being discovered, and that what people conflate now (sexual and romantic attraction) will not necessarily be conflated in the future.

[historicula]

Huh. Maybe it just feels like it was longer...

I don't remember. Maybe it was my mindset at the time? But I do recall thinking it was a silly questions b/c of course these things aren't fundamentally different.

[knittingdemon]

I think the spectrum of sexuality as a whole is underplayed, so it makes sense that it's something that can be difficult for people to get. Categories are very good for initial identification; however, categories are bad for understanding the individual. So just as someone can be asexual and grapple with a sex drive, someone can be 'mostly' straight, but have a passing interest in same sex individuals. I see many good reasons for group identification (say lobbying for same-sex marriage) but I do think we loose some of the subtleties that way.