Haven for the Human Amoeba

Ok, I've done ALOT of thinking about the big questions that have been floating around this forum. Namely, how do romance, sex, love and asexuality all fit together?

Where to start. For the purposes of discussion, lets say that love exists in just about all relationships. Love is any degree of enjoying someone's company, being grateful for what they've done for you, and generally considering them a swell chap. So it is merely a matter of degree between a new aquantance and a 50 year monogomous intimate relationship.Love is gratitude for past emotional fulfilment. This is, of course, open to debate, but moving on..

Sex: My personal theory is that sex accelerated relationships, which is to say that sexual relationships develope faster, and less stably, than platonic or nonsexual relationships (see <a href=http://djay.web.wesleyan.edu/Theory/affects.htm target=new>http://djay.web.wesleyan.edu/Theory/affects.htm</a> ,since I don't know if this forum supports tags).

So are romantic relationships just sexually sped-up friendship? Yes, sorta, but not all the time. The distinction that I like to draw here is between what I've dubbed Passive and Active relationships. Bear with me here. This is where love fits in.

An active relationship is basically your standard romantic relationship, sexual or otherwise. This is a relationship in which it is important that love be expressed. Example: Two people are dating, they say that they love each other, they say that they are "in love." The idea that they love each other and that they are in love is extremely important to their relationship, they spend alot of time thinking about it, basking in it, and fighting over it, in fact that seems to be what alot of their relationship is based on.

A passive relationship, by contrast, is many platonic friendships, a relationship in which the expression of love is NOT important. Example: Two people are friends. They enjoy hanging out together and messing around, and trust each other deeply. If you asked one of them if they loved the other they'd say yes, but its not the sort of thing that they generally think about alot. When they hang out they tend to be focused on what they're doing together, not how they feel about each other.

Grr.. says my message is two long so I'll have to split it. More in the next post...

Continued...

I hope the distinction is clear, here's how the two weave together:

An active relationship forms when two people want to have a relationship together. They agree that they are going to pursue a relationship, and each of them forms an ideallized version of the relationship-to-be in their heads. This ideallization brings in alot of hopes/dreams/fears that you don't get in a passive relationship, so active relationships tend to build alot faster and be alot more emotionally intense. As both people rush to build a relationship to fit their dreams, they need constant reassurance that things are going according to plan (that they love each other) or that they've arrived (that they're "in love.")This requires constant expression of love, which is why sex and sexuality fit so well into active relationships. Often the relationship that gets built looks enough like both party's expectations that everyone winds up living happilly ever after. However, in many cases the reality in one way or another doesn't live up to the dream, and once the dream is cast aside the relationship goes with it. Active relationships tend to be an all-or-nothing deal, people are either "together" or "broken-up", and when things fall apart the fallout from all those expectations gets extremely emotionally heated.

By constrast passive relationships are extremely calm. In a passive relationship people who just happen to be hanging out together realize that they like to hang out together, and decide to do so on a regular basis. They don't really expect anything of the relationship, but as they talk more and get to know one another better they eventually begin to trust one another. They can become extremely close, but the existance of that closeness isn't focused on the way it is in an active relationship. If it is necessary for them to become less close or to spend less time together then they let it happen with little emotional fuss, the relationship remains flexible and isn't "called off" on the account of one or two aspects not working. Because the closeness in this relationship is not expressed it is often more difficult to pick up on, but (I believe) it is possible to become just as close, and just as emotionally fulfilled in this type of relationship as in an active relationship. While it takes longer and while it might not be as intense, it has its plus-sides.

Also, its not like there are just two types of relationships, all relationships have both passive and active elements to them, but I think its a useful distinction to make.

Hopefully its fairly apparent to everyone how sexuality and active relationships go hand in hand. Sexual attraction does wonders for setting up the expecations necessary for active relationships, and sexual expression of love/sex endorphines do wonders for keeping them there. That being said, there are plenty of active nonsexual relationships, and some passive sexual ones (though there are scores more that have tried and failed.)

So that's my volume response to the definitions of romance love and sex. It should be easy to see where asexuality (passively) slides in there hope this is useful to people.

--D "Why get it when you can kick it?" J

Okay everyone get your undies out of a wad. It was just a joke not meant to redicule anyone in particular but just to make light of the silly stuff sex drives ppl too. Now I do have to admit that many women do think men just want sex from them and NO it is not fair. Luckily I have tried to have an open mind and I don't think every guy that says hello just wants in my knickers. You also have to look at the flip side and realize that men can be the same way. If we say hi to a man or even look at a man a lot of times they do the same thing and assume that we are just sluts and that we want to hop in the sack. It's a universal theme in this sexual world though men do get more flack but I think only because men are the traditional initiators. So there is my view on what as usual was meant to be a joke but then turned into a debate (atleast it sparked some posts :))

Foxfrye (sp) I am sorry to hear that you feel that way but freely admit that I went through a similar stage where I found men to be suspect and worthless. However there are some good men out there that aren't worthless. It just seems like it because as women we are constatnly bombarded by men pressuring us for sex and/or dumping us at the drop of a hat when they have had their fun. Honestly though, while I haven't had a close friendship with men as of yet, there are some bright possibilities of such right now. I hate to see you cut a whole sect of the population out. You have to choose your men fiends carefully like you do your women friends. Both can be treatourious (okay bad spelling but u get the point) but it only seems worse with men cuz sex is involved. You just have to send the crummy ones on their way.

--GirlTech

Ok, my last post of the day, I promise...

Us and what marketing bracket? Right now we don't have enough of a collective community, with enough agreed upon about asexuality to warrent a book. I think, for the time being, the internet is a good place of residence. I know I have ALOT of stories and essays, short and otherwise, that I could write for both sexual and asexual people (witness my posts so far.) But it poses the interesting question: What do we want to say to other asexual people? Do we want to find them? If so how? What do we want to say to sexual people?

And last but not least, my little asexual humor piece...

When We Rule the World

1. The word "fucker" will finally be a logical insult.

2. Boats, swords, and guns will remain appropriately sized.

3. Soap operas will focus on particularely dramatic global hotspots.

4. Hollywood will be stocked with the people who *gasp* have the best acting ability.

5. All highschool students will complete discrete integral calculus by their sophomore year.

6. The fat girl will ALWAYS win (go SHREK !!)

7. California will fall into the ocean.

8. The Pope won't know what hit him

9. Minnesota won't nowtice

Got to go, NPR to listen to...

-DJ

fox, what made you think that all I wanted was sex?? It's that kind of discrimination that I face day-in/out.....

THAT is why I want to outlaw sex.... I'm just so fed up with it ALWAYS being held against me like I had a choice in being a guy...

AND FYI: I HATE "The Man Show"!!!!!!!!!

Hehe I liked your asexual humor. The book question was just to generate converstation (I tend to post things to do that from time to time :-P). Though I honestly wanted to know what others in the club had to say on the subject. I really thought that your passive and active relationships idea really made sense. I think that helps to break things down a bit. I look forward to hearing more of your ideas since many of the club members seem to be shy about posting.

BTW I wanted to say that I have had the opportunity to chat with many of the members in live chat and hope to soon "meet" the ones that I haven't gotten to speak with yet.

--GirlTech

Greetings, one and all. My Name is PlatonicPimp, and I come to this site by way of BloodyRedCommie. I am a 19 year old Strait Male, currently inolved in a romantic and Sexual relationship. As such I grudgingly represent teh societal Norm. My best friend Is Asexual,(you all know and love him...). So I could be considered an "Ally" if you wish to parallel the Gay Movement.

I have been present for much of The developementof BRC's "Relationship Theory, and I have to say, He's converted me. I try to operate using his method of thought, and it works even for those of us with pesky sex drives. I have found my relationships more fufilling, less problematic and more prolific than before. I do possess a sex drive. It rears it's head quite often, but It ALWAYS takes a back seat to getting to know the person, and all the other aspects to a relationship.

So, do you (anyone) think Asexual thinking is applicable even when Sexuality is involved?

Thanks BRC for pointing out this site. I can't wait to hit the webring. Get AVEN upgraded soon.

I was sitting on the cement, with my back against a nice wall whilst enjoying a cheaply produced bean burrito when I got to thinking: I wonder if there is some place on the net for asexuals. There's got to be!

So I trundled back to the office, and here I am.

For years I have been this lonely anomoly that I suppose you all are well familiar with. I'm actually different than most in that I was at one point very sexually attuned. The only problem is, this happened when I was about seven years old.

Years later, I'm not really sure when I realized that I had no interest, I'd have to say I first realized it after my first aborted relationship in highschool. Though at the time, it was a dim realization. Something I didn't dare even utter to myself in thoughts. I had concerns, doubts, but they swam beneath my consciousness.

By the time I was 22, I realized that I had already passed that little phase that everybody referred to as "those hormone crazy teenagers." It didn't make sense to me, I never understood what they were talking about -- and it was a little depressing to think that any excessively weak urges I had felt during that timeperiod were as strong as they would ever be.

It -really- was depressing too. I kept on getting older, the little envelopes wrapped in filmy paper with "Glad Greetings" of marriages. All of my old friends and new friends alike were finding this new world with somebody -- and there I was, alone.

At this point, I've had four girlfriends. One lasted a week, I didn't even kiss her and that foiled her plan I guess. The second lasted two weeks, I frustrated her. The third lasted six months. We only kissed occasionally, and eventually she just ended it, saying I was the most intelligent and caring guy she knew, but that I might as well just be a friend with her. That was the aformentioned point of dim realization.

After that relationship I swore that I would never let it happen again. I couldn't hurt people anymore by not being able to give something they felt was important. I managed to accomplish that to, for about four years.

Of course, I was weak, and it happened one last time.

*sigh* the last was the hardest. That relationship toiled on for a year while I fought myself, trying to get over the repulsion -- trying to find an interest for her sake. I tried to tell her how much I loved her, and how much I cared about her -- I just showed it in different ways than other men. Well she loved me too, and that is why it went on so long I suppose, but eventually we realized that you just can't bring two seperate universes together, no matter how much you'd like it to happen. She could only take so many nights of me rolling over to my side of the bed. I could only take so many nights of having to engage in an activity that made me sick with myself and my life -- showering for hours on end trying to rinse all of the problems and the tears away.

Our relationship ended about a year ago, and I finally finished realizing just what I was, or wasn't. In the past year, things have become so much better. I've finally actualized the extent of the issue, and instead of trying to fight it like I have my whole life, now I'm learning to live it and to even love it.

I enjoy the freedom it gives me. I listen to people around me talking, and 80% of what they say has to do with sex in some indirect or even sometimes direct way. It fills their life. Everywhere you look it saturates society, from marketing to entertainment. When I started seeing all of this, I realized why so many of the other things about my "eccentricity" existed. Why I never really gave a hoot about pop culture, celebrities. Why I always avoided marketing tactics and went for the underrated brands. So many little details just started appearing everywhere.

There are two distinct "eras" in my life that I can fully say I was HAPPY in them, and both of those times were when I was a solitary man. A few casual friends, maybe, most often not. For most people it would be the opposite, being such a loner would depress them deeply, but for me it gives me strength and energy beyond anything else.

I do still get that desire though, from time to time. Not for any of the animal pleasures, but for the companionship. Having somebody who trusts you, and will always trust you. You feeling the same towards them.

In the past year this imaginary relationship has become more clearly defined, and I am convinced that the only way it could exist is with another person like me. I have no huge urges though, not really anymore. I've settled that score with the past when I realized that it was just me trying to desperately be "normal" to a world that seemingly could not -fathom- a man with no sex drive.

Right now, I'm happy again. Yes, the second era for me is right now and really that is all I feel any of us humans should ever ask for.

I've read this board, and I've seen some interesting views. I suppose I should state my philosophies. I don't hate anybody, for any reason whatsoever. I don't hate women, I don't hate men. The only thing that I do hate is when people place me in a category simply because of my gender. I still don't hate -them- just the action.

I'm always the guy that is sitting around with a group of women who are talking on and on about men. They don't really notice that I am there, I think they sense it on an intuitive level. I'm a non-factor in their discussion. Of course this always ends eventually with big eruptions of: "OH! I didn't know you were listening, I wasn't talking about you, just other guys."

Then I feel a bit better, even though I know they are just saying it because I'm present.

I've also had people ask me if I'm homosexual, that is usually the first question that pops into anyone's head when they think of a guy who doesn't fall down drooling over a poster with a woman on it.

I can say, with more certainty than most men, that I am not homosexual. Why? I've tried it, and it disgusted me just as much as it did with women.

Thirdly, I'm not "anti-sex" or "celibate." I've seen that issue bandied around here as well. I pretty much agree with what has already been stated. There is a very -huge- difference between voluntary celibacy, a culture-fad statement, and true asexuality: The complete inability to find attraction in either sex at the most basal levels.

I'm pro-sex. If that is what keeps all of them happy, then MORE POWER TO THEM. They seem to enjoy their life, even though they ceaselessly gripe about it.

Anyway, I'm Glad that I found this place. I've managed to find one other person in the world who is like me, and she is seriously one of the coolest people I've ever met. I knew there had to be more of us -- lurking in the cultural shadows somewhere.

That pretty much sums up my philosophies. Thank you for listening. (I'm not proof reading this, because I do not wish to. I really am a clever writer, I swear it! :)

Sorry about the fragmented nature of this. I wrote it all in a text editor (I don't trust web browsers to not crash!) and then when I pasted it all in, Yahoo said that I was being too wordy. So, its in four parts now.

Thank you.

Not all of us are here because we're like you.... I for one am here to find out how they don't let their sexuality control them...

(which I consider an "outlawed" idea, since it's a true sign of being weak... and you KNOW what Darwin says about the weak).

Let me be the first (are others already typing posts?) to give you a warm welcome, iopaetraka, and to thank you for sharing your story. I know that alot of it resonates with my personal experience (though I'm still a college freshman, so I haven't been able to have as much of it,) not understanding the sexual insantity of highschool, seeing the subtle and not-so-subtle saturization of culture by sexuality, the difficulty around relationships and the ideas about what sort of a one I'm looking for (see my lengthly passive v. active schpeal or my site for the bitter theoretical aftermath.) I am extremely heartened, also, by the fact that you simply walked into your office and found this site. I looked for a year and a half before I found anything other than plant studies and old term papers on bacteria (I'm not the only one, why do you think there are all the amoeba references?), and another 6 months before I found any sort of an active online asexual community. I have more to write, but must leave the computer, so for now welcome and if you want to talk about asexuality or life in general my E-mail is always opened.

-BRC

AVEN Webmaster

<a href=http://djay.web.wesleyan.edu target=new>http://djay.web.wesleyan.edu</a>

Greetings all. Hope everyone is having a 'julie andrews singing on the mountain top wonderful' kind of day. Well, my brain just locked up so I guess I'll get on with the post.

PIMP: Welcome. I am glad you decided to join. I think it is great that you are a supporter. I look forward to hearing your views. I personallly don't feel that just because you are sexual you can't practice 'asexual thinking' as you put it. I don't think that sexuals just want to hump with out getting to know ppl. It just seems (to me anyway) that sex drive gets in the way of that most of the time and before you know it you are just each others' sex toy. I think it is great that you are trying though and I wish you the best of luck at it.

IOA: Yay I get to give two welcomes in one day! Ahem...anywho. I can totally relate to your relationship stories. It is hard to care about a sexual person but have to break it off because you can't fulfill their needs. I think that this is why several asexuals avoid relationships with sexual people. There is always that chance of getting emotionally involved and there is no way that we can fulfill their needs and vise versa. It is just less complicated to stick with homosexuals of the opposite sex (though through this forum, I have started easily conversing with straight, asexual men). I unfortuneatly am also finding myself getting attached to a sexual man at the moment :-( I am glad you stumbled upon this forum and I hope you find a friendly community in which you can share your thoughts (this goes for all new members).

EIJI: I just wanted to let you know that there are actullly websites out there for 'forced celibates' if you want to have a look. I would post the URLs but I can't seem to locate them. I found them searching for celibacy sites for the webring and I didn't look at them, but maybe you can find some useful info. As for trying to learn "how we do it", I don't know if that is possibe. To be asexual is to NOT have a sex drive, so it is not like we have had a sex drive in the past but found a masterful way of excorcising it out of us like some demon. At least for me, it wasn't there to begin with. I am not fighting any drive to have sex and I think that the same can be said of anyone who is an asexual (after all, isn't that what being asexual is?).

Well I guess that is all I have to say in the way of replies.

--GirlTech

Hello again,

I was just wondering if anyone here knows japanese? How does this relate to asexualism, you ask? Well, monte and I have found a symbol that we like for the webring and have also found a pic that we like but it is under copyright. The copyright holder is Japanese so I was wondering if anyone knows it and would be willing to tranlate a short e-mail to the copyright holder (the actual pic is on monte's profile if you want to see and view previous posts for the webring URL...a full description of the blue rose and why we like it is posted on the ring's home page)? If not, can anyone in here draw a decent looking rose? In fact it may be better to just have a new rose commisioned because I am also wanting to start the "asexual support and awareness" campaign and I think it would be less messy copyright-wise. If not I know of some artist that I can try to commision it from but I was wanting it to come from the club if possible.

Also I wanted to post a reminder and let the new members know that we do hold live chats in the chat room. We can usually russel up 3-4 members for a chat(these numbers will hopefully grow with the new members of the club and when drksparkle gets back). If you stop in and feel like a chat but don't see any members in the room, you can usually find me and monte on Yahoo messenger and we invite other members to join in. It has worked out pretty well this way since having scheduled chats seems next to impossible. Also feel free to add me to your friends list or e-mail me if you want to chat. As you'll notice from the posts, I always have something to say ;-)

Well guess I'm gonna be off now. Need to do some major updates to my site.

--GirlTech

I'm all for the idea of an asexual support an awareness campaign, that's alot of what I'm trying to do with AVEN. What kind of ideas do you have for implimentation?

Also (note, this is at least 40% fueled by me liking my symbol better 'cuz its mine) I still don't like the blue rose just because the rose, and flowers in general, are such a sexual symbol. Besides being the actual sex organs of a plant "rose" has meant "romantic love" and "vagina" (though not necissarily in that order), since people first figured out a way past the thorns. I appreciate the Wildeian paralell of the green carnation, but I still associate flowers with alot of the sexual pomp and circumstance that it seems like we're trying to get away from. Just throwing some stuff out there for discussion, I'm curious what other people think.

-BRC

Yay, finally some feedback on this topic (we have only been trying to get a symbol forever now)! BRC, I think that your symbol is a fine, well-thought-out piece of work. My hang-up with it is that the triangle is a sign for gays already. It is not that I mind being associated with gays, but (a). they already have recognition and exposure and (b). many sexuals already believe that asexuals are just repressed homosexuals so I figure a triangle as a symbol would do more harm than good for our cause. Perhaps this is just me. I would love to hear other members' opinions on this. Also, does anyone have an idea of something ELSE that they would like to submit as an asexual symbol? Maybe we could find something that we all agree on or have a vote of all submited symbols to decide on the one we choose. Just an idea.

BTW, as many of you know, if we are trying to organize a chat and you are on messenger, we will IM you with an invite. It is not our intent to pester people so if you do not wish to be IMed when there is a chat going on, please post it so that we will know not to bother you. With the new members of the club I find that a large chat session is more plausable (more now than ever) and I hope to see members, both new and old, actively participating in chat.

--GirlTech

You touch on another pertanant issue that needs to be thrown out there: how is asexuality related to the queer rights movement? Is asexuality a sexual orientation, are asexual people queer? For me the answer to both these questions is yes, which is why my symbol is so pink-triangle-esque, but I'm curious what other people think.

(Also, I thought about flipping the triangle-spectrum upside down to avoid the any pink-triangle confusion and to put asexuality pompously "on top", but then it looks WAY too much like the freemason pyramid, and we DEFINITELY don't need "Vast Internation Asexual Conspiracy" idea flying about. At least not until we can set one up.)

BRC

(PlatonicPImp Morphs into an Engineer...)

BRC, Perhaps one could place the triangle Sideways? Just a thought.

As to The Idea of Non-sexual thinking, I should really use the term "Davidian Relationship Theory" Which is in part what BRC talks about in some of his posts. I hope to forge Passive Romantic Relationships. It's hard, mostly because Few other people think about relationships the same way. This has recently resulted in some difficulties with the woman I love. Ah well, Such things shall work themselves out.

And in reference to Teh Idea that Asexuals subvert their sex drive, I have to agree with Girltech that Asexuals are simply lacking them. It is impossible to fully subvert one you posess. You just have to make certain it only suggests, it doesn't command. Some of the advantages to a Platonic Relationship can be created in another type if the people involved make certain that they are more interested in each other than sex. Sexual People reading this, ask this question. If you stopped desiring Sex, How would your relationships change? You'll find it an interesting exercise.

This is a very interesing topic. In fact we have discussed this topic in chat. See, the book called "Boston Marriages" is actually written for 'asexual lesbians' which sparked a discussion this very topic. In my opinion, asexuals are not gay, if we were we would not be asexual.

Bear with me for a moment. It is pretty well agreed on that asexuals expereince no sex drive/sexual attraction therefore we are not sexual attracted to the same or opposite sex. To be gay is to be sexually attracted to the same sex. Therefore how can you be asexual AND gay? I personally am not attracted to men (heterosexual) or women (homosexual), atleast sexually. So for me asexuality isn't an orientation but a *sexuality* itself.

I am actually quite interested in your view though, BRC. One question I have already is why you consider asexuals to be gay and not heterosexual? If you think asexuals are gay (i.e. attracted to the same sex) then what is your definition of asexuality? It obviously isn't "lacking sexual attraction". I am just trying to understand where you are coming from.

I would also like to hear other's views on this (don't be shy, ya'll). Well it is past my bedtime so nite all.

--GirlTech

I believe symbols should be extremely simple for a number of reasons. One, they are easy to remember in the mind, and two they are easy to replicate on multiple forms of media. A blue rose, while striking if done correctly, would be in general, expensive to duplicate on multiple forms of media. I admit I haven't seen the rose in question, but I would have other [symbolic] problems with the symbol too.

Has anyone thought of perhaps just using a simple circle? This idea just popped into my head when I saw the topic line. As you know, the circle is the base for both gender symbols. Many alterations to the ancient roman astrological symbols have been done over the years to denote different sexual orientations. Interlocking two male or female symbols is commen for gay pride. Transgendered individuals have sometimes used both gender symbols tacked on to one circle. Additionally there is an 'official' symbol featuring a third 'limb' on the upper left with an inverted triangle.

How about -- just the circle -- itself? I have never seen anything use that before, and it would be a somewhat clever comeback to the manipulations that have already been done to the symbols.

The basic problem with that would be that it is just a circle, and most people probably wouldn't get it without having it explained to them. So I've come up with a set of ideas based on the principle.

For me, understanding what I am, has caused me to become much more aware of myself, as a -person- and not as a man. I believe the central circle refers to the soul or the person. The colors blue and green are just there for kicks I guess. To me they represent earth, the sky, water, and land encapsulated in the realization of self as Human within the confines of the circle. The disconnected dual gender limbs to provide recognitions, disconnection to promote the neither this nor that ideology in a nonchalant manner, not a proactive manner. That goes for the grayed out disconnected gender limbs in the center example. The only major criticism I would have with the colored one is that it might be color-blind weak. I believe green and blue are two colors that are hard to pull apart for people with color-blindness. Blue and yellow would be a better choice there, as most color-blind folks have no problem discerning yellow and blue.

Link: <a href=http://ioa.netfirms.com/gfx/tmp/asymbol.gif target=new>http://ioa.netfirms.com/gfx/tmp/asymbol.gif</a>

From my experience, I would disagree with you. I no more sexually relate to homosexuals than I do with straight individuals. My brother is homosexual, and I would say the main thing I can really relate to with him on this issue is simply the social aspect of being in a fringe group that is not commonly understood.

He cannot relate to having no attractions anywhere. It is just that his attractions have been "forbidden" in the culture we grew up in [strict Christianity].

So, I would say the only ways any asexual awareness program would be related to the gay rights movement is in the friction between "common" sexuality and "fringe" sexuality. Most of the other issues that they face, do not really adhere to us though. There are no laws prohibiting people from living alone (as opposed to the laws prohibiting homosexual marriage rights.) We can join the military if we please, ect. In general the social stigma that homosexuals have to fight against, does not entirely apply to us.

This is all just from my point of view though, my experience. I have a feeling that there is such a massive minority of people like this, that each life is going to have enough differences to make a common understanding much more difficult. I hope I'm wrong about that one though.

Sorry, let me further explain how I'm using the word "queer."

What started as the gay rights movement has expanded, the lesbians wanted in, then trans folk (since heterosexism and homophobia had a nasty habit of clumping orientation and gender-transing together), then people realized that bisexuality existed, and THEY wanted in, then the questioning folk. So, come the early 90s (I think), it had moved from the gay rights movement to the GLBTQ movment, rapidly expanding. As the idea of spectral sexual orientation and gender took hold, people started getting the idea that the ever-expanding mess of labels was many times only standing in the way, so the word "queer" was re-adopted to sort of encompas the general gyst of what everyone was fighting for. So queer just came to mean "not the sexual/gender norm", and some places prefer the term to LGBTQ, which can be confusing. Also some people, who don't want to worry about whether they are lesbian or bi or lesbian-who-happens-to-be-very-occassionally-attracted-to-men, identify as "queer" and nothing else. In that sense I consider asexuality to fit under the umbrella, sort of. Asexuality qualifies as "not the sexual/gender norm", but we're not as directly targeted by heterosexism. Basically what it boils down to is: how closely is whatever we're trying to do/figure out associated with what the current LGBTQ movement is doing? I've been working with my campus queer group just because it seemed like the closest thing to what I was looking for, but there is alot that doesn't overlap. There's also alot that does.

-BRC

I really liked ioapetrka's idea for the symbol. I was thinking of it myself, of course I didn't analyze it as deeply as he did. Someone was talking about Triangles, so I figured why not a circle? Or how bout we take the triangle aspect, and interlock three circles together? You know sort of like a magician typ deal.

My main purpose for this post was a to deal with a problem I'm having. Most people in this club have expressed the definition of asexual as having no sex drive. I for one have a sex drive, but I don't act on my sexual drives like a normal person I guess. What I mean, is I'm not really attracted to guys or girls, I don't hit on guys or girls, I don't look for romantic relationships, but yet I masterbate, quite often. I figure, what's the point of sex? Masterbating takes minutes, while to get sex, you sometimes have to wait days or even months. Of course there's money you spend just for the sole purpose of sex. Almost everyone here on campus, trys to look good. A lot are dressed as if they're ready to go clubbing. Why? Everyone knows that clubs/bars are places where 'normal' mating/courting rituals (i.e. picking up chicks). So does that make school a place to pick up guys or girls? Obviously it is. Has anyone ever read 'The Fountainhead' by Ayn Rand? Well there's a terrific quote in there that I can't quite remeber, but it goes something like 'Toohey was never interested in sex. He just supposed there were more important things in life than sex.'

That's my view on asexualism. Its not about having a sex drive or not, that would be called impotentcy. Its about the desire to NOT have sex. If it is possible to have a desire to NOT do something.

Those are my 2 cents, who knows, maybe I'm in the wrong club. If I am, let me know.

pete