It’s not like we don’t have enough faux minorities clamoring for non-existent or made-up “rights.” With the obesity epidemic, I thought that fat people would have been next up in the victimhood lineup, but there appears to be another entrant in the race to make us feel guilty about…something.
There’s nothing wrong with minorities who have been historically oppressed to demand their rights under the Constitution. But how far do we take the concept that a minority — any minority — is owed the kind of redress that racial, religious, and ethnic minorities currently enjoy under the law? Is there no limit — no bar — to the notion that someone may be discriminated against — say, someone with red hair — and that this is a wrong that must be made right? The idea of equal rights has been perverted by quotas and other gimmicks that far from seeking equality, look to punish the majority and create outcomes rather than opportunities. The fact is, victimhood is a profitable enterprise. And new “victims” are always seeking a way to break through to the mainstream where there’s a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow.
Apparently, a book is coming out next month that will make the claim that about 1% of the world’s population feels no attraction whatsoever to either sex. The author, Professor Anthony Bogaert, wants official recognition of a “fourth sexual orientation” — Asexuality.
Professor Anthony Bogaert’s book, Understanding Asexuality, argues that a growing number of people consider themselves asexual. He believes asexual people are “an under-studied population” who can feel excluded from our “very sexualised culture”. He said our society, “can place expectations on both sexual and asexual people, but particularly asexual people”.
Joshua Hatton, 23, a language student from Birmingham, agrees. “Three years ago, I came across asexuality – it explained everything. I no longer had to lie to myself. Young men are expected to have some sort of casual sex; it’s all around. Now I feel more comfortable.”
Bogaert, an associate professor at Brock University in Canada, defines asexuality as a complete lack of sexual attraction. “There are two forms: people who have some level of sex drive, but don’t direct this drive toward others (so they may masturbate); and other people who have no sex drive whatsoever.”
The first non-academic conference to tackle asexuality took place at Southbank University, London, last month. Michael Doré, organiser of the World Pride conference, said: “We want asexuality to be recognised as a valid sexual orientation, rather than a disorder or something people have to hide.”
The term asexual became popular in 2001, when David Jay launched the Asexuality Visibility and Education Network – or Aven – website. There are now more than 50,000 members worldwide.
The asexual community is made up of people who define themselves as hetero-romantic, meaning they feel romantic feelings towards the opposite sex, though no sexual desire, homo-romantic, meaning they feel affection for the same sex, and bi-romantic.
Dizzying, isn’t it? Note the language of the victimhood lobby. The “discrimination” comes from treating asexuals like they are suffering from a disease, or humiliating them so much they feel they must hide their “condition.” And God forbid we place “expectations” on asexuals. Perhaps we should ask them to wear a sign delineating their “Fourth Way” sexual orientation so we don’t hurt their feelings.
No one is calling for asexual rights — yet. But the pathology of victimhood is already present and only needs an incident, or a leader, to get the ball rolling. Then we will be treated to perhaps the most boring people in the world whining for their “rights.”
If you read about the way Chuck Schumer has been twisting the arms of his staffers to all get hitched and make babies, you’d have a little more sympathy for people who don’t want to be pestered about such things in the workplace.
Not that we need any new laws; the existing law should cover this. Problem with Schumer is that Congress is exempt from all employment law, and they can sexually harass with complete impunity. And they frequently do. It’s a perk.
Newt in the Contract applied these laws to Congress. However, they are somewhat different; otherwise Republicans would de facto be required to hire Democrats.
What monirity? Anyone who believes in traditional morality has the same issue.
“I no longer had to lie to myself. Young men are expected to have some sort of casual sex; it’s all around. Now I feel more comfortable.”
Wasn’t this once called “normal”?
Yes it was. It was also called “mature restraint” and “deferred gratification.” Those are things that have left the building a long time ago.
Actually, it was called “celibacy.” Delayed gratification implies that you intend to obtain some long-term goal, but someone who has no sexual desire at all has little reason to marry (unless they want children, even if they care little for the act of begetting them). On that note, orphanages used to be run by priests and nuns, so child rearing was an option available to those who had no interest in marriage as an act of mercy toward orphans.
If an asexual wants to enter into a civil union with his credenza who are you to judge?
H8ers will H8.
I already have the right not to have sex. No one can do anything to me for exercising that right.
It’s the women down through the years who exercised their right not to have sex with me that I have a problem with.
“I already have the right not to have sex. No one can do anything to me for exercising that right.” — True, but you could be taxed for it. Beware!
“It’s the women down through the years who exercised their right not to have sex with me that I have a problem with.” — No problem, man; just addaTax!
Seriously, what’ll they think of, next ?!? — Just askin’.
Oy. (face palm)
It’s just another group of people the left wants to intellectually enslave. The left’s M.O. is to define people narrowly based on some classification (e.g. gay, athiest, &c.), and then declare to that group that the left will benefit this now narrowly-defined group if that group turns around and works to benefit all the other narrowly-defined groups as determined by the leftist elitists in order to inact the Utopian vision of those leftist elitists.
Also, by carving out more and more people from the “strait white male” demographic, it makes those “strait white males” a small minority that is easier to push around. Already, you have extreme leftists declaring that only 10% of people are strait (80% are alleged to be bisexual, and 10% exclusively homosexual), and by shrinking that number even more, the left can more easily paint those “hetero-normative” “oppressors” as a small cabal oppressing everyone else.
Sadly, these lunatics have been so successful thus far…
Next time you post, please consider a spell-checker and/or a grammar checker.
“Athiest” should be “atheist”.
“Strait” in the context you employed should be “straight”.
Hoo kares?
Ah, Bogaert’s at last explained Sheldon Cooper.
You have the right to remain Silent.. Anything you say or do will be used against you unless you Vote for Obama.. I dont care if your Sex organs are on top of your head.. You need to get a JOB .. Your not getting special treatment for a extra organ. You want that ??? Join the circus or do a Porno movie where you can ” show it off”… I personally dont want to see members of the Oppsite sex in public restrooms no matter what they want to have sex with..If you dont like it .. Too bad..I also hope all democrats turn Gay and stop BREEDING..That will fix alot of this silly crap!!!
Yeah Right! We’ve all seen those mobs rampaging through the streets with their pitchforks and torches forcing people who don’t want to have sex to start fornicating. Where were they when I was in high school and college? I thought I wsn’t having sex because I had a bad complexion and was socially awkward. It seems I was really part of an oppressed minority. Who knew?
This is just another creepy atempt by the Left’s “Department of Victimhood Classification” to drum up a little more business.In case you haven’t been paying attention most of the liberal project for the last forty years has been to cut us all up into competing “victim blocs” with each featuring it’s own cadre of specialized advocates and “scholars.” Talk about dehumanizing.
This is my problem with it – how many kids, with perfectly normal sexual development, who don’t want to sleep around, are going to adopt a label like “asexual” in order to feel like they’re not weird? I get the cultural pressure to have sex is intense, but offering people a label that’s possibly going to screw their sexual development up in their 20s and 30s is not the answer.
I think teenagers these days need abstinence education in school, if only to tell them that it’s OKAY to NOT have sex at 15!
Wait, so now anybody who’s experienced peer pressure is a “victim”? Because that’s what he’s describing here.
Can I now file a lawsuit any time I see a commercial for a product I’m not interested in? They tried to pressure me into buying! I’VE BEEN VICTIMIZED!
Laugh now, but give it a decade.
They hate capitalism, so why not?
Professor Bogaert is not, AFAICT, demanding formal compensation for oppression or any such nonsense. Rather he is addressing an aspect of culture. Cultural and social expections put pressure on people. When that pressure reaches intense levels on people who can’t or conform to it, it can drive those people crazy or worse.
His particular issue was addressed many years ago by science-fiction writer Theodore Sturgeon in his acclaimed 1955 novella “The [Widget], the [Wadget], and Boff”. A team of aliens researching human psychology pose as the proprietors of a boarding house, whose residents become their test subjects. (The story contains excerpts from the aliens’ reports, including complaints about having to use an obsolete [widget] and worn-out [wadget].)
Among the residents are:
A man blocked from marrying the woman he loves by family pride.
A girl compelled to pursue her family’s dream for her of movie stardom.
A man who feels abnormal and defective for his below-average sex drive.
It’s this last group Professor Bogaert is writing about, and he has a point. It’s easy to dismiss the pressures he notes as “peer pressure”, but peer pressure and social expectations can be ferocious. It is especially hard to resist or deflect them when they aren’t recognized. That’s why it’s important to be aware of them.
girl
The smallest minority is the individual. If we protect individual rights we’re protect everyone.
The Democrats are more interested in dividing people into groups so they can claim to protect those groups against everyone else as a way to buy votes.
I’ve come to believe that many Democrats aren’t capable of seeing people as individuals and only see people as part of a group. That’s why they’re so quick to see racism everywhere.
“It’s not like we don’t have enough faux minorities clamoring for non-existent, or made-up “rights.” With the obesity epidemic, I would have thought that fat people would have been next up in the victimhood lineup, but there appears to be another entrant in the race to make us feel guilty about…something.”
I thought some fat people had gone into that racket years ago. I, the Lucky One™, am both asexual & obese–the former long predating the latter. Unfortunately for the Demagogs I’m also conservative.
“12. djkelly
The smallest minority is the individual. If we protect individual rights we’re protect everyone.”
Exactly.
BTW asexuality is not the same as celibacy. You can learn about this stuff on AVEN. AFAIK, beyond some involvement in others’ “pride” parades, there’s not much political development. There’s been publicity out there for some years now. Of course the loudest voices do sometimes seem to come from the left.
“No one is calling for asexual rights — yet. But the pathology of victimhood is already present and only needs an incident, or a leader, to get the ball rolling. Then we will be treated to perhaps the most boring people in the world whining for their ‘rights.’”
There’s no need for special rights! If you figure such people are boring, don’t bother investigating. But, Mr. Moran, any “whining” would appear to emanate from your direction.
Interesting article and the comments. It’s amusing to how influenced people are by our culture which now favors promiscuity and the loud, brash, extroverted sociopath. That description fits half of the people ranging from average to “Girls Gone Wild” types. Unfortunately this is also the extreme that dictates popular entertainment. The other half ranges from average to hermit. These are people happier in small groups or their own company, pursuing their own interests while leaving others alone and wanting to be left alone, save for when they actually want company. The other half thinks because they aren’t constantly howling, fighting for attention, getting drunk and rutting there is something wrong with them.
Asexuality isn’t just celibacy until marriage or “proper restraint” or dry spell or hormone deficiencies, etc. As the article states, it is possible to have a libido but no desire to have relations with another person. The point here being it isn’t just some passing phase or something that needs to be “cured.” Just as some people are just aren’t interested in as was said in the novel “Dune:” the messy huddlings of sex.
As for the political side: there are some in any group who try to gain power. It is not unique to Asexuals, Autistics, etc. What most would find surprising is that most people in those categories find these power seekers disgusting. For example: there are some pushing for minority status recognition for those on the Autistic Spectrum, even going so far as to petition the UN. They were doing that on their own. No one asked them to and most wanted them to shut up and go away. Their only supporters were those clinging to them to make money or gain political power. Annoying. Very annoying.
Next on the faux victimhood-grovelling-for-validation-and-compen$ation line-up – egosexuals!!! They are everywhere, especially Hollywood, DC, SF and NYC. No more discrimnation and hate speech like “wakers” and “jerks.” Egosexiuality is a beautiful lifestyle choice. maybe they can get their own bathrooms at High Schools so they can express their love with the one they love most! Twinkles up!!
Once again, lawyers and other power-hungry lunatics are taking a serious issue and turning it to their own gain. Asexuals, from the ones I know and have talked to, are generally not interested in politics because of “minority” status or anything. The more forthcoming asexuals (such as myself) simply want a return to decency in our everyday lives.
“Sex is everything” has become the mantra of politics, entertainment (gossip magazines: sex; movies: unnecessary sex scenes; fashion: see Cosmopolitan; music: nearly any rap song in the past 10 years), school education (have sex, but use these free condoms; can’t afford the kid: cheap abortion; etc. etc.), and on it goes. There isn’t a single subject of interest in this country right now that doesn’t involve sex in some fashion.
What I meant earlier by “a return to decency” does not involve giving asexuals minority status, or giving them scholarships because of their “disability”. I meant that if I see a woman in public, I would prefer for her to not -always- be wearing shorts so short that her butt hangs out of them. I would enjoy seeing women wearing dresses at least every once in a while simply because it is refreshing and does not automatically make me think of the perverse religion known as feminism. I would enjoy watching a movie that does not involve the now required sex or make-out scene. I would enjoy listening to rap that involves more than a cunning allegory to sex, sexual behavior, or its ilk. Such music does exist, but currently it requires that I either use my iPod or I win the lottery on the radio.
These are all relatively small things, but in combination it becomes a miasma that is uncomfortable to deal with every day. Again, it shouldn’t be politics or censorship that redefines our collective culture, but instead an agreement on what is both morally acceptable behavior and acceptable culture. This should require a serious conversation in the homes of Americans everywhere.
~Zamir
I wish I could upvote this comment, because that’s all so, so true. A return to decency is desperately needed right now. Society shouldn’t be pushing this hyper-sexualized culture on everyone, nor making those who don’t wish to participate, for whatever reason, feel marginalized.
I see a lot of parallels between what you’re saying about asexuals and those of us who identify as bisexual – generally speaking, most of the bisexuals I know (including myself) just want some recognition that sexuality is far more complicated a thing than would be suggested by the labels we tend to slap on ourselves, and that labels themselves can be damaging to us as people. It’s not about politics for us; we want the dialogue expanded. In my experience, we tend to face a lot of the same sexual rot in modern society, and lacking the convenience of the “hetero” or “homo” labels, navigating it can be quite difficult. Most sincere bisexuals I know prefer not to identify as anything – we just want to be with who we’re with, and would like to keep the politics out of it. I think it’s unfortunate that some asexuals, like the man who wrote this book, feel as if they have to go to these lengths to not have sex shoved in their faces every minute of the day.
I agree that a national conversation on these things is long overdue. Overall, I think we’ve all done ourselves a great disservice with how sexuality is handled in America.
So is Morrissey going to do all the PSAs for this important new victim demographic?
This headline is WRONG.
There are already 5 genders in the orientation community: lesbians, gays, bisexuals, transgenders, and questioning, thus LGBTQ. Now we get to add asexuals, so it’s the sixth, not the fourth.
Back in the ’90s, I lived in LA. I joked to someone that there are seven scientifically identified “genders” already, but the search is on for the other eight genders theoretically believed to exist in nature but not yet discovered in the wild. How little I understood how prophetic that joke would be.