/u/sorry97 on For all my fellow aces and community, something to learn.

Beg to differ.

As some of you may know already the DSM has changed A LOT in the past 50 years when it comes to sexuality.

For example, if you look at one of the very first pages of “psychopathia sexualis” (idk if I wrote it right), it says it is “rare for a man to not be interested in a female companion, same as a female actively looking for a male companion” (it states that in other words, but this is basically what it means.

Homosexuality was considered a mental disease back then, and it took a pretty long time for it to change (even now, conversion therapy and other stuff exists, so it is still treated like a disease in some places).

So what does all of this have to do with asexuality?

First of all, if you are asexual you’re referring to your sexual orientation, which is different to sexual attraction (yes, even non asexuals aren’t interested in sex from time to time, they aren’t in the “mood” or whatever). But this is the tricky part, when exactly is it asexuality and when does it start to be a disease?

If people understood asexuality this wouldn’t be an issue (after all, we are all “happy” being asexuals, we’re not suffering from it or whatever; which would be the equivalent to disease in a “healthy” person). This concept is hard to grasp cause well, there aren’t that many asexuals out there, so sex is normalised and yada yada.

TL ; DR: Homosexuality is still considered a disease in some places, even after all these years. It’ll take even longer for asexuality to not be considered a “disease”, let’s take baby steps for now, as research advances in this area we will all be able to understand the whole concept on “attraction better.

September 19, 2020 at 12:02AM