Aside from these arguments against pathologizing asexuality, there is lab research on arousal that may support the idea that asexuality is not a disorder. As mentioned in chapter 6, research has demonstrated that asexual women, like sexual women, show non-category-specific responding to sexual stimuli; that is, asexual women show some level of genital arousal to both male- and female-oriented sexual stimuli, very similar to heterosexual women and lesbians (Brotto & Yule, 2011). Thus asexual women do not show low arousal (i.e., abnormally low vaginal responses) to sexual activity, as women diagnosed as “dysfunctional” often do.{Whether someone with low arousal should be construed as having a disorder (especially if he or she has no distress about it) is, of course, another issue to consider.] Indeed, the authors of the study argue that this work gives additional support to the idea that asexuality is a sexual orientation, like being gay or straight, because asexual women respond physically in ways that are very similar to their (non-dysfunctional) homosexual and heterosexual counterparts.
Let’s return to the issue of distress, but from the flip side. There are often hidden benefits to asexuality that need to be considered when making a final determination about the question of whether asexuality is a sexual “disorder.” In fact, psychologists Nicole Prause and Cynthia Graham found that asexuals report significant advantages to their asexuality. The top four were as follows: (1) avoiding the common problems of intimate relationships, (2) decreasing risks to physical health or unwanted pregnancy, (3) experiencing less social pressure to find suitable partners, and (4) having more free time (Prause & Graham, 2007, p. 351). Perhaps we can add to these the issue raised in chapter 8: Asexuality avoids the
At this point, you may be thinking:
Maybe. But who am I to say—and who are you to say—what passion is right for a given individual? Have you ever skydived before? Of course, most people haven’t and have no interest in it. I have, and for me, it was a thrill. But do those who have not had, and do not want to have, this experience have a disorder? So, if you don’t want this experience, should we diagnose you with, say,
I was recently invited to give a talk on asexuality to the Society for Sex Therapy and Research, or SSTAR. (Such organizations often try to find a catchy acronym to make their group memorable. I like theirs: “STAR” with a stutter.) SSTAR is the main conference for the world’s sex therapists. Attendees come from a variety of backgrounds, including medicine, psychology, and social work, and all are trained (or in training) to help people with sexual problems.
Frankly, I was nervous to give a talk to SSTAR. Although trained in sexology, I’m an academic, and like most academics, my work primarily relates to teaching and research. Thus, unlike SSTAR members, I am not a sex therapist or even a clinician. These folks work in the trenches, even if those trenches sometimes lie on (or near) Madison Avenue and can be mined for gold. Thus, I did not know if I was a lone sheep set loose among two hundred battle-ready and hungry (clinical) wolves.
Another reason I was nervous was because a past surgeon general of the United States was in attendance. She was in one of the front rows looking at me, and I was looking at her.
However, the most important reason I felt nervous was because I was arguing that asexuality should not (necessarily) be construed as a disorder. Years before, I had gotten into fights—no, not fistfights—with some clinicians who I felt were putting inappropriate pressure on some asexuals to become sexual beings. Moreover, the majority of the attendees at SSTAR have spent their professional careers trying to increase (healthy) sexual behavior in their clients. Thus, I felt that they, like the few clinicians I had interacted with, would consider asexuality a disorder that needs fixing. So, my expectation was that I would be either coolly received or hotly dismissed.