Understanding Asexuality

Another food connection is this: Dietary practices are influenced by sex hormones. There is, for example, evidence that men and women differ in their taste preferences—men being more focused on meat and women being more focused on sweets and fats, a difference that occurs even in children (Caine-Bish & Scheule, 2009). This gender difference is related, at least indirectly, to sex hormones, because these hormones partly underlie sexual differentiation, the process whereby male and female fetuses differentiate before birth. There is also evidence that sex hormones play a role in women’s salt preferences across the menstrual cycle (Curtis & Contreras, 2006). Similar differences have been found in other species (e.g., salt preference over the estrus cycle in female rats). One reason women, relative to men, may have more of a craving for sweets and fats is to build up fat for their curvy bodies. Relative to women, men may crave meat more because their bodies require more protein to build muscle mass.{Even if one agrees that taste preferences are influenced by “sex” hormones, does this mean that “sexuality” causes these food preferences? For example, one could argue that the true sexual connection here is indirect at best, because these sex hormones influence food preferences through their effect on biological sex/gender, and not through their impact on “sexuality” per se. Thus, am I conflating sexuality influences with prenatal hormonal influences on biological sex and gender? Perhaps. As mentioned in chapter 6, however, sex and gender are so intertwined with sexuality, and vice versa, that to argue that only sex/gender (completely independently of sexuality) is a significant influence here is misleading. Also, given that these hormones vary across the menstrual cycle and evidently have an impact on food preferences, they are not just acting to cause “prenatal” sex/gender differences but also likely relate to day-to-day adult activities, including sexuality.}

Here is one final food example: Humans have long searched for the perfect aphrodisiac to drive their lovers wild and to increase their sex drive/potency. In fact, countless animals have been slaughtered and others driven to near extinction so that humans could extract and then ingest their body parts in the name of better sex. The Chinese seem especially susceptible to the (often misguided) notion that sexual powers reside in food, sometimes with dire ecological consequences. For example, the Chinese belief that the scales of the pangolin, or scaly anteater, have aphrodisiac qualities has led to the near extinction of this animal in Southeast Asia. Similarly, the Chinese belief in the aphrodisiac qualities of the rhino’s horn, with its suggestive phallic shape and angle, has also been this animal’s undoing, with it likewise being driven to near extinction. Of course, the fact that humans believe that sex and what we ingest are related, even if they are not (and thus foods have no true aphrodisiac qualities), is also testament to the fact that humans imbue nearly everything around us with special sexual meanings.

In short, it does not take long to find sexual connections to what seems like, on the surface at least, an aspect of our culture and lifestyle—food—that has no sexual relevance. For closure’s sake, let’s explore how these food examples might impact asexuality. In the first example, if dieting and related body-image issues are often driven by mating concerns, might asexual people never or rarely have dieting problems? Perhaps even a bolder prediction could be made: there may be no asexual bulimics (or at least no asexual people who have become bulimic). This is not to say that asexual women may not be concerned about their body image for reasons other than sex/mating (i.e., finding a romantic partner if romantically inclined) but I expect their body-image issues and control of food consumption to differ from those of sexual women.