Freedom, Invisibility, and Community: A Qualitative Study of Self-Identification with Asexuality

Abstract

A significant body of research is now emerging on the subjective meaning of asexuality. This study explored how self-identification as asexual is managed, both as a threat to the self-concept and a source of personal meaning. A total of 66 self-identified asexuals were recruited from an asexuality internet community and responded to open-ended questions on an online survey. Of these, 31 participants identified as female, 15 as male, 18 gave a different label such as genderqueer or androgynous, and two did not provide information on gender. A thematic analysis of the transcripts resulted in three themes. Socially, asexuality attracted denial and resistance due to incompatibility with heteronormative societal expectations. Despite the threat to self-integrity arising from asexuality being socially rejected, it was typically assimilated as a valued and meaningful orientation on an intra-personal level, aided by information and support from the online community. A second level of threat to self arose whereby other self-identifications, especially gender, had to be reconciled with a non-sexual persona. The accommodation made to other elements of the self was reflected in complex sub-identities. The findings were interpreted using identity process theory to understand how threats arising from self-identifying as asexual are managed. Although asexuality emerges as an orientation to sexuality that can be reconciled with the self, its invisibility or outright rejection in society constitute an on-going challenge.

Comportamientos homosexuales en jóvenes heterosexuales: diferencias de género

“…Pese a que se intentan mejorar los instrumentos y se amplían las dimensiones a examinar, algunos aspectos siguen quedándose fuera. Tal es el caso de las orientaciones «minoritarias» o menos conocidas, como son la pansexualidad (Ca-llis, 2014;Flanders, 2017), la demisexualidad (Carrigan, 2015;Pinto, 2014), el arromanticismo (MacNeela y Murphy, 2015;Scherrer, 2008), etc. No obstante, no siempre hay concordancia entre la identidad de género/sexo y las prácticas sexuales, es decir, pese a identificarse como heterosexuales, hay personas que manifiestan atracción sexual por otras de su mismo sexo o, incluso, haber tenido experiencias homosexuales (Pathela y cols., 2006), lo cual si cabe es todavía más evidente en las mujeres (Copen y cols., 2016;Smith y cols., 2003).…”

Understanding asexual identity as a means to facilitate culturally competent care: A systematic literature review

“…In addition to strengthening the asexuality, data from Foster and Scherrer () suggest that asexuals use AVEN as an educational tool for teaching nonasexuals about asexuality, taking asexuality knowledge to others who are less knowledgeable. Whether the experience of identifying oneself as asexual was positive or not, the data suggest that an online community such as AVEN is central to strengthening the fidelity towards an asexuality self‐concept, and AVEN appears to have assisted previously confused and anxious nonidentified asexuals towards describing sexual status (Scherrer, ), personal freedom and confidence (MacNeela & Murphy, ), belonging, or “coming home” (Carrigan, ), and relief (Robbins et al., ). The growth of AVEN and other asexual online communities has provided a space for asexuals to self‐express and share affiliations based on shared values and beliefs.…”

“…Data across a number of studies suggest that the experience of relationship formation can be categorised by a deep affectional and/or emotional awareness and expression, which for many asexuals seems to facilitate relationships and affiliation, not always in the absence of sexual attraction, because as the quantitative data suggest some asexuals can and do feel something that they understand to be sexual attraction, but in the presence of sexual indifference. Participants make references to experiencing attraction in emotional and intellectual terms (Carrigan, ; MacNeela & Murphy, ), appreciation of others in artistic and aesthetic ways (Haefner, ; MacNeela & Murphy, ; Pacho, ; Scherrer, ), desiring a different kind of closeness than sexual (MacNeela & Murphy, ; Sloan, ; Van Houdenhove et al., ), loving the human form (Scherrer, ), or achieving happiness by just spending time with, and being close to another person (Brotto et al., ).…”

“…The frequency upon which the data suggested the participants perceived their connections with others to be of almost a different emotional depth from sexual connections was enough for romantic differences alongside sexual indifference to be considered as a key characteristic of asexuality. The romantic dimension is alluded to across a number of studies, Scherrer () refers to the romantic and aromantic identity, data from MacNeela and Murphy () refer to asexual bi/romantic/affectionate reference points in the asexual self‐identity, Carrigan () acknowledges the range of attitudes and orientations towards sex and romance, and Brotto et al. () found that three of four participants experienced romantic attraction, and 70% of participants had been in a romantic relationship, respectively.…”

“…Qualitative accounts from Brotto et al. (), Carrigan (), MacNeela and Murphy (), Pacho (), Scott, McDonnell, and Dawson (), Sundrud () and Van Houdenhove et al. () provide insights into the process of identity formation for many asexuals.…”