Asexual: A person who does n-
What’s that? You’ve already heard it a million times? You want us to move on?
Recently, some people called for AVEN’s front page to not just define “asexual”, but to also define “sexual attraction”. They wanted to get to the next step, to go beyond the basic definition. But they run into a fundamental problem: once we get past the basics, we can no longer agree. Ask ten different people to define sexual attraction, and you’ll get at least ten answers. You may even find that people have completely different philosophies to approach the question, with some taking essentialist views and others taking constructivist views. Many answers will be similar, but no one answer can fully capture sexual attraction and how we think of it.
And yet, some people asked that sexual attraction be given one definition, and that this definition appear on the static AVEN page.
We now have an abundance of static resources on asexuality, but I believe that we also need a dynamic approach. We need multiple views, views both consonant and dissonant. We need views that will change and update in light of new concepts and community developments. This is true when we talk about the definition of “sexual attraction”, and even more true when we talk about approaches to activism, intersectionality, academic research, and the media.
Welcome to The Asexual Agenda, a blog offering dynamic content on asexuality.
We have multiple experienced writers with different perspectives. We will opine on old topics, and discuss news. We will disagree with each other. We will do our best to cultivate a community, inviting you to participate as well.
Thanks for reading, I hope you enjoy it.