Every Friday, we will share links to news, blogs, and anything else we find interesting. We can’t catch everything, so you are invited to self-promote in the comments!
Swankivy explains asexual relationships on Good Vibrations
Participate in this Health & Healthcare survey for people in the asexual community.
Brighteyes-Vanderde lists characteristics of romantic attraction gathered from psychology research.
A new blog, Queer Ace jumps right into it: Is asexuality a sexual orientation?
Concept Awesome: Some thoughts on ace rings
A Christian Post blogger derives lessons from asexuality. I think I have some major philosophical disagreements with this writer.
The Asexual Agenda 
AUGH, that CP post is infuriating, on so many levels. I feel like I should leave the author an explanation of why her post is offensive, but I’m still trying to figure out a good way to phrase it.
It was interesting to finally see a clinical definition of romantic attraction, although I’m not sure how much help it was. The two crushes I’ve had (assuming they can accurately be termed ‘crushes’) involved 6 of those 16 characteristics, and all 6 are negative. I’m increasingly inclined to think that what I want, if anything, is a zucchini.
I’ve been trying to write a rebuttal to the CP article as well, but every time I look at it my brain shorts out.
On the other hand the queer ace’s post is great !
I admit I skipped over it at first, thinking, “I’ve read enough about that debate to last a lifetime”, but you’re right. It’s the best post on the subject I’ve seen.
I started reading the CP article with the intention of writing a rebuttal, but the author and I come from such different viewpoints that banging my head against a wall would probably be more productive.
It might still be worth doing to demonstrate that hers is not the One True Christian opinion on the matter.
I’d like to see that. I have a feeling my rebuttal from an atheist viewpoint might not go over so well on that site. I ended up just leaving a comment pointing out that her definition of asexuality is pretty far off. I’d really like to see an alternative to her “One True Christian opinion”, though.
Same here. Her attacks on ‘secular society’ are pissing me off.
“Secular society wants to convince you that only asexuals do not have sex.”
Whereas she wants to convince us that no one should have sex.
“Secular society wants to convince you that if you have sexual desires, that you must act upon them.”
Whereas she wants to convince us that sexual desires are evil and people must refrain from acting on them.
“Secular society is false, hating the concept of self-control and of personal responsibility.”
Self-control (n): Organized repression of the self by a religious institution, especially through guilt tactics.
OK, I’ll try to do it, then, but I don’t know when I’ll get to it.
Oh man, that CP article is nearly as bad as the Celibrate piece from a few years ago. Gross.
And… hm, as a person who is not really sure about the distinction that people draw between romantic relationships and other ones, I’m not really that much a fan of Helen Fisher. I watched a TED talk of hers about six months ago and found her tendency to describe romantic love as utterly universal and clear fairly off-putting.
Adding another link: http://www.bulletnewsniagara.ca/2012/10/05/storm-watch-the-mystery-of-sexual-attraction-and-asexuality/
There’s an interview of Anthony Bogaert here about his book, Understanding Asexuality.