Slog News & Arts

Line Out

Music & Nightlife

« Moving Books | A Faggot Coulter Likes? »

Tuesday, March 6, 2007

The Slog Post I Was Going to Write

posted by on March 6 at 12:15 PM

It was called “The Real Sexual Minority” and it went like this:

* * * *

Asexuals.

Victoria Glancy and Karl Hodgetts got married in May. They had sex once, but have no real interest in doing it again and still consider themselves asexual.

And, should you want to come out as a—what would the slang term be? an aggot?—there are some helpful hints on this site:

Sexual people.

They’re pretty much everywhere. Most of the characters we see in movies, most of our friends, most of the people that we’re in relationships with and most of our families care about sexuality a great deal. As asexual people many of us have no innate understanding of why the world spends so much time meditating on the nasty…
* * * *

But, by the time I finished it, the post seemed vapid and a little mean. (Aggot? Seriously, Brendan?)

So I abandoned it and decided to go have some lunch instead.

(An Aggot, by the way, turns out to be an actual thing for cricket teams: “The Aggot™ has been developed by coaches who are just as interested in helping other coaches gain an understanding of what is actually happening when the ball is released from the bowlers hand.”)

RSS icon Comments

1

I know that folks like this exist, but, as someone in the article suggested, I kind of wonder how many in the category "asexual" really are that way, and how many are just terribly sexually inhibited and trying to avoid it (closested gays, folks raised as Christian fundies who haven't gotten over their conditioning, etc.)

Posted by tsm | March 6, 2007 12:59 PM
2

"Friends without benefits."

Posted by Courtney | March 6, 2007 1:03 PM
3

Agate!

Posted by SEAN NELSON, EMERITUS | March 6, 2007 1:07 PM
4

Cricket is awfully confusing.

Posted by Abby | March 6, 2007 1:08 PM
5

Cricket is the most god awful boring game on the planet.

Posted by elswinger | March 6, 2007 1:25 PM
6

Regardless, I didn't like the shrill tone of the sex therapist in that article. She pretty much said that obviously these people are deranged and self-delusional freaks if they don't have sex.

It doesn't sound like that's the case here. These people just aren't that sexual and are tired of beating themselves up over it. Forming a club seems a bit much, but whatever.

Posted by weird | March 6, 2007 2:34 PM
7

arg , i want to watch the videos !

Posted by dorothy | March 6, 2007 2:43 PM
8

videos !
Here :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sk8FEh2ANMc

can you tell i am home sick ?

Posted by dorothy | March 6, 2007 2:46 PM
9

@Elswinger: The point of cricket, as told to me by an awesome bartender in Scotland:

The game of cricket is long and takes all day/many days. This give you plenty of time with your friends to get trashed and stay trashed for hours on end. You don't have to keep an eagle eye on the game, since the damn thing last so long. You also have an excuse to stay out of the house for 8-10 hours at a time. Drunk As Piss


The British are geniuses!

Posted by Monique | March 6, 2007 4:01 PM
10

self-censorship, brendan? but yet you put it up anyway. hmmmmm.

Posted by kt | March 6, 2007 4:29 PM
11

I know a guy who's asexual, and his background is pretty much as far left as you can get-- definitely not a question of sexual repression or fundamentalist upbringing or anything like that.


He dated a couple of girls in middle school, then tried dating guys in high school (we went to a small, very liberal private school where this was more than ok), and came to the realization that he just wasn't sexually interested in men or women.


Now that he's found a way to categorize himself, he's a lot happier and doesn't feel pressure to have sexual relationships. He's content with his job, his friends, his hobbies, etc.


Knowing Dave, I can understand why these guys in the article would want to form a group with other asexual people, since they're probably as sick as he is of all the pressure to have sexual relationships, and the comments like #1 above.


*off the soapbox now*

Posted by Megan | March 6, 2007 4:50 PM
12

Well, at least they aren't contributing to further world overpopulation.

Posted by isabelita | March 6, 2007 5:24 PM
13

If you acknowledge that people have varying levels of sexual desire, which is impossible to not do, you pretty much have to accept that some people have virtually none. What's so difficult for that "sex therapist" to understand about that?

I could honestly live easily without sex. It takes too long to get where you're going, and the conclusion is always kind of ho-hum. What confuses me is why the couple sees any need to be in a relationship at all.

Posted by Chris | March 7, 2007 12:26 AM

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 14 days old).