Understanding Asexuality

But this book is written not just for asexual people, or even just for research scientists studying asexual people. It is also written for anyone interested in learning more about sexuality. For example, a book on asexuality may satisfy curiosity—both scientific and public—about a sexual minority that has been overlooked until recently. Thus many readers will get a chance to peek into and learn more about a world that is sexually different from theirs. Aside from satisfying curiosity, such glimpses into new worlds may have health and social benefits, as exposure to sexual minorities may help to increase general tolerance and acceptance. This idea—called the “contact hypothesis” of prejudice reduction—is often associated with psychologist Gordon Allport (1954), but the original theory has been extended beyond personal contact to encompass exposure through the media, including books (Cameron & Rutland, 2006).

A book about asexuality is also a book about sex (how could it be otherwise?), and therefore many of the reasons listed above to study sex apply equally well to the study of asexuality. For example, recall that one of the reasons to study sex is that it informs a number of scientific disciplines, including demography, which studies, among other things, fertility and marriage. There are no published data on the fertility of asexual people (a topic well worth looking into), but in the first published study on asexuality using a national probability (or random) sample of adults in Great Britain, I found that 33 percent of asexual people were currently in a long-term relationship (e.g., married), compared to 64 percent of sexual people (Bogaert, 2004). Thus, the study of asexuality reveals how variations in sexuality profoundly affect one’s (demographically relevant) life trajectories.

There is another equally important reason to study asexuality that has not yet been mentioned. Asexuality offers us a unique opportunity to look at sexuality through a new lens, affording perhaps a clearer (or at least new) view of what sex is and what it is not. In fact, this is one of the reasons why asexuality is interesting to a sexologist like me: It reveals hidden truths about sex. In the same way that homosexuality allows us to understand heterosexuality, and vice versa, asexuality allows us to make broad comparisons to understand sexuality as a whole. This is also why a book on asexuality matters.

In support of my argument, consider further the example above: 33 percent of asexual people were found to be in long-term relationships, compared to 64 percent of sexual people. Again, this information provides evidence that life circumstances often differ between asexual and sexual people, but in these figures (in particular, the 33 percent for asexual people), there is also something interesting revealed or at least suggested about the nature of human sexuality and romance.

We often use the words “sex” (or “sexuality”) and “romance” synonymously; in other words, sex equals romance and romance equals sex. “Romance” is perhaps the softer, gentler, and euphemistic word for “sex” (more on the meanings of romance in chapter 2), but the two words are often used interchangeably. In commercials for an erectogenic drug, advertisers tell men to “Buy Discount Cialis and Enjoy a Romantic Weekend” (ED Pills, 2010 March 30). Of course, we all know what that means: Use this drug and there is plenty of sex ahead, boys! Indeed, the ad goes on to suggest that “With a single pop of Cialis, you will not only enjoy a romantic night; expect a weekend of sizzling nights with your beloved.” So, romance equals sex.