When you get down to it, asexuality means no sexuality at all. Once people start broadening the term and allowing more people in, how are true asexuals supposed to identify? That’s the entire reason why I’m clearing these things up; not because I don’t believe asexuality doesn’t exist, or to say someone isn’t an asexual, but because there’s a reason why there are definitions to these labels.

I’d like to take this time to introduce “gray-A’s”, which encompass “demisexuality”, “hyposexual”, “semisexual”, “sexual/asexual-ish”, and “low intensity sexual”. Gray-A is just that; a form of sexuality that’s in-between asexual and sexual. The spectrum, as you may guess, is much more broad than the other two types of sexuality. Think of asexual as white, sexual as black, and gray-A being all the shades of gray in the middle.

Gray-A’s can also encompass people who do not wish to have sexual relations with another person, but can be sexual while on their own. This is something that I’ve discussed with two doctors, and have done some pretty extensive research on. There is nothing wrong with saying this! There is nothing wrong about enjoying sexual stimulation

I’d also like to say this: many people use the term “asexual” even if they aren’t truly that, simply because it’s easier to explain. And that’s okay! I’ve done that myself, plenty of times. Sometimes I don’t want to get into explaining what a “gray-A” or “demisexual” is. As far as I’m concerned, I’ve not yet felt any true sexual attraction towards anyone, and that’s probably enough information to give to someone you don’t care to delve too deeply with.

As for the term non-libidoism, that in itself is a somewhat controversial term. If you wish to use it, nobody should be able to stop you. The biggest problem that people find with it is the fact that people who use it generally believe “libido” and “sex drive” are different. The few people I’ve met that use that term have found libido to equal arousal, and sex drive to equal the urge to be sexual (either by themselves or with another). However, libido and sex drive are in fact definitions of one another, and are often used interchangeably. The non-libidoists I’ve met have all been male, and have all said they feel arousal but have no sex drive, that sometimes they get aroused by accidental touch. I’m no expert, but I’ve discussed with two of them a bit deeper into it; the fact is, like I said in a previous post, we all have buttons that can be pressed and we feel arousal whether we want to or not. Men, even moreso. Just because you get aroused doesn’t mean you have a sex drive; things like accidental stimulation or stimulation without any sexual thoughts don’t equal a sexual drive. While I’m not entirely dismissing non-libidoism, I do think that it’s only truly something one can believe in if one believes libido and sexual drive are different.

I’d like to reiterate that true asexuals do not feel any sort of sexuality. That’s exactly why the word was created in the first place; to give those who truly feel no sexuality a label to call themselves. The word has in fact evolved a bit to encompass those that are truly what you would call gray-A’s; which I personally don’t think is “right”. Because then asexual turns from “no sexuality” to “some sexuality”.

Again, only you can decide who you are and what you want to call yourself. There is no “right” or “wrong”, but there is still the threat of getting others confused if you use an incorrect term. If someone said “I’m wearing a blue shirt” and it was in fact red, you’d probably be a little confused too! But still, on a personal level, no one has the right to say “you’re wrong” when someone says they identify as such.