My favorite line of the episode cleverly captured a question common across so many atypical sexualities. It came from Dr. Wilson, in the opening scene, in the exam room, after the patient finished explaining to him exactly asexuality was. Then, in his lab coat, holding his pen, and staring at his clipboard:
"Not quite sure what box to check here..."
Ultimately, House discovers that the patient's husband had a prolactin-secreting tumor that suppressed his sex drive, while she finally admitted to merely going along with the asexuality for his sake, being that she was satisfied by all the other aspects of their relationship (and by keeping a sex toy at the ready).
Asexual bloggers were not amused. From their point of view, they were already having enough trouble getting anyone to believe that asexuality was a valid sexual orientation, and House's outcome didn't help.
To me, the question Is asexuality a sexual orientation? is a bit of a red herring. Scientifically, the term has no universal definition; it differs across scientific contexts. Some writers have used the term to mean attracted to men versus women versus both—but the continuum from male to female has no place to fit neither. (Thus, this definition would suggest asexuality is not, technically, a sexual orientation.) Other writers have used the term more broadly: For them, sexual orientation refers to one's fundamental sexual interests in general: men, women, amputees, rubber boots, or whatever. (This definition would seem to have some more wiggle room in it.) But when we ask Is X a sexual orientation?, what we generally trying to ask is Is this an in-born, life-long, unchangeable trait?
For that question (the more interesting one, to me) not all of the jury is back. There do exist medical conditions that cause a loss of sex drive, and they can sometimes go undetected. Not everyone who uses or identifies with the word asexual may mean exactly the same thing by it, and being able to distinguish a lack of sex drive from a lack of sexual attractions can be a tricky business.
Sir is it really possible to not have any sexual feeling at all? A friend of mine is about to get married and says she is asexual and that she doesn't feel anything when she is with her partner. She said its not just him, but in general. She is worried about it.
ReplyDeleteYes, it would seem so. At least, very many people claim not to experience sexual attraction (or drive). The hard part is that, especially for women, there are many things that can block sexual arousal, attraction, or drive (and these can be very difficult to tell apart).
DeleteThe central issue for her, however, does not appear to be about whether she is >really< asexual, but that she is worried about it. Asexuality is not automatic doom for a marriage (nor is celibacy), but leaving the husband-to-be in the dark and simply hoping things will get better can be.
Couples can try (and have tried) tried everything from celibacy, to one partner merely tolerating sex, to open relationships where some (or all) sexual outlets are with other partners. Although these work for some people, they are not for everyone, and there is no way to find out until some (probably much) discussion. If nothing can be worked out for the long term, better to know now.
And just to note the obvious: Some consultation with a sex therapist or sexually savvy physician can help to rule out or identify any physical or psychological issues that might be blocking a sexuality that is there after all.
The writer of this episode of House seems to have gotten confused between asexuality and lack of libido. There are asexuals with a libido, and non-asexuals without one. The defining thing with asexuality is not lack of sex drive, it is lack of sexual attraction to anyone. As not only an asexual man, but an asexuality educator, this episode is a thorn in my side because ever since then the people that think that asexuality is a medical condition is a lot bigger. It's not. Many studies have been done and no cause has been found at all. There is no disease or syndrome or condition that causes it. There is a disorder that used to be diagnosed when in reality the person is asexual, called Hypoactive Sexual Desire Disorder, but while the DSM IV labeled it that way, the new DSM V notes a difference. If it's either lifelong or doesn't cause 'significant distress' to the individual then it's not HSDD, and is asexuality instead. And yes, it can be something that comes on later, but still be asexuality because of a concept most people haven't considered called fluid sexuality, where ones orientation can change during their life. But the point here is that the writer of the episode failed to do even basic research on asexuality, then wrote an episode and then claimed to have done research. It's a terrible episode and I wish it would go away.
ReplyDelete