A question for the ladies of AF

[Catholic_Lady]

Oh I know. I just figure sex hormones are responsible for sex drive. So if the sex drive is so low to where the person doesn't even feel sexual attraction to anyone, it makes sense on paper that it could be influenced by an imbalance or deficiency of sex hormones. But i wouldn't rule out other causes, whatever they may be. It's just a guess.

Well that's fair enough as long as you don't consider that 'deficiency' to be unhealthy or 'abnormal' in a bad way. The problem with words like 'deficiency' or 'lack' is they have a connotation that implies 'not enough', as in, that asexuals don't have the sex hormones that they should have.

It's the same reason I always object when atheists say they 'lack belief in god', because an absence is not a lack. A lack would suggest that we 'don't believe enough', whereas an absence just means we 'don't believe'.

I do think that a sex drive is entirely biochemical and asexuals have an absence of a sexual biochemistry. The problem is that words like 'deficiency' have connotations that you probably didn't intend. I'm sure you don't mean that asexuals lack the sex drive that they should have, you merely mean their sex drive is absent. But your statement could be misunderstood that way.

It's similar even with words like 'imbalance'. Because 'balance' is considered to be a good thing. And, for instance, people are often medicated with drugs like lithium to correct an imbalance in the brain, because their brain chemicals are not as balanced as they should be ('balanced' often means 'stable', for instance, and imbalanced or unbalanced often means 'unstable', which definitely also has a negative connotation. But even when we're not talking about stability or unstability, balance is often considered good and imbalance bad, just as moderation is considered good and immoderation bad).

And of course I know you would never suggest that asexuals be given medication that increases their sex drive to correct an 'imbalance'. I know that you mean 'imbalance' and 'deficiency' in a purely neutral way, but the problem with words like those and words like 'lack' is they don't have neutral connotations and they can easily be misunderstood for you suggesting that there's something wrong, abnormal or unhealthy with asexuality rather than it simply being less common.

Well, if it IS something abnormal in the hormone production, I think not addressing this for political correct reasons is probably a bit counter productive. Because if so, a person can receive hormone treatment if they so choose. Though of course I would never suggest anyone be pressured into it if they'd rather not, just that they know it's an option if they want it.