A question for the ladies of AF

[Edwardo Piet]

I don't think bi/homo/pan sexuality is a hormone issue because those people still have sexual desire/attraction.

But for the person who doesn't have that at all, i just wonder if it might be related to a hormone issue. I'm not saying it's immoral or anything, just saying it might be related to a hormone deficiency. And if it is, I don't think there's anything wrong with acknowledging that. Especially in case the person chose to treat the deficiency/imbalance.

I don't understand what you are saying though. An absence of sexual hormones is no more deficient or unbalanced than a presence of sexual hormones and it's no more unhealthy than any other orientation or absence thereof.

I can't even imagine the unhealthiness of asexuality being possible. All the possible arguments against the healthiness of asexuality seem to rely on the premise that asexuals aren't really asexual and that they do actually have sexual desires but they are repressing them or they're 'frigid'. Assuming that we're talking about genuine asexuality, about a genuine absence of a sex drive, then asexuality cannot possibly be unhealthy.

I don't care about political correctness at all, by the way, but I'm utterly obsessed with technical correctness. And I think both the statement "atheists lack belief in god" and the statement "asexuals have a hormonal deficiency" are technically incorrect statements.

Speaking of technical correctness by the way, I once had a friend who was one of those annoying atheists who are an atheist but they don't like the word 'atheist' and they'd rather not call themselves an atheist. Another friend asked him what he believed and he said "Well, technically I'm an atheist." and I then asked him what he was non-technically. He said he didn't understand the question