Whatever doesn't turn you on:
David and Victoria are part of a growing number of people publicly declaring themselves 'asexual'. David even started an online discussion forum called the Asexual Visibility and Education Network.
"People just started pouring in from all over the world with similar experiences saying, ya know, 'I'm not interested in sexuality; I don't experience sexual attraction," says David.
The group now has more than $4,000 [sic]members. They sell T-shirts touting their lifestyle and hand out pamphlets explaining that they're normal and perfectly happy with their lives.
"There are asexual people who are old, who are young, who are male and female," says David. He says some asexuals are happy on their own. Others, like Victoria, are interested in romantic partners, minus the sex.
Link.
Romance without the possibility of sex. Isn't that kinda like drinking without the possibility of at least mild inebriation?
G.K. Chesterton said there is no romance without permanency. The hallmark of permanency is laying down roots through children, which come from sex.
Could this be the first ripple of a possibility that, to the best of my knowledge, has never been considered: a culture disinterested in sex? All cultural indicators show that, as interest in children decreases, the interest in sex increases. Futuristic visions and dystopias also portend rampant sex, from Huxley's Brave New World to Percy's Thanatos Syndrome.
But if the ultimate fruits of sexual relations (babies) are denied, maybe the natural inclination to sex could actually decline. I find it highly improbable and contradicted by previous cultures that didn't care much for babies (the late and decadent Roman Empire, for instance), but such things are interesting to ponder.
