Download Annotated bib final

Kat Bailey
UNIV 112
November 4, 2015
Professor Dempster
Annotated Bibliography
Research Question: What is Asexuality? What are the myths about it? Is it a valid sexuality?
What can be done to aid the asexual community?
Source 1: “How is asexuality different from hypoactive sexual desire disorder?” by Andrew
Hinderliter.
MLA: Hinderliter, Andrew. "How Is Asexuality Different from Hypoactive Sexual Desire
Disorder?" Psychology & Sexuality 2.4 (2010): 167-178. Taylor & Francis Journals Complete.
Web. 01 Nov. 2015.
Qualifications: Andrew Hinderliter is a Ph.D. student at the University of Illinois-Urbana
Champaign currently working on his dissertation on online asexual discourse. He has made
multiple publications regarding the classification of sexual disorders, asexuality, and other
psychological topics. These include (but are not limited to) “The six essential questions in
psychiatric diagnosis,” a widely cited essay.
Main Claim: Asexuality and hypoactive sexual desire disorder (HSDD) have some things in
common and are often grouped together, but they have important distinctions that separate
asexuality as an identity rather than a disorder. Neither concept is going away any time soon, and
we must accept the fact that they can both exist (even in the same individual) without one
neutralizing the other.
Subclaim 1: The asexual community is working to bring asexuality into the mainstream “norm.”
Evidence: 2008-2009: members of the asexual community formed the ‘AVEN DSM
Taskforce’ and interviewed experts in human sexuality. A report was submitted afterwards
recommending that HSDD have an explicit exception for asexuals.
“A major goal of the asexual community is for asexuality to be seen as a part of the
‘normal variation’ that exists in human sexuality rather than a disorder to be cured. As HSDD
labels lack of sexual interest (at least sometimes) as a disorder, this is problematic for that goal.”
(167)
Subclaim 2: The rise of knowledge and awareness about asexuality arose in the 90s to early
twenty-first century partly or wholly due to the correlating rise in studies and pharmaceuticals
regarding female sexual dysfunction and other sexual problems
Evidence: A Yahoo group called “Haven for the human amoeba” was created in 2000. In
2001, AVEN (Asexual Visibility and Education Network) the website was created by a college
freshman named David Jay. He defined asexual as: ‘A person who is sexually attracted to neither
gender.’ This was later changed to ‘A person who does not experience sexual attraction’ in order
to be more inclusive of the idea of a gender spectrum. These events began taking place a few
years after the 90’s, during which time there was a boom in the pharmaceutical role in treating
sexual disorders and the term female sexual dysfunction (FSD) was coined.
“Many women cannot/do not distinguish between sexual desire and subjective sexual
arousal, drawing into question whether it makes any sense to treat these as distinct
phenomena.”(170)
Subclaim 3: Masturbating and even experiencing a sex drive does not negate the possibility of
someone being asexual.
Evidence: This is really sort of a subjective/up to interpretation still. However, the
definition of asexuality on AVEN’s page today only defines asexuality by a lack of sexual
attraction to others. The website “The Official Asexual Society” maintained that masturbation
excluded one from being asexual; however it later changed its name to “The Official
Nonlibidoism Society.”
“As David Jay's primary interest was in constructing asexuality as an identity that people
found to be helpful in making sense of their lives and navigating relationships, he strongly
believed that anyone who felt that identifying as asexual made sense for them should be allowed
to do so.” (171)
“Feeling that what people do or do not do in private with respect to masturbation has little
consequence for their social relationships, he held that it made perfect sense for masturbation to
be consistent with an asexual identity.” (171)
Subclaim 4: Asexuality cannot be diagnosed like a disorder; only the individual can decide
whether or not to identify themselves as asexual.
Evidence: AVEN refuses to directly answer questions along the lines of “am I asexual?”
because it firmly maintains this position. There is no “official” way to diagnose asexuality, but
there are ways that clinicians diagnose HSDD.
“This contrast involves differences in the locus of expert knowledge. For HSDD, it is the
clinician who possesses it. For asexuality, it is the individual who possesses it.” (173)
“One of the most important differences between asexuality and HSDD is their valuation
of lack of sexual interest/attraction. HSDD regards lack of sexual interest as negative, whereas
asexuality values lack of sexual attraction as neutral or positive. The goal with HSDD is, if
possible, to get the person (more) interested in sex, whereas asexuality aims at self-acceptance,
viewing asexuality as something that does not need to be ‘cured.’” (173)
Why use this source: This source maintains that asexuality is a valid identify separate from the
closest related sexual disorder (HSDD.) It details the rise of the asexual community and
awareness about asexuality, which I can use to provide background and show that there is a lot of
support for asexuality as an identity. The first quote under subclaim 3 is also one that I really like
and will almost definitely use because it ties into the moral aspect we are supposed to include.
Research Question: What is Asexuality? What are the myths about it? Is it a valid sexuality?
What can be done to aid the asexual community?
Source 2: “Biological Markers of Asexuality: Handedness, Birth Order, and Finger Length
Ratios in Self-identified Asexual Men and Women” by Morag A. Yule et al.
MLA: Yule, Morag A., Lori A. Brotto and Boris B. Gorzalka. “Biological Markers of
Asexuality: Handedness, Birth Order, and Finger Length Ratios in Self-identified Asexual Men
and Women.” Archives of Sexual Behavior 26.1 (1997): 299-310. Springer Standard Collection.
Web. 01 Nov. 2015.
Qualifications: Authors Morag A. Yule and Lori A. Brotto are affiliated with the department of
obstetrics and gynecology at the University of British Columbia, and are the researchers who
performed one of the key studies discussed in the article. Author Boris B. Gorzalka is affiliated
with the department of Psychology at the University of British Columbia.
Main Claim: There are certain markers which are indicative of asexuality as well as other
deviant sexualities, suggesting that they are similar in development and impact on the
individual’s life more so than asexuality is similar to a dysfunction.
Subclaim 1: Our highly sexualized culture demonstrates an “intolerance of waning sexual
desire” (299) which may create a climate in which asexual people are misunderstood, leading to
attempts at diagnoses and treatment.
Evidence: Tucker Carlson, a popular news anchor who works for Fox News today,
hypothesized that all asexual individuals have HSDD (a distressing lack of sexual fantasies or
sex drive) during an interview with David Jay (the founder of AVEN). This interview took place
during Carlson’s segment on a national broadcast called The Situation in 2006. Asexuals have
been “treated” accordingly by doctors, therapists and psychologists who thought similarly to
Carlson. There were (and still are) sex clinics intended to induce sexual desire through
counseling, activities, diet changes and drug therapy treatments.
Subclaim 2: Asexuality differs from a sexual disorder not only because it does not (in and of
itself) cause distress to the individual, but also because it does not physically manifest itself like
other sexual dysfunctions.
Evidence: In 2011, researchers Brotto and Yule performed a study to measure physical
arousal in women of different sexual orientations. Bisexual, heterosexual, homosexual and
asexual women were all shown the same erotic films. The women all experienced comparable
levels of physical arousal, including the ones who identified as asexual. However, asexualidentified women did not report an increase in sexual attraction during or after the viewing, while
the other women did. This demonstrates that attraction and physical response operate separately
of one another, supporting the idea that asexuality is an orientation and not a dysfunction.
“In a direct test of whether asexuality might be explained by a dysfunctional sexual
arousal response, asexual, heterosexual, lesbian, and bisexual women were compared and found
not to differ from one another in the genital sexual arousal response to erotic films (Brotto &
Yule, 2011). This lack of group difference in genital response is consistent with a growing body
of evidence that women, regardless of stated sexual preferences and type of erotic material,
respond in a similar manner with regard to their genital sexual response.” (300)
Subclaim 3: There are multiple characteristics which are more prevalent in asexual individuals,
indicating that the development of asexuality may have to do with biological pathways. These
traits are also associated with other non-heterosexual identities.
Evidence: Researcher Bogaert performed a study in 2004 which concluded that short stature and
late menarche are predictive of asexuality. Non-right-handedness is associated, not only with
asexuality, but with all deviant sexualities. Having multiple older siblings, particularly brothers,
is also more common among non-heterosexuals than it is among heterosexuals. This is a very
important piece of information because it represents the very real possible of a detectable
neurological similarity between asexuality and other sexualities, thereby “proving” (as much as it
is possible to prove) that asexuality is a valid sexuality akin to heterosexuality, homosexuality
and bisexuality, as it seems to develop similarly and have similar manifestations in other
seemingly unrelated aspects.
“Novel to this study was the finding of a significant relationship between number of older
siblings, both sisters and brothers, and asexuality.” (307)
“Prenatal stress might play a role…” (307)
Why use this source: This source details a study explicitly intended to test whether or not
asexuality is a sexual dysfunction and declares that it is not. It also relates multiple studies which
find a relationship between all forms of non-heterosexuality, including asexuality, and certain
other traits, specifically handedness and sibling order. This indicates that asexuality is a
neurological state much the same as homosexuality or bisexuality. This study is basically the
best “proof” of validity as is academically possible. The source also makes a brief hypothesis
about the role of prenatal stress in the development of deviant sexualities, which I may or may
not look for further sources on depending on the availability of further research on the topic.
Research Question: What is Asexuality? What are the myths about it? Is it a valid sexuality?
What can be done to aid the asexual community?
Source 3: “Asexuality: A Mixed-Methods Approach” by Lori Brotto et al.
MLA: Brotto, Lori A., Gail Knudson, Jess Inskip, Katherine Rhodes and Yvonne Erskine.
“Asexuality: a Mixed-Methods Approach.” Archives of Sexual Behavior 26.1 (2010): 599-618.
Springer Standard Collection. Web. 01 Nov. 2015.
Main Claim: It is important that asexuality is recognized by the mainstream worlds of media
and academics and that people become educated on the subject of asexuality.
Subclaim 1: There is a stigma against people who self-identify as asexual, and a complex exists
in the efforts to draw hard lines around what exactly asexuality is which might cause distress to
people who feel they are asexual but are challenged to “prove” their asexuality and maintain it
throughout their lifetimes, lest their identity be challenged and/or denied.
Evidence: Over one third of asexual participants in Bogaert’s study demonstrated more
reluctance talking about masturbation habits than their sexual counterparts, or refused to discuss
them altogether. While the subject is generally an uncomfortable one, asexual-identified
individuals seemed to display an abnormal amount of discomfort and squeamishness. “One
might posit that such reluctance around talking about masturbation might be even more
pronounced than in the sexual person given that an open admission of masturbatory activity
could threaten one’s asexual identity.” (612) In other words, the author hypothesized that the
existence of a gatekeeper complex around asexual identity and the asexual community stifles
asexual-identified individuals because they are afraid to express certain things for fear of being
stripped of their identity. There is no solid research on this, but it is a valid point worthy of
consideration regardless.
Subclaim 2: Asexuality is an “invisible” sexuality, meaning it has very little exposure and
mainstream attention. The lack of awareness around asexuality is very much a negative thing; it
even hinders some asexual individuals because they may not even be aware that asexuality exists
as a viable identity that they can claim.
Evidence: Participants in this study made multiple claims along the lines of: “I am very
keen on getting the word out because had I known years ago my life could have been so
different.” (613). “Some talked about a great sense of relief upon discovering AVEN, particularly
in finding that many others had also experienced a non-distressing lack of sexual attraction like
them.” (613) and “…I never heard of asexuality. I didn’t realize that I could say, hey, I’m
asexual, you know…go away.” (613-614). I would also like to corroborate this with a touch of a
personal story in my paper; I didn’t even learn about the existence of asexuality and the asexual
community until my late teens, and struggled a lot with attempting to find an identity that felt
right.
Subclaim 3: There is as much variation among asexuals in terms of sexual activity, fantasy and
masturbation habits as there is among sexuals.
Evidence: Demographically speaking, asexual participants in this study and online
surveys cited in the essay reported a wide variety of habits and feelings, falling on a spectrum
anywhere from total sex repulsion to typical enjoyment. Some asexuals report masturbating or
even having sex simply because they enjoy the physical sensation, even though they do not
experience sexual attraction; this is important because it demonstrates the difference between
sexual attraction and sexual drive, or libido; it must be noted that individuals may have both,
neither, or one without the other. Some asexuals report feeling an attraction to other people, just
not in a sexual way, while others report no attractions whatsoever at any point in their lives.
Additionally, the level and degree of the presence of sexual fantasy, masturbation and sex is
widely varied among individuals in the asexual community.
Why use this source: This source has a lot of personal, unaltered quotes from asexual
individuals who agreed to discuss their personal lives, giving another, more human dimension to
impersonal discussions about the validity of asexuality and those who have incorporated it into
their identities. Also, while this source supports my position (that asexuality is valid and should
not be left up to the individual to determine for themselves, not determined by a rigid set of
rules), in subclaims 1 and 2 it also delves into the opposing side that people have taken against
asexuality and discusses the stigma against it and the way that ace invisibility could be hurting
people. This could be really important and helpful because it can help to answer the last piece of
my research question, ways in which the asexual community can be helped.
Research Question: What is Asexuality? What are the myths about it? Is it a valid sexuality?
What can be done to aid the asexual community?
Source 4: “Theoretical issues in the study of asexuality” by CJ DeLuzio Chasin
MLA: Chasin, CJ DeLuzio. “Theoretical issues in the study of asexuality.” Archives of Sexual
Behavior 40.4 (2011): 713-723. Springer Standard Collection. Web. 01 Nov. 2015.
Main Claim: Asexuality is a multi-faceted phenomenon and researchers attempting to study it
need to be mindful of this fact. There are several factors that make studying the asexual
population and manifestations of asexuality in separate individuals tricky.
Subclaim 1: There is a pattern of inconsistency regarding asexual sexual orientation-related selfidentification when given forced-answer question, leading to questions and confusion on the part
of researchers and academics as to how to properly sort, filter and evaluate information and
participants in studies they perform. This makes it more difficult to study asexuality as a single
phenomenon.
Evidence: When given forced-answer questions, self-identified asexual people in studies
consistently have a percentage which do not mark themselves “asexual,” even when it is
presented to them as an option. In 2007 a study by Prause and Graham found that out of 41 selfidentified asexual participants, only 22 chose “asexual” from a forced answer form. A study by
Brotto in 2010 came across similar difficulties: 47 out of 187 self-identified asexuals chose a
sexuality other than asexual on a forced-answer question. This demonstrates the necessity to
differentiate between sexual and romantic attraction; when given a box to clarify an answer of
“other,” participants would specify such orientations as “homoasexual” and “biromantic
asexual.” This took care of the discrepancy almost completely.
“…the association between physiological genital arousal and sexual attraction is neither simple
nor straightforward.” (717)
Subclaim 2: The distinction between sexual and romantic orientation is a key aspect to any
study on asexuality and to understanding the diversity within the asexual community.
Evidence: The study cited in subclaim 1 demonstrated this importance; it is impossible to
study asexuality without acknowledging this dichotomy because, like any other population of
people, asexual-identified individuals are not one unanimous entity with the same feelings.
Failure to acknowledge this diversity within the asexual population will lead to confusion,
conflicting information, and skewed data, not to mention the negative response such studies
might receive from the asexual community should it be brought to the mainstream attention.
“Given the apparent heterogeneity of asexuals, it makes little theoretical sense to approach
asexual people as though they represent a single, homogeneous, and unitary population.” (715)
“The asexual sample required for this type of comparison (i.e., the representative sample) must
be sensitive to diversity within the asexual population.” (715)
“Even if the category of asexual (just like other categories of people, such as gay, White, or
woman) may not be rooted in an objective, substantive reality, the category itself has a social
reality, with a very real impact on people.” (718)
Why use this source: This is the only (academic) source I have found which discusses the
distinction between romantic and sexual orientation, which I definitely want to discuss as I feel
that it is really important to keep in mind when studying or even just discussing the nature of
asexuality and/or the diversity within the self-identified asexual population. I also think that this
distinction is very much under the radar in our culture today, with many people – a majority,
even – completely unaware that it exists and has meaning in plenty of people’s lives. It also has
some solid, workable quotes on diversity and the importance of population samples that
represent that diversity accurately that I will definitely work those into my paper, because that
perspective works as a call to action and is a great example of how research on asexuality can be
improved upon constantly. It also helps to answer the last part of my research question by giving
a simple example of one thing that can aid the asexual community; better academic research and
studies are a stepping stone to better information and acceptance, creating a better climate for the
population as a whole.
Research Question: What is Asexuality? What are the myths about it? Is it a valid sexuality?
What can be done to aid the asexual community?
Source 5: “Combating the stigma against asexuals and aromantics” by Hao-Han Pan
MLA: Pan, Hao-Han. “Combating the stigma against asexuals and aromantics.” Studlife.com.
Washington University, 18 Feb. 2015. Web. 01 Nov. 2015.
Qualifications: The author of this article is a student and therefore has no particular
qualifications. The paper, “Student Life,” is a University paper published by Washington
University, a private research university in St. Louis, Missouri. This is one of the nation’s oldest
student run papers, established in 1878. They have a team of 76 undergraduate students working
on writing, editing, and fact-checking the paper. Each edition prints 6,000 copies due to its
popularity and reputation. They do not seem to exhibit any particular bias. The author is biased
because she references personal relationships she has with asexual individuals.
Main Claim: Asexuals are the “minority within the minority”, and subsequently they are
frequently marginalized not only by the mainstream culture but even within the LGBTQ
community. As a result of this marginalization there is a pervasive stigma and wealth of
misinformation about asexuality and asexual-identifying individuals.
Subclaim 1: Myths include: 1) asexuality is a choice, like celibacy. 2) Having sex means you are
no longer asexual. 3) Asexuality and aromanticism are the same thing. 4) Asexuality and
aromanticism are caused by physical dysfunction, such as hormone imbalance.
Evidence: The author does not really give any specific evidence for these claims. (This is
a result of this being a less academic/credible source; I’ll discuss in my final section, why to use
the source, why I am including it in this annotated bibliography and planning on working it into
my paper.) Because the author is a young student at a university, it is implied that these are
myths which she herself has seen or experienced.
“There are many reasons why asexuals may have sex—to have children, to bond with
non-asexual spouses or even simply because they enjoy the physical sensation of it, even if
they’re not attracted to their partners.”
“It is entirely possible for an asexual to be in a romantic relationship and for an aromantic
to experience sexual attraction.”
Subclaim 2: The stigma against asexuality is real, alive, and harmful.
Evidence: First kisses, first boyfriends/girlfriends, losing virginity, etc. are common rites
of passage in our modern society for youths and young adults, and without these rites individuals
are often widely looked down on and treated as if they are not “real” adults. Our media is
obsessed with sex and love; they make up an entire, main genre of film and literature, as well as
the sub-plots in the vast majority of works in the public mainstream today. They also pervade the
arts, such as music, photography, and illustration. This alienates asexual individuals from any
feeling of inclusion in their culture and community, leading to many asexuals believing they are
“broken.” This mindset is also not at all discouraged by the general public, who are quick to
accuse asexual individuals of just being “attention seeking.”
“To delay these rites is pitiful, though understandable – to opt out of them entirely and
say ‘no thank you, pass the chocolate’ is inconceivable.”
“Flying under the radar doesn’t mean you won’t be shot down.”
Subclaim 3: The LGBTQ community is widely guilty of contributing to the stigma against and
marginalization of asexual individuals and the asexual community as a whole.
Evidence: A landmark case in 2012 conducted by Brock University researchers declared
that across the board, people of all sexualities were most likely to participate in discrimination
and hateful language towards asexual-identified individuals. Asexuals who are active on the
internet often become victims of threats of violence and/or “corrective rape.”
“In the drive to let people freely love whom they love and do what they do, those
uninterested in sex or romantic love all too often fall by the wayside.”
Why use this source: I know that this is not the most technically “good” or reputable source that
I have. It is published by youths, not academic professionals. However I think it is important to
have at least one source that reflects the common person’s point of view, considering that is a
large part of my research question (relating to what myths exist and whether it is “valid”), and a
paper published by a University seemed like the best source to gather information along the lines
of popular opinion, which can’t really be studied in an academic setting. Or at least it hasn’t been
studied in the case of asexuality. This is also the only source I found which devoted the majority
of its body to discussion of the existence of a stigma against asexuals and aromantics; my
academic sources mention this, or mention conflict regarding what qualifies someone as an
asexual, but do not delve into any great detail on the topic. Again, I believe that this is most
likely due to difficulty in studying the topic. It may also be related to the fact that many
academics are still simply arguing that asexuality exists, and not focusing on their treatment or
social reform as of yet.