Asexual Identity And Community: Article Analysis

In her article, Scherrer describes how language and naming are important in constructing asexual identities and communities. Though not all individuals experience asexuality in this way, it is commonly defined as lacking romantic, sexual, and physical attraction towards other individuals (Scherrer 2008). Using language from a predominately heteronormative society such as binary understandings of sex and gender affect the construction of an asexual identity. For example, many individuals who were interviewed described their sexuality in relation to the gender of their partner and limited definitions of sexual behaviors to androcentric views of vaginal sex (2008). Being able to name acts as sexual versus nonsexual or romantic versus aromantic removes limitations on a strict definition of asexuality, giving individuals freedom to define their identity differently. Similarly, using essentialist language when discussing asexuality constructs a community that views
The Asexuality Visibility and Education Network provides a safe space for support and discourse where individuals can explore their identities and establish a platform that is often suppressed in dominant society (2008). Here, asexuals expand their identities when labeling themselves as romantic asexuals, aromantic asexuals, queer asexuals, or bi-asexuals. For example, a romantic asexual may enjoy a partnership and engage in kissing, but not sex. The distinctions drawn between sexual or romantic experiences allow individuals to feel different emotions and attractions other than lust. The language in AVEN allows individuals to legitimize their own feelings and allows them to explain their identity to themselves and others. Language is important, as many individuals could not make sense of their identity until discovering the term asexuality and began claiming it as their