Getting started on an introductory page

One of the first projects we should try is an introductory page explaining what we are, what we aren't, and the issues we face. I've pieced together some information posted in the Site Info and Announcements board, but that's mainly about the language-related issues surrounding this community.

I also have plans of creating a site that will host articles written by us. The first three projects I'd like to get started with are:

1. An introductory, or 101 page.
2. A general FAQ.
3. A forum-specific FAQ.

What would you want to see on them? This is a thread for ideas, and drafting.

I pinned this thread, and am looking for input. I think the first thing to get started with would be the introductory page that gives an overview of what we are, and what we aren't.

On the overview, I'd like to show that we have differing paths that led to rejecting sex, differing reasons for it, and differing viewpoints, but also show what unites us. I've attempted something like this before, but it mostly fell apart due to lack of input (one other person showed interest, knows what they want to write about, and still does, but they're busy with other things too).

Here is my view on what antisexualism is:

I. Antisexualism is an ideology that is against sexual activity.

II. Antisexualism opposes all forms of sexual activity, including, but not limited to: sexual intercourse, foreplay, mutual masturbation and self-stimulation.

III. An antisexualist is an individual who supports and identifies with the antisexual movement.

Here is my view on what antisexualism is not:

I. Antisexualism is not the same as celibacy or abstinence. Instead of representing a habit (or lack of), antisexualism represents an ideological stance against all forms of sexual activity. For example, an individual does not necessarily need to be a virgin in order to be antisexual, they only need to be in opposition of the practice of sexual activity.

II. Antisexualism is not a political system or a religion. Furthermore, antisexualism does not explicitly oppose a political system or a religion. Some antisexualists are religious and or political.

III. Antisexualism is not a sexual orientation, nor is it explicitly against any sexual orientation. For example, antisexualism is not explicitly against someone who feels sexual attraction towards another, but it is against sexual behaviour. Therefore, antisexualism should not be considered a "hate group" towards irreversible traits, like skin colour, ancestral history or reproductive organs.

Note: The term "hate speech" and "hate group" is often used to silence ideological dissenters. Anyone claiming that antisexualism is a "hate group" should be aware that antisexualism is against sexual behaviour (or more specifically, consented sexual behaviour). If antisexualism is truly a "hate group", then so is all the groups against smoking tobacco, alcohol intoxication and or drug abuse, but of course all those behaviours are commonly accepted as harmful.

Keep in mind that I have put an effort to isolate the definition of antisexualism and not mix it with other ideologies.

That doesn't mean shaming others for consensual activity, does it, like how antinatalism doesn't automatically mean shaming people who do have biological children? I disagree with "sex-positivity", but I also disagree with shaming or attacking people just for having consensual sexual activity.

However, that still leaves room to discuss the many drawbacks of sex in general, and there are ethical concerns surrounding sex in general, even when it's consensual. Among those concerns: 1. How meaningful is consent, in a world where the expectation to want, and have sex is pushed on everyone as a whole, and sexual objectification is rampant? 2. Relationships being destroyed by cheating on one's partner.

It's best to save the hate for the sexual abusers. It goes without saying that we're against sexual violence in all forms, and hate those who commit it for what they did.

I've seen people say that someone must be sex-positive if they don't shame others for having consensual sex, but that's a false dichotomy. It's possible to not shame others for having consensual sex, while disagreeing with the statement that sex a positive thing in general.

What I also see is supporting those who choose to not have sex, and support them in a world that keeps telling them that their choice isn't valid, or constantly feel pressured to justify it. I actually see the antisexual community as something on the defensive. We're not here to impose our views on others, as that would be hypocritical, but find those who rejected sex and need support, or are looking to reject sex. I'd say we're also seeking how to cope against unwanted sexuality, especially for those of us who aren't asexual.

I would not bother attempting to shame a sodomite, however, outside of a work environment, I want nothing to do with them.

In fact, given the option, I would support the segregation of the guilty from the innocent, especially in order to not only feel more comfortable, but also to protect the innocent.

ForeverPure wrote:I would not bother attempting to shame a sodomite, however, outside of a work environment, I want nothing to do with them.

In fact, given the option, I would support the segregation of the guilty from the innocent, especially in order to not only feel more comfortable, but also to protect the innocent.

I'm not completely sure what you mean in this context. Is what you call a sodomite, the same as what I've described here as a sexophile?

We'd also need to keep loaded words to a minimum, or at the very least, be as clear and specific as we can, to reduce the chances of what we say being taken the wrong way.

Admin wrote:

ForeverPure wrote:I would not bother attempting to shame a sodomite, however, outside of a work environment, I want nothing to do with them.

In fact, given the option, I would support the segregation of the guilty from the innocent, especially in order to not only feel more comfortable, but also to protect the innocent.

I'm not completely sure what you mean in this context. Is what you call a sodomite, the same as what I've described here as a sexophile?

We'd also need to keep loaded words to a minimum, or at the very least, be as clear and specific as we can, to reduce the chances of what we say being taken the wrong way.

Taken in the wrong way? This website is dedicated to the resistance movement against sexualism, is it not? My definition of "sodomite" is anyone who commits immoral sexual behaviour - which includes any sexual activity that involves another person.

The whole "asexual" movement has already been corrupted by individuals obscuring and blurring the lines between what is "sexual" behaviour and what is not. Antisexualism is going down a similar route. I feel this may be the case because of an on-going censorship campaign against "offensive content" - which of course is always vaguely defined.

I am not the only one who fears that in the future an authoritarian sodomite state will make "offending" anyone illegal in the name of preventing "hate speech". Just like how the Rainbow Fascists (also known as the "LGBT" - Lewd Group of Barbarous Teenagers)  are going absolutely insane over their "right to marriage" and encouraging "tolerance" while completely contradicting themselves through the practice of censorship.

In fact, the more the sodomites attempt to censor the movement against their barbaric practices, the more the innocent will be compelled to take action.

The interesting thing is...you never quite see much censorship going against the sodomites. They have infected the entire media industry: television, internet, magazines, music, film, the list goes on and on... When they see a movement that actually encourages abstinence and is against others from doing otherwise they view it as a threat. I think it is clear that being pressured not to engage in sexual activities is clearly a lot better than being pressured to engage in sexual activities. You may think it is wrong to pressure individuals to be abstinent, but then again, individuals are pressured for a lot of other harmful activities as well: drinking and driving, abusing drugs, consuming artificial sugar that causes obesity and especially tobacco usage.

You see, "sexuality" is not an entirely private matter because it is not isolated to private conditions. The sodomites preach their activities literally everywhere, they exchange bodily fluids from their mouths in public, they disturb others with their poorly parented children (which they could have chosen adoption instead) and are more likely to engage in other impulsive behaviours that lead to harming other people's lives (drunk driving).

If you do not "tolerate" their barbarianism, they label you a "hater" and then also try to enact laws to get you arrested and criminally charged for "discrimination". Sexuality is no longer a "private" matter in many societies and due to the lack of proper enforcement, the sodomites have been able to infiltrate and infect almost all layers of society. Only certain religious groups are partially against sodomy, while others have given into the hypocritical movement of "political correctness".

Are you referring to all LGBT with that statement, or the mainstream movement? Keep in mind, that there are LGBT people who don't want sex, and feel isolated within the mainstream LGBT movement because of it.

Of course we're about encouraging not having sex, and supporting those who don't want sex, but we need to find the most effective way to live up to that goal. There exist other sexual abstinence movements, but they're predominantly religious, and are only about abstaining until marriage. Some outright say that they believe that sex is inherently good, but believe it's "proper" place to be practiced is marriage. Their values clash with ours.

Another issue, is that some of those movements, especially in fundamentalist circles, use all kinds of shaming tactics AND doesn't teach anything on how to abstain from sex nor cope with sexuality, so many they end up having sex before marriage anyways, but more recklessly. The areas where this is prevalent have the highest rates of STDs, premarital sex, and unplanned pregnancies. In fact, the tactics used often backfire, and hypersexualize situations that most people wouldn't, and reinforce the belief that people can't control themselves!

Those are pitfalls we need to avoid. We believe people can control themselves, and deserve to be held accountable. I see what you mean with censorship though. It's a shame that the statement of mind over matter, or people being greater than their urges, can be interpreted as "elitist" though. I've been accused of elitism because I believed that.

We have to be clear on what we are, because we're not like those other abstinence groups, which are most people's first impression. At the same time, this community has a range of views on specific points, and that diversity is important.

Admin wrote:Are you referring to all LGBT with that statement, or the mainstream movement? Keep in mind, that there are LGBT people who don't want sex, and feel isolated within the mainstream LGBT movement because of it.

By "LGBT" I am directly referring to those involved with the social movement. I find it interesting that many of these movements preach "equality" yet at the same time differentiate themselves with labels.

I'm just about ready to create a site where the introductory page, FAQ, and other article ideas would go. I have in mind hosting it on Wordpress, because it's free and easy to use, though I don't like that WP sites aren't very customizable without paying for upgrades.

The first issue is the URL to use, because iamfortress is taken. I thought of something like "resistingsexualsociety", but is that too unwieldy?

After that is set up, who wants to help with those first 3 proposed projects?

.

I just got started on the main page now, it isn't up yet since there's still a lot of work that needs to be done before the first version is ready to go public. I've already written an introduction, the first few questions for an FAQ page, and a misconceptions page. I'd like to also write a page detailing the different reasons someone may be antisexual, and would especially like help with it.

Pure Life wrote:Antisexual people are smart people who has seen what's going on in this world, how sex-obsessed people has become, how everything is about sex, sex, sex nowadays. Everyone has to be hot and they must want to have sex. If they are not in that way, they get either categorized as mentally ill people or not taken seriously. If you look at the movies, TV-programs etc, you can see that everything is always about same story, a girl falls in love with 2 guys and drama, sex, drama, sex, drama etc.

One of our main goals is affirming that there's nothing wrong with not wanting sex, and fighting against the misconceptions and stigmas people face for choosing to not have it. It's an ideal that wouldn't just help us, but society as a whole, because people would be happier knowing that they don't have to have sex.

That pressure to have sex, and how inevitable it seems, reminds me of the people who've gotten married and had children only because they thought everyone did, or thought they were supposed to, even though that lifestyle may make them unhappy. They never did decide for themselves whether they wanted to get married, because that was never even presented as an option.

So the antisexuality for me is to push down the sex-obsession that exists today. I feel like women has become as something that exist only to fulfill the mens desires, and many women they want "love" from men so they give them what the men wish for, they fix bigger lips, bigger boobs, even their butt!! and they pay alot of money to look like the women that is in every mans dream. many of these women have bad self esteem from the beginning, they don't appreciate themselves. This world has become like a mans world. And the women they themselves are so brainwashed that they don't even see this. If you ask them about the surgeries, they will say that they did it for themselves and not anyone else. Like yea, shall I believe something like that? lol So if you lived on an island, and there were only you and animals would you still make all those cosmetic surgeries? ahahahahaaa, I don't believe what they are making all those surgeries for themselves.

It raises an interesting question though: Do we not want sex because it's shoved everywhere, or did we not want it anyways, but it's shoved everywhere, so we need to fight against it to defend our right to not have sex?

For some, and including me, I saw turning to antisexuality as a way of keeping my bodily autonomy, when I almost lost it. You also mentioned a pragmatic reason: So much time, energy and money is spent trying to attract sexual partners, and so many people let that overtake their lives. They put their attractiveness to other people over the qualities that matter more.

I've been in a relationship where I felt like an object and I hated it. I felt like an object, and my partner's "property" when he introduced me to other people, and thought that they just saw me as that and nothing else, and that who I am as an individual didn't matter.

I have been on forums were the women are worried about how their v----a looks, they upload photos on their private parts and ask people what they think about it, and if they should do surgeries to make it look beautiful eh.. Seriously, you can google it yourself, both men and women are worried about how their private parts looks like, and some people do make surgeries to make it look beautiful and some by the way have you heard about genital piercing?

I find it ridiculous, and sad that so many people are worried what those parts look like, and spend so much money altering them, presumably to please their partner.

This world has gone waayyy too far. anyways, the antisexuality for me is to remove all these sex-obsession in the world. Antisexuals (those who can) should try to spread the message in real life as well, putting up leaflets here and there were the people are.. The children and teenagers should be protected from all these disgusting way of life. I know that there are people nowdadays who have sex with their friends, they call it "kk" in swedish, it means f-k-friend. They have boyfriends/girlfriends and friends who they have sex with sometimes as well, so when their partners find out about.. DRAMA/THREATS/JEALOUSY/FIGHT/BREAK UP/KILL.......

There's so much drama surrounding sexual relationships. In the thread about romance, I asked if romantic relationships without sex would be worth it, though they can still be subject to the same kind of drama. However, with the example you mentioned, there's an issue of these people not telling their partners about seeing other people. Seeing other behind their partner's backs is cheating. Some of that cheating can be prevented if these people were honest to their partners, and their partners approved, but some people don't care that what they're doing is cheating, and care more about the sex they're getting.

.

" I mean there are 11 years old children who have sex nowadays and they get pregnant, not because they want to build a family but because they were sexualy aroused and excited about all the sex they have seen in their favorite TV-series and movies so they could not wait to try it."

That's disturbing and sad.  When I was 11, I had just learned how babies are made.  (And that was back when my boy-crazy phase was at its peak.  I wanted a boyfriend, but I was kind of naive about sex.)  This was back in the late nineties, when the Internet was around, but it wasn't as ubiquitous as it is today.  Not many kids owned cell phones, and texting and social networking didn't exist.  (Boy, I'm starting to feel old, ha!)  Anyway, now that sexual content is easier for minors to access, it's harder to protect them from such propaganda.


"One of our main goals is affirming that there's nothing wrong with not wanting sex, and fighting against the misconceptions and stigmas people face for choosing to not have it. It's an ideal that wouldn't just help us, but society as a whole, because people would be happier knowing that they don't have to have sex."

Stumbling across the Antisexual Stronghold helped me with being honest with myself.  Before discovering the website, I knew that deep inside me, I found sexual situations repulsive and offensive, but I didn't want to admit that to anyone, not even myself.  I spent years trying to convince myself that my feelings were weird and I should like, or at least tolerate sex.  Then, I came across AVEN, which had the message that it's okay to not have sex, but I shouldn't condemn it as a whole, and I tried to think that way.  Some years later by accident, I found the Antisexual Stronghold website, and found it ridiculous at first.  But, I kept visiting the website and finally learned to accept my true feelings towards antisexuality.  I am very grateful for the website (even though it doesn't exist anymore), and for forums like these.  If I didn't explore them and kept living in denial, I probably would have made decisions that would be difficult or impossible to reverse, such as you mentioned above: getting married and having children without giving it much thought.  I'm a borderline hermit, so I can't imagine sharing living space with anyone besides my cat.  (I lived with roommates for a while, and without going into detail, that was a dud.)  

You're right.  Hopefully one day, being antisexual wouldn't be seen as something to be cured from.

Thanks for sharing your experiences and insights! I may have to split them off into a new topic so they can still get their own attention without getting lost in this thread.

This is the current progress with the first 3 proposed projects:

1. An introductory, or 101 page.
2. A general FAQ.
3. A forum-specific FAQ.

I don't have anything written for the forum-specific FAQ yet, but are there any questions about the forum policies, and code of conduct that anyone has? I wrote a little bit about it in the introductory thread, but is there anything I need to elaborate on.

The general FAQ has been started on the main site, and is a rough draft with a few questions up. What other questions anyone would want to add to it?

The "About" page on the main site describes some of the introductory information, though more about the site itself, than what we are. Either on the same page, or on a separate page, I also had in mind adding sections that explain:

• How much or little someone physically desires sex isn't necessarily related to how much they want and value it: there are asexuals that can enjoy sex despite no desire for it, and there are antisexuals who aren't asexual.
  
• How our attitudes towards romance vary, and why some would also be antiromantic.
  
• The challenges we face, including: lack of information (including the lack of information on how to effectively cope with unwanted sexuality), the various misconceptions, and still being at risk of being pathologized.
  
• I've written a section explaining how we could still technically be pathologized, based on the fact that the criteria used for Sexual Aversion Disorder and Hypoactive Sexual Desire Disorder. SAD was removed as a diagnosis, but the redefinition of HSDD still doesn't account for the reasons why someone would feel distress.