Anonymous said: I identify as an ace, and was just wondering, is it possible for aces to experience 'wet dreams'? Because I haven't, and if it's really uncommon it can maybe an indicator? (this sounds really unscientific i am just wondering)


Yeah, they probably could, but without sexual attraction giving us more food for fantasy, it’s less likely. Dreams are how we process the events of the day. So if your daily events don’t include anything sexual, you probably won’t dream of anything sexual and therefore won’t have wet dreams.


If the poster is referring to nocturnal emissions, they are a physiological response that does not necessarily correspond to having a dream with sexual content.  They just kind of happen.

They don’t happen to everyone, though.  Apparently, about 15-20% of people (regardless of orientation) have never had one.  Those that do have them vary widely in frequency, and frequency will tend to drop off with age.

You might not even be aware that you’re having them.  They’re not necessarily connected to sex dreams (or any dreams at all), and not all sex dreams will lead to a nocturnal emission.  If you wake up during or just after, you might notice, but if you sleep through it, it could be dry by the morning and not leave much trace behind.

I had a few that I noticed when I was a teenager, but as far as I’m aware, I haven’t had one in years.  I do, however, have sex or masturbation dreams a couple of times a year.


Does anyone have any links to specific resources for sex-repulsed people? Like, things on how to cope with compulsory sexuality & being sex-repulsed in a society that places so much emphasis on sex?

Or, are there any sex-repulsed people reading this who would be willing to be a resource for…

This month’s Carnival topic is Repulsion/Aversion:

You might find some useful resources there.



Throwing this out to the world.

Let me know if you have any feedback, in particular, if you have any better ways to respond to some of these comments.

I’d like this to be a living section of the site, with new additions from time to time.

I have nothing to say right now except that I will be adding this to my resources immediately. I’ve been eagerly awaiting your deconstruction of these comments and I’m really excited to read through everything you’ve mapped out here. I really like the idea of separating the types of comments into categories, giving examples of subcategories, distilling them, and giving a rationalization of why these attitudes (represented by these comments) are a problem.

Can’t even imagine the headaches that must’ve come from this, but thank you for creating this insightful resource and set of reactions.

Yeah, the headaches…

At first, I was angry.  Then I started laughing at their ridiculousness.  By the end, I was just tired and wanted to be done with it.  It took so much longer than I wanted it to that eventually I had to force it out.  (And unfortunately, I think it shows…)  There were three or four more sections that I wanted to write originally, but there are only so many ways to say “People suck, here’s why” before you just can’t do it anymore.

I may eventually get around to those lost sections, but I didn’t want to hold up what I already had written any longer.  I should’ve done it as a monthly installment series from the start…



Throwing this out to the world.

Let me know if you have any feedback, in particular, if you have any better ways to respond to some of these comments.

I’d like this to be a living section of the site, with new additions from time to time.

Would you be able to add a break down of the count/distribution of the types of comments?
If you’re planning to make it a living section it would be interesting to be able to have an easy way to see if their is trend in the types of comments over time.

In the master post, I did include the raw source data:

My single-pass, largely arbitrary classification count is here:  It’s very loose, since I just wanted to get an idea of which types of comments were most common, and not a completely accurate count of their frequency.  You should not perform any analysis based on the numbers in that file, because it will not be accurate.  (I also learned that I really should have tagged all the comments as I went, instead of just counting them this way.  It’s now impossible to figure out exactly which comments I thought fit into which buckets, which made finding examples of each type rather difficult months later…)

The complete set of comments (As of sometime in January/February) can be found here:  They’re grouped by article and by thread, and have been anonymized.  (Although it’s grouped by article, the article title isn’t mentioned in the file.  I’m pretty sure it was in order.  I’m also not sure if I included the comments from the table of contents and the infographic pages.)  If someone wanted to do a more thorough classification or determine the ratio of Positive to Neutral to Negative comments on the article, that would be the place to start.

As far as including the number of related comments as part of each section, I deliberately did not want to do that.  Partly, this was because I was so loose with my tally (Both in numbering and classification), that any numbers I gave wouldn’t really be accurate.  Beyond that, I didn’t really feel that the numbers would have been relevant to the final categories.  It doesn’t really matter if one got 27 hits and another only had 3.  Sometimes the one that had just three comments needed to be torn down more than the one with far more.

I don’t know that it would be possible to do an accurate break down of comments over time, because the site that the article is on will greatly affect the type of comments received.  I think what could be interesting is if someone did a break down of the types of comments made based on the sites they’re made on.  The Huffington Post series was posted in their “Gay Voices” section (Although I think one of the articles did get front page headline exposure for a while), so the readers of that series probably leaned left and gay.  And you could see that in the comments, both positive and negative.  Even the exact same article posted two places can get different treatment.  There was that clueless Australian sex therapist spouting nonsense about a month ago.  On the original site, many of the comments were positive and called the author out.  However, when it got picked up by a news aggregator site, the comments took on a more negative tone.

Throwing this out to the world.

Let me know if you have any feedback, in particular, if you have any better ways to respond to some of these comments.

I’d like this to be a living section of the site, with new additions from time to time.

Where are people getting the idea that “cisgender” means “straight”?  Because I keep seeing people say things like “I thought I was cisgender, but I might be asexual instead” or “I’m cisgender, so I don’t understand what it’s like to be gay”, which does not compute.  Those are not mutually exclusive things. The two concepts not even remotely contradictory.  It’s like saying “I’m tall, so I don’t understand what it’s like to have bad eyesight”.  What?  No, that’s not how it works.

Are they independent misunderstandings, or is someone actively giving out a bad definition?


So. For the long time I thought I was cisgendered and I was fine with it even though I thought I was horrible at maintaining sex drive. It’s always felt like I have to pretend to be something else, or that maybe it’s just natural for a girl to not think about sex all the time. I started doing some research.
The more I read about being asexual….. The more I know I’m asexual.
I don’t know how to feel about this.
Time to do more research!!

Being cisgender and being asexual are not mutually exclusive.  Cisgender is a gender identity, while asexuality is a sexual orientation.  If you’re cisgender, then the body parts you were born with match your gender, in other words, you’re a woman with a vagina or a man with a penis, in other words, anyone who’s not trans.  It’s possible to be cisgender and any sexual orientation.

Green Apple Skittles Suck

This needed to be said.  Bring back the lime.

Did you really think that claiming that asexuality doesn’t exist would make it through the moderation queue on my site?  I do appreciate that you posted on the “Things That Are Just Plain Wrong” article, though.

And….  deleted!

I really need to start a collection of the reactions of people who are liveblogging their first viewing of the asexuality episode of House.

It’s really depressing to see the initial elation get crushed into a flaming pile of rage over the course of an hour.  It’s an example of why we need more visibility and better representation.