Talk:Antisexualism

I'm just wondering...

... are the people who are staunchly opposed to all forms of sex perhaps just cranky because they're not getting any? It's something worth considering ;) 24.189.87.160 (talk) 08:01, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

      This isn't a place to debate about anti-sexualism. Please don't be toxic. 100.36.232.242 (talk) 05:25, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

Reasons for antisexualism

I removed this section again because although it later appeared to be sourced, the single source appeared to make nine points (in Russian, btw, and were difficult to translate) whereas the article listed fourteen points. Where did the other points come from? In addition, much of it was still written in the second person. Erpert ^{Who is this guy? | Wanna talk about it?} 07:56, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

i think we should get it back, but get someone to translate it, otherwise people will think antisexuals are stupid or something, oh well, we can remove it for now

some sites have quoted this part, saying it is from wikipedia so will be confused if they come back 90.211.72.234 (talk) 17:17, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

nevermind this is pretty old (didnt see 2012 lol)

we should addd it back sometime soon 90.211.72.234 (talk) 17:18, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

Is Terminology section NPOV?

It seems biased against antisexuals, by the article calling them “coitophobic” and “prudish”. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 100.36.232.242 (talk) 04:30, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Agreed and corrected.

79.190.7.114 (talk) 79.190.7.114 (talk) 07:38, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

Not all antisexuals are fully sex negative, only birth control negative

Like I, I wish there was another term for antisexuals who believe in sex only for reproduction, and you should abstain (and I am not religious), procreationists maybe (obviously it won't be on Wikipedia unless it gets coverage)

I believe society in the west is too hypersexual, why want a 5 minute activity for some 5 second pleasure which you regret after, unless it brings a child, heck even multiple times for the exact same thing. But this isn't always a good argument, chocolate brings us dopamine, so why restrict it. But when it comes at the cost of a potential child, and contraception could have stopped your existence, I argue this, as eating chocolate doesn't really lead to a child. Sexual desire now has no purpose to us, we aren't animals, it only brings us down.

Also some men say sex should only be for procreation but oh no they just want to control women and enjoy the sex themselves. As a male I think this is wrong, in his mind, he should be thinking of creation, not sex as the outcome of this activity (although this is impractical for most men) cause too many men think women want 20 children or something, and use this argument for their gratification (See US and abortion, abortion bans are... too easily exploitable. Maybe artificial wombs will solve the problem).

90.211.72.234 (talk) 17:27, 31 January 2025 (UTC)