Step 1: Blog about asexuality
Step 2: Cake
Step 3: ???
Step 4: Profit!
SF Human Rights Comm… on A Designated Person luvtheheaven on Asexual Prevalence in the ACHA… Chrysocolla Town on Asexual Prevalence in the ACHA… Chrysocolla Town on Asexual Prevalence in the ACHA… Chrysocolla Town on Asexual Prevalence in the ACHA…
Category Archives: Asexual Research
Today I wanted to highlight a pretty cool but little known new source of potential asexual prevalency information: The ACHA NCHA II. (s/o to David Jay for sending me a link to this!) The ACHA-National College Health Assessment II (ACHA-NCHA II) … Continue reading
Now that the Asexual Explorations bibliography has officially been retired, there is a dearth of good resources for people who want to start reading up on asexual research but have no idea where to start. Bibliographies – whether comprehensive or … Continue reading
A/N: This is mostly a linkdump, but may be of interest if you are an ace history nerd interested in the history of “A” in one particular LGBTQIA Acronym One of the first places that I remember seeing “LGBTQIA” with … Continue reading
It’s that time of year again – we are now recruiting participants for the ace community census! The ace community census is an annual survey by the Asexual Visibility and Education Network which collects valuable information on the demographics and … Continue reading
First, a big shoutout to my mom for finding this as a used book, knowing it was relevant to my interests and bringing it back for me! Also, if this kind of historical snippet is up your alley, consider joining … Continue reading
This post is about a single sentence, and the story of how a single citation of “fact” can be wrong in so many ways. This example was only a single sentence, but it’s a good example of a larger problem in the growing field of “asexuality studies”.
The story start’s in Sinwell’s recent essay, where she starts off with what seems a fairly simple claim: “According to Anthony Bogaert, between 1% and 6% of the American population describe themselves as Asexual”. Seemed straightforward, which is why at first, I was confused – I was sure I’d read all of Bogaert’s work, how could I have missed that!
Of course, it turns out I hadn’t missed it, it was just flat out wrong – it’s an incredibly confused misinterpretation at best, or deliberate deception at worst. Even then, it took a little bit of detective work to figure out where she was pulling that claim from, since it’s most likely from several different bits of data that have been mashed together. Continue reading