i think RT has a crush on me

biochemically speaking doesn't matter evidently because the general consensus is that asexuality does exist; the same applying to its subsets

c. robin, muffin man wrote:lol are you implying asexuality doesn't exist

theoretically, asexuality can exist if your body had absolutely no way to have its neurotransmitters pick up sex pheromones

but that would be something that would lead to other non-sexual affects, like cerebral palsy or other damage to nerves (as this deals with neuroreceptors, proteins on neuron soma and axons that pick up these chemicals)

unless you have some other disorder that involves neuroreceptors, "Asexuality" is something that is produced as a lie by your brain, ot something that can be physiologically analyzed like other things

the thing with sexual orientation and the physiology behind it is that people are afraid of orientation being categorized by biochemistry, which is why theres so much illiteracy involved with it

c. robin, muffin man wrote:biochemically speaking doesn't matter evidently because the general consensus is that asexuality does exist; the same applying to its subsets

do you think that the individual neuron gives a shit about general consensus?

the universe wont change the way biochemistry works just because it hurts your feelings

your body is capable of interacting with pheromones and sending signals to your brain which produces sexual desire, period.

nobody knows this because asexuality isn't studied extensively

it's not even agreed that it's a sexual orientation

op a general consensus by scientists generally means that you're shit and wrong andfrom what i'm seeing here there's a pretty clear consensus that it does exist in some form

studies in pheromones can at least give us a logical guess to asexuality and its debunking

asexuality = your brain doesn't care for sex, which is total bullshit

the brain will always read pheromones, which is why you feel all "weird" when near a person of the opposite gender (or preferred). physiological responses occur, and you yourself release your own pheromones. this is how other animals sexually attract mates.

for humans, we are the only species who has sex for reasons other than survival (for pleasure), so we are attracted based on character and physical appearance, which is controlled by how our brain reads pheromones

where the fuck are you getting "brain doesn't care about sex " from?

asexuality literally just means that you don't have sexual attraxtion towards people, it doesn't mean you don't have sexual attraction at all

c. robin, muffin man wrote:op a general consensus by scientists generally means that you're shit and wrong andfrom what i'm seeing here there's a pretty clear consensus that it does exist in some form

yeah, look how many times the "general consensus" was bitched-the-fuck-out-ed in history (evolutionary theory, the proof of DNA by watson and frick, the shape of the earth)

quit holding on to science-ism and understand that the universe wont magically rewrite textbooks to prove a social viewpoint

tomoko's posts are a great example of saying very little with a lot of shit read seconds before from medical journals and wikipedia and shit pulled out of her gaping ass (dolphins and some primate whose name has failed me also get it on for funsies)

c. robin, muffin man wrote:where the fuck are you getting "brain doesn't care about sex " from?

asexuality literally just means that you don't have sexual attraxtion towards people, it doesn't mean you don't have sexual attraction at all

youre going hardcore on semantics

sexual attraction towards people is the only normal sexual attraction that exists in human beings hate to burst your bubble mr hands when you read "No sexual attraction towards others" they dont mean "this person is only into goat sex"

"don't have sexual attraxtion towards people, it doesn't mean you don't have sexual attraction at all"

it means you dont have attraction, but doesn't mean that you dont have attraction

what? please clarify, now im confused

"normal"
furries would beg to differ, friend

salty wrote:tomoko's posts are a great example of saying very little with a lot of shit read seconds before from medical journals and wikipedia and shit pulled out of her gaping ass (dolphins and some primate whose name has failed me also get it on for funsies)

fuck you

before wanting to be a mathematician, i wanted to be a neurosurgeon, so i know what im talking about

read this paper if you want to

http://www.ejog.org/article/S0301-2115(04)00474-9/abstract

also a textbook i recommend is "neuroscience, exploring the brain" by mark bear and barry connors, it explains things better

tomoko kuroki wrote:"don't have sexual attraxtion towards people, it doesn't mean you don't have sexual attraction at all"

it means you dont have attraction, but doesn't mean that you dont have attraction

what? please clarify, now im confused

asexuality is the lack of attraction towards people; it is still possible to have attraction, though

c. robin, muffin man wrote:"normal"
furries would beg to differ, friend

furries are not fucking normal you faggot 99% of the population gay straight bisexual or asexual does not think gardevoir titties or the tiger from kung fu panda are hot

salty wrote:

c. robin, muffin man wrote:"normal"
furries would beg to differ, friend

furries are not fucking normal you faggot 99% of the population gay straight bisexual or asexual does not think gardevoir titties or the tiger from kung fu panda are hot

there are a very significant number of furries in the world so

c. robin, muffin man wrote:

tomoko kuroki wrote:"don't have sexual attraxtion towards people, it doesn't mean you don't have sexual attraction at all"

it means you dont have attraction, but doesn't mean that you dont have attraction

what? please clarify, now im confused

asexuality is the lack of attraction towards people; it is still possible to have attraction, though

bullshit

"lack" and "possession" are complementary antonyms, there is no "middle ground" or "spectrum"

if you have attraction, even the slightest, you aren't asexual, just shy or some shit

you either like people or not, you cant be an "on and off" asexual

tomoko kuroki wrote:

c. robin, muffin man wrote:

tomoko kuroki wrote:"don't have sexual attraxtion towards people, it doesn't mean you don't have sexual attraction at all"

it means you dont have attraction, but doesn't mean that you dont have attraction

what? please clarify, now im confused

asexuality is the lack of attraction towards people; it is still possible to have attraction, though

bullshit

"lack" and "possession" are complementary antonyms, there is no "middle ground" or "spectrum"

if you have attraction, even the slightest, you aren't asexual, just shy or some shit

you either like people or not, you cant be an "on and off" asexual

if you don't have attraction towards people but still have attraction to things then what the fuck does that make you then???

tomoko kuroki wrote:

salty wrote:tomoko's posts are a great example of saying very little with a lot of shit read seconds before from medical journals and wikipedia and shit pulled out of her gaping ass (dolphins and some primate whose name has failed me also get it on for funsies)

fuck you

before wanting to be a mathematician, i wanted to be a neurosurgeon, so i know what im talking about

read this paper if you want to

http://www.ejog.org/article/S0301-2115(04)00474-9/abstract

also a textbook i recommend is "neuroscience, exploring the brain" by mark bear and barry connors, it explains things better

i see nothing in the abstract that explicitly says that a lack of human sexual attraction is implausible as a result of their findings

i totally believe that 420% of the dudes on tumblr saying theyre asexual are just pussies though

hey tomoko
http://www.asexuality.org/home/overview.html
http://www.asexuality.org/home/general.html#ex1

stop

c. robin, muffin man wrote:

tomoko kuroki wrote:

c. robin, muffin man wrote:

tomoko kuroki wrote:"don't have sexual attraxtion towards people, it doesn't mean you don't have sexual attraction at all"

it means you dont have attraction, but doesn't mean that you dont have attraction

what? please clarify, now im confused

asexuality is the lack of attraction towards people; it is still possible to have attraction, though

bullshit

"lack" and "possession" are complementary antonyms, there is no "middle ground" or "spectrum"

if you have attraction, even the slightest, you aren't asexual, just shy or some shit

you either like people or not, you cant be an "on and off" asexual

if you don't have attraction towards people but still have attraction to things then what the fuck does that make you then???

it means your asexuality is bullshit, its just shyness, and it also means you have fetishes for objects like gardevoir titties, that's what it means!

c. robin, muffin man wrote:

salty wrote:

c. robin, muffin man wrote:"normal"
furries would beg to differ, friend

furries are not fucking normal you faggot 99% of the population gay straight bisexual or asexual does not think gardevoir titties or the tiger from kung fu panda are hot

there are a very significant number of furries in the world so

if there are 10 million animal fuckers and god forbid there are that many then over 99.9859% of humans do not get off to that shit

c. robin, muffin man wrote:hey tomoko
http://www.asexuality.org/home/overview.html
http://www.asexuality.org/home/general.html#ex1

stop

your gay website just says "asexuals identify as x" there is no explanation of the condition

c. robin, muffin man wrote:hey tomoko
http://www.asexuality.org/home/overview.html
http://www.asexuality.org/home/general.html#ex1

stop

theres no explanation to anything behind asexuality, its just a beta-support group

salty wrote:

c. robin, muffin man wrote:hey tomoko
http://www.asexuality.org/home/overview.html
http://www.asexuality.org/home/general.html#ex1

stop

your gay website just says "asexuals identify as x" there is no explanation of the condition

p sureyou missed the point

tomoko kuroki wrote:

c. robin, muffin man wrote:hey tomoko
http://www.asexuality.org/home/overview.html
http://www.asexuality.org/home/general.html#ex1

stop

theres no explanation to anything behind asexuality, its just a beta-support group

that's not the point faggoat