‘Category X’: What’s the science behind asexuality?

Credit: David Allan Barker
Credit: David Allan Barker

“Asexuality is an identity on equal footing with heterosexuality, homosexuality and so on”, says Sunniva Árja Tobiasen.

She is one of the few academics in Norway who has immersed herself in research on asexuality, during her master’s programme at the University of Oslo. Unlike other sexual identities, people don’t talk much about being asexual in our society.

For some individuals, it can therefore be difficult to reconcile themselves to the fact that they do not feel a sexual attraction to other people.

Follow the latest news and policy debates on sustainable agriculture, biomedicine, and other ‘disruptive’ innovations. Subscribe to our newsletter.

The first time asexuality was described in a way similar to how we think of it today was in 1954. In the Kinsey report on women’s sexual habits and behaviour, the authors introduced category X:

Finally, an individual receives the designation X if he or she does not react erotically to either heterosexual or homosexual stimuli.

Both Tobiasen and [professor Randi Elin] Gressgård believe that the medical community has contributed to pathologizing asexuality.

The definition of diagnoses labelled sexual dysfunctions overlaps with the description of being asexual.

“Experiencing little or no sexual desire does not have to mean that something is wrong,” says Tobiasen.

This is an excerpt. Read the original post here.

{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.singularReviewCountLabel }}
{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.pluralReviewCountLabel }}
{{ options.labels.newReviewButton }}
{{ userData.canReview.message }}

Related Articles

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Does glyphosate—the world's most heavily-used herbicide—pose serious harm to humans? Is it carcinogenic? Those issues are of both legal and ...

Most Popular

Screenshot-2026-04-22-at-12.21.32-PM
Viewpoint: Why the retracted Monsanto glyphosate study doesn’t change the science—the world’s most popular herbicide is safe 
ChatGPT-Image-Apr-16-2026-02_56_53-PM
Financial incentives, over diagnosis, and weak oversight: Autism claims are driving up Medicare costs
Picture1
The FDA couldn’t find a vaccine safety crisis, so it buried its own research
ChatGPT-Image-May-1-2026-11_42_59-AM-2
Viewpoint: NAD is the wellness grifters latest evidence-lite longevity fad. At least the mice are impressed.
global warming
‘Implausible’: Top climate scientists reject worst-case scenario—soaring temperatures and fast-rising sea levels
Screenshot-2026-05-21-at-12.15.17-PM
UK gene-editing milestone: Livestock barley that increases ruminant value and reduces methane emissions is first-approved CRISPR crop
Screenshot-2026-05-21-at-3.15.53-PM
Chiropractors may no longer be modern-day snake oil salesmen, but the benefits of their therapy are limited–at best

Sorry. No data so far.

glp menu logo outlined

Get news on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.