Originally, part of my dialog included thoughts about whether as a species we've grown past sex. Any time we tackle a subject, we risk the possibility of not doing it justice. I apologize that you feel I did you a disservice. It was not my intent.Of all the things you could possibly say about asexuality, this one really gets me. It offends me as an asexual and as a skeptic. If there's one way to make House's portrayal of asexuality even worse, this is it.
Asexuality is a new topic for me and definitely one I find fascinating. It is a subject I would like to continue to explore here or ..on future shows I write for. I think it speaks to where humans are now and where we are going. I will do my best in the future to do it justice. Thank you for feedback and please share any and all thoughts.
I'm not really sure where people get this idea, that asexuality is the future. It's comparable to Creationism in how wrong it is on evolution. It's a magical worldview, where cultural saturation of sex will somehow spawn asexuals as a spiritual counterweight. It's a false equation between "evolution" and "progress". It's a mythical view of the pure, superhuman asexual. It just doesn't make any sense no matter how I look at it.
Nonetheless, this is not the first time I've heard it. In fact, I hear it from several different quarters.
1. People who think they're helping.
Sometimes I get this response from non-asexuals who are trying to affirm asexuality. How else to affirm it, but by saying what you think is great about it? Maybe you think chastity is christ-like, or that society is so oversexed that it's desensitizing itself. Asexuals sure sound chaste, and maybe they're part of the coming Great Desensitization!
Ugh! If asexuals are chaste, it's not usually because they hold it up as a virtue. It's because they would rather be chaste, regardless of whether or not they happen to think it is a virtue. I certainly do not regard chastity as a virtue; furthermore, like many other asexuals, I am not chaste. I find it really offensive to stuff these "values" into my mouth and pretend that's what I asked for.
If you talk about how extraordinarily great asexuals are, that's missing the point. Asexuals are ordinary people. Sexuals are ordinary people. Neither is a choice, and both can result in functional human beings, so why is it suddenly a moral thing? And what induces a person to say that they themselves are in the immoral, lesser group, I'll never understand.
2. People who think that's what I say.
Observe that the religious right is always stuffing their values of "purity" into your face. Asexuals sure sound pure. They think they're better than us! They're be hijacking the discourse of sexual identity in order to advance the "family values" agenda!
If I really were advocating everyone be more abstinent, and if I really were using my identity as a way to protect my politics from criticism, then my critics would be absolutely justified. This is what I am afraid would happen in House. An asexual character, written by a clueless non-asexual, says something clueless. And then viewers (especially my friends in skepticism) would call out the BS, and they would be right to do so.
Meanwhile, in the real world, asexuality actually made me even more liberal on sexual issues. Before I knew I was asexual, the only way I could make sense of the world was by assuming people were almost like me, but exaggerating their sexuality. Now I know better. Now I recognize that there is wide variation in sexuality, and what seems unthinkable to one person is the reality of the next person. I've heard so many times the idea that more sexuality is better, and that's wrong. But if I simply reversed it, saying less sexuality is better, that would also be wrong as well as hypocritical.
3. Asexuals who say it, putting me down.
A corollary of "asexuals are ordinary people" is that some asexuals will also believe some wacky things. They're put in a senseless position in life, and they have to make sense of it. And why not make sense of it in a self-flattering way? I'm not weird, I'm above it all. I'm the next step. Sex has been cheapened and no one takes it seriously anymore.
The trouble, besides the blatant misunderstanding of evolution, is that other asexuals don't "fit" into this picture. As a gray-A, I definitely don't fit into the picture. To them I'm not a "real" asexual, I'm just a sexual trying to be like them. As if I would try to be like anything. I have one foot on each side, and I didn't get to be this way by thinking one side is "better" than the other. What am I to them, a pervert, half a pervert? I don't know what they think of me; I suspect they don't think of me at all.
Because this view is fundamentally harmful to the community, I usually only see it coming from a few newbies. Presumably, they're either soon disabused of the notion, or they stop participating in the community.
tl;dr: The idea that asexuality is the next stage of humanity is just wrong and offensive from all angles. I just lost all confidence in the writer for House, and would really rather she never "explore" asexuality again.