Patterns of Asexuality in the United States

Demographic Research a free, expedited, online journal of peer-reviewed research and commentary in the population sciences published by the Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research Konrad-Zuse Str. 1, D-18057 Rostock · GERMANY www.demographic-research.org DEMOGRAPHIC RESEARCH VOLUME 23, ARTICLE 18, PAGES 509-530 PUBLISHED 03 SEPTEMBER 2010 http://www.demographic-research.org/Volumes/Vol23/18/ DOI: 10.4054/DemRes.2010.23.18 Research Article Patterns of asexuality in the United States Dudley L. Poston, Jr. Amanda K. Baumle © 2010 Dudley L. Poston, Jr. & Amanda K. Baumle. This open-access work is published under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial License 2.0 Germany, which permits use, reproduction & distribution in any medium for non-commercial purposes, provided the original author(s) and source are given credit. See http:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/de/ Table of Contents 1 Introduction 510 2 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 Background Asexual behavior Asexual desire Asexual identity Characteristics of asexuals Our analysis 511 512 513 513 514 515 3 Data and methods 516 4 4.1 4.2 Results Prevalence of asexuals Characteristics of asexuals 519 519 521 5 Discussion and conclusion 526 References 529 Demographic Research: Volume 23, Article 18 Research Article Patterns of asexuality in the United States Dudley L. Poston, Jr.1 Amanda K. Baumle2 Abstract In this paper we use data from the 2002 National Survey of Family Growth (NSFG) to ascertain and analyze patterns of asexuality in the United States. We endeavor to extend the earlier work of Bogaert (2004) on this topic, which focused on patterns of asexuality in Great Britain. Using a social constructionist perspective to study asexuality, we conceptualize and measure the phenomenon in several ways, according to behavior, desire, and self-identification. We use the NSFG respondent sampling weights to produce several sets of unbiased estimates of the percentages of persons in the U.S. population, aged 15-44, who are asexual; each set is based on one or more of the various definitions of asexuality. Finally, we describe some of the characteristics of the asexual population using logistic regression. 1 2 Department of Sociology, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843. E-mail: . Department of Sociology, University of Houston, Houston, TX 77204. E-mail: . http://www.demographic-research.org 509 Poston, Jr. & Baumle: Patterns of asexuality in the United States 1. Introduction In recent years there has been an increase in demographic studies of sexuality. The resulting research has provided insights into broader population patterns of sexual behaviors, desires, and identities, and has emphasized the complexities inherent in the analysis of sexual outcomes. But with very few exceptions, none of the sexuality analyses have focused on asexuality, hence overlooking a sexuality dimension that may well characterize a not insignificant percentage of the population. In this article, we examine data from the 2002 National Survey of Family Growth (NSFG) dealing with the prevalence and characteristics of asexual persons. Our research highlights the measurement and interpretation challenges that accompany demographic analyses of sexuality in general, and asexuality in particular. Recent research about sexual behaviors, desires, and identity has found that a small, but notable, number of individuals do not appear to fall clearly into the heterosexual, gay, or bisexual categories in terms of their sexuality. Rather, they report that they are not engaging in sexual activity, that they experience no sexual desire, and/or that they selfidentify as asexual (Bogaert 2004; Laumann et al. 1994). Asexuality has gained modest attention in the popular media as a sexual orientation (Sohn 2005; Jay 2005), but little quantitative and generalizable information is available about the prevalence of asexual identity or behavior in human populations or the characteristics associated with asexual persons. In the one quantitative study of which we are aware, Bogaert (2004) conducted a study of asexuality using nationally representative data, concluding that around 1.1 percent of the sampled British population provided an asexual response to a survey question on sexual desire. Drawing on 2002 NSFG data, we seek to extend Bogaert’s analysis in two ways. First, we explore whether similar patterns of asexuality are exhibited in the U.S. population as in the British population. In addition, and more importantly in terms of broader demographic studies of sexuality, we incorporate multiple dimensions of asexuality, in contrast to the single dimension permitted by Bogaert’s data. The limited literature on asexuality presents three kinds of definitions dealing with the phenomenon, namely, definitions based on one’s behavior, one’s desires, and one’s self-identification. Our analysis of asexuality across these three dimensions highlights the manner in which both the prevalence and implications of asexuality vary depending on the dimension employed. Further, our analysis demonstrates some of the challenges faced by demographers using survey data on sexuality, as well as in crafting questions to explore population sexuality. 510 http://www.demographic-research.org Demographic Research: Volume 23, Article 18 2. Background There is a limited social science literature on asexuality. This is due in part to the presumed low levels of asexuality in human and nonhuman populations. Asexuality is thought by some to be low because “one would expect strong selection pressures against such nonreproductive tendencies” (Bogaert 2004: 279). But the fact that a behavior has “nonreproductive tendencies” does not necessarily mean that it will have a low prevalence. Indeed Bogaert (2004: 279) has noted that homosexuality, i.e., “samesex attraction ... is clearly a nonreproductive orientation; ... [but] its prevalence over time and across societies continues to challenge evolutionary theorists.” Further, the prevalence of asexuality depends significantly on the manner in which asexuality is defined. As with other sexual identities, when behavior is the primary measure we would expect to see a higher prevalence of asexuality than if identity is the primary measure. In other words, individuals are more likely to not engage in sexual activity, than to identify as “asexual” (see Mosher et al. 2005; Laumann et al. 1994), suggesting that behavioral measures of sexuality may be expected to produce a higher prevalence than identity measures. Whether the primary component of asexuality is behavioral (a lack of sexual behavior), desire-based (a lack of sexual desire), or identity-based (labeling oneself as “asexual”) is debatable. Indeed, even among those who identify as asexual, there is a lack of agreement regarding the degree to which an absence of sexual behavior or desire is a necessary component of asexuality (Prause and Gra (...truncated)