Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ

Speaking as another asexual, reading just the first part of the first chapter alone made me feel nauseated at best.

Though, in general I prefer to avoid books dealing with asexuality, as regardless of whether it was the intent or not, I often feel like they take this one giant spectrum and shove it into one little neat box.

Shelby wrote: "Speaking as another asexual, reading just the first part of the first chapter alone made me feel nauseated at best.

Though, in general I prefer to avoid books dealing with asexuality, as regardle..."

Same. The ace spectrum is always boiled down to one tiny little novelty for everyone to gawk at, and never treated with the depth and nuance it deserves.

As someone who finished the book, I personally found it incredibly nuanced, intersectional, and valuable.

Do those of you who didn't like it have specific examples? I've seen many aces and acespecs praising it - for any sexuality or orientation there's going to be more nuance than any one book or definition can cover, but that doesn't mean a shared basic understanding isn't useful.

May I ask, was part of the problem that the author says she is asexual and then the prologue is this blurb about how much she enjoys sex? Or am I way off base?

Erin wrote: "May I ask, was part of the problem that the author says she is asexual and then the prologue is this blurb about how much she enjoys sex? Or am I way off base?"

I'm not sure if that was this reviewer's issue, but I feel obligated to jump in here to say that aces can have and enjoy sex. Asexuality is about not experiencing sexual attraction to people, and is unrelated to how aces feel about sex itself, which could be repulsed, averse, indifferent, or favorable.

Jessica wrote: "Erin wrote: "May I ask, was part of the problem that the author says she is asexual and then the prologue is this blurb about how much she enjoys sex? Or am I way off base?"

I'm not sure if that w..."

Oh, I had not considered that � thank you for the clarification!