Is it possible to be asexual? People always categorize each other into either straight, gay, or bi. What about the people who just aren't sexually attracted to anything? What kind of reactions would you get from people?
Also, what about the people who are sexually attracted to objects or animals? How come we never hear about these kinds of people? It being sexually attracted to a tortoise became common, would there be a law banning marriages to them?
These inquiries all sound silly, but they are very real questions. What if some other sexual attraction became as common as the basic three, and how would our society react to it?

Are you new to the internet? :-D

Given how badly our society (broad generalisation!) reacts to homosexuality, I would imagine anything less common would be even less understood, less tolerated and so on.
Basically, the further you are from the norm, the tougher it gets to be accepted for who you are.

The problem with sexuality when it comes to anything other than men/women is consent. Nothing can give adult consent other than.. well, adult humans.
As for asexuality - there are people who claim to have that. On the xkcd (www.xkcd.com) forums there are a number of people who say they're asexual - they have relationships with people but sexuality is just not an aspect of their life. As for reactions - I expect some people might find it odd, but I find it hard to believe people would have a problem with it (except for the people in relationships with them, I've read that it can strain things quite a bit if one person is asexual, and the other isn't).

Hehe thats certainly true, I went through school as some frankenstinian cross between the nerd, the fat kid and that kid everyone avoids because he's a bit of a psycho
I'm a weird one when it comes to sex, I can't stand the idea of touching people so the practical matter of it would be very difficult to do but I'm straight and still have sexual thoughts as the half terabyte of porn on my media PC proves...
I blame those prurient music videos I saw when I was growing up. Women dancing... it's FILTH I SAY!
Must find those music videos again one of these days...

Wait, back up. You're telling me that asexual people are in relationships with others? Why would anyone get married if they can't get sexually attracted by anything? That must be torture.
I mean, I know sex isn't everything in a healthy relationship, but it's important to have some of that as a factor, isn't it?

as a gay gamer can I just say:
y'all is crazy
to the hetero people: please stop speaking about homosexuality as if you've got a clue
to the homo people: please stop defensiveness and divisive attitude as it's counter productive to whatever point you want to make
I haven't read every single post in this thread but I've read enough
Who the fuck cares about who you fuck? For real
if people want to make it their business and start hating, then go elsewhere and let them stew in their bullshit
as for asexuality
no
just, no
I don't care what your conscious mind is telling you. Chances are asexuals are telling themselves that because they've got some other shit they haven't fully dealt with about themselves. It is NOT an orientation. It's some psychological bullshit.
Humans are sexual beings. They just are.
being in a relationship completely disproves the legitimacy of asexuality as the feeling of love is deeply rooted in sexual desire. So they're lying to their partner about loving them or lying to themselves
and if someone is going to be stupid enough to identify as "asexual"... then I don't want them breeding anyways so maybe it's not all bad

Well, being asexual obviously doesn't imply that they don't need company/intimacy/all the other things you get from a relationship. I expect that it's really tough if one of them is asexual and the other is not. Christ knows how that would work long time - I expect sex is involved, it's just the asexual partner gets no enjoyment out of it. Still, if you find someone who means that much to you, I expect you do what you can to keep the relationship - even if that means no sex/much less sex.
I find that interesting, given the what you went on to spout about asexuality. You say it's rubbish, but that's a pretty illogical attitude. Sex drive in all animals is pretty obviously designed for reproduction - yet here you are, a gay gamer. Clearly your sex drive is not going to result in offspring, so for whatever reason - it's not the way things were supposed to be. How can you be so judgemental about people who claim to be asexual - that's clearly not the way things are supposed to be but you're all ready to dismiss it as a psychological disorder. Loads of people have tried to pin homosexuality on that too - I'd have thought that being gay would give you a bit more of an open mind. Guess not. From a medical perspective it's pretty easy to see how asexuality is possible - hormonal imbalances or whatnot - I dunno, but stating with some false sense of authority that it's just psychological is total crap.
Anyway, from reading a number of posts about peoples asexuality, some people claim that it is a psychological thing - some just don't have it. Plus, your opinions on relationships being based purely around sex is a pretty depressing outlook - and completely incorrect. Sex is merely a part of intimacy, I personally go for the whole package but that doesn't mean people can't experience it without a sex drive.
One more thing:
You have a lot of sexual desire towards your family members? No? Thought not.

That should be your catchphrase!
True asexuality can probably exist but as the form of a genetic abnormaility. On a strictly biological level, the sole purpose of an organism is to reproduce so any sexual activity that does not furtrher that goal is acting against the organism's nature. Not that its a bad thing, plenty of things are unnatural; pizza, Dr Who, the ability to buy Fallout for only us$6 with no DRM... I love all of those things but they don't help the grand scheme of perpetuating this organism's DNA (not that I would even if I had the opportunity, I hate children)
Side note: Isn't organism a great word?

This line of reasoning would only hold if genes only contributed to single traits, which is patently untrue, especially when it comes to complex behavioral traits (where environment and its interaction with genetics really comes into play). Rather, single genes often contribute to multiple traits, and most traits are governed by multiple genes. Thus genes which have the potential to contribute to something like asexuality could also confer various evolutionary advantages, and only in rare cases where these otherwise beneficial genes are expressed in the right combination do you get an evolutionary dead-end. See sickle-cell anemia for an incredibly simple example of this.

I was probably using the word gene incorrectly then, its been 15+ years since I did anything close to genetics. I know they're each responsible for influencing numerous things but I was under the impression that the equivelent of a single corrupted line of text in the document of a gene could create unexpected consequences in the end product.

I didn't say it was a psychological disorder. I said that I think being asexual is based purely on what one's conscious mind is telling them and that I don't think it's an orientation. If there is a mammal that exists with no innate need to breed, please enlighten me.
And excuse me but I found your last little comment there hilarious. You try to make a point to counter mine, but really you can't think that is what I (or anyone) would drive at? Obviously you don't want to bang your relatives or family members, but who you grow up around and grow up with influences what you look for in a partner (it's filed under one of those 'well no shit' theories)
You can't sit there and tell me that love you feel for your partner and how you love your family are one in the same, because they aren't. Since we were on the subject of relationships I meant that kind of love.
I really shouldn't have to spell out such obvious things. If you're smart enough to play devil's advocate, you're smart enough to deduce this all on your own.

You're talking about random mutation, such as point mutations, transcription errors, etc. This can introduce entirely new genetic sequences (and thus characteristics) into an organism's genetic code, but in the vast majority of cases it either results in no meaningful change or it results in a nonviable organism. However, even when looking at random mutation as the original source for sexual orientation, as complex behaviors are affected by many, many, many genes, a single mutation would be incapable of giving rise to such a thing all by itself, and rather it would require the aggregate of numerous mutations over a long period of time, mutations which were either evolutionarily benign or advantageous in and of themselves.

questions for you (and these might come off as bitchy, but I am sincerely curious in my asking):
1. how are asexual males able to get an erection?
2. if you are asexual then do you have a preference of who you sleep with? Or, more accurately, who sleeps with you?
3. I've had moments where I've had little to no interest in sex. Many people do and these moments can last for months or even years. How do asexuals know it's not something closer to that (which is what I think) than an orientation. I mean, sexual orientations define who you would like to sleep with, not who you wouldn't.