You said psychological bullshit, I paraphrased as psychological disorder. If that's not what you meant then I'm sorry but it wasn't exactly a massive leap.
Obviously the love *you* feel for partners you may have is different from the love you feel for a family member. The point I was making is that not all love is based around sexual desire, as you claimed it was. So it's no stretch of the imagination to see how someone who lacks sexual desire could feel love for a partner, without any sexual feelings.
Plus, yes mammals have needs to breed, but that doesn't mean that it always works out that way. Like I said - given your sexuality, breeding is pretty much out of the question, yet there it is. It's not difficult to see that some people would simply - for whatever reason, hormonal imbalance maybe - have no sexual desire. You're right, it's not an orientation per se, it's a lack of one.
The thing that makes it a bit messy is that I expect there *are* people out there who say they're asexual for the very reasons you mentioned, but there are those that say that's not the case. Who are we to say that they're just kidding themselves.

I remember reading somewhere that the ancient greeks had terms for the various examples of love, maternal, friendship, sexual etc. which helps to differentiate by intention, rather than the more context sensitive usage we now have.
The trouble with using the term "asexual" is that it is often thought of in terms of asexual reproduction (of which humans are incapable), rather than the meaning in this case of "without sexuality". In the latter case, I would imagine that relationships would be formed between similar individuals as equivalent to very close friendships, which would differ from the norm by the loss of the sexual aspect of the relationship. This, I suppose, is harder to believe for those who hold the sexual aspects as the core of such a relationship.
Is it just a "lifestyle choice"? There are many that call homosexuality the very same. It causes no problems though, and any biological reasoning is speculative at best.

Maybe it's just that I don't fully understand asexuality then. I'm under the impression that asexuality = no sexual desire. If there's no sexual desire then can there really be a full, deep attraction to someone else? and if not then how can they be in a relationship? Furthermore how can someone want to be in a relationship with someone who doesn't desire them?
I must stress; I do not like my own opinion on asexuality - I don't think it's a real thing, but I want to. I want to because this kind of opinion is wayyyy wayy too close to someone telling me "maybe you just haven't found the right girl?" haha
there is just so much about it that doesn't seem to add up on any sort of level
if it doesn't mean being without a sexuality then what else is it supposed to mean?
I totally get what you're saying about being in relationships though. That actually clarified a lot. I just have to add though; I don't think most couples hold the sexual aspect as a core piece of the relationship. It's more of a bonus lol

Well I expect that's really rather tricky, but humans are imperfect. If I found a girl who I was nuts about and who liked me enough to have a relationship but had zero sexual desire (in anyone) I'd probably stupid enough to enter in to a relationship. It may not last, it may end in tears but hey - we're only human. Plus I think you're projecting a lot of your own attitudes of what makes up a relationship on to what others may experience. There may not be a deep attractions but that doesn't mean there'd not be deeply held loving feelings. I don't know, but I'm just looking at it from a completely neutral perspective and can see how it would work. If you put your own feelings on to it, it's easy to dismiss it as rubbish.
Homosexuality doesn't add up to me - how could a guy be attracted to masculinity? I just can't see what's going on there, but that's irrelevant - it clearly happens, there's clearly absolutely nothing wrong with it (anyone that says otherwise is putting their own illogical emotional ideals on to it) it's just how it is. It's pretty easy to pop idea on to other forms of sexuality, or lack thereof.

You have just levied at others exactly the same ignorance that you've jst displayed.
Asexuality is about the lack of or very litle sexual orientation. You can still get erections, still have orgasms, stil get excited, just very, very rarely.

lol it doesn't add up to you because that's not what it is; a guy being attracted to masculinity
and that is why asexuality doesn't add up to me; i don't get what it is and probably never will.
but if you can bring homosexuality to that kind of level, then I certainly can for asexuality

But what I'm saying is, I don't get it on a personal level - but that doesn't mean I can't accept it for what it is. I don't assume that because I personally feel a certain way about something that it has any bearing on reality.
The way I see heterosexuality is being attracted to feminine physicality, I just figured that homosexuality is being attracted to masculine physicality. If that's wrong/you see it differently, how do you see it? I'm not being argumentative on this point, I'm genuinely interested.

1) Lack of sexual desire does not mean you don't respond to physical stimuli.
2) It depends on the individual. But would be based on other factors than focused on gender.
3) This is something many who class ourselves as this should ask. There are medical reasons which can cause a lack of drive, or events in the past. I am not a doctor or have good knowledge in the field, so I shan't dispense advice!