[Zardoz84]

> - internal development and expression of sexuality does not happen at the same pace and at the same amplitude for everybody (some people really are asexual their whole life) and of course the familly, sister/brotherhood, socio-economical environment influence it too

Some people IS asexual. Asexuality it's a valid sexual orientation like being bi/pan/homo or heterosexual. It isn't lack of sexual development or sexual expression or result of family, socio-economical environment influences.

Perhaps, you should inform about it better : https://www.asexuality.org/?q=overview.html

[notmars]

I was not suggesting it was, I was talking about expression of sexuality, both in the construct of the self and in society, that was a different part of my questioning. To be precise, it’s non-applicability in the case of asexual people, but I simplified to make my point to say it is extremely diverse and complicated and these studies are really not helping (I believe) by using a very large hammer to nail a multi-dimensional non-euclidian nail. Appreciate the correction on the grammar though and I knew that resource already but it’s always helpful to reread :-)

[corin_]

I might be misunderstanding a valid criticism, but your complaint is about the parent comment's using "are" rather than "is"?

That's simply the plural version: if one person is asexual, multiple people are asexual.

[Zardoz84]

I was trying to point that a person can't become asexual (on the same way that no body can change is sexual orientation). Asexuals are born asexuals. Like a homosexual is born homosexual, etc.

[pharmakom]

I don't think this is true. People's sexual orientation can shift over time, and that might be to being asexual.