The Self‐Identifcation, LGBTQ+ Identity Development, and Attractionand Behavior of Asexual Youth: Potential Implications for Sexual Health and Internet‐Based Service Provision
McInroy, L. B., Beaujolais, B., Craig, S. L., & Eaton, A. D. (2021). The Self-Identification, LGBTQ+ Identity Development, and Attraction and Behavior of Asexual Youth: Potential Implications for Sexual Health and Internet-Based Service Provision. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 50(8), 3853–3863. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-021-02064-y
Background
Asexuality as an identity often receives minimal attention, causing a lack of awareness and understanding. Asexuality in healthcare and research spaces is typically focused on in a clinical definition, yet asexuality has a vast spectrum of meanings to a diverse subpopulation (ace gray, aromantic, asexual, etc).
The understanding of Asexuality in youth has been dismissed, with the falsehood that sexual attraction will grow as they mature. Most research focuses on asexual adults reflecting on their youth, with a large research gap of understanding asexual youth in real time.
Study Description
The research goal was to gain a better understanding of the asexual youth experience and their identity development, and the perceptions and implications on service provision.
This study had a sample of 711 self identified youth from the LGBTQ+ community who used labels within the spectrum of asexuality. The youth category was defined as 14-24.
Around 66.8% of participants within the study identified along the trans and gender diverse spectrum.
Unique Findings
For the average participant, the initials thoughts that they may be a part of the LGBTQ+ community occurred around 13; knowing for sure around 15.
Sexual Attraction and Behaviour Findings:
Around 60.2% of youth shared they had been romantically/sexually attracted to someone who was the same sex.
Around 56% of youth shared they had been romantically/sexually attracted to someone who was the opposite sex.
Around 54.7% of youth shared they had been romantically/sexually attracted to someone along the transgender and gender-nonconforming spectrum.
Around 27.1% of youth had never experienced any kind of romantic or sexual attraction at all.
LGBTQ+ Identity Disclosure and Outnesss Findings:
Only 14.3% of youth had “come out” to everyone in their lives, with the contrast of 2.4% not coming out to anyone at all.
The largest portion of “outness” was seen amongst “many” online friends at 45.6%; in comparison to “many” offline friends at 34.3%
Only around 16.7% had “come out” to a health professional.
Participation in LGBTQ+ Activities:
Over half (54%) of youth were online for more than 5 hours a day; in contrast to the 8.2% of youth who were online for less than 2 hours a day.
Participants reported using LGBTQ+ online spaces through blogs, social media, LGBTQ news websites, and online videos. Participants were more likely to engage online than offline.
Participants were more likely to access health information online, with 45.7% reporting they have acquired information compared to the 18.7% accessing a clinic.
Conclusions
The low percentage of youth who have “come out” to a healthcare professional is a concerning finding; aligning with previous research that highlights this care gap. In order to foster more engagement, health care professionals should consider increased visibility and clinical training surrounding asexuality and foster affirming attitudes. Examples of this can be seen in more inclusive surveys, such as having “never” or “not currently” in sexual activity questions.
Healthcare providers are to focus on quality care that honours the youth's concerns and self-determination of sexual identity. This is inclusive of seeing the spectrum of asexuality and sexual behaviours of the youth at hand.
As most participants accessed service through online facets, healthcare professionals may create an impact by exploring online delivery. Despite the being the primary source, online sexual health education surrounding asexuality is limited.
