Journal of LGBT Issues in Counseling, 8:331343, 2014

Copyright Taylor & Francis Group, LLC

ISSN: 1553-8605 print / 1553-8338 online
DOI: 10.1080/15538605.2014.960130

ASEXUally: On Being an Ally to the Asexual

Community
STACY ANNE PINTO
The Graduate School, Montclair State University, Montclair, New Jersey, USA

The development of allies is crucial to the asexual population. The

asexual community is among the most under- researched and
poorly understood sexual minority populations. Through discussion of basic information on asexuality, the distinction between
asexuality and a diagnosable disorder, and ways that other identities intersect with asexuality, this article offers a foundation and
model for asexual ally development. Based on the information presented, recommendations for counselor and counselor educator
allies who are working with asexual identified, or potentially asexual individuals, are presented. Suggestions for future research on
asexuality are also explored.
KEYWORDS ally, ally development, asexual, asexual ally, asexuality, romantic orientation, sexual continuum, sexual orientation

INTRODUCTION
Within the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, questioning, intersex,
asexual (LGBTQQIA) community, an ally can be defined as an individual
who provides support to those who identify as members of the LGBTQQIA
community. Allies can be members of the LGBTQQIA community or can
identify with the majority population (ALGBTIC LGBQQIA Competencies
Taskforce, 2013). Each population referenced within the LGBTQQIA community has unique attributes and needs. Asexual individuals are those who
do not experience sexual attraction (AVENwiki, 2013; Bogaert, 2004). Given
the minimal level of understanding of this population, there is a significant
need for counselors who identify as asexual allies.

Address correspondence to Stacy Anne Pinto, The Graduate School, Montclair State
University, 1 Normal Avenue, College Hall Room 226, Montclair, NJ 07043, USA. E-mail:
pintost@mail.montclair.edu
331

332

S. A. Pinto

The question of whether asexuality falls under the queer umbrella is an

ongoing discussion. As with many identities that tend to be grouped together
in the ever-expanding acronym, many asexual persons identify their relationships as conventional and do not identify themselves as queer. However,
other asexual individuals find their relationships to be unconventional in
nature, fitting into the queer category (Asexual Visibility & Education Network [AVEN], 2012). This highlights the need to focus on personal preference
when working with the asexual community.
Although the ALGBTIC LGBQQIA Counseling Competencies (ALGBTIC
LGBQQIA Competencies Taskforce, 2013) do not specifically include asexual individuals, the principles can be effectively applied to this community.
To display knowledge and awareness as a counselor ally during practice,
counselors must learn about their own identities and how they compare to
members of the LGBTQQIA community, become educated on current issues
and applicable laws within the community, and have an understanding of
intersecting identities. Counselors must also use inclusive language, while
respecting and integrating personal choices and experiences of each individual into the counseling relationship. Additionally, counselor allies should
have a supportive, validating understanding of the coming-out and personal
identification processes. They should seek out an experienced, affirming
supervisor and regularly engage in relevant professional development. Although the competencies mentioned here represent only a selection of the
competencies identified by the ALGBTIC Taskforce (ALGBTIC LGBQQIA
Competencies Taskforce, 2013), these competencies help to outline a foundation for work as an ally counselor.
The purpose of this article is threefold. First, basic information is provided to increase awareness and knowledge of the asexual community. Additionally, a model of asexual ally development is presented, facilitating
discussion of how to promote asexual ally development. Finally, case examples are discussed to identify potential issues when working with the asexual
community.

ASEXUALITY
Human asexuality has garnered little attention from the academic community.
The attention that has been given to the subject has been rooted in psychological and medical research, pathologizing the experience, and prompting
the American Psychiatric Association (APA) to add inhibited sexual desire
as a diagnostic category in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental
Disorders (DSM-III ; APA, 1980; Cerankowski & Milks, 2010). This category
was later changed to hypoactive sexual desire disorder (HSDD) (DSM-IV ;
APA, 1994) and has recently been separated into two separate diagnoses:
one for men, male hypoactive sexual desire disorder, and one for women,

ASEXUally: On Being an Asexual Ally

333

female sexual interest/arousal disorder (DSM-5; APA, 2013). Although there

are criteria which call for diagnoses, counselors must acknowledge that not
all instances of a lack of interest in sexual contact are related to pathology.
Asexuality is one of the most under-researched, misunderstood, underrepresented sexual identities of the 21st century (Cerankowski & Milks, 2010;
Van Houdenhove, Gijs, TSjoen, & Enzlin, 2014). The last 100 years have
brought the United States from a general intolerance of same-sex relationships to an understanding and support of a broad range of sexual identities.
However, the general population has barely skimmed the surface of the
sexual spectrum.
Sexuality can be defined as an individuals sexual practices and desires
(Sexuality, 2014). Asexuality is defined as an absence or lack of feelings
of sexual attraction (AVENwiki, 2013; Bogaert, 2004; Cerankowski & Milks,
2010). It has also been defined from a perspective of a lack of sexual behavior (Scherrer, 2008), asexual self-identification (Prause & Graham, 2007),
and a blend of various perspectives (Van Houdenhove et al., 2014). Scholars,
including Bogaert (2004) and Van Houdenhove and colleagues (2014), have
indicated that, depending on the definition or perspective used, between
0.6% and 5.5% of the population can be identified as asexual. However,
given the lack of understanding of this identity, it is possible that this figure is deflated, or that other, more commonly understood identities take
precedence for asexual individuals when self-labeling.
As counselors and counselor educators, it is critical to have an understanding of how to distinguish between asexuality as a sexual orientation and
as a mental disorder. As previously discussed, a sexual orientation refers to
the sex or gender of persons to whom an individual is sexually attracted
(American Psychological Association, 2011). A mental disorder, however, is
defined as a condition distinguished by clinically substantial disturbance in
a persons behavior, regulation of emotion, or cognition. This disturbance is
reflective of a dysfunction in the biological, developmental, or psychological processes associated with mental functioning. Mental disorders are often
correlated with considerable distress in various aspects of an individuals life
(DSM-5; APA, 2013). It is suggested that one in 10 persons who identify as
asexual experience identity-related distress (Bogaert, 2006; Brotto, Knudson,
Inskip, Rhodes, & Erskine, 2010; Prause & Graham, 2007), with the potential
for a related diagnosis.

A Diagnostic Perspective
In the DSM-IV-TR, the diagnostic concept of asexuality was referred to as
hypoactive sexual desire disorder (DSM-IV-TR; APA, 2000). After significant
criticism of how sexual disorders have been expressed in the DSM (Bancroft,
Graham, & McCord, 2001; Basson et al., 2000; Tiefer, 2001; Vroege, Gijs, &

334

S. A. Pinto

Hengeveld, 2001), the DSM-5 (APA, 2013) has revised the nomenclature and
criteria, distinguishing between the diagnosis for a man and that of a woman.
Male hypoactive sexual desire disorder can be diagnosed if a man experiences a consistent absence or deficiency of sexual and/or erotic thoughts as
well as sex drive (as determined by the counselor) for a minimum period of
6 months (DSM-5; APA, 2013, p. 440). Additionally, the absence/deficiency
must cause the man clinically significant distress and not be accounted for
by another psychological or medical condition (DSM-5; APA, 2013). Female
sexual interest/arousal disorder is slightly more complicated to diagnose
(DSM-5; APA, 2013, p. 433). Primarily, a woman would have to present notably decreased or an absence of sexual arousal or interest, demonstrated by
a minimum of three of the following six criteria: interest in sexual activity is
reduced or absent, erotic and/or sexual fantasies or thoughts are reduced or
absent, reduction in or lack of prompting sexual activity and lack of receptiveness to a partners initiation of sexual activity, reduced or absent sexual
pleasure or excitement during 75% to 100% of sexual activity, reduced or
absent sexual arousal or interest in response to erotic or sexual cues, reduced or absent sensations throughout 75% to 100% of sexual encounters.
The aforementioned criteria must have been present for a minimum period
of 6 months, cause the woman clinically significant distress, and not be accounted for by another psychological or medical condition (DSM-5; APA,
2013).

Asexuality as an Identity
When it has been determined that an individuals behavior or experience is
not a diagnosable disorder, counselors may find comfort in moving forward
with them as an asexual individual. A number of stereotypes that individuals
who identify as asexual often have to combat include that they cannot fall
in love, do not have sex, have been the victim of sexual abuse, have chosen
to be celibate or abstinent, are not attracted to anyone, just need to find
the right person, are sociopaths or nonfeeling, are sexually deviant, are
sexually frustrated, are denying their feelings, do not masturbate, do not
enjoy any sexual activity, will be/live single/alone forever, or that the asexual
orientation is just not real. As with any population, habits or preferences of
asexual individuals cannot be generalized across the community, and each
person must be encouraged to identify his or her own experience.
Prause and Graham (2007) discussed advantages and disadvantages of
asexuality. Advantages include preventing usual troubles associated with relationships that are intimate, avoiding certain threats to physical well-being
or unwanted/unexpected pregnancy, experiencing a decreased level of pressure from society to settle down, and having more time to oneself. Disadvantages associated with asexuality include trouble establishing the types of
intimate relationships that are preferred by most individuals, a preoccupation

ASEXUally: On Being an Asexual Ally

335

to find out what the source of the asexuality is, having to cope with societys
view of asexuality, and being unable to experience the positive components
of sexual relationships.
Sexual orientation, as it is generally understood, refers to the gender(s)
to whom an individual is attracted. This definition will be deconstructed for
this section, and reconstructed to reference individuals experience of their
own sexuality. Sexuality can be understood as existing on a continuum, or
a range of identities that differ slightly from one another, but exist between
distinct poles or possibilities (Continuum, 2014), with sexual on one end
and asexual on the other.
In between the opposite ends of the Sexual Orientation Continuum
(AVENwiki, 2013) (asexual and sexual) exist gray-A and demisexual, or
variations thereof. Gray-A is an individual who does not identify as sexual or asexual, but in the gray area between the two poles. Other terms that
have been used to describe this identity include semisexual, asexual-ish, and
sexual-ish. Demisexual is someone who experiences sexual attraction only
after a significant emotional connection is established. The difference between gray-A and demisexuality is that gray-A is a general, nonspecific term,
whereas demisexuality is a concrete sexual orientation that falls between
asexual and sexual on the continuum.

ROMANTIC ORIENTATION
In addition to an individuals sexual orientation is his or her romantic orientation. Romantic orientation, in contrast to sexual orientation as previously
described, does not exist on a continuum. Once more, to be conceptualized
on a continuum, a construct must have two distinct possibilities, whereas
the things between them are variations of those possibilities (Continuum,
2014). The commonly referenced romantic orientations (i.e., aromantic, heteroromantic, homoromantic) are all distinct from one another.
Due to the fact that the concept of romantic orientation is relatively
new, many people do not yet identify within this construct. To simplify
the concept, it is helpful to associate the commonly used language (sexual
orientation) with each romantic orientation identity. An individual who is
aromantic is an individual who does not experience significant or any romantic attraction to anyone. Aromantics do not have a need to connect with
other people on an emotional level. This is commonly referred to as simply
being attracted to no one. A heteroromantic person, commonly known as
being heterosexual or straight, is someone who is romantically attracted to
an individual of a sex or gender different than his or her own. Someone
who is biromantic, commonly known as bisexual, is romantically attracted
to two sexes or genders. A person who is panromantic, often referred to as
pansexual, is someone who is romantically attracted to individuals of any sex

336

S. A. Pinto

or gender. Finally, an individual who is homoromantic, commonly known

as gay, lesbian, or homosexual, is someone who is romantically attracted to
members of the same sex or gender (AVENwiki, 2014).
A survey conducted by AVEN (2008) provided some insight into the
romantic orientations of individuals who identify as asexual. Romantic orientation, otherwise known as affectional orientation, references a persons
romantic attraction founded on another individuals gender identity (AVENwiki, 2014), whereas sexual orientation is an identity that references the
sex or gender of persons to whom an individual is sexually attracted (AVENwiki, 2013). The survey was posted on the AVEN Announcement Forum from
February through April 2008, and gathered information on a variety of demographics including year of birth, education, birth gender, sexual orientation,
romantic orientation, genderedness, religion, and country of origin. Note that
no validity or reliability measures were directly accessible through AVEN. Of
the 247 individuals who responded to the survey, 31.4% identified as heteroromantic, 17.5% as bi- or pan-romantic, 17.5% as aromantic, 13.5% as unsure,
8.6% could not distinguish between romantic and nonromantic, 6.5% as homoromantic, 3.7% could not be categorized (for various reasons), and 1.2%
identified as being attracted only to androgynes. This data helps researchers
and practitioners to see that an identity as an asexual individual usually does
not, but sometimes may, carry an identity as an aromantic individual.

ALLY DEVELOPMENT
As a small, invisible minority group, the importance of allies to this community cannot be overstated. The existence of informed, empowered allies
will help the asexual community to become more understood and accepted.
It will also help individuals who may be asexual, or a variation thereof, to
accept themselves for who they truly are.

A Model for Asexual Ally Development

Poynter (1999) outlined a model of heterosexual ally development consisting
of four statuses. This model describes the process of ally development from
unawareness through integration. The following status titles have remained
consistent with Poynters original model, but due to the limited research on
asexual ally development, the tenets of this model have been modified and
applied to ally development for the asexual community, specifically.
STATUS 1: PRECONTACT (NONIDENTIFICATION)
An individual begins to abandon conventional or familiar isms and phobias regarding the sexual spectrum, becoming minimally aware of asexuality

ASEXUally: On Being an Asexual Ally

337

based on media as opposed to direct contact with an asexual individual.

Persons in this stage will still believe that their sexual identity and expression, and identities with which they are familiar, are superior to others. This
person will have a negative perception of asexuality, will not self-identify as
an asexual ally, and will be comfortable with this status.

STATUS 2: CONTACT

AND

RETREAT

An individual experiences personal contact with an asexual coworker, friend,

or family member. Sexual persons are still the norm and superior to asexual
persons, but this contact allows the individual to recognize that asexuality
exists. The contact could lead to one of two pathways. It could create anxiety
due to the incongruence between an individuals proasexual thoughts and his
or her outward behaviors (Gelberg & Chojnack, 1995; Getz & Kirkley, 2003),
leading to an increased interest in asexual individuals and facilitate transition
into Status 3. The contact could also initiate a retreat where the individual
will close off to asexual concerns and support based on various personal
beliefs and revert to Status 1. Note that some individuals may self-identify as
allies without experiencing contact. These individuals will pass over Status
2, until contact is made, but will still be able to continue development as
allies.

STATUS 3: INTERNAL IDENTIFICATION

Persons in Status 3 are in the formative stages of the development of an
identity as ally to the asexual community. The ally in this status will not yet
openly identify as such, but he or she will pursue additional contact with the
community and self-identified asexual allies. Individuals in this status may
struggle with finding their place as an ally, worrying about making mistakes
or inadvertent homophobia (Gelberg & Chojnack, 1995). The Status 3 ally
will gain knowledge and awareness of the asexual community, leading to
an understanding of the need for advocacy and support for the community
and begin to cautiously act on this understanding.

STATUS 4: EXTERNAL IDENTIFICATION

After exploring personal anxieties and becoming knowledgeable about asexual oppression (Gelberg & Chojnack, 1995; Getz & Kirkley, 2003), the nonasexual individual will proudly identify as an asexual ally. The Status 4 ally
will have an appreciation and respect for, a positive attitude toward, and
significant knowledge and awareness of the asexual community. This individual will feel a sense of estrangement from individuals who do not identify

338

S. A. Pinto

as allies to the asexual community and employ a variety of mechanisms for

coping with negative reactions surrounding their identification as an ally.

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR COUNSELOR AND COUNSELOR

EDUCATOR ALLIES
Case Examples
Although the adapted version of Poynters (1999) model of ally development
can be helpful to conceptualize where a counselor ally falls, and potentially
how to progress in his or her development, this model only lays the foundation for a comprehensive view of counseling an asexual individual. Once
the counselor ally has gained an understanding of his or her development,
and a basic framework for this portion of an individuals identity has been
established, it is important to conceptualize how asexuality manifests in everyday life. To truly understand, it is crucial to recognize how an individuals
romantic orientation, sexual orientation, and gender identity intersect with
one another, and how they may present within the counseling environment.

CASE EXAMPLE 1
Taylor and Kasey are partners. Taylor was assigned female at birth, identifies
as a woman, is romantically attracted to women, and does not experience
sexual attraction. She identifies as a cisgender, homoromantic (or lesbian),
asexual woman. Kasey was also assigned female at birth, identifies as a
woman, is romantically attracted to women, and does experience sexual
attraction. Kaseys identities mirror Taylors in all referenced aspects besides
asexuality. Taylor and Kasey have been romantically involved for more than
5 years and have been sexually intimate 15 times. Due to their lack of sexual
intimacy, Kasey is concerned that Taylor is not attracted to her, or that she
is otherwise unhappy in the relationship.
An identity as asexual has broad implications. Although Taylor does not
experience sexual attraction, she cares deeply for Kasey and is willing to
occasionally engage in sexual intimacy for Kaseys benefit. Counselor allies
should be prepared to facilitate understanding and communication within
relationships, with an emphasis on recognizing and exploring the true presenting issue and helping the parties to identify mutual ground. Additionally,
it will be important for counselor allies to be comfortable with their own sexuality, as well as openly discussing sex and sexuality (Dillon, Worthington,
Soth-McNett, & Schwartz, 2008; Owen-Pugh & Baines, 2013; Rutter, Estrada,
Ferguson, & Diggs, 2008; Walker & Prince, 2010). When working with clients
who have presenting issues around their asexual identity, this will likely
be a primary focus. Finally, counselors should be mindful of the focus of

ASEXUally: On Being an Asexual Ally

339

counseling. Though a couple may be presenting with issues surrounding

asexuality, it is important not to abandon traditional techniques of couples
counseling including altering perspectives within the relationship, modifying
problematic behaviors, decreasing avoidance of emotional expression, and
promoting strengths (Benson, McGinn, & Christensen, 2012).
CASE EXAMPLE 2
Kris was assigned male at birth, identifies as a woman, is romantically attracted to men, and does not experience sexual attraction. She identifies
as a transgender, heteroromantic (or straight), asexual woman. Kris has not
been romantically involved with anyone for 2 years and is struggling to find
companionship. She states that she does not have trouble meeting men who
are interested in getting to know her, but they often lose interest once she
comes out as asexual.
In this case, Kris does not engage in any sexual intimacy. Although she
would like to have a romantic relationship, she is having trouble maintaining
a relationship with a man that does not involve sexual intimacy. Given Kriss
identity as transgender and asexual, counselor allies must be conscious of
implications associated with both identities and be equipped to distinguish
between the source of her presenting issue, prior to moving forward with
treatment or recommendation. Through exploration of Kriss experiences
and understanding precipitating factors relating to the dissolution of past
relationships, the counselor will be more adequately equipped to establish a
course of treatment. In the event that Kriss issues are related to her asexual
identity, the counselor may proceed by helping Kris to become more integrated within the asexual community, in person or online, and to develop
more effective dating skills (Barrett & Logan, 2002).

Implications
Without respect for and understanding of nonmajority sexual orientation
identities, asexuality in particular, the words and actions of allies, counselors,
and counselor educators could have significant impact on this population.
Basic counseling principles suggest that it is easy to offend, break trust with,
reinforce stereotypes, or inhibit the growth of a new or existing relationship
with someone who identifies as asexual by making assumptions about their
behavior or expression. Additionally, given the nature of asexuality, one can
infer that asexual individuals are at a higher risk for intimate partner sexual
or physical abuse, consistent with the LGBT community as a whole (Balsam, Rothblum, & Neauchaine, 2005; Duke & Davidson, 2009; Hassouneh
& Glass, 2008; McClennen 2005; Messinger, 2011; Stanley, Bartholomew,
Taylor, Oram, & Landolt, 2006).

340

S. A. Pinto

Allies to the asexual community have a significant responsibility. First

and foremost, allies must be prepared to educate the people around them.
From casual conversation with family and peers to intentional advocacy activities, allies will find themselves at the forefront of promoting awareness,
imparting knowledge, and increasing acceptance for this group. With such
a responsibility, it is critical for individuals who identify as allies to be wellinformed and comfortable addressing the sometimes taboo issues surrounding the asexual population (ALGBTIC LGBQQIA Competencies Taskforce,
2013).
Counselors and counselor educators, in particular, must be cognizant of
the risk for further increasing the stigma associated with counseling through
a lack of knowledge, and by mistakenly focusing the counseling relationship on symptoms of an individuals asexuality, such as encouraging a
heteroromantic man to end a relationship with a woman because he is not
sexually attracted to her. Although most of the basic skills that counselors
are equipped with will serve this population well, the lack of familiarity
with the communitys needs or existence could create blind spots within
the counseling relationship. Through actively integrating this concept into
the curriculum, counselor educators can help their students to become more
cognizant of this identity and its implications for practice.
Finally, the under-representation and misunderstanding of this population implores for advocacy. A first step toward effective advocacy is to
understand a population. Through education of the public and supportive
practice, counselor allies can assist asexual individuals to more fully embrace their sexual experience and/or expression, as well as their sexual and
romantic orientations.

Suggestions for Future Research

Additional research in this area is necessary. Primarily, a study designed to
more accurately identify the prevalence of asexuality within the population
would help to diffuse the stigma associated with asexuality. A resonating
question is whether more people would identify as asexual, or along the
asexual continuum, if it was more commonly acknowledged as an acceptable, understood identity. Such a study could establish and present criteria
for asexuality and survey for said criteria, while also asking individuals to
self-label their sexual orientation. By quantitatively identifying the level of
congruence between these different methods of assessing sexual orientation,
scholars would be able to deepen the understanding, and more accurately
describe the prevalence and demographics of the asexual population. Furthermore, future research should explore the value and impact of labeling
along the sexual orientation continuum. Given the fact that the sexual orientations that have been previously discussed (sexual, asexual, demisexual,

ASEXUally: On Being an Asexual Ally

341

gray-A) exist on a continuum, it would be interesting to learn more about if,

where, and why the lines between these orientations are drawn.

CONCLUSION
Asexuality is a complex, often misunderstood, sexual orientation identity.
The previously discussed evolution from a diagnostic perspective of asexuality to asexuality as an identity provides evidence that scholars are moving in a positive direction regarding this population. Through efforts to bring
information regarding this stigmatized identity to light, it is possible for asexual individuals, and the individuals in their lives, to better understand this
identity and how it can be integrated into a whole, full life. Furthermore, an
understanding of romantic orientation as well as sexual orientation allows
individuals to express themselves as the true, complex individual that they
are. Although the idea of labeling can sometimes be restrictive, it can also be
liberatingbreathing life into an idea or feeling that had yet to be articulated.
As helping professionals, counselors and counselor educators strive to
be on the forefront of social justice and advocacy. Given the limited research on and experience with individuals who identify as asexual or on
the sexual orientation continuum, researchers and practitioners are found in
a difficult position. Through intentional development as allies, along with
awareness of and support for this underrepresented and underserved population, counselors can help the individuals whom they serve to live fuller,
more congruent lives.

REFERENCES
ALGBTIC LGBQQIA Competencies Taskforce. (2013): Association for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Issues in Counseling competencies
for counseling with lesbian, gay, bisexual, queer, questioning, intersex,
and ally individuals. Journal of LGBT Issues in Counseling, 7(1), 243.
doi:10.1080/15538605.2013.755444
American Psychiatric Association. (1980). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (3rd ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
American Psychiatric Association. (1994). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders: DSM-IV. (4th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed., text rev.). Washington, DC: Author.
American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.). Arlington, VA: Author.
American Psychological Association. (2011). The guidelines for psychological practice with lesbian, gay, and bisexual clients. Retrieved from
http://www.apa.org/pi/lgbt/resources/guidelines.aspx?item=2

342

S. A. Pinto

Asexual Visibility & Education Network. (2008). AVEN Survey 2008. Retrieved from
http://www.asexuality.org/home/2008_stats.html
Asexual Visibility & Education Network. (2012). General FAQ. Retrieved from
http://www.asexuality.org/home/general.html
AVENwiki. (2013). Sexual orientation. Retrieved from http://www.asexuality.org/
wiki/index.php?title=Sexual_orientation
AVENwiki. (2014). Romantic orientation. Retrieved from http://www.asexuality.org/
wiki/index.php?title=Romantic_orientation
Balsam, K. F., Rothblum, E. D., & Neauchaine, T. P. (2005). Victimization over the life
span: A comparison of lesbian, gay, bisexual and heterosexual siblings. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 73(3), 477487. doi:10.1037/0022006X.73.3.477
Bancroft, J., Graham, C. A., & McCord, C. (2001). Conceptualizing womens
sexual problems. Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy, 27(2), 95103.
doi:10.1080/00926230152051716
Barrett, B., & Logan, C. (2002). Counseling gay men and lesbians: A practice primer.
Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
Basson, R., Berman, J., Burnett, A., Deragotis, L., Ferguson, D., Fourcroy, J., . . . , &
Whipple, B. (2000). Report of the international consensus development conference on female sexual dysfunction: Definitions and classifications. Journal of
Urology, 163(3), 888893. doi:10.1016/S0022-5347(05)67828-7
Benson, L. A., McGinn, M. M., & Christensen, A. (2012). Common principles of
couple therapy. Behavior Therapy, 43(1), 2535. doi:10.1016/j.beth.2010.12.009
Bogaert, A. F. (2004). Asexuality: Prevalence and associated factors in a
national probability sample. Journal of Sex Research, 41(3), 279287.
doi:10.1080/00224490409552235
Bogaert, A. F. (2006). Toward a conceptual understanding of asexuality. Review of
General Psychology, 10(3), 241250. doi:10.1037/1089-2680.10.3.241
Brotto, L. A., Knudson, G., Inskip, J., Rhodes, K., & Erskine, Y. (2010). Asexuality: A mixed methods approach. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 39(3), 599618.
doi:10.1007/s10508-008-9434-x
Cerankowski, K. J., & Milks, M. (2010). New orientations: Asexuality and its implications for theory and practice. Feminist Studies, 36(3), 650664.
Continuum. (2014). Merriam-Webster.com. Retrieved from http://www.
merriamwebster.com/dictionary/continuum
Dillon, F. R., Worthington, R. L., Soth-McNett, A. M., & Schwartz, S. J. (2008). Gender
and sexual identity based predictors of lesbian, gay, and bisexual affirmative
counseling self-efficacy. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 39,
353360. doi: 10.1037/0735-7028.39.3.353
Duke, A., & Davidson, M. M. (2009). Same-sex intimate partner violence: Lesbian,
gay, and bisexual affirmative outreach and advocacy. Journal of Aggression,
Maltreatment & Trauma, 18(8), 795816. doi:10.1080/10926770903291787
Gelberg, S., & Chojnack, J. T. (1995). Developmental transitions of
gay/lesbian/bisexual-affirmative, heterosexual career counselors. Career Development Quarterly, 43(3), 267273. doi:10.1002/j.2161-0045.1995.tb00867.x
Getz, C., & Kirkley, E. (2003, April). Identity development models: One size fits all:
Heterosexual identity development and the search for allies in higher education.

ASEXUally: On Being an Asexual Ally

343

Paper presented at the 84th meeting of American Education Research Association, Chicago, IL.
Hassouneh, D., & Glass, N. (2008). The influence of gender role stereotyping on
womens experiences of female same-sex intimate partner violence. Violence
Against Women, 14(3), 310325. doi:10.1177/1077801207313734
McClennen, J. (2005). Domestic violence between same-gender partners: Recent
findings and future research. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 20(2), 149154.
doi:10.1177/0886260504268762
Messinger, A. M. (2011). Invisible victims: Same-sex IPV in the national violence against women survey. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 26, 22282243.
doi:10.1177/0886260510383023
Owen-Pugh, V., & Baines, L. (2013). Exploring the clinical experiences of novice
counsellors working with LGBT clients: Implications for training. Counselling &
Psychotherapy Research, 14(1), 1928. doi:10.1080/14733145.2013.782055
Poynter, K. (1999, March). Heterosexual allies: Their role in the learning community.
Paper presented at the annual conference of the American College Personnel
Association, Atlanta, GA.
Prause, N., & Graham, C. A. (2007). Asexuality: Classification and characterization.
Archives of Sexual Behavior, 36(3), 341356. doi:10.1007/s10508-006-9142-3
Rutter, P. A., Estrada, D., Ferguson, L. K., & Diggs, G. A. (2008). Sexual orientation and counselor competency: The impact of training on enhancing awareness, knowledge and skills. Journal of LGBT Issues in Counseling, 2, 109125.
doi:10.1080/15538600802125472
Scherrer, K. S. (2008). Coming to an asexual identity: negotiating identity, negotiating
desire. Sexualities, 11(5), 621641. doi:10.1177/1363460708094269
Sexuality. (2014). Merriam-Webster.com. Retrieved from http://www.merriamwebster.com/dictionary/sexuality
Stanley, J. L., Bartholomew, K., Taylor, T., Oram, D., & Landolt, M. (2006). Intimate
violence in male same-sex relationships. Journal of Family Violence, 21(1),
3141. doi:10.1007/s10896-005-9008-9
Tiefer, L. (2001). The consensus conference on female sexual dysfuntion: Conflicts of interest and hidden agendas. Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy, 27(2),
227236. doi:10.1080/00926230152052049
Van Houdenhove, E. V., Gijs, L., TSjoen, G., & Enzlin, P. (2014). Asexuality:
Few facts, many questions. Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy, 40(3), 175192.
doi:10.1080/0092623X.2012.751073
Vroege, J. A., Gijs, L., & Hengeveld, M. W. (2001). Classification of sexual dysfunctions in women. Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy, 27(2), 237243.
doi:10.1080/00926230152052058
Walker, J. A., & Prince, T. (2010). Training considerations and suggested counseling
interventions for LGBT individuals. Journal of LGBT Issues in Counseling, 4,
217. doi:10.1080/15538600903552756