kunst nugget wrote: » I don't know if you could make that assumption tbh. I think he was a bit sh¡tty with the way he signed off that interview. He really needs to sort that research out and get a decent set of questions beforehand and not leave it to questions from the listeners because it becomes a complete shambles.
Meangadh wrote: » I actually felt kind of sorry for Ray there, they were impossible to interview! Trying to understand asexuality and yet they wouldn't answer questions about arousal and the physical side of things. I understand it's very personal but surely that's the most basic side to sexual attraction. Not the be all and end all, but certainly a huge part. When people were asking questions, they only did so to understand, not to ridicule or condescend- I mean it is difficult for most of us to understand. They were just rude in most of their answers, almost indignant that people would dare to question it. Why did they come on then, what did they expect to happen?
NotVeryHappy wrote: » Bar the "are your parents still together" question it wasn't that bad an interview from Ray He did fine with very tough guests. Vivian took offence at everything and was extremely condescending. The interview was on asexuality. aSEXuality. Of course there's there's going to be some personal questions in there and if you don't want to answer them fair enough, be polite and move on. Instead the guests felt insulted. The vast majority of the population don't differentiate between romance/attraction/arousal as they are so interlinked and we don't spend the day looking up textbook definitions of each of them because it's not really relevant to us. But because it is relevant to the guests they've spent a load of time reading, try to understand and define these terms. Just because we don't understand, yet want to understand doesn't make us rude and stupid like Vivian seemed to think.
Still Ill wrote: » I got the distinct feeling that the asexuals feel they are quite superior to us mere mortals who waste our time thinking about frivolous things like sex.
BPKS wrote: » Caught most of that interview this morning and I must say I felt sorry for D'Arcy. That Vivian (Vivienne?) came across very badly, like was mentioned above it was a case of "you mean you still cant understand a-sexual, a-romantic".Maybe at the next meeting of the A-sexual association of Ireland (to be held in in a phonebox somewhere in Dublin city centre) they could come up A-sexuals for Dummies manual.
kunst nugget wrote: » I didn't get that feeling at all from your man Oscar who seemed quite friendly and willing to talk at the beginning but I think Vivian would have had that attitude irrespective of his sexuality.
sydthebeat wrote: » What? ??? Was that two men? ? I would have sworn that oscar was a woman and Vivian was a guy.
Twas Not wrote: » It was a lass and a lad I thought? Oscar the grumpy one and Vivienne was the lass
sydthebeat wrote: » other way round was the way i got it.....
kunst nugget wrote: » No, it was two lads. Ray was asking your man Oscar about erections and your man Vivian was told he should join the priesthood.
Twas Not wrote: » They don't sound like two men. I did miss the start tbh
Ray's speaking to Oscar and Vivien, two guys in their 20's, who are both asexual which means that they do not experience sexual attraction.
Doctor Strange wrote: » Whatever about how someone came across in an interview, this dismissive attitude is a load of crap.
BPKS wrote: » D'Arcy asked them who many people were members of the group and they refused to answer it. To be honest, straight away this came to mind:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gb_qHP7VaZE
kunst nugget wrote: » What difference does knowing how many people are in the group going to make? I'm not sure what the Monty Python sketch has to do with it either tbh…
BPKS wrote: » Whatever happened to the Popular Front? He's over there.
Michael Weston wrote: » I think the point he was making was how the Vivian guy was so dismissive of people asking questions about his lifestyle much like the gentleman at the start of the clip, when asked are you the people's Judean front he replied with fack off. It's like he wanted the attention but not to explain it to people. I could easily see the similarities and it's just a bit of humour.
Maybe at the next meeting of the A-sexual association of Ireland (to be held in in a phonebox somewhere in Dublin city centre) they could come up A-sexuals for Dummies manual.
kunst nugget wrote: » Dismiss the guy Vivien all you want, he did come across like a bit of an ass and it was pointless him going on the radio to speak about it when you was guarded and exasperated by curiosity, but BPKS was dismissing everyone who was asexual when he said:
BPKS wrote: » Am no I wasn't. The points I was making was that it appears that there are not too many members of the association or group representing asexuals. And if they are not going to explain it without taking umbrage to most questions on national radio, then they should prepare a manual for the general public who find it difficult to understand (Like Changing a Wheel for Dummies or French for Dummies or Computers for Dummies books you see).
