Is Vore an Asexual fetish?

[VorDog]

So like the title says, if you are into vore but have no interests in sex, does that make you asexual?

[Humbug]

If you have no interest in sex, you're asexual. Vore can be either sexual or asexual.

If vore gets you off, but you still have no interest in sex, you're probably what people are calling "Gray ace." That's what I am anyway.

[InDepthLook]

Yo, Ace here. Fetishes exist outside of sexuality.

Asexual people can still experience arousal, participate in sex, and enjoy sex. The only thing that makes you asexual is if you aren't sexually attracted to any genders.
Fetishes are, again, not related to sexuality. I can find pleasure in something like vorephilia. I am still an asexual person because I do not feel sexual desire or attraction to anyone. Look at your real life attraction and determine your sexuality from there.

Trying to connect dots between fetishes and sexuality is how you get pedo's trying to say their fetish is a sexuality and they should be a part of the LGBT community, lmao.

[coop500]

No, it's not an asexual fetish.

However, asexual people CAN like vore, both/either for non-sexual and/or sexual reasons.

Yes, non-sexual vore exists, if you don't believe it is, then that's your problem IMO.

[jaggedjagd]

.......................................

[wamdueCastle]

im bi sexual, so no its not an asexual fetish. Its a submissive thing to enjoy, unless are you are the predator of course.

[somethingsomething2077]

Trying to connect dots between fetishes and sexuality is how you get pedo's trying to say their fetish is a sexuality and they should be a part of the LGBT community, lmao.

I like this line, as i saw some people trying to use their fetishis (Pedos, Zoophiles, etc) into the LGBTQ+ community for no fucking reason

But yeah overall no vore has nothing to do with sexuality or gender

[Impact]

I'm agreeing with vore being asexual itself.

If we define vore as "the pelasure of eating or being eaten", then it is, implicitly, asexual. It is the idea of devouring or being devoured what gives you pleasure, not who is performing it.

I guess the fetish can be modified by or applied to our sexuality, becoming something like, in my case, the pleasure of being swallowed whole by a woman I find attractive.

This is just my reasoning, of course.

[Slappy]

Asexual people can still experience arousal, participate in sex, and enjoy sex. The only thing that makes you asexual is if you aren't sexually attracted to any genders.
Fetishes are, again, not related to sexuality. I can find pleasure in something like vorephilia. I am still an asexual person because I do not feel sexual desire or attraction to anyone. Look at your real life attraction and determine your sexuality from there.

This about sums it up really. Just because you like the idea of eating/being eaten by a particular person or thing doesn't mean you're sexually attracted to them or it.

[quickcrunch]

I will say this first, it as a fetish is not linked to asexuality in any way, it can be both erotic, and nonsexual respectively. I've seen people use it to get in the mood for sex, there are plenty of people who also enjoy sex who also enjoy vore. It can be used for nonsexual things, but this does not mean it is an asexual fetish.
I'm an asexual who enjoys vore, or well you could say I'm somewhere on that so called ace spectrum. I'm not really interested in sex much at all, not even much in a fantasy sense either. Could never do sex in real life, probably never will. In rp i've done smut, but it's never been a massive interest, i never get invested or excited by it, and if i happen to its because it's linked to a fetish i like preformed in a certain way that gets me to that point. vore itself doesnt even manage to arouse me straight up unless it has very specific things that i like filled in preformed either in writing, art, or roleplay. I mainly use vore as a way to nonsexually cope with crap happening in real life and online. Imagining myself in a small warm space surrounded by nothing but sounds that cover up the real world helps me cool off. Sometimes I even curl up in a blanket, and pretend I'm both predator, and prey. While I play as pred in this scenario I'm very gentle, and calming to the point in which all feelings of danger by bieng someone's possible meal is erased. I've done it to even drift myself into sleep when my mind was too actively thinking about things that cause me anxiety. There's a lot more to vore than meets the eye. I do a lot of research, and talk with many fans of it since most people who don't like it legitimately think its always sexual. Still that bieng said, some vore still does arouse me.
Edit: A lot of the other posters have really good points about how you shouldn't link a fetish to a sexuality, which is true, they really aren't related to each other at all.
If there were a sexuality for this fetish it would probably be "gutsexual" or something since some people aren't even attracted to the things that eat them, and just like to get eaten lol!

[Wolfsage]

For me, it's a bit complicated.
I don't care about sex, I find it a bit gross, so it doesn't exist in my vore fetishes, but my body still reacts the same way.

[eaterjolly]

Asexual people can still experience arousal, participate in sex, and enjoy sex.

That might confuse some. I go with the prescriptive definition "to have no desire for sexual experience".
I agree you are asexual ofc, but you have some fuzzy verbiage.

---

Experiencing pedophiliac urges might make an excellent reason for someone to seek neuro-linguistic reprogramming to experience asexuality.
I say that, although I know someone would need to have quite a large share of luck to ever find that kind of help anywhere in the world.

Fetishes, throwing-back to the anthropological sense, imo should refer to an opposite for fascination.
Someone such as myself would consider a fascination generative, or in other words a trait generating art.
Where-as a fetish has a purely or mostly absorptive connotation, or in other words a trait absorbing art.

However descriptively many artists (for example Karbo) claim to have a fetish.
Although I create few pieces in any medium, I like to think I have a fascination since I think about the art a lot.
I think in such cases what matters for what you call it is whether the trait turns out more fetish or more fascination.

I will say this first, it as a fetish is not linked to asexuality in any way.

I disagree with that on principle that any physically impossible sexual experience is at least somewhat asexual in nature.

[EmilyNidhoggr]

I can only say, I knew I was completely 100% asexual, and that I was extremely switched on by the idea of swallowing and digesting people and drawing that, years before I knew anyone else in the world was either of those things.

Even after some time on this site, I still get grossed out by the more pornographic stuff that features genitalia (especially UB and CV), like having to look at the black bit of a banana.
Not that sexuality, as an aspect of the general human condition, can't be made hot to me by being twisted to the service of predation in ways I find creative.

I think my own art style is off-putting to a lot of people because it isn't so pornographic, and is more about conveying dynamics than reveling in sexualised bodies. I get the sense that's not what most people are here for. So I would hesitate to universalise my experience, and say, yes, in my case it's an asexual fetish, but that like all fetishes it is wrapped up with straightforward sexual desire in most people.

[InDepthLook]

Asexual people can still experience arousal, participate in sex, and enjoy sex.

That might confuse some. I go with the prescriptive definition "to have no desire for sexual experience".
I agree you are asexual ofc, but you have some fuzzy verbiage.

I get what you're saying, but not all asexual people have no desire for sexual experiences, lol. You can want sex or even become horny and still be asexual, because we asexuals still have normal hormones running around in our bodies. If by prescriptive definition you mean the one used to "diagnose" people with asexuality, I'd consider not going by the DSM-5 when describing your sexuality, lol. Asexuality is an orientation, not a mental disorder.

[blergle]

It isn't for me, but for asexual people it might be. Really think it just varies by the individual.

[quickcrunch]

I will say this first, it as a fetish is not linked to asexuality in any way.

I disagree with that on principle that any physically impossible sexual experience is at least somewhat asexual in nature.

Sure, but having a fetish not linked to sex does not always make you asexual, that was the point I was making. There are sexuals that like vore. Honestly what you're saying looks like you're saying you cannot feel arousal from anything if you're asexual which is not the case. There are asexuals that get aroused, and can even experience sexual things, though naturally they have no interest or desire to do so.
Maybe I could have said the link between the two is very small, but even then as many people said before my post, linking a fetish to a sexuality isn't really something we should do since they do not go hand in hand as it can excuse those with illegal, and even harmful fetishes.
Also it seems like you didn't read my whole post since I clearly stated in a large paragraph how my asexual self uses vore in a nonsexual way, so yeah.

[Silhouette]

By most commonly accepted definitions, it isn't.

A fetish, in the manner used by this forum, is defined as:

"a form of sexual desire in which gratification is linked to an abnormal degree to a particular object, item of clothing, part of the body, etc." - Oxford

"an object or bodily part whose real or fantasied presence is psychologically necessary for sexual gratification and that is an object of fixation to the extent that it may interfere with complete sexual expression" - Webster's

"any object or nongenital part of the body that causes a habitual erotic response or fixation." - Dictionary.com

"a sexual interest in an object or a part of the body other than the sexual organs" - Cambridge

While there are some variant definitions, I'd argue these show a trend in the primary and most common ones. According to this definition, fetishes are inherently sexual in nature.

That said, there's another end to the argument: Asexual, outside of the biological context, is still a relatively new and fluid term as far as its meaning goes: I've seen it previous described as extreme as being biologically sexually-insensate, and as soft as "just not being interested in sexual relationships". To that end, maybe the question is less about whether the fetish is asexual, and more about "What do you mean when you say 'I'm asexual'?"

For example, if you regard it as being sexually-insensate, a fetish would be incompatible with that. You're either asexual and do not have a fetish, or you're not asexual and do. If you regard it as being more of a soft definition like the aforementioned asocial one, then you can reconcile having a sexual fetish and just not pursuing sexual relationships, although one could argue that engaging with others, like say, in the roleplay and chatrooms, for example, -are- sexual relationships.

tl;dr Probably not, by most primary definitions, but to be honest, I don't think that'll really matter all that much to anyone insistent about it.

[eaterjolly]

DSM-5

Prescription originally and authentically means to assign in a self-fulfilling way. In linguistics, it is saying what a word "should" mean. No one other than someone such as myself will tell you exactly what depth the corruption of the "psycho-analytic" or mental environmental establishment reaches. Terra-earth desperately needs a new establishment to replace that one. If Freud disliked Jung, then Freud would have stripped all dignity from Jung like a predator to unwilling prey. Such grammar appropriation exists only for propaganda purposes. Sexual experience with a full-stop or a period would not default to "all". I recommend the predicate logic of lojban for a grammar study, any ambitious communicator would learn a lot.
It would default to "coordinated".

Anti-libidoists fit as a counter-example. Mention that group more. I like the influence of that group, honestly.

---

Sorry quickcrunch about ignoring things that matter to you how I responded. Removing context removes the person in such cases. Thank you for hints in your post. When people fetishize people, both gradually stop being people. By contrast, when people fetishize things, ghosts of both grow more potent and more present for longer whiles. Hey, ur pretty cool.

[ShadesofBlack]

Not exclusively, but definitely for some people.

[Slappy]

By most commonly accepted definitions, it isn't.

This is one of the reasons why, when I talk about vore, I refer to it as a fantasy rather than a kink or a fetish. I'd rather not argue with people who think you can't be asexual and like vore at the same time.