Sexual Violence Victimization and Substance Use among Individuals Identifying on the Asexual Spectrum: Differences between Asexuality, Graysexuality, and Demisexuality

ABSTRACT

Despite the growing visibility of the asexual community across the globe, little is known about how individuals on the asexual spectrum navigate their (a)sexual experiences. Asexual individuals may be highly vulnerable to sexual violence victimization due to prejudice against their lack of sexual attraction. Perpetrators may seek to pressure asexual individuals into sexual activities by invalidating their asexuality or manipulating their need for emotional intimacy. Such non-consensual sexual acts or behaviors may have a profound impact on asexual individuals. The present study aimed to examine the prevalence of sexual violence victimization and its relationship with substance use among individuals identifying on the asexual spectrum. The data for this study were derived from a global sample of 8,752 individuals on the asexual spectrum from the Ace Community Survey. The results indicated that 67.4% of the participants had experienced at least one form of sexual violence victimization in their lifetime. Experiences of sexual violence were related to more frequent engagement in substance use over the past year. Additionally, the results showed that compared with asexual individuals, graysexual and demisexual individuals were more likely to experience sexual violence, which was linked to substance use. Given the widespread prevalence and detrimental effects of sexual violence victimization, it is important to integrate asexual perspectives into prevention and intervention efforts, while simultaneously raising public awareness about affirmative consent and boundaries. The study also offers significant implications for trauma-informed care, public education, and social policies that address the unique needs and experiences of this population.

Introduction

Asexuality is an umbrella term that describes individuals who experience little or no sexual attraction to anyone, regardless of sex or gender (Bogaert, 2015; Copulsky & Hammack, 2023). Although there is a lack of sexual attraction among individuals identifying on the asexual spectrum, they have diverse needs and experiences related to (a)sexuality, which may affect their vulnerability to sexual violence victimization. Previous studies have indicated that individuals on the asexual spectrum are often subject to various forms of sexual violence, such as unwanted sexual contact, sexual coercion, and attempted or completed rape (Fink, 2023; Lund, 2021; Mollet & Black, 2021; Parent & Ferriter, 2018). These experiences may have negative consequences on their lives and well-being. Notably, exposure to sexual violence victimization may lead to substance use as a coping mechanism (Balsam et al., 2011; Rhew et al., 2017). However, the relationships between sexual violence victimization and substance use in asexual populations remain understudied. Therefore, the present study aimed to explore the experiences of sexual violence, as well as the impact of sexual violence victimization on substance use among a global sample of individuals on the asexual spectrum.

Asexual Spectrum

Asexuality has been increasingly recognized as a distinct sexual identity or sexual orientation category, with approximately 1% of the general population identifying on the asexual spectrum (Antonsen et al., 2020; Bogaert, 2015). Individuals on the asexual spectrum generally share substantial similarities in experiencing little or no sexual attraction, but it is important to recognize the nuances and diversity within the asexual community (Cowan & LeBlanc, 2018). Identity labels along the asexual spectrum are constantly evolving and highly heterogeneous (Antonsen et al., 2020). Some of the common identities include asexual (i.e., those who experience no sexual attraction), graysexual (i.e., those who may occasionally experience sexual attraction and consider their sexuality to fall in the “gray area” between asexuality and allosexuality), and demisexual (i.e., those who experience sexual attraction only after forming a strong emotional connection with another person) (Cowan & LeBlanc, 2018; Decker, 2015). Considerable heterogeneity is discovered among individuals on the asexual spectrum, with unique experiences on sexual desires, sexual attitudes, sexual behaviors, romantic attractions, and intimate relationships (Antonsen et al., 2020).

Sexual Violence Victimization among Individuals on the Asexual Spectrum

Sexual violence is defined as “any sexual act, attempt to obtain a sexual act, or other act directed against a person’s sexuality using coercion” (World Health Organization, 2019). It encompasses a wide range of non-consensual activities of a sexual nature, including sexual harassment, sexual coercion, sexual assault, and rape. Sexual harassment, in particular, involves “unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature” (U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 1997). Sexual coercion refers to the use of threats, manipulation, deception, power, or influence to obtain sexual contact without the person’s consent (Michigan State University Center for Survivors, 2020). Sexual assault entails the act of sexual touching without the person’s consent or an act of forcing a person to engage in sexual activity against their will (Gong et al., 2019). Rape is a specific type of sexual assault that involves oral, vaginal, or anal penetration or attempted penetration using any body part or object without the person’s consent (Messinger & Koon-Magnin, 2019). Previous studies have indicated that lesbian, gay, bisexual, and questioning (LGBQ) individuals are at higher risk of experiencing sexual violence victimization than heterosexual individuals (Chen et al., 2020; Coulter et al., 2017; Katz-Wise & Hyde, 2012). For instance, Williams and Gutierrez (2022) found that LGBQ youth were more likely to experience sexual violence, sexual dating violence, and forced sexual intercourse than their heterosexual peers. Coulter et al. (2017) also reported that individuals who identified as LGBQ were twice as likely to experience sexual assault in the past year than heterosexual individuals.

Sexual violence poses serious threats to individuals on the asexual spectrum. Under the influence of allonormativity, sexuality is regarded as an essential aspect of human nature (MacInnis & Hodson, 2012). All human beings are presumed to be allosexual (i.e., experiencing sexual attraction toward others), and those who lack interest in sex are pathologized and stigmatized as sexually deviant (Gupta, 2017; Mollet & Black, 2021). Specifically, asexual individuals are often stereotyped as “less human,” “deficient,” and “incomplete” (Hoffarth et al., 2016; MacInnis & Hodson, 2012; Pacho, 2013). Anti-asexual prejudice may exert intense pressure on asexual individuals to engage in unwanted sex in order to please their partners or fit in with social norms (Gupta, 2017). For example, a person may compromise and agree to have sex that they do not desire when responding to their partner’s request. While the sexual acts may be initially consensual, difficulties may arise in negotiating and maintaining clear boundaries during the intimate process. On some occasions, when asexual individuals are coerced or emotionally pressured into engaging in sexual acts against their will, these acts may become non-consensual and constitute sexual violence (Gupta, 2017). Additionally, asexual individuals often report being subjected to corrective rape, as they are perceived as “broken and not whole.” Perpetrators may try to “correct,” “cure,” “fix,” or “disprove” their asexuality through sexual violence (Lund, 2021; Mollet & Black, 2021).

Sexual violence is the most prevalent form of victimization experienced by individuals on the asexual spectrum (Weis et al., 2021). With a global sample of 10,648 participants, Weis et al. showed that a significant majority (82.2%) reported experiencing at least one type of sexual violence in their lifetime. In comparison, 31.5% of the participants experienced online harassment, 30.9% reported experiencing verbal harassment, and 5.1% encountered physical violence. Similarly, Mollet and Black (2021) found that more than 70% of asexual college students reported unwanted non-contact sexual experiences, over 50% experienced unwanted sexual contact, and almost 25% were raped by coercion or physical force. Parent and Ferriter (2018) also revealed that asexual individuals were 2.5 times more likely to report experiencing sexual trauma in the last year compared to their allosexual counterparts. This line of research offers compelling evidence of the widespread occurrence of sexual violence within the asexual community, underscoring the urgent need to understand the impact of these experiences on individuals on the asexual spectrum.

Substance Use among Individuals on the Asexual Spectrum

Lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) individuals are at heightened risk for substance use than heterosexual individuals (Marshal et al., 2008; Schuler & Collins, 2020). Previous studies have shown that LGB adults have significantly higher rates of binge alcohol use, cigarette smoking, marijuana use, illicit drug use, opioid misuse, and substance use disorders than their heterosexual counterparts (Schuler & Collins, 2020). A meta-analysis by Marshal et al. (2008) revealed that rates of substance use among LGB youth were almost three times higher compared to their heterosexual peers. This included higher rates of cigarette smoking, alcohol consumption, and use of marijuana, cocaine, and injection drugs. Moreover, LGB youth were more likely to start using substances at younger ages and continue using alcohol, tobacco, and marijuana over time than heterosexual youth (Talley et al., 2019).

However, most of the existing research on substance use has mainly focused on the experiences of LGB individuals or treated sexual minority individuals as a homogeneous group (Barger et al., 2021; Scroggs et al., 2023). With increasing awareness and visibility of underrepresented subgroups of sexual minorities, recent studies have begun to investigate the prevalence of substance use among individuals on the asexual spectrum (Weis et al., 2021). For instance, Bauer et al. (2020) found that compared to allosexual individuals, asexual and graysexual individuals reported significantly less alcohol consumption and were more likely to be nondrinkers and to abstain from drinking alcohol. Likewise, McInroy et al. (2022) reported that asexual adolescents were less likely to use substances (e.g., alcohol, tobacco, marijuana, ecstasy, cocaine, and prescription drugs) than their allosexual sexual minority peers. Additionally, individuals identifying as asexual had lower odds of reporting binge alcohol and marijuana use in the past year than those with other sexual minority identities (Barger et al., 2021). Scroggs et al. (2023) also showed that asexual individuals reported significantly lower levels of alcohol, tobacco, cannabis, and cocaine use than individuals identifying as gay and lesbian. While existing literature indicates that substance use varies among sexual minority subgroups, empirical research is warranted to examine the profiles and risk factors for substance use among individuals on the asexual spectrum.

Effects of Sexual Violence Victimization on Substance Use

Grounded in stress and coping theory (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984), exposure to stressors (i.e., stimuli appraised as threatening, challenging, or harmful) evokes one’s negative emotional responses, and the resulting distress may trigger the use of coping strategies for emotion regulation. Consistent with this theory, previous studies have demonstrated that exposure to sexual violence victimization often leads to substance use as a coping strategy (Ullman et al., 2013). Experiencing sexual violence can elicit a series of overwhelming emotions, such as fear, anxiety, anger, sadness, guilt, shame, and self-blame (Silver et al., 2022). Some survivors of sexual violence may opt for substance use as a way to manage the lasting effects of the trauma they have endured (Ullman et al., 2013). Substance use may serve as an avoidance coping mechanism for temporary mental disengagement, which allows them to alleviate emotional distress and escape from the trauma caused by their victimization experiences (Ullman et al., 2013).

Victimization is one of the risk factors for substance use among LGB individuals (Chan & Huang, 2021; Goldbach et al., 2014). The minority stress model suggests that exposure to sexual minority stressors (e.g., stigma, discrimination, and victimization) may lead to psychological distress and substance use (Meyer, 2003). Moreover, previous studies have proposed that victimization may trigger the use of substances as a way of emotion regulation and cognitive escape among sexual minority individuals (Hatzenbuehler, 2009). They may engage in substance use to cope with or avoid negative emotions (e.g., anger, sadness, and distress) resulting from victimization (Talley & Littlefield, 2014). Empirical evidence supported this idea, showing that lesbian and bisexual women who encountered sexual harassment and sexual assault reported significantly higher levels of alcohol consumption than those who did not (Nawyn et al., 2000; Rhew et al., 2017). Balsam et al. (2011) also found that lesbian women and gay men who suffered from childhood sexual abuse or adult rape were more likely to use alcohol, marijuana, and other drugs than those without such experiences. This line of research suggests that substance use may be a coping strategy among sexual minority individuals in response to sexual violence experiences.

While there is a well-established body of research examining the relationship between sexual violence and substance use among more extensively studied subgroups of sexual minorities (e.g., lesbian, gay, and bisexual individuals), our knowledge of such experiences among individuals identifying on the asexual spectrum is still limited. Recent research has documented the negative impact of victimization on mental health outcomes, including psychological distress and suicidality, within the asexual population (Barreto & Boislard, 2023; Chan & Leung, 2023). However, to date, there is a noticeable research gap regarding the specific effects of sexual violence victimization on substance use. Further empirical investigations are needed to understand the complexities and dynamics of sexual violence and substance use among individuals on the asexual spectrum.

Differences between Identities on the Asexual Spectrum

There are notable distinctions in sexual attraction, desire, and behavior between individuals identifying with different asexual spectrum identities (e.g., asexual, graysexual, and demisexual) (Copulsky & Hammack, 2023). Previous studies have demonstrated that the levels of sexual attraction within the asexual spectrum vary, ranging from almost nonexistent for asexual individuals, to infrequent for graysexual individuals, and to being context-dependent for demisexual individuals (Hille et al., 2020). Among individuals on the asexual spectrum, it has been observed that while many have engaged in some forms of sexual activity, asexual individuals are less likely to experience a desire for sexual activity compared to graysexual individuals, and graysexual individuals are less likely to experience that desire compared to demisexual individuals (Hille et al., 2020). Copulsky and Hammack (2023) also showed similar patterns, with asexual individuals reporting the lowest and demisexual individuals reporting the highest levels of sex drive and personal disposition toward engaging in sexual activities. These variations can be partly explained by the stronger desire to establish an emotional connection with others among graysexual and demisexual individuals (Hille et al., 2020). Previous studies have indicated that asexual individuals are more likely to identify on the aromantic spectrum (i.e., experiencing little to no romantic attraction) than graysexual and demisexual individuals (Copulsky & Hammack, 2023; Hille et al., 2020). Asexual individuals are more likely to be single, whereas demisexual individuals have the highest likelihood of being currently involved in intimate relationships (Copulsky & Hammack, 2023).

Emerging studies have uncovered the disparities in sexual violence victimization among individuals on the asexual spectrum (Fink, 2023). In a sample of college students on the asexual spectrum, Mollet and Black (2021) found that students who identified as graysexual and demisexual had higher odds of experiencing non-contact sexual violence, unwanted sexual contact, and coercive rape than asexual students. Fink (2023) also suggested that graysexual and demisexual individuals were more likely to experience occasional sexual attraction than asexual individuals. Perpetrators who are aware of the need for intimacy and connection experienced by graysexual and demisexual individuals may exploit this vulnerability through manipulation and coercion to obtain sexual contact, thereby potentially increasing their susceptibility to sexual violence.

Aims of the Present Study

The present study aimed to (1) estimate the prevalence of sexual violence victimization and substance use among individuals identifying on the asexual spectrum, (2) investigate the demographic characteristics associated with sexual violence victimization, (3) examine the effects of sexual violence victimization on substance use, and (4) determine the associations between asexual spectrum identities, sexual violence victimization, and substance use. Specifically, we proposed a mediation model to depict the relationships between asexual spectrum identities, sexual violence victimization, and substance use. It was hypothesized that graysexual and demisexual individuals would be more likely to experience sexual violence victimization than asexual individuals. Additionally, we hypothesized that sexual violence victimization would be positively associated with substance use.

Method

Study Design

The present study was based on the data from the Ace Community Survey conducted in 2020. Participants were recruited through targeted and snowball sampling methods. The survey information was distributed on major asexual websites (e.g., The Asexual Visibility and Education Network and The Asexual Agenda) and asexuality-themed groups on various social networking sites (e.g., Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, Tumblr, and Reddit). The survey was also shared on non-English asexual websites, and translation guides were offered to help participants answer the questions. Individuals who were interested in the study were directed to the online survey platform hosted by Google Forms. They were encouraged to share the survey with other asexual communities or individuals. Participants were given the study information and asked to provide informed consent before starting the study. They were told that their participation was voluntary, and they could skip any part of the survey or withdraw from the study at any time. The study was approved by the survey and behavioral research ethics committee of the corresponding author’s institution.

Participants

This study included a global sample of 8,752 individuals on the asexual spectrum from 109 countries. The inclusion criteria for the analysis were as follows: (1) self-identification on the asexual spectrum, and (2) being 18 years of age or older. Most of the participants identified as asexual (65.9%), followed by graysexual (12.2%), demisexual (10.5%), questioning if asexual/graysexual/demisexual (8.6%), and other (2.8%). Approximately 60.7% of them were on the asexual spectrum only, and 39.3% were on both the asexual and aromantic spectrums. The participants had a mean age of 25.27 years (SD = 6.97, range = 18–84). Nearly half of them identified as female (49.5%), while 10.5% identified as male and 40.0% identified as non-binary. Approximately 0.6% of the individuals were intersex. Most participants were cisgender (85.8%), and 14.2% were transgender. About 12.5% were a racial/ethnic minority in their country of residence. More than four-fifths of the participants had completed tertiary education (83.7%), 12.8% had completed secondary education, and 3.5% had less than secondary education. Almost half of them were employed (49.2%), 30.0% were students, and 17.8% were not in employment or education. The majority of participants lived in high-income countries (91.6%), followed by upper-middle-income countries (6.9%) and lower-middle-income or low-income countries (1.5%). The country income groups were categorized into three groups using the World Bank classification (World Bank, 2020).

Measures

Sexual Violence Victimization

Participants were asked to report their lifetime experiences of sexual violence victimization on five dimensions: sexual harassment, sexual coercion, sexual assault, rape attempt, and rape. Sexual harassment was measured with a single item: “How many people have ever exposed their sexual body parts, made you show your sexual body parts, or made you look at sexual photos or movies when you did not want it to happen?” Sexual coercion was assessed with four items (e.g., “How many people have ever had vaginal, anal, oral, or manual sex with you, or put fingers or an object into your vagina or anus after they pressured you by threatening to end your relationship or threatening to spread rumors about you?”). Sexual assault was measured with a single item: “How many people have ever kissed you in a sexual way, fondled, groped, grabbed, or touched you when you did not want it to happen or in a way that made you feel unsafe?” Rape attempt was measured with a single item: “How many people have ever used force or threats of physical harm to try to make you have vaginal, anal, oral, or manual sex, or put fingers or an object into your vagina or anus, but it did not happen?” Rape was assessed with two items (e.g., “How many people have ever had vaginal, anal, oral, or manual sex with you, or put fingers or an object into your vagina or anus when you were drunk, high, or passed out and unable to consent?”).

Participants responded to these items by giving a rough estimate of the number of people who committed the above sexual violence acts on them. The number in each item was then recoded as a dichotomous scale (i.e., “Yes/No”), where zero was recoded as “No” and one or more was recoded as “Yes,” indicating whether the participants experienced sexual violence victimization. Participants who reported one or more perpetrator(s) in any of the items in each dimension were considered as having experienced that specific type of sexual violence.

Substance Use

Participants were asked to indicate the frequency of substance use in the past 12 months, involving alcohol, tobacco, marijuana, prescription drugs for recreational use, other non-injection recreational drugs, and other injectable recreational drugs. Participants responded to the items using six response options: “not at all in the last 12 months,” “once/twice in the last 12 months,” “once/twice a month,” “once/twice a week,” “3/4 days a week,” and “5+ days a week.” An ordinal scale was used to represent the frequency of substance use, ranging from less frequent substance use to more frequent substance use.

Data Analysis

Descriptive statistics were conducted to investigate the demographic characteristics, sexual violence victimization, and substance use of individuals on the asexual spectrum. Logistic regression analyses were performed to identify demographic characteristics (i.e., age, gender, intersex condition, transgender/cisgender identity, asexual spectrum identity, romantic orientation, racial/ethnic status, education level, employment status, and country income group) that were associated with different forms of sexual violence victimization (i.e., sexual harassment, sexual coercion, sexual assault, rape attempt, and rape). Additionally, ordinal regression analyses were conducted to examine how demographic variables and sexual violence victimization were related to substance use, including alcohol, tobacco, marijuana, prescription drugs for recreational use, other non-injection recreational drugs, and other injectable recreational drugs. Age was a continuous variable measured in years. Other demographic variables were categorical variables and were dummy coded for the analyses. The above analyses were conducted using SPSS version 28.0.

Structural equation modeling was conducted to examine whether the association of asexual spectrum identities with substance use would be mediated by sexual violence victimization (Figure 1), controlling for demographic variables (i.e., age, gender, intersex condition, transgender/cisgender identity, romantic orientation, racial/ethnic status, education level, employment status, and country income group). The latent construct of sexual violence victimization was indicated by sexual harassment, sexual coercion, sexual assault, rape attempt, and rape, whereas the latent construct of substance use was represented by the ordinal variables measuring the frequency of alcohol, tobacco, marijuana, prescription drugs for recreational use, other non-injection recreational drugs, and other injectable recreational drugs. Direct and indirect (through sexual violence victimization) associations of asexual spectrum identities with substance use were examined. The goodness-of-fit of the models was evaluated by examining the χ² statistic, comparative fit index (CFI), Tucker-Lewis index (TLI), root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA), and standardized root mean square residual (SRMR) (Hu & Bentler, 1999). Criteria for acceptable model fit include CFI and TLI values of 0.90 or above, RMSEA value of 0.08 or below, and SRMR value of 0.08 or below (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2007). A bootstrapping analysis was performed to estimate the indirect effects, and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated using 1,000 bias-corrected bootstrapped samples. The indirect effects were considered statistically significant if the 95% CI did not include zero (Preacher & Hayes, 2008). Structural equation modeling was performed using Mplus version 8.9.

Figure 1. Hypothesized model of asexual spectrum identities, sexual violence victimization, and substance use.

Results

Prevalence of Sexual Violence Victimization and Substance Use

Table 1 shows the prevalence of sexual violence victimization in the current sample. Two-thirds of the participants (67.4%) reported experiencing sexual violence victimization in their lifetime. Specifically, 57.4% had experienced sexual assault, which involved instances of being sexually touched by others without their consent. Approximately 43.3% had experienced sexual harassment, which included being exposed to others’ sexual body parts or sexual photos. In addition, more than one-fourth of the participants (28.9%) reported experiencing sexual coercion, which involved various methods such as emotional manipulation and persistent pressure for sex (24.8%), deception and false promises (14.8%), threats of ending the relationship or spreading rumors (9.1%), and the use of influence or authority (5.0%). Approximately 11.0% of the participants reported surviving rape attempts, while 15.8% had experienced rape, including instances of incapacitation due to being drunk, high, or unconscious (11.7%) and the use of force or threats of physical harm (7.7%).

Table 1. Demographic characteristics, sexual violence victimization, and substance use of the participants (N = 8,752).

	n (%)/M (SD)
Demographic characteristics
Age	25.27 (6.97)
Gender
Male	920 (10.5%)
Female	4,330 (49.5%)
Non-binary	3,499 (40.0%)
Intersex	54 (0.6%)
Transgender	1,239 (14.2%)
Asexual spectrum identity
Asexual	5,771 (65.9%)
Graysexual	1,070 (12.2%)
Demisexual	915 (10.5%)
Questioning if asexual/graysexual/demisexual	749 (8.6%)
Other	247 (2.8%)
Aromantic	3,434 (39.3%)
Racial/ethnic minorities	1,091 (12.5%)
Education level
Less than secondary education	301 (3.5%)
Secondary education	1,119 (12.8%)
Tertiary education	7,293 (83.7%)
Employment status
In employment	4,289 (49.2%)
Student	2,619 (30.0%)
Not in employment	1,553 (17.8%)
Other	257 (2.9%)
Country income group
Lower-middle-income/low-income	131 (1.5%)
Upper-middle-income	602 (6.9%)
High-income	8,018 (91.6%)
Sexual violence victimization
Sexual harassment	3,704 (43.3%)
Sexual coercion	2,353 (28.9%)
By deception and false promises	1,187 (14.8%)
By threats of ending the relationship or spreading rumors	726 (9.1%)
By emotional manipulation and persistent pressure for sex	2,005 (24.8%)
By use of influence or authority	396 (5.0%)
Sexual assault	4,959 (57.4%)
Rape attempt	920 (11.0%)
Rape	1,277 (15.8%)
Incapacitation due to being drunk, high, or unconscious	945 (11.7%)
Through use of force or threats of physical harm	618 (7.7%)
Substance use
Alcohol	5,511 (63.1%)
Tobacco	779 (8.9%)
Marijuana	1,500 (17.2%)
Recreational use of prescription drugs	254 (2.9%)
Other recreational drugs (non-injection)	293 (3.4%)
Other recreational drugs (injectable)	13 (0.1%)

Nearly two-thirds of the participants (65.8%) reported using substances in the past 12 months. Approximately 63.1% consumed alcohol, 17.2% used marijuana, and 8.9% used tobacco. In addition, 2.9% of the participants engaged in recreational use of prescription drugs. About 3.4% of them used other non-injection recreational drugs, and 0.1% used other injectable recreational drugs. Table 1 displays the prevalence of substance use in the past 12 months.

Demographic Characteristics Associated with Sexual Violence Victimization

Table 2 presents the results of logistic regression. Only statistically significant results are reported in this section. Age was positively associated with sexual harassment (AOR = 1.03), sexual coercion (AOR = 1.05), sexual assault (AOR = 1.05), rape attempt (AOR = 1.04), and rape (AOR = 1.06), with older individuals being more likely to report sexual violence victimization experiences than younger individuals. In addition, men were less likely to experience sexual harassment (AOR = 0.59), sexual coercion (AOR = 0.63), sexual assault (AOR = 0.42), rape attempt (AOR = 0.63), and rape (AOR = 0.71) than women. Non-binary individuals were more likely to report experiences of sexual harassment (AOR = 1.28), sexual coercion (AOR = 1.17), rape attempt (AOR = 1.43), and rape (AOR = 1.36) than women. In addition, intersex individuals were more likely to experience sexual harassment (AOR = 2.11), rape attempt (AOR = 2.21), and rape (AOR = 3.00) than endosex individuals whose innate sex characteristics fit into medical and social norms for typically male or female bodies. Transgender individuals were more likely to report sexual harassment (AOR = 1.28), sexual coercion (AOR = 1.38), sexual assault (AOR = 1.28), and rape (AOR = 1.29) than cisgender individuals.

Table 2. Demographic characteristics associated with sexual violence victimization.

	Sexual harassment		Sexual coercion		Sexual assault		Rape attempt		Rape
	AOR	95% CI	AOR	95% CI	AOR	95% CI	AOR	95% CI	AOR	95% CI
Age	1.03***	1.03, 1.04	1.05***	1.05, 1.06	1.05***	1.04, 1.06	1.04***	1.03, 1.05	1.06***	1.05, 1.06
Gender
Male	0.59***	0.51, 0.70	0.63***	0.53, 0.76	0.42***	0.36, 0.49	0.63**	0.47, 0.83	0.71**	0.56, 0.90
Female (reference)	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
Non-binary	1.28***	1.15, 1.42	1.17**	1.04, 1.32	1.06	0.95, 1.17	1.43***	1.21, 1.68	1.36***	1.18, 1.57
Intersex	2.11*	1.14, 3.91	1.65	0.90, 3.03	1.75	0.91, 3.36	2.21*	1.15, 4.23	3.00***	1.63, 5.49
Transgender	1.28**	1.11, 1.47	1.38***	1.18, 1.61	1.28**	1.11, 1.47	1.23	1.00, 1.51	1.29**	1.07, 1.55
Asexual spectrum identity
Asexual (reference)	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
Graysexual	1.56***	1.36, 1.80	2.00***	1.73, 2.32	1.68***	1.45, 1.95	1.86***	1.53, 2.26	2.20***	1.85, 2.61
Demisexual	1.84***	1.59, 2.14	1.71***	1.46, 2.01	1.62***	1.39, 1.90	1.40**	1.12, 1.76	1.67***	1.37, 2.02
Questioning	1.28**	1.09, 1.51	1.35**	1.12, 1.61	1.26**	1.07, 1.49	1.37*	1.07, 1.76	1.57***	1.26, 1.96
Other	1.51**	1.15, 1.97	1.54**	1.15, 2.07	1.44*	1.09, 1.90	1.33	0.88, 2.01	1.52*	1.06, 2.18
Aromantic	0.74***	0.67, 0.82	0.56***	0.50, 0.62	0.73***	0.66, 0.80	0.66***	0.56, 0.77	0.68***	0.59, 0.78
Racial/ethnic minorities	1.15*	1.00, 1.31	1.16	1.00, 1.36	1.20*	1.04, 1.37	1.38**	1.13, 1.69	0.99	0.82, 1.20
Education level
Less than secondary education	1.02	0.79, 1.31	0.82	0.59, 1.14	0.76*	0.59, 0.98	1.19	0.79, 1.81	0.99	0.66, 1.48
Secondary education	1.39***	1.21, 1.59	1.18*	1.01, 1.38	1.07	0.93, 1.23	1.55***	1.26, 1.90	1.24*	1.02, 1.51
Tertiary education (reference)	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
Employment status
In employment (reference)	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
Student	0.82***	0.73, 0.91	0.73***	0.64, 0.83	0.76***	0.68, 0.85	0.80*	0.66, 0.97	0.75**	0.64, 0.90
Not in employment	1.06	0.93, 1.20	1.06	0.92, 1.21	1.02	0.90, 1.16	1.08	0.90, 1.31	1.05	0.89, 1.24
Other	1.32*	1.01, 1.73	1.28	0.96, 1.71	1.12	0.85, 1.48	0.92	0.60, 1.42	1.11	0.78, 1.58
Country income group
Lower-middle-income/low-income	2.07***	1.43, 3.00	1.41	0.91, 2.19	2.19***	1.46, 3.27	1.62	0.92, 2.84	0.85	0.45, 1.62
Upper-middle-income	1.44***	1.21, 1.72	1.13	0.93, 1.39	1.62***	1.34, 1.95	1.66***	1.29, 2.12	1.14	0.89, 1.45
High-income (reference)	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–

AOR = odds ratio adjusted for all other variables in the model; *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001.

Compared to asexual individuals, graysexual individuals were more likely to experience sexual harassment (AOR = 1.56), sexual coercion (AOR = 2.00), sexual assault (AOR = 1.68), rape attempt (AOR = 1.86), and rape (AOR = 2.20). Demisexual individuals were also more likely to have encountered sexual harassment (AOR = 1.84), sexual coercion (AOR = 1.71), sexual assault (AOR = 1.62), rape attempt (AOR = 1.40), and rape (AOR = 1.67). Similarly, individuals who were questioning were more likely to report sexual harassment (AOR = 1.28), sexual coercion (AOR = 1.35), sexual assault (AOR = 1.26), rape attempt (AOR = 1.37), and rape (AOR = 1.57). Aromantic individuals were less likely to experience sexual harassment (AOR = 0.74), sexual coercion (AOR = 0.56), sexual assault (AOR = 0.73), rape attempt (AOR = 0.66), and rape (AOR = 0.68) than alloromantic individuals.

Individuals who were racial/ethnic minorities were more likely to report sexual harassment (AOR = 1.15), sexual assault (AOR = 1.20), and rape attempt (AOR = 1.38). Compared to those with tertiary education, individuals with less than secondary education were less likely to experience sexual assault (AOR = 0.76). Those who had secondary education were more likely to have encountered sexual harassment (AOR = 1.39), sexual coercion (AOR = 1.18), rape attempt (AOR = 1.55), and rape (AOR = 1.24). Compared to those who were employed, students were less likely to report sexual harassment (AOR = 0.82), sexual coercion (AOR = 0.73), sexual assault (AOR = 0.76), rape attempt (AOR = 0.80), and rape (AOR = 0.75). Additionally, individuals in upper-middle-income countries were more likely to experience sexual harassment (AOR = 1.44), sexual assault (AOR = 1.62), and rape attempt (AOR = 1.66) than individuals in high-income countries. Individuals in lower-middle-income/low-income countries were also more likely to report sexual harassment (AOR = 2.07) and sexual assault (AOR = 2.19).

Effects of Sexual Violence Victimization on Substance Use

Table 3 presents the results of ordinal regression. Sexual harassment was positively associated with the recreational use of prescription drugs (AOR = 1.50). Sexual coercion was positively predictive of marijuana use (AOR = 1.40). Additionally, sexual assault was positively associated with the use of alcohol (AOR = 1.42), tobacco (AOR = 1.48), marijuana (AOR = 1.63), prescription drugs for recreational purposes (AOR = 1.74), and other non-injection recreational drugs (AOR = 1.62). Rape attempt was negatively associated with the consumption of alcohol (AOR = 0.71) and marijuana (AOR = 0.80), and positively related to recreational use of prescription drugs (AOR = 1.51). Rape was positively associated with the use of alcohol (AOR = 1.74), tobacco (AOR = 2.90), marijuana (AOR = 2.04), prescription drugs for recreational purposes (AOR = 1.76), and other non-injection recreational drugs (AOR = 4.13).

Table 3. Effects of sexual violence victimization and demographic characteristics on substance use.

	Alcohol		Tobacco		Marijuana		Recreational use of prescription drugs		Other recreational drugs (non-injection)		Other recreational drugs (injectable)
	AOR	95% CI	AOR	95% CI	AOR	95% CI	AOR	95% CI	AOR	95% CI	AOR	95% CI
Sexual violence victimization
Sexual harassment	0.99	0.90, 1.09	1.20	0.98, 1.47	0.96	0.83, 1.11	1.50*	1.06, 2.12	0.98	0.71, 1.36	1.97	0.40, 9.72
Sexual coercion	1.08	0.96, 1.22	1.19	0.96, 1.49	1.40***	1.19, 1.65	1.16	0.80, 1.67	0.85	0.59, 1.22	1.14	0.17, 7.61
Sexual assault	1.42***	1.29, 1.57	1.48***	1.20, 1.84	1.63***	1.40, 1.90	1.74**	1.19, 2.55	1.62**	1.14, 2.30	0.31	0.05, 1.82
Rape attempt	0.71***	0.61, 0.82	1.01	0.80, 1.28	0.80*	0.66, 0.97	1.51*	1.04, 2.17	1.09	0.76, 1.56	3.91	0.67, 22.79
Rape	1.74***	1.51, 2.01	2.90***	2.30, 3.64	2.04***	1.71, 2.44	1.76**	1.20, 2.57	4.13***	2.87, 5.96	2.36	0.33, 17.09
Demographic characteristics
Age	1.02***	1.01, 1.03	1.00	0.98, 1.01	0.99*	0.98, 1.00	0.98	0.96, 1.00	0.98*	0.96, 1.00	0.92	0.81, 1.06
Gender
Male	1.18*	1.02, 1.35	2.65***	2.07, 3.38	1.70***	1.40, 2.07	1.52	0.97, 2.36	2.67***	1.81, 3.94	2.19	0.38, 12.72
Female (reference)	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
Non-binary	0.90*	0.82, 0.99	1.45***	1.20, 1.76	1.27**	1.11, 1.47	0.98	0.71, 1.36	1.66**	1.23, 2.26	0.99	0.22, 4.41
Intersex	1.09	0.64, 1.86	1.20	0.53, 2.76	1.35	0.70, 2.58	0.36	0.05, 2.72	0.65	0.15, 2.87	0.00	0.00, 0.00
Transgender	0.75***	0.66, 0.85	0.69**	0.54, 0.89	1.01	0.84, 1.21	1.23	0.83, 1.81	0.81	0.55, 1.19	1.83	0.40, 8.28
Asexual spectrum identity
Asexual (reference)	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
Graysexual	1.41***	1.24, 1.60	1.50**	1.19, 1.88	1.97***	1.66, 2.33	1.30	0.89, 1.91	1.30	0.91, 1.87	0.64	0.07, 5.53
Demisexual	1.30***	1.14, 1.49	1.30*	1.01, 1.68	1.79***	1.49, 2.15	1.08	0.70, 1.66	1.03	0.67, 1.58	2.77	0.67, 11.49
Questioning	1.13	0.97, 1.32	1.55**	1.18, 2.04	1.57***	1.27, 1.95	1.37	0.87, 2.17	1.79**	1.20, 2.68	0.00	0.00, 0.00
Other	1.13	0.88, 1.45	2.09***	1.41, 3.11	1.43*	1.01, 2.02	0.95	0.41, 2.20	1.54	0.78, 3.03	0.00	0.00, 0.00
Aromantic	0.77***	0.70, 0.84	0.79*	0.66, 0.95	0.75***	0.66, 0.86	0.76	0.56, 1.04	0.66**	0.49, 0.88	1.39	0.39, 4.87
Racial/ethnic minorities	0.82**	0.72, 0.93	1.11	0.87, 1.41	1.21*	1.01, 1.44	1.16	0.79, 1.73	1.28	0.89, 1.85	4.07*	1.16, 14.23
Education level
Less than secondary education	0.44***	0.35, 0.57	1.10	0.68, 1.77	0.53**	0.34, 0.82	1.77	0.95, 3.30	1.11	0.53, 2.33	3.42	0.37, 31.42
Secondary education	0.73***	0.64, 0.83	1.29*	1.02, 1.64	0.90	0.74, 1.09	1.23	0.84, 1.81	1.30	0.90, 1.87	2.61	0.60, 11.31
Tertiary education (reference)	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
Employment status
In employment (reference)	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
Student	0.77***	0.69, 0.85	0.87	0.70, 1.08	0.69***	0.59, 0.81	0.89	0.62, 1.29	0.60**	0.42, 0.86	0.32	0.06, 1.70
Not in employment	0.67***	0.60, 0.76	1.00	0.80, 1.24	1.02	0.87, 1.21	1.68**	1.20, 2.35	1.06	0.76, 1.48	0.51	0.10, 2.63
Other	0.85	0.66, 1.09	1.05	0.65, 1.69	0.78	0.54, 1.14	0.99	0.43, 2.32	1.04	0.50, 2.18	0.00	0.00, 0.00
Country income group
Lower-middle-income/low-income	0.49***	0.33, 0.72	1.31	0.66, 2.59	0.51	0.25, 1.03	0.67	0.17, 2.75	0.00	0.00, 0.00	0.00	0.00, 0.00
Upper-middle-income	0.84*	0.71, 0.99	1.33	0.99, 1.77	0.88	0.69, 1.12	0.84	0.49, 1.45	1.06	0.66, 1.70	0.00	0.00, 0.00
High-income (reference)	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–

AOR = odds ratio adjusted for all other variables in the model; *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001.

The results also showed that some demographic variables were associated with substance use. Age was positively associated with alcohol consumption (AOR = 1.02) and negatively related to the use of marijuana (AOR = 0.99) and other non-injection recreational drugs (AOR = 0.98). Men reported more use of alcohol (AOR = 1.18), tobacco (AOR = 2.65), marijuana (AOR = 1.70), and other non-injection recreational drugs (AOR = 2.67) than women. Non-binary individuals were less likely to consume alcohol (AOR = 0.90) and more likely to use tobacco (AOR = 1.45), marijuana (AOR = 1.27), and other non-injection recreational drugs (AOR = 1.66) than women. Use of alcohol (AOR = 0.75) and tobacco (AOR = 0.69) were less prevalent among transgender individuals than cisgender individuals. Compared to asexual individuals, graysexual individuals reported more use of alcohol (AOR = 1.41), tobacco (AOR = 1.50), and marijuana (AOR = 1.97). Similarly, demisexual individuals were more likely to use alcohol (AOR = 1.30), tobacco (AOR = 1.30), and marijuana (AOR = 1.79). Individuals who were questioning were more likely to use tobacco (AOR = 1.55), marijuana (AOR = 1.57), and other non-injection recreational drugs (AOR = 1.79). Aromantic individuals were less likely to report using alcohol (AOR = 0.77), tobacco (AOR = 0.79), marijuana (AOR = 0.75), and other non-injection recreational drugs (AOR = 0.66) than alloromantic individuals.

Individuals who were racial/ethnic minorities were less likely to use alcohol (AOR = 0.82), and more likely to use marijuana (AOR = 1.21) and other injectable recreational drugs (AOR = 4.07). Compared to those who had tertiary education, individuals who had less than secondary education were less likely to use alcohol (AOR = 0.44) and marijuana (AOR = 0.53). Individuals who had secondary education were less likely to report using alcohol (AOR = 0.73) and more likely to report using tobacco (AOR = 1.29). Additionally, students were less likely to use alcohol (AOR = 0.77), marijuana (AOR = 0.69), and other non-injection recreational drugs (AOR = 0.60) than individuals who were employed. Individuals who were not in employment or education were less likely to consume alcohol (AOR = 0.67) and more likely to use prescription drugs for recreational use (AOR = 1.68) than those who were employed. Compared to individuals in high-income countries, those in upper-middle-income countries (AOR = 0.84) and lower-middle-income/low-income countries (AOR = 0.49) reported lower levels of alcohol consumption.

Associations between Asexual Spectrum Identities, Sexual Violence Victimization, and Substance Use

Structural equation modeling was conducted to examine the hypothesized mediation model. The results showed that the measurement model had an acceptable model fit: χ² (85) = 2157.06, p < .001, CFI = 0.95, TLI = 0.94, RMSEA = 0.05, SRMR = 0.05. The structural model also showed an acceptable model fit: χ² (205) = 1990.89, p < .001, CFI = 0.95, TLI = 0.93, RMSEA = 0.03, SRMR = 0.04. Compared to identifying as asexual, identifying as graysexual (β = 0.13, p < .001), demisexual (β = 0.11, p < .001), questioning (β = 0.06, p < .001), and other (β = 0.04, p = .001) were positively associated with sexual violence victimization. Additionally, the results showed that compared to identifying as asexual, identifying as graysexual (β = 0.09, p < .001), demisexual (β = 0.05, p = .006), and questioning (β = 0.06, p = .001) were also positively related to substance use, whereas identifying as other was not related to substance use (β = 0.03, p = .06). Sexual violence victimization was positively associated with substance use (β = 0.30, p < .001). The model explained 14.7% of the variance in substance use. Table 4 shows the unstandardized and standardized path coefficients for the hypothesized model.

Table 4. Unstandardized and standardized parameter estimates of the hypothesized mediation model.

	Unstandardized	Standardized
	B (SE)	β
Direct effect
Identifying as graysexual (versus asexual) → Sexual violence victimization	0.33 (0.03)***	0.13***
Identifying as demisexual (versus asexual) → Sexual violence victimization	0.28 (0.03)***	0.11***
Identifying as questioning (versus asexual) → Sexual violence victimization	0.16 (0.04)***	0.06***
Identifying as other (versus asexual) → Sexual violence victimization	0.21 (0.06)**	0.04**
Identifying as graysexual (versus asexual) → Substance use	0.10 (0.02)***	0.09***
Identifying as demisexual (versus asexual) → Substance use	0.05 (0.02)*	0.05**
Identifying as questioning (versus asexual) → Substance use	0.07 (0.02)**	0.06**
Identifying as other (versus asexual) → Substance use	0.06 (0.04)	0.03
Sexual violence victimization → Substance use	0.13 (0.02)***	0.30***
	Standardized	95% CI
	β	lower, upper
Indirect effect
Identifying as graysexual (versus asexual) → Sexual violence victimization → Substance use	0.04***	0.03, 0.05
Identifying as demisexual (versus asexual) → Sexual violence victimization → Substance use	0.03***	0.02, 0.04
Identifying as questioning (versus asexual) → Sexual violence victimization → Substance use	0.02***	0.01, 0.03
Identifying as other (versus asexual) → Sexual violence victimization → Substance use	0.01**	0.01, 0.02

*p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001.

The indirect effects of asexual spectrum identities on substance use were examined using bootstrapping analysis. The results revealed that the association between asexual spectrum identities and substance use was significantly mediated by sexual violence victimization. Compared to identifying as asexual, identifying as graysexual (β = 0.04, 95% CI = 0.03, 0.05), demisexual (β = 0.03, 95% CI = 0.02, 0.04), questioning (β = 0.02, 95% CI = 0.01, 0.03), and other (β = 0.01, 95% CI = 0.01, 0.02) were indirectly related to substance use through sexual violence victimization.

Discussion

Prevalence and Factors Associated with Sexual Violence Victimization

The present study sheds light on factors associated with sexual violence victimization and substance use among individuals identifying on the asexual spectrum. Based on global data from individuals on the asexual spectrum, the study showed a high prevalence of lifetime sexual violence victimization. Over two-thirds of the participants indicated they had experienced at least one form of sexual violence. The most common form of victimization was sexual assault, with 57.4% of participants being sexually touched by other people without their consent. Sexual harassment was also frequently reported, with 43.3% being exposed to other people’s sexual body parts or sexual photos. It is worthwhile to note that a significant proportion of participants had experienced sexual coercion (28.9%) or even rape (15.8%). The prevalence of sexual violence among individuals on the asexual spectrum was much higher than that reported by LGB individuals in the United States (Chen et al., 2020). The widespread occurrence of sexual violence victimization among individuals on the asexual spectrum necessitates urgent and immediate attention. It is important to understand and address the underlying factors that contribute to the pervasiveness of their experiences of sexual violence victimization.

This study also highlighted how gender and sexuality were related to sexual violence victimization. Compared with women, men were less likely to experience sexual violence victimization, whereas non-binary individuals reported a significantly higher rate of sexual violence victimization. Intersex and transgender individuals were also at greater risk of sexual violence victimization. Such patterns are consistent with previous findings in heterosexual and other sexual minority populations (Blondeel et al., 2018; Connolly et al., 2021). In addition, differences between asexual spectrum identities were observed, with graysexual, demisexual, and questioning individuals being more likely to report sexual violence than asexual individuals. Participants on the aromantic spectrum were less likely to experience sexual violence victimization than their alloromantic counterparts. Being graysexual or demisexual can imply having a limited level of sexual attraction, but these asexual spectrum identities are less commonly understood or recognized compared to asexuality (Cowan & LeBlanc, 2018). The lack of awareness or misunderstanding by others may thus lead to instances of unwanted sexual contact, increasing the vulnerability of graysexual and demisexual individuals to sexual violence. On the other hand, alloromantic attraction signifies a desire to form emotional bonds with others, while the level of interest in sexual behavior among alloromantic individuals can vary. However, potential partners may lack an understanding of the nuances of sexual attraction and desire experienced by alloromantic individuals on the asexual spectrum. Some may also lack the necessary knowledge to engage in conversations about sexual desire with alloromantic asexual individuals, resulting in unwelcome sexual advances and instances of sexual coercion.

It is also important to identify the sociodemographic characteristics associated with sexual violence victimization. Consistent with existing research conducted among heterosexual and other sexual minority populations (Black et al., 2011), our study found that individuals from racial/ethnic minorities were more likely to report experiences of sexual violence. Older participants were also more likely to experience sexual violence than their younger counterparts. Compared with those who completed tertiary education, participants with only secondary education were more susceptible to sexual violence victimization. Additionally, the study found that participants from lower- or middle-income countries reported a higher rate of sexual violence than their counterparts from higher-income countries. The results underscore the need for sexual violence prevention and intervention efforts that specifically address racism and classism, which are intertwined with experiences of sexual violence. These efforts are crucial in improving the protection of individuals from racial/ethnic minorities and those with lower levels of education, particularly in lower- or middle-income countries.

Prevalence and Factors Associated with Substance Use

The present study documented the prevalence of substance use among individuals identifying on the asexual spectrum over the past 12 months. Around two-thirds (63.1%) reported alcohol use. A notable proportion of participants had used marijuana (17.2%) and tobacco (8.9%). Some had also engaged in the recreational use of prescription drugs (2.9%) and non-injection drugs (3.4%) over the past 12 months. In comparison to previous studies conducted in the United States among LGB individuals (Barger et al., 2021; Schuler et al., 2019; Scroggs et al., 2023), the rates of past-year smoking, marijuana use, and illicit drug use among individuals on the asexual spectrum were found to be lower.

Moreover, this study identified the demographic characteristics associated with substance use. Specifically, men were found to have a higher likelihood, while non-binary individuals were found to have a lower likelihood, of engaging in substance use compared to women. Graysexual and demisexual individuals were more likely to report substance use than asexual individuals. Aromantic individuals showed a lower frequency of substance use than their alloromantic counterparts. Compared with individuals with tertiary education, those with lower education were less likely to use alcohol and marijuana, but more likely to smoke over the past 12 months.

Effects of Sexual Violence Victimization on Substance Use

Sexual violence victimization was found to be a risk factor for substance use among individuals on the asexual spectrum. Specifically, the results showed that experiences of sexual assault were associated with more frequent use of alcohol, tobacco, marijuana, and other illicit drugs over the past year. Survivors of rape were also more likely to engage in substance use. The findings build upon previous studies that have established associations between sexual violence victimization and substance use among LGB populations (Balsam et al., 2011; Rhew et al., 2017). Survivors of sexual violence often experience negative feelings, such as shame, guilt, and self-blame, which can be overwhelming and difficult to bear. Some of them may resort to substance use as a means of escape to cope with the psychological aftermath of sexual violence (Talley & Littlefield, 2014). Substance use may provide temporary relief from emotional distress and allow them to numb or mask the trauma and pain resulting from their victimization experiences (Hatzenbuehler, 2009). It is crucial to acknowledge that certain forms of substance use, such as responsible alcohol consumption, may not necessarily signify problematic or abusive behavior. Instead, they may serve as a coping mechanism for individuals with traumatic experiences.

Furthermore, the present study found that sexual violence victimization mediated the association between asexual spectrum identities and substance use. Compared with asexual individuals, graysexual and demisexual individuals were more likely to experience sexual violence, which was in turn linked to heightened levels of substance use. Navigating a unique space between asexual and allosexual identities, graysexual individuals occasionally experience sexual attraction, and some of them may engage in physically intimate behaviors with their partners. This fluidity in their sexual attraction, which differs from asexual individuals who typically experience no sexual attraction, may not be fully comprehended by their partners (Copulsky & Hammack, 2023; Hille et al., 2020). Thus, there can be confusion or miscommunication surrounding sexual desires and behaviors, potentially heightening the risk of sexual violence for graysexual individuals. On the other hand, demisexual individuals experience sexual attraction only after forming a deep emotional connection with others. The emphasis on emotional closeness and the importance of establishing relational connections among demisexual individuals may be perceived as a vulnerability by their partners. These partners may attempt to exploit or manipulate them, taking advantage of their desire for intimacy (Copulsky & Hammack, 2023). Consequently, this may leave demisexual individuals more susceptible to sexual assault or coercion by their partners. For graysexual and demisexual individuals, substance use may serve as a coping mechanism to manage traumatic experiences and alleviate distressing feelings associated with sexual violence (Hatzenbuehler, 2009).

Practical Implications

The current study offers valuable insights for the development of sexual violence prevention and intervention strategies aimed at protecting and supporting individuals on the asexual spectrum. The findings underscore the significance of incorporating asexual perspectives into sexuality education and community outreach programs. Asexuality has long been marginalized and rendered invisible in mainstream society, resulting in a lack of representation for individuals who experience limited or no sexual attraction. This invisibility has led to widespread misunderstanding and biases toward asexual spectrum identities (Mollet & Lackman, 2019). To counteract this, public education initiatives are needed to promote awareness of the diverse lived experiences and sexualities of individuals on the asexual spectrum. Such initiatives can help dispel misconceptions stemming from compulsory allonormativity, which assumes that all people experience sexual attraction. Additionally, it is crucial to engage asexual-friendly organizations and allies in advocacy efforts to promote inclusivity and increase the visibility of the asexual community. By affirming asexuality as a valid sexual identity, these efforts play a vital role in dismantling harmful beliefs surrounding asexuality and mitigating sexual rights violations against individuals on the asexual spectrum. Furthermore, it is essential to develop and implement a comprehensive sexuality education curriculum that emphasizes affirmative consent, healthy boundaries, and open communication in intimate relationships. This approach has the potential to enhance people’s sensitivity and competency in making informed sexual decisions and foster respect for autonomy and agency. Creating a culture that prioritizes consent and mutual respect is of utmost importance in preventing sexual violence across all relationships.

Considering the high prevalence of sexual violence victimization, there is an urgent need for trauma-informed care to address the co-occurring sexual violence victimization and substance use problems among individuals on the asexual spectrum (Scheer & Poteat, 2021). Mental health professionals (e.g., clinical psychologists, social workers, and substance misuse counselors) should be trained in trauma-informed practice to provide appropriate care and support for survivors of sexual violence. It is necessary to create a safe space to encourage clients on the asexual spectrum to express their needs and concerns, while understanding potential triggers and preventing retraumatization during care interactions. In addition, specialized training should be provided to law enforcement personnel and healthcare providers on the unique experiences of individuals on the asexual spectrum to ensure that reporting mechanisms for sexual violence are accessible and responsive to their needs. Policymakers and legislators should also work toward inclusive policy and legal frameworks that explicitly protect asexual individuals from sexual violence. A key priority is to ensure that existing sexual consent laws fully acknowledge and affirm the autonomy and agency of individuals on the asexual spectrum. Moreover, it is vital to foster close collaboration between professionals in different sectors and the asexual community. This collaborative approach enables a deeper understanding of the specific concerns and needs related to sexual violence prevention and intervention within the asexual community. By working together, targeted strategies can be developed to empower individuals on the asexual spectrum, ensuring their rights and safety are upheld.

Limitations

Notwithstanding the strengths and novelty of the study, there are several limitations that are worth mentioning. First, while the present study included a global sample of individuals identifying on the asexual spectrum, the sample might not fully represent the experiences of asexual populations across the world. In particular, our sample was overrepresented by individuals who were from higher-income countries and more educated, which might have limited the generalizability of the findings. Future studies should attempt to recruit samples from lower- or middle-income countries and include participants with lower education levels. They may be even more vulnerable to the experiences and impact of sexual violence victimization. Second, as the study’s survey involved questions regarding experiences with sexual violence and included explicit references to sexual acts, participants were allowed to skip these questions if they felt uncomfortable or triggered. While such procedures are necessary to protect the well-being and privacy of participants, they may lead to potential non-response bias. Individuals who were particularly traumatized by their sexual violence experiences might be more likely to skip these questions, which might impact the estimation of sexual violence experiences and the representativeness of the findings. Third, this study relied on cross-sectional data and was not able to establish causality between variables. Participants were asked to report lifetime experiences of sexual violence and past-year substance use, which might provide more information about the temporal ordering of events. Nevertheless, prior engagement in substance use was not measured and controlled. To overcome this limitation, longitudinal studies are needed to collect data over time to better understand the temporal relationships between sexual violence victimization and substance use among individuals on the asexual spectrum.

Conclusion

Based on a global sample of individuals on the asexual spectrum, the present study provides rigorous evidence of the relationship between sexual violence victimization and substance use. Overall, the results showed that two-thirds of the participants experienced sexual violence in varying forms, including sexual harassment, sexual coercion, sexual assault, and rape. Their lifetime experiences of sexual violence victimization were associated with more frequent engagement in substance use over the past year. The study aligns with the growing visibility of the asexual community and the emerging recognition of the need to address and combat sexual violence against individuals on the asexual spectrum. The results provide practical implications for sexual violence prevention, public education, social policy, and trauma-informed care in this population. While the present study represents one of the initial efforts to document the impact of sexual violence victimization on substance use among individuals on the asexual spectrum, further research is needed to characterize the profiles of individuals at risk of sexual violence and identify the most effective approaches for supporting survivors of sexual violence within the asexual community.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Volvoredra from the Ace Community Survey Team for providing feedback on the manuscript.

Disclosure Statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

The authors reported there is no funding associated with the work featured in this article.