Talk:List of fictional asexual characters

Tori Spring
Tori Spring is confirmed asexual by creator Alice Oseman, but she appears in both comic series Heartstopper and its TV adaptation, as well as the book Soilatire. Which section should she been in? Nadavhirshfeld (talk) 19:54, 5 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Hmm. Maybe she could have an entry in one section, with references to the other places she appears, so there isn't duplication, if that makes sense. Historyday01 (talk) 14:17, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
 * @Historyday01 Cool. I'll add her to the literature section since that's where she made her first appearance. Nadavhirshfeld (talk) 17:18, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

Sherlock Holmes
For characters in literature, the list is titled as characters in modern literature, but Sherlock Holmes was portrayed as asexual and aromantic, despite the terms not being in (common) usage while it was being written. Should he be listed as an ace character? 109.249.184.145 (talk) 11:11, 24 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Iren Adler. IKhitron (talk) 20:58, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

Demisexual Characters?
Are Demisexual characters invluded as per the point of being part of the asexuality-spectrum or grouping?

See, I noted that Colonel Henry Wong, main protagonist of Glynn Stewart's "Peacekeepers of Sol: Raven's Peace" (ISBN-13: 978-1988035970) isn't listed, while being a character who self-identifies as demisexual, and whose demisexuality plays a notable part of the book series. 158.174.22.239 (talk) 20:28, 20 November 2022 (UTC)


 * If there is a reliable source which shows that to be the case, then it should be included. Historyday01 (talk) 01:04, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Light Yagami
Light Yagami from Death Note should be here, he too is asexual. He's clearly stated to have no interest in women... nor does he appear to be gay. 93.144.189.243 (talk) 13:43, 26 April 2023 (UTC)


 * If there is a reliable source which shows that to be the case, then it should be included. Historyday01 (talk) 01:04, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Gwenpool's history
Having read all of the pre-'love unlimited' gwenpool stuff referenced on this page currently, I am fairly certain it is irrelevant to her current identification as ace. Maybe it gave space to reading her as ace, hence that development, but there was no textual reason to believe it was canon before. Also, she straight-up just does not appear in marvel pride 2021? Mek-laa-ni (talk) 19:53, 27 April 2023 (UTC)


 * @Sariel Xilo I am new to wikipedia etiquette, so I don't know if this is appropriate, but based on my having read the sources cited, I don't think this info should be kept on the wikipedia page. Mek-laa-ni (talk) 21:35, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
 * You'll see in some of the other entries that character development and/or analysis is included. I've trimmed a bit of the plot details & added two secondary sources (re: Pride 2021 - CBR states The content representing the asexual and aromantic communities in the 2021 Pride issue came in two forms: pride flags in a pride parade scene as well as a scene in which Gwen Poole / Gwenpool cameos wearing the colour scheme of the asexual pride flag). Sariel Xilo (talk) 21:45, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the clarification. I just re-read the pride issue to confirm, but Gwenpool has no such cameo in it, that seems to be a journalistic mistake. I have not recently re-read the Kelly Thompson West Coast Avengers, but I am tempted to ask why personal interpretations that are not supported textually or metatextually are being cited as fact. Mek-laa-ni (talk) 22:12, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
 * It'll be few days until I can get Marvel Voices out of the library but I'm inclined to believe CBR is correct on the cameo. The ScreenRant article ("10 Asexual Icons In Comic Books", August 2022) states: While the solo series shows Gwen has no interest in physical relationships, her first appearance depicted her as graysexual and entering a relationship with Quentin Quire. However, Gwen later admits in the metafictional narrative of West Coast Avengers that she wanted to be less of a supporting character and thought a romantic relationship with Kid Omega would mean she'd be less likely to be killed off. That's a secondary source doing the analysis and not an editor's interpretation of the source material.
 * If I hadn't found a secondary source and we only had the primary to go on, I would have trimmed it to just the straight plot detail (rough ex: During writer Kelly Thompson's run on West Coast Avengers (2018), Gwen entered into a romantic relationship with Quentin Quire, however, Gwen later admits that she only did so because she felt that a romantic plot would make her less of a supporting character in the metafictional narrative of the series and thus less likely to die. ... In 2023, it was then confirmed that Gwenpool was ...). Sariel Xilo (talk) 23:06, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
 * I think it usually makes more sense to cite a secondary source than a primary one, but I don't know where the information that she is grey-asexual in this series is coming from. This article was published after Gwenpool reportedly appeared in the pride issue in asexual colours, (which I believe would not really be a confirmation of asexuality if it happened), so I feel that the author of this article may have gone back to these comics with the reading of her as ace in mind but been confused by her being in a relationship with Quire. There is nothing on page, in my opinion, that supports that reading. There had been no evidence at this point to suggest she was supposed to be read as any flavour of asexual. I suspect the word 'grey-asexual' was used because of her relationship with Quire, but there is also no confirmation on page that Gwenpool is experiencing (a rare) sexual attraction, although I would say it seems to be a bit implied she is attracted to him. The Love Unlimited: Gwenpool series also confirms that Gwenpool has never felt 'butterflies' for anyone before, leaving me to believe she is not grey-sexual either. Maybe at least a clarification that despite her relationship with and possible attraction to Quire in the West Coast Avengers series, it was later confirmed that she has never felt attraction? Mek-laa-ni (talk) 12:34, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
 * I think this article makes it pretty clear it was not canon until a couple of weeks ago that gwenpool is asexual. I think I will re-delete everything outside of the love unlimited stuff, with that in mind. Mek-laa-ni (talk) 15:36, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Again, I still think character development & retcons are important context so I partially reverted that edit. I left out the cameo because it is a blink or you'll miss it (Gwen is at a table in the ace colors but not in her costume). Sariel Xilo (talk) 18:20, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

Word of god?
There are many characters here that have been 'confirmed' to be asexual metatextually, and while this page does a good job of making that clear, I wonder if there is really any merit to these characters being listed at all? Mek-laa-ni (talk) 15:56, 6 May 2023 (UTC)


 * Which characters are you thinking of? Historyday01 (talk) 17:48, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
 * From Animation and Anime: Lilith Clawthorne, Perry the Platypus, Peridot, From Film: Alan Garner, Adrian Veidt/Ozymandias, From Comics, Webcomics, and Graphic Novels: Nadia van Dyne/Wasp, and Yelena Belova Mek-laa-ni (talk) 18:18, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I would say the Lilith Clawthorne entry is well-sourced enough, and arguably the same for Peridot. The Perry the Platypus entry is a flippant comment by Dan Povenmire, so I'd be fine with removing that. It appears that the Alan Garner one is pretty straightforward. As for Nadia van Dyne / Wasp entry, the sources seem shaky. The entries on Adrian Veidt/Ozymandias entries and Yelena Belova entry seem fine to me. Historyday01 (talk) 00:42, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
 * I was not particularly concerned that there are good sources stating that so and so said that a character is ace, if it is not shown textually. If the character is not shown in text to be ace, what is the point in including them? Especially regarding Yelena Belova, the source given literally says "I have absolutely no control over Marvel’s decisions for her in the future. I like the idea of her being ACE and hope they go with that, but despite my 20+ years writing comics, there isn’t even anyone there I can mention that to. That’s not how comics work. Even if I said she’s X or Y or X and Y, Marvel might be a day away from releasing something that takes her in a totally different direction. Ultimately, my ideas about how Yelena identifies are no more right or wrong than yours." (https://web.archive.org/web/20230319211040/http://www.devingrayson.net/devingraysonblogish/yelenas-sexuality) Having had more time to think about it, I can appreciate why they are on the list, but I do find it frustrating that so many characters listed here are not actually shown textually to be ace.
 * I also wondered what was wrong with the source provided for Kerewin Holmes in The Bone People? I thought it was pretty reliable, but I am still new to editing here, so I would appreciate any insight. I also wonder if the book itself could be a source? I think this quote is pretty indicative:
 * "I spent a considerable amount of time when I was, o, adolescent, wondering why I was different, whether there were other people like me. Why, when everyone else was fascinated by their developing sexual nature, I couldn't give a damn. I've never been attracted to men. Or women. Or anything else. It's difficult to explain, and nobody has ever believed it when I have tried to explain, but while I have an apparently normal female body, I don't have any sexual urge or appetite. I think I am a neuter." Mek-laa-ni (talk) 23:10, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
 * I think there should be a balance. If a creator, actor, etc. makes a flippant comment that a character like Dan Povenmire (as he did with Perry the Platypus), then surely it should NOT be included. In terms of Yelena, I'd be fine with removing that. As for Kerewin Holmes in The Bone People, I primarily removed in part because it cites the book, but doesn't even cite a specific page! Considering that quote, I'd guess there would be a good secondary, and reliable, source to add to that entry as well. I can admit that there are probably MORE ace characters which SHOULD be added to the page. The problem I had before was that the citations were lacking. I added eight new entries to the "Comics, manga, and graphic novels" sub-section recently, which are all textual ace characters. Considering the long discussions on Talk:List of fictional non-binary characters about the inclusion criteria, on that page, I don't have a desire to repeat that any other page or create similar edit notices, unless absolutely necessary.
 * As I mentioned in my below comment in response to someone who claimed that Saiki Kusuo is textually ace (I couldn't find any evidence of that, apart from one listicle), some people see ace characters in O Maidens in Your Savage Season, I Hear the Sunspot: Limit, She Loves to Cook, and She Loves to Eat, Whisper Me a Love Song, and Kiss and White Lily for My Dearest Girl, but those appear to be headcanons, from what I can tell. Historyday01 (talk) 01:21, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks for re-adding the Kerewin Holmes and O from 'Sex Education' entries, and a new entry for Jay from 'State of the Union'. These days, there probably are more ace characters which are confirmed textually than those 'confirmed' as asexual metatextually. But, perhaps those that are confirmed metatextually should be examined on a case-by-case basis? Historyday01 (talk) 12:31, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
 * I agree. Personally, I think that Yelena should be removed (I tried when I was adding the other things, but I kept creating formatting issues with the table : and spongebob as well. I am also kinda on the side of removing Alan Garner and Ozymandias.
 * Thank you, by the way, for removing Billups from here a while ago. I did not know why he was listed.
 * I definitely think there is a problem with listing head-canons here. In fact I wonder if Gwenpoole being confirmed asexual was not citogenesis (as coined by xkcd), so I appreciate your diligence. For what it is worth, I do not think you are trying to 'silence ace voices'. Mek-laa-ni (talk) 14:43, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Looking at it now, the Yelena entry does seem too speculative (saying that she is probably asexual or would keep her sexual orientation to herself), while Spongebob was only stated as asexual in response to right-wing criticism saying he was gay. As far as I know, his asexuality hasn't actually been shown in the show itself. I can agree with Alan Garner too, as it seems like an off comment "Alan’s asexual. If he doesn’t know that by now, he’s in trouble" (this wasn't even shown in the movie). The same goes for the Ozymandias entry, as Matthew Goode called him "possibly homosexual" and "more asexual than anything else" which gives some wiggle room that he ISN'T asexual. I think Billups was listed as some people seemed to thin there were ace vibes coming from Billups, but he is never stated as asexual in the show, nor has anyone who has worked on the show said he is ace either.
 * Thanks! I try to be diligent on this page, as a major contributor to it over the years. I think the person who said I was trying to 'silence ace voices' was annoyed that I removed an entry for Saiki Kusuo more than anything else. But, yes, there is undoubtedly an issue with headcanons being listed on here. It's a problem for many LGBTQ pages, to be honest, which requires diligence, to ensure there aren't such entries.Historyday01 (talk) 15:27, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
 * I've restored Gwenpool as primary & secondary sources list her as ace (she has a whole story arc in Love Unlimited discovering what it means to be ace so it is quite literally in the text). Sariel Xilo (talk) 23:43, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you, sorry, I undid all of that previous edit without realizing it was possible to only partially revert an edit, and was going to fix that manually. I do have a concern about one of the sources, since it was only officially confirmed that she is ace this year, but it was a popular headcanon before that, and the first screenrant article cited is from 2022. Mek-laa-ni (talk) 23:54, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
 * As discussed above, that ScreentRant article is used as a secondary source for the character's development (specifically, the West Coast Avengers run) and the entry in this article does not mention the headcanon reported on in 2022. Sariel Xilo (talk) 00:03, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Yeah, it is tricky when it comes to pages like this, as it is far too easy for headcanons to slip in. So, the best sources which are added to verify the content, the better. Historyday01 (talk) 02:10, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Maybe we could have a separate section on the creators saying what characters were (meant to be) asexual, but the text itself not necessarily explicitly saying so? And media interpretations, like Norman Reedus responding to fan perspectives on Daryl Dixon potentially being so? 91.102.162.100 (talk) 03:59, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

I actually think there's room for development on canon versus headcanon versus the nebulous bit where creators state things that aren't in the text; there must be academic sources on the murkiness of the portrayal of asexuality in fiction. But I think it should go in Media portrayal of asexuality instead of this list article. Sariel Xilo (talk) 04:24, 29 November 2023 (UTC)


 * I agree. As I see it, we need to ONLY have canon characters on this page, not ones with headcanons. And there are undoubtedly some sources, academic and otherwise, on the murkiness of the portrayal of asexuality in fiction as you put it, which could be noted on the Media portrayal of asexuality page. Historyday01 (talk) 13:39, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Remaining removed Marvel entries
Taking a closer look, it appears that Shatterstar was an asexual character from 1991 to 2007. Beyond word of god (ie. the creators), the character's wikipedia article cites X-Force #43 (although it doesn't give a year so I'm not sure what run that is). It also has the full quote from Fabian Nicieza: "In my final issue, I pretty clearly stated that Shatterstar had no real understanding of sexuality – homo or hetero – and needed to learn about general human nature before he could define his own sexual identity." So it seems the creators did say something in the text but I don't have the time to try to track down back issues via my library. Similarly, Sarah Gailey stated she would include a textual depiction in her White Widow run which started in November 2023 but that's not something I'm going to be able to verify (while my library carries a bunch of TPBs, it'll be ages until a new comic run becomes part of their circulation). So I think for now, Shatterstar should be restored (like Gwenpool, it wasn't discussed above as a character to remove but was removed anyway) while Yelena can wait until it is published. Thoughts? Sariel Xilo (talk) 02:27, 3 December 2023 (UTC)


 * I think I agree with Shatterstar being restored, it is complicated because it is not currently true, but comics are a bit of a strange medium where one can pick and choose what to read and what one thinks is 'canon', and anyway the history is important to the character. I can also commit to keeping up with this new ongoing white widow series, although it does not look great :/. Mek-laa-ni (talk) 00:47, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

Stop removing Saiki Kusuo please.
I am an actual asexual who has added this entry multiple times only to have it removed under the claim that it is unsourced. The “source” is THE SHOW. The dialogue of THE SHOW discusses his asexuality, unless the citation you are expecting is each time marker when this is stated. It is repulsive that the characters from House get an entry for their deliberate falsification and demonization of the ace community but more proof than hard dialogue is required for one of the firmest ace representations in animation. @Historyday01 you may stop trying to silence ace people now. If you have not seen the show that is not my problem. Verify my entry by doing your research rather than attempting to gatekeep canon. Kusuo is canonically asexual, HIS LACK OF ATTRACTION IS EXPLICITLY STATED IN THE SERIES. Add a citation for the link to stream it on Netflix so people can go check if it burns you up so much. 2603:6080:F540:10:8896:F22A:BFF3:2423 (talk) 23:46, 25 October 2023 (UTC)


 * Ok. Whew, your comment is a LOT. Not trying to "silence" anyone here. To be perfectly clear, I'm only a stickler for having reliable sources on here because LGBTQ+ pages on Wikipedia have a problem with people adding in reliable sources. Only characters who are verified as asexual, with reliable sources to back it up, on the page.
 * The only source I'm finding as of yet about Saiki Kusuo being asexual is a listcle (I have added this sources before to entries, but have learned that these aren't the best sources), and a bunch of unreliable sources (mostly blogs on Tumblr and postings on social media, which are self-published, unreliable sources) when searching "Saiki Kusuo" on a "Saiki Kusuo asexual" and "Saiki K asexual" Google search. I was mistaken when I said there was an Anime News Network (ANN) review, as the review of the anime by Rebecca Silverman (she's a pretty great anime reviewer) doesn't mention it. I'd LOVE to have an entry for Saiki Kusuo (the more asexual characters on this page, the better!), but having a reliable source is important for anyone who wants information on asexual representation in the media (which is admittedly abysmal and almost non-existent, sadly). Preventing misinformation or headcanons from going on the page is important.
 * In terms of having an entry on House, that entry on the page relies on two reliable sources: Lauren Jankowski's article on asexual characters in pop culture and Tracy Clark-Flory's article criticizing House for getting asexuality wrong. Both sources are undoubtedly critical of the representation. On Wikipedia, pages MUST be neutral, so there can't be a preference for "good"/"great" representation over "terrible"/"awful"/"bad" representation. I will admit that not every entry is the best, but your comment is giving me a bit inspiration to go through the existing entries and making sure they are up to snuff. I try and make sure I go through this page as much as I can, but sometimes I fall down on the job a bit.
 * Adding to this, and doing some searching on ANN and found some other asexual characters which I will add to the main page (unless something changes) if I have time:
 * Yuriko in I Want to Be a Wall [ANN preview guide], [ANN Review], and this [ANN news item]
 * Mine in Mine-kun is Asexual [ANN news item
 * Chika in Is Love the Answer? [ANN Review]
 * Kashiwa in Sex Ed 120% [ANN Review]
 * Amiru in Last Gender: When We Are Nameless [Fall manga guide from ANN]
 * Ku in Our Home's Fox Deity [ANN Review]
 * However, Doughnuts Under a Crescent Moon isn't part of this, despite the comment in one review about reading "three separate titles where one or both of the protagonists exhibit signs of being on the asexual/demisexual spectrum" (but this seems to be a headcanon, I think), is O Maidens in Your Savage Season as the reviewer notes, and I Hear the Sunspot: Limit as far as I can tell from reviewers of those titles. Yako may be asexual in She Loves to Cook, and She Loves to Eat as she has waving lesbian and asexual flags in one illustration by the manga author, so I may try to dig into that more, to see if I can find additional information, if possible. The same goes for possible asexuality in Whisper Me a Love Song and Kiss and White Lily for My Dearest Girl. I also found another article about asexuality in Bloom Into You (I've read a couple articles on that aspect in the past) Historyday01 (talk) 00:36, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Reacher
Hi. How about adding Frances Neagley by Maria Sten from Reacher (TV series) to the list? Timestamp 28:10 in 2x01, "But you found her attractive." – "Who wouldn't?" – "Me. I don't find anyone attractive.". IKhitron (talk) 16:30, 16 December 2023 (UTC)


 * I think if we have some more sources about that, then we could add it. I mean for readers or anyone interested in diving deeper into this topic, it would be helpful to have secondary sources. Historyday01 (talk) 15:48, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Well, I hope some sources will pay attention to this, but there is a chance it can take years. IKhitron (talk) 15:50, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

Monkey D. Luffy
Isn't Luffy asexual? 93.144.189.144 (talk) 13:55, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

List ordering
The ordering of the different sections is extremely inconsistent. Some sections are ordered by the characters' names, while others are ordered by the characters' debut dates. The top of the page claims that "The names are organized by the year of the character's debut", but when you attempt to edit the source there is a message at the top of each section saying to "List in alphabetical order by surname (i.e. last name) or by singular name if there is none". I would just correct this myself, but I'm fairly new to Wikipedia editing and not sure which of these conflicting messages is the correct way to order the list. Could a more experienced editor please clear this up? BossBabyIsAMasterpiece (talk) 08:37, 23 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your message! I think at one time it WAS organized by year of the character's debut (I was the one that originally proposed that), but the number of new entries threw it off... I did some light editing this morning and fixed it so that ALL the categories are organized "in alphabetical order by surname (i.e. last name) or by singular name if there is none". I'm glad I did these edits as well as the source for Loveless didn't even mention the book! So, I fixed that as well and removed I think one or two entries which didn't have reliable sources. I'm tempted to remove the entry for Perry the Platypus too (it was weakly confirmed on a Tik Tok comment, but I'm not sure that's enough to justify an entry to be perfectly honest). Historyday01 (talk) 13:40, 23 May 2024 (UTC)