Reports worldwide have been showing increases in the rates of sexually transmitted infections (STIs) and condomless sex in recent years. Research has identified several individual and situational variables that can determine the decision to use condoms or forgo their use. We argue that such a decision can also be shaped by motives related to pleasure and safety (i.e., regulatory focus in sexuality). Using open-ended questions, we asked 742 Portuguese and Spanish adults to indicate situations and reasons that could inform the decision-making process with casual partners and the functions/attributes related to condoms. Using thematic analyses, we coded the drivers of condomless sex and condom use into themes and subthemes, and computed frequencies. Using quantitative measures, we also asked participants to indicate their condom use expectancies and perceived barriers. Comparing participants according to regulatory focus revealed some differences. Pleasure promotion participants were more likely to consider that condom use decision-making is driven by unexpectedness, pleasure, and intimacy pursuit, attached more pleasure reduction functions to condoms, expected more negative outcomes in condom use, and endorsed more sensation and partner barriers in condom use. In contrast, disease prevention participants were more likely to consider that condom use decision-making is driven by adequate sexual education, responsibility, and behavioral control, and attached more health protective functions to condoms. These differences can inform the development of tailored intervention and awareness campaigns aimed to help people to use condoms more consistently with casual partners and avoid behaviors that put them at risk of STI transmission.

Asexuality is typically defined as a lack of sexual attraction, not representing the multitude of experiences in the ace community. To understand the complex ace identity, we explored the correlates cognitions, feelings, and desires of ace individuals. Results of a cross-sectional study (N = 447, 61.8% women; Mage = 24.62, SD = 6.98) showed that endorsing asexuality as a lack of sexual desire was associated with less experience with romantic partners, more experience with intimate affective relationships, more sex averse attitudes, and avoidant attachment. Sexual attraction was associated with more experience with romantic partners, less experience with intimate romantic and affective relationships, and more sex favorable attitudes. Romantic attraction was associated with more experience with romantic partners, less experience with intimate romantic relationships, and anxious attachment. Desire to establish intimate romantic relationships was associated with more experience with romantic partners, more sex favorable attitudes, and anxious attachment. Lastly, desire to establish intimate affective relationships was associated with more experience with affective relationships and anxious attachment. This study highlights the need to acknowledge diversity within the ace community by showing the importance of past experiences and individual differences in shaping the way ace individuals construe their identity and their relationships.

Asexuality is a complex construct with a considerable lack of research until recently. Building upon available findings, we examined the extent to which romantic orientation shapes individual and relationship experiences and expectations of asexual individuals. Specifically, our research focused on the distinction between romantic asexual individuals, who experience romantic attraction, and aromantic asexual individuals, who do not experience romantic attraction. A cross-sectional study with members of different asexual online communities (N = 447, 55.02% women; Mage = 24.77, SD = 7.21) aimed at examining how both groups differ in their identification with the asexuality construct as measured by the Asexuality Identification Scale (Yule et al., 2015), individual perspectives on sexuality, sexual behavior and relationships, concerns about commitment and sexual performance in a relationship, and attachment style. Results showed that aromantic asexual individuals identified more with asexuality, reported a more avoidant attachment style, and were more concerned with relationship commitment. In contrast, romantic asexual individuals reported less sex aversion, more sexual experiences (both past and current), and more sexual partners in the past. These individuals also indicated to have engaged in romantic relationships more frequently, desire to engage in romantic relationship in the future (either with or without sexual intimacy), and were more concerned with sexual performance. Overall, our findings contribute to the literature by highlighting the need to consider romantic orientation when examining asexuality and its interpersonal outcomes.