The present study investigates the attitudes of individuals identifying as asexual toward domestic partnerships, with a particular focus on the role of values experienced in the process of family upbringing. It assumes that family upbringing serves as a fundamental reference point that shapes identity formation by embedding specific values and behavioral patterns. Given the limited representation and frequent misunderstanding of asexual individuals in mainstream discourse, the study highlights their perspectives on intimate relationships, which are primarily built on the foundations of trust, honesty, freedom, compatibility, understanding, respect, tolerance, openness, security, maturity, cooperation, and equality. 

The research is framed within the broader context of equality education, which emphasizes the necessity of recognizing and respecting diverse identities while challenging social stereotypes. Equality, as a fundamental social value, underpins inclusive civic structures and contributes to the prevention of discrimination and social exclusion. The study aligns with the principles of equality education, which promotes the recognition of diverse sexual orientations and fosters an educational environment that supports pluralism and respect for individuality.  

Conceptually, the research is grounded in the sociology of values, which posits that values function as critical determinants of human attitudes and interactions. Values influence an individual’s decisions and relationships at both personal and collective levels, contributing to broader social cohesion. The study applies the framework of value socialization, which examines how values are transmitted and internalized through primary social institutions, particularly the family. The research acknowledges the intergenerational transmission of values and its impact on the construction of self-perception, gender identity, and relationship preferences among asexual individuals. 

Additionally, the study highlights the role of upbringing in shaping these perspectives; individuals from supportive family environments tend to replicate values of trust, cooperation, and equality in their partnerships, whereas those from restrictive or neglectful backgrounds often develop alternative frameworks prioritizing autonomy and self-preservation.  

These results underscore the importance of equality education in fostering an inclusive environment that acknowledges diverse relationship models. Asexual individuals often encounter misconceptions and exclusion due to prevailing societal norms that prioritize sexual attraction as a defining characteristic of romantic relationships. By integrating discussions on asexuality into educational curricula, educators can contribute to dismantling stereotypes and promoting a more inclusive understanding of human relationships. The study thus advocates for an educational paradigm that values diverse experiences, cultivates open dialogue, and reinforces the principles of respect and equality.  

Overall, this research contributes to the discourse on sexual diversity and social inclusion by providing empirical evidence on the lived experiences of asexual individuals in relation to domestic partnerships. It calls for a reevaluation of traditional relationship norms and emphasizes the significance of values as guiding principles in personal and social development. As education plays a crucial role in shaping societal attitudes, integrating an inclusive and value-based approach to relationship education can enhance the recognition and acceptance of asexual identities in contemporary society. 

The research objective was to explore the views of asexual respondents towards partnerships, considering the role and importance of values experienced in their family upbringing environments. Achieving this objective required answering the following research questions: 1. How do the surveyed asexual people refer to their sexuality and domestic partnerships? 2. What values in domestic partnerships are valued by the surveyed asexual persons? 3. What was the upbringing process like in the family of the asexual persons studied? 4. What values were respected in the family environment of the asexual persons studied? This study employed a diagnostic survey method to delve into the intricate social dynamics of upbringing, social awareness, and the prevailing attitudes within specific communities. Recognizing the depth and nuance of the subject matter, open-ended individual interviews were chosen as the most effective approach to capturing rich, personal narratives. The interview framework was carefully structured to explore four core themes: self-perception of sexuality and domestic partnerships, the hierarchy of values within intimate relationships, formative experiences within the family unit, and the transmission of values across generations. Participants were selected through a purposeful sampling strategy, ensuring a diverse range of perspectives. Recruitment was conducted via Aseksualni Polska, the largest Polish online community dedicated to individuals identifying as asexual, comprising approximately 4,600 members. The final research cohort included 24 adults aged 18 to 45, representing a spectrum of gender identities: 12 women, 7 men, and 5 individuals identifying as non-binary or agender (the latter assigned male at birth). Ethical considerations were paramount, with all participants providing informed consent before engaging in the study. To ensure both comfort and accessibility, interviews were conducted via participants’ preferred messaging platforms. Each conversation was meticulously recorded, transcribed, and subjected to rigorous thematic analysis while upholding strict confidentiality. Definitional indicators were employed to systematically categorize responses, enabling the identification of nuanced patterns and emergent themes. This methodological approach provided an in-depth exploration of how asexual individuals conceptualize domestic partnerships, with a particular emphasis on the foundational role of familial upbringing in shaping their values, relationship dynamics, and broader worldview.

The study reveals that asexual individuals approach domestic partnerships through a framework centered on emotional and intellectual intimacy rather than sexual attraction. The findings highlight that trust, honesty, mutual respect, and equality serve as foundational values in their relationships, shaping their expectations and interactions. While some individuals engage in sexual activity as a form of compromise for their partners, others prioritize non-sexual expressions of affection, reinforcing the diversity of experiences within the asexual spectrum. One of the most significant findings is the role of family upbringing in shaping attitudes toward relationships. Those raised in supportive environments that emphasized communication, cooperation, and equality tend to replicate these values in their partnerships. Conversely, individuals from restrictive or authoritarian family backgrounds often develop alternative frameworks that prioritize autonomy, self-preservation, and strict personal boundaries. These findings underscore the profound influence of early socialization on later relationship patterns. Furthermore, the study identifies misconceptions and challenges that asexual individuals face in a society that often equates romantic relationships with sexual activity. By integrating discussions on asexuality into educational curricula, institutions can challenge stereotypes and foster greater social inclusion. Ultimately, the study advocates for a redefinition of relationship norms that acknowledges diverse partnership models. Promoting values-based education can enhance respect for asexual identities and encourage inclusive social attitudes. The expected outcome of such efforts is a more accepting and informed society where individuals of all sexual orientations can establish meaningful, fulfilling relationships based on mutual understanding and shared values. Education for equality cannot be limited to the transmission of knowledge. For it to have a genuine social effect, care should be taken to educate people about equality and diversity. It is understood as undertaking specific actions in various educational institutions run by specific teachers, educators, pedagogues, and educators in formal and informal education.

Bogaert, A. F. (2004). Asexuality: Prevalence and Associated Factors in a National Probability Sample. The Journal of Sex Research, 41(3), 279–287. Bogaert, A. F. (2006). Toward a Conceptual Understanding of Asexuality. Review of General Psychology, 10(3), 241-250. Bogaert, A. F. (2015). Asexuality: What It Is and Why It Matters. The Journal of Sex Research, 52(4), 362–379. Bogaert, A. F. (2017). What asexuality tells us about sexuality. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 46(3), 629–630. Bokszański, Z. (2016). Zmiana społeczna i jednostka we współczesności. Przegląd Socjologiczny, 65(3), 9-21. Borecka-Biernat, D. (2023). Parental Influence Modelling the Formation of Adolescents' Coping Strategies in Situations of Social Conflict. Podstawy Edukacji. Equal opportunities for all or fair chances to all in education, 16, 57–75. Kamińska, M. (2020). Czy jesteśmy gotowi na edukację równościową? - dylematy społeczno-pedagogiczne. Pedagogika Społeczna, 77(3), 97-110. Karkowska, M. (2020). Skrypty, opowieści i narracje w perspektywie pedagogicznej. Ku świadomości wychowania. Kraków: Oficyna Wydawnicza „Impuls”. Łobocki, M. (2010). Teoria wychowania w zarysie. Kraków: Oficyna Wydawnicza „Impuls”. Łukaszewski, W. (1984). Szanse rozwoju osobowości. Warszawa: Książka i Wiedza. Majewska, E., Rutkowska, E. (2007). Równa szkoła – edukacja wolna od dyskryminacji. Poradnik dla nauczycielek i nauczycieli. Gliwice: Dom Współpracy Polsko-Niemieckiej. Małolepszy, A. (2024). Postawy osób identyfikujących się jako aseksualne względem związków partnerskich w kontekście wartości doświadczanych w procesie wychowania (Niepublikowana praca magisterska), Uniwersytet Jana Długosza w Częstochowie. Mead, M. (2000). Kultura i tożsamość. Studium dystansu międzypokoleniowego. Warszawa: PWN. Obrycka, M., Piekarski, G., Sałapata, M. A. (2020). Edukacja równościowa. Tworzenie przestrzeni i warunków dla innego. Kraków: Oficyna Wydawnicza „Impuls”. Pilch, T., Bauman, T. (2001). Zasady badań pedagogicznych. Strategie ilościowe i jakościowe. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Akademickie „Żak”. Strzelczak, A. (2019). Tożsamość osób aseksualnych a ich funkcjonowanie w bliskich związkach. [Rozprawa doktorska, Uniwersytet Jagielloński]. Repozytorium Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego. Teutsch, A. (2002). Dwie koncepcje równości. W: M. Grabowska (red.), W drodze do unii Europejskiej. Przewodniczka nie tylko dla kobiet. Warszawa: Fundacja im. Heinricha Bolla. Tyszka, A. (1994). Kultura jest kultem wartości: aksjologia społeczna – studia i szkice. Lublin: Wydawnictwo Norbertinum. Włodarczyk, E. (2003). Kultura. W: J. Pilch (red.). Encyklopedia Pedagogiczna XXI wieku (Tom 2). Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Akademickie „Żak”. Żegnałek. K. (2010). Metodologia badań dla autorów prac licencjackich i magisterskich z pedagogiki. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Wyższej Szkoły Pedagogicznej TWP w Warszawie. Żukowicz, O. (2021). Mniejszość w mniejszości. Jak aseksualność wzbogaca myślenie o ludzkiej seksualności. Uniwersyteckie Czasopismo Socjologiczne, 28(2), 31-39.