I'm not very witty

I mostly made this blog so I could respond to some discourse posts instead of sending anon asks. Feel free to message me when I say something shitty or ignorant, I'll do my best to correct it. Read my About Me for more info.

[aceaventurine]

If the discourse has lead you to believe ace people are annoying, think they’re better than other people, think sex is gross and “icky”, are some kind of oppression-obsessed cringe fest...

You may need to take a few steps back.

Ace people are diverse. You don’t get to caricature us like that. I don’t care if you are an inclusionist or an exclusionist, you need to realize you’re not talking about some carboard figure here ; you’re talking about actual living people. We are not jokes, we are not living stereotypes, we are not discourse fuel.

Thanks for reading !

[aceaventurine]

I’m a bit confused by some conversations I read so... Can inclusionists and/or respectful exclusionists give their opinion on this issue ?

“Gay ace”, “bi aro”, “ace lesbian”... These identities are using the SAM, aren’t they? Or is the SAM specifically “homoromantic ace” and other labels using the suffix “-romantic” ?

Thanks for answering me, I’m curious to see what discoursers think about this point.

[hauntedhostbody-deactivated2019]

“squishes” I’m begging you to go outside

[aceaventurine]

“Go outside”, says the person who puts “proud aphobe” in her bio.

[acesian]

It’s absolutely inappropriate to hack someone’s account and say “I’m a nazi” on it. Do you really think making nazi jokes are funny?? Do you really think that Jewish people, lgbt+ people, people of color, etc feel comfortable with nazi jokes??

Your behavior is absolutely appalling.

[glimmer-lied]

what happened.

[aceaventurine]

Lesbi-catra’s blog was hacked.

The hacker posted gross stuff (including the “i’m a nazi” stuff) and also added a nsfw image on the blog. The above link contains said nazi and nsfw stuff, and also various hatred and mockeries towards ace/aro people and mogai.

[aceaventurine]

I'm not an inclu but I gotta say, your takes are some of the best I've seen from that side. :)

Well, thank you Anon !I’ve learned a lot from other inclusionists to be honest, so most of my takes come from listening and reflecting on their posts and ideas.

I don’t aim at making people “change side”, but I do hope they read my blog and learn more about how to discourse without disrespecting people’s identities and experiences.

Have a nice day, Anon !

[faggotnewt]

SDKJHFJKSDHGJKSDHGKSJDHGKJ

[aceaventurine]

Is “ace discourse” code for “anything mocking ace/aro people” ? Please, can you not mock other people’ relationships or redefine them ? It costs literally nothing to leave these people alone.

[faggotnewt]

I think you’re a real fucked up person for thinking you’re not allowed to love your friends endlessly without it becoming a qpp or platonic no romo relationship or whatever the fuck. It’s more fucked up when first messenger told the second person, a KID, who is 15, that his relationship with his best friend had to be a QPP because ‘they love eachother too much’. So fuck off.

[aceaventurine]

I don’t support the fact that they tried to convince someone to label their friendship as something else. That’s not an ok thing to do.

However I do support people labelling their relationship the way they want. A QPR is not “extra super best friendship”, it’s not “friendship but better”, so I really don’t understand why you think it’s somehow devaluing friendship. It’s just an aro term for aro experiences. You’re absolutely allowed to love and care for your friends endlessly, the fact that some people try to use a label that’s not “friendship” nor “romantic relationship” doesn’t change that at all.

If you don’t use it that’s super fine, but I don’t get why you feel the need to post hate about it, that’s all.

[aceaventurine]

Also, if I may add, if your issue is the fact that someone tried to force the qpr thing on someone else, a kid, you should have screenshot that part. Because I disagree with this just like you, and I think it’s always important to remind people that it’s not ok to do this.

But your post is not about this. Your post is just “qpr = best friend, you’re so silly SDKJHFJKSDH”. You’re laughing at the relationship described in the screenshot, period. Please do not try to change the point of the OP. You choose to make the post about the “cringy qpr” stuff, and not about forcing a label on someone.

[faggotnewt]

SDKJHFJKSDHGJKSDHGKSJDHGKJ

[aceaventurine]

Is “ace discourse” code for “anything mocking ace/aro people” ? Please, can you not mock other people’ relationships or redefine them ? It costs literally nothing to leave these people alone.

[faggotnewt]

I think you’re a real fucked up person for thinking you’re not allowed to love your friends endlessly without it becoming a qpp or platonic no romo relationship or whatever the fuck. It’s more fucked up when first messenger told the second person, a KID, who is 15, that his relationship with his best friend had to be a QPP because ‘they love eachother too much’. So fuck off.

[aceaventurine]

I don’t support the fact that they tried to convince someone to label their friendship as something else. That’s not an ok thing to do.

However I do support people labelling their relationship the way they want. A QPR is not “extra super best friendship”, it’s not “friendship but better”, so I really don’t understand why you think it’s somehow devaluing friendship. It’s just an aro term for aro experiences. You’re absolutely allowed to love and care for your friends endlessly, the fact that some people try to use a label that’s not “friendship” nor “romantic relationship” doesn’t change that at all.

If you don’t use it that’s super fine, but I don’t get why you feel the need to post hate about it, that’s all.

[faggotnewt]

SDKJHFJKSDHGJKSDHGKSJDHGKJ

[aceaventurine]

Is “ace discourse” code for “anything mocking ace/aro people” ? Please, can you not mock other people’ relationships or redefine them ? It costs literally nothing to leave these people alone.

[buckbisexualbitch]

pls explain “allo” privilege. like.. y’all know gay sex is illegal right? gay people are put to death for having sex but yeah “allos” oppress u somehow. pls grow a brain and get back to me.

[aceaventurine]

pls explain “allo” privilege

There’s no “allo privilege”. If anything like “allo privilege” existed, it would be incredibly deeply rooted in straightness and patriarchy, using it to qualify lgbt people would be non-sense. “Allo” just means “non ace”. It’s a useful word to discuss our experiences.

I won’t deny it’s quite possible some people used the idea of an “allo privilege” in the discourse, but it doesn’t mean it is a well established and agreed upon concept among discoursers or among ace/aro communities. I hope this clarifies the issue a bit, and I hope you won’t let some bad posts in an internet discourse shape your opinion of a whole group of people.

[buckbisexualbitch]

well ur absolutely right in saying that anything that might be mistaken for non ace privilege is actually just straight privilege and or misogyny. when i made this post it was out of annoyance after reading all the posts that try to explain how asexuals are oppressed. nothing that i post is a reflection of how i feel about asexual/aromantic people in general, its how i feel about including people who are straight and cis into the lgbt community and the things some people say in support of that idea. ace/aro people are certainly discriminated against because of the culture surrounding sex (and other things) but being ace alone isnt lgbt so i dont include it.

also i only put “allo” in quotes cause i think its kind of stupid and i prefer to just say non ace.

[aceaventurine]

I guess when people discuss ace/aro “oppression” it’s easy to think they automatically paint non ace/aro people as the oppressors, thus making “allos” oppressors regardless of their orientation. Which, I agree, doesn’t make sense since gay/bi/pan people surely aren’t privileged for experiencing attraction. But it’s not really “aces/aros VS allos”.

Actually it’s mostly about heterosexism. Discussions about the hardships experienced by ace/aro people mostly centers around how our straightnormative society and sexism hurt ace/aro people, etc.

I can understand that for some people, it’s not a good reason for including ace/aro people, because to them the community centers around specific fights : against homophobia and transphobia. Other people however think that anyone who suffer under cisheteronormative society because of their gender alignment and/or because of their orientation can be welcomed (in specific spaces though, of course non gay people won’t go to gay safe spaces, same with cis people etc). It’s never been about being oppressed by allos as a group (in my book anyway, and I’ve read the discourse for far too long haha)

I guess I reacted to your post in particular because I was tired of seeing so many people misuse the word “allo”. I’m so tired how seeing people joking about “filthy allos”, “dirty allos”, “allogays”, or mentioning “allo privilege”, because it really misrepresents what the word means, and what it’s used for.

Thank you for your respectful reply.

[buckbisexualbitch]

pls explain “allo” privilege. like.. y’all know gay sex is illegal right? gay people are put to death for having sex but yeah “allos” oppress u somehow. pls grow a brain and get back to me.

[aceaventurine]

pls explain “allo” privilege

There’s no “allo privilege”. If anything like “allo privilege” existed, it would be incredibly deeply rooted in straightness and patriarchy, using it to qualify lgbt people would be non-sense. “Allo” just means “non ace”. It’s a useful word to discuss our experiences.

I won’t deny it’s quite possible some people used the idea of an “allo privilege” in the discourse, but it doesn’t mean it is a well established and agreed upon concept among discoursers or among ace/aro communities. I hope this clarifies the issue a bit, and I hope you won’t let some bad posts in an internet discourse shape your opinion of a whole group of people.

[scorpiorisingfemme]

actually asexuality ISNT about who you’re attracted to. its about how you experience sexual attraction. if you can be gay or straight and have that not affect your asexuality, its not about who you’re attracted to. and being LGB is about who you’re attracted to. sure, if you’re SGA and asexual, youre gay or bi and belong in the LGBT community. but straight cis asexuals are still straight cis people, and they dont belong in the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender community.

[aceaventurine]

Didn’t an ace blogger explain to you literally one or two days ago that asexuality was her orientation, meaning she wasn’t attracted to any gender...? If her asexual label doesn’t say who she’s attracted to, then what does ?

[tracecourse]

hot take, but if you genuinely believe asexual means “doesn’t fuck” or “doesn’t want to fuck” you shouldn’t be involved in ace discourse.

like? if you don’t even understand the definition of the thing you’re arguing about you have no kind of authority or credibility to talk about it as if you do. knowing what this means is the absolute bare minimum to expect from a discourser; you don’t have to be an expert, obviously, but at least know what you’re talking about.

it’s really hard to have discussion when there are people who are so grossly misinformed but still think they’re right.

[aceaventurine]

To be honest I don’t think they don’t understand, I think they just don’t care. Painting asexuality as “no fucky” is just another way to dismiss this identity and the experiences attached to it.

Same with the whole aroace thing, the huge majority of exclusionists know the discourse is not just about cishet aces and aros, they know they also exclude cis aroaces and aces who don’t use the SAM, but they just don’t care enough to take 2sec to acknowledge this. Because “cishet” is a simpler umbrella term, who cares if it’s a shitty thing to do.

I highly doubt this comes from a misunderstanding of the issue, but rather from a global disinterest in actually discoursing. I hope I’m wrong, but the discourse has been going on for so long that it seems unlikely that such misconceptions persist.

[aceaventurine]

I see we’re back to furry comparisons in the discourse. I’m…disappointed, but not surprised ?

Needless to say, it’s just as silly, irrelevant and inappropriate than the hundred other times this came up in the discourse.

Can’t wait for the return of the “being ace is just like being left-handed !” argument. /s

[acephobia-is-fake]

be mad retarded kweer

[aceaventurine]

What are you even trying to accomplish, buddy

Please stop trolling, the discourse is bad enough already. Find a better hobby.

[aceaventurine]

I see we’re back to furry comparisons in the discourse. I’m...disappointed, but not surprised ?

Needless to say, it’s just as silly, irrelevant and inappropriate than the hundred other times this came up in the discourse.

Can’t wait for the return of the “being ace is just like being left-handed !” argument. /s

[aceaventurine]

Gosh I'm an exclu but you are actually discoursing well and I thank you.

Thanks, I appreciate it. I don’t discourse much, but I try my best to stay polite and articulate.Thank you for sending nice words, I wish you a great day !

(I have no idea when this was sent, I hope I’m not too late !)

[gay-cousin-official]

hot take but. asexuals/ace spectrum ppl talk abt sex with literal actual strangers more than any “”“allo”“” person i know and somehow WE’RE the dirty dirty perverts

[aceaventurine]

1) ... Source...?

2) Please, no one think “allos” are “dirty perverts”. It’s really time to stop feeding into these stereotypes, it doesn’t help the discourse in any way.  I’m pretty sure you can find a few posts where “ace people” sex-shame non ace people, but please keep in mind a few posts on the internet, especially in a discourse full of trolls and young people, isn’t exactly a good reason to caricature a whole identity.

Have a nice day !

[fish-course]

I see all these examples of “aphobia” that are men coming onto ace women and not taking no for an answer, and people wanna act like this is exclusively an ace issue when the fact is it’s literally misogyny. It’s misogyny and acting like it’s an issue faced exclusively by ace ppl is just detrimental to women as a whole.

[aceaventurine]

Do people actually want to make this an ace exclusive issue ? Because I’ve never seen that, and it surprises me. Who does this ?

I’ve read a lot of stories about ace people being assaulted and abused, and yes, it is mostly rooted in misogyny and toxic masculinity imo. But if they were specifically targeted because of their asexuality, why shouldn’t they use a word to express this idea ? Me being insulted because I rejected a man’s advances, and me being “proposed” fixing because I talked about not being into men are two examples of misogyny. But one happened specifically because of my orientation, and I think it’s important to be able to talk about it.

Ace people talking about violence and assaults and using the term “aphobia” to discuss the specificities of their experiences doesn’t mean all violence and assaults are exclusive to aphobia. 

If you have any example of people claiming “men not taking no for an answer” (to quote your OP) is an ace only issue, feel free to link them to me, because that’s not ok. However there is a lot of misunderstandings and misreading in the discourse, and sometimes just saying “this thing happened to me because I’m ace” can be read as “this thing only happens to ace people/is somehow worse because I’m ace”. Which is a shame because it doesn’t really go anywhere.

Thanks for reading.