I love your Tumblr, but I've always been curious about your thoughts on this new trend of asexuals that are neither trans or attracted to the same sex romantically demanding inclusion in LGBT spaces.
Asexual people are not a “new trend”. And it is sort of ironic that you use that language to describe them since it has been used to describe every letter in the acronym constantly, and that stigma is one this project was created to fight.
The idea that somehow asexual people don’t belong or deserve to be respected because the identity is seen as a “trend” alone gives them enough in common with the rest of the community for me to believe that they deserve to be a part of the queer movement.
But to pretend that asexual people have not been a part of our community ever before is ahistorical (see article above) and honestly, a tired and boring argument that has been debunked so many times I am almost bored of it.
So if after all that you still are unsure of our stance on inclusion within the queer community try reading our articles and it may help clear that up for you.
I have been read for the ages. 😒 I never said asexuals were a new trend. I only asked about clarification on your thoughts on cis gendered asexuals that aren’t romantically attracted to the same sex demanding inclusion in the LGBT community now in the modern age. I don’t recall these asexuals I am speaking of wanting to be consisted LGBT in the 60’s through the 2010’s until the last few years.
You’re an inclusionist, kool. I don’t know what an article about sapphic asexuals in 17th century China has to do with my question. I never asked about gay asexuals historically.
Don’t twist my words then come for my wig when you’re literally begging for Patrons every other day for what amounts to small, but admittedly interesting well written, articles that lots of LGBT/Queer studies majors could do on 4 hours of sleep.
Become a Patron of my project literally begging for Patrons every other day for what amounts to small, but admittedly interesting well written, articles that lots of LGBT/Queer studies majors could do on 4 hours of sleep to make an aphobe angry.
*Toasts @makingqueerhistory* Cheers to pissing off aphobes. They really didn’t even read their ask before they pitched a fit about your very accurate answer. Also, have you read The Asexual Manifesto from the 1970s or early 1980s? https://archive.org/details/asexualmanifestolisaorlando We are a ‘new trend’ that’s older than ME!
This post is circulating again on my day for answering questions, so I wanted to touch on it a bit.
First off, a thanks for all the sweet words from everyone responding to the response, including myself from the past, because when I read that last paragraph, having forgotten about this interaction entirely, it was a little disheartening.
As a queer creator, no it is not fun to have to constantly ask for patrons, and “begging” is what it feels like a lot of the time. I know my work has improved immeasurably since I first answered this response, but I wouldn’t have been able to do that if I had been forced to give up on this project due to lack of financial stability. So to those who are patrons, or have been, thank you for allowing me to continue pissing off aphobes with my “admittedly interesting well written, articles that lots of LGBT/Queer studies majors could do on 4 hours of sleep”.
I also think it is worth noting that calling the self-combing members of The Golden Orchid Society sapphic shows a severe lack of understanding of the entire concept. The self-combing women had the choice to marry other women, being members of the Golden Orchid Society, but chose not to, so to state that they are all sapphic is reductive and odd. As expressed in the article:
“When women in China were married, they would have their hair combed differently to signal to society and any men interested in courting them that they were not available. While the terms we use now for asexual or aromantic did not exist yet, the Golden Orchid Society had a system set up for women who wanted to avoid both marriage options, and any romantic or sexual partnership, by introducing “self-combing women.” These women would comb their hair into a married woman’s style and often had a ceremony to celebrate such a decision, similar to a marriage ceremony. And for asexual women who were romantically attracted to other women, the marriages were often non-sexual – a decision supported by most of the Golden Orchid Society.”
There were likely sapphic asexual women within the Golden Orchid Society, but to say all the self-combing women were sapphic, is just incorrect.
In hindsight, yeah, I see how I focused initially on a misunderstood part of the question, but the question is answered in the end, as stated here: “to pretend that asexual people have not been a part of our community ever before is ahistorical"
Asexual people “that are neither trans or attracted to the same sex romantically demanding inclusion in LGBT spaces” are only as new as LGBT spaces are. Something that is shown within the Golden Orchid Society is that the queer community is not some monolith that has done one thing for all its members since the beginning.
There are and have been thousands of branches in the history of this community, and some of them have included asexual and people, some of them have not. But being an “inclusionist” is not an insult to me.
Having spent five years in this field now, researching, being proven wrong, and having my assumptions challenged, I can’t say I have ever seen a good reason to be anything but an inclusionist. I have seen plenty of fantastic ones not to exclude, though.
This hair-splitting reminds me of Lou Sullivan, who was told by doctors he was not allowed to be a part of the trans community because he also experienced same-gender attraction. Queer people are only allowed to be counted as queer if they tick some arbitrary boxes. It is not a new sentiment, it has a longer legacy than most people realize, and I will do everything in my power to keep from adding to that legacy.
So no. Five years on, looking back, I do not see this “new trend” of asexual people “demanding” space within my community, with fear. I see it with hope, and love, and thanks. I am so grateful for the asexual members of my community, how they have shaped discussions, supported others, and uncovered beauty in things I never would have seen without them. If I had only met awful asexual people I would still be grateful, because I am endlessly thankful for every member of this community. The paths they have forged, whether perfect or human, mean everything to me. I would not exclude a single one.
Putting in my plug for signing up for @makingqueerhistory’s patreon! I’ve learned a lot in the short time I’ve been a subscriber AND I got some neat stickers!
Thank you so much!
"If I had only met awful asexual people I would still be grateful, because I am endlessly thankful for every member of this community. The paths they have forged, whether perfect or human, mean everything to me. I would not exclude a single one." is really so beautifully written.
