#aerf

[stfudiscoinfernoed-archive]

If you use “aerf” (asexual exclusionary radial feminist) or “blerf” (bisexual lesbian radical feminist), you are a transmisogynist. Terfs working to keep or make LGBT and feminist spaces hostile to trans women and partnering with with conservatives to pass regulations and legislation that target trans women will never be equivalent to people saying cishet aces/aros aren’t LGBT or people saying that bisexual and lesbian are mutually exclusive terms. By using aerf or blerf you are dismissing and minimizing the harm terfs do.

[adonistheoddity]

I’m not sure if they and their followers are aphobic, but @agualavanda is certainly not a supporter of safe spaces.

I would also like to emphasize how every one of their statements in response to an honest question began with an insult, and they never defended their opinions and only attacked. Take that as you please.

[aspec-sexuality]

Please do not use “AERF”

Do not do that

I know there is a close tie between TERF ideology and general exclusionism for the very fact that they are exclusionistic beliefs, but “ace exclusionary radical feminist” does not make sense nor is it okay

Thank you for understanding

[johncribati]

So a lot of people are up in arms about “aerf” being a thing. 

I personally don’t know of anyone who uses this unironically, and have never seen it. I ran a quick google on it and about 30% of Google results are people saying that it sounds fucking stupid and 68% saying that it’s transphobic because it co-opts a transgender term in a way that is disrespectful to that specific struggle, but whatever, let’s say I’m not deep in The Discourse (TM) even though a good 20% of my mutuals are a-spec and I follow a good 40 or 50 blogs that have “Ace” in the name, and there’s some mega-popular ace blog out there who all the aphobes are hate-following that seriously use this term.

It’s wrong. For all the reasons other people have stated. I’m not going to use it, and nobody else should.

But you know what isn’t wrong?

Even though aphobia and transphobia are two different spheres of ignorance (there is a Venn Diagram of sorts going on because there are trans ace people of course), lot of rhetoric that aphobes use is basically rinse-and-repeat Mad Lib terf and biphobe rhetoric. That's still a fact.

[tunajorts]

"if you replace 'cishet' with 'males' exclusionists sound pretty terfy huh" if you replace "cishet" with "dogs" it sounds pretty caninephobic too :/ funny how that is :/ almost as though :/ changing words changes the meaning of a sentence ://

[theloveliestpartsofasexuality]

Lovely Thing Number Fifty One:

"Aerf?" What?! I can only see people being confused about this dog sound suddenly entering the world from seemingly nowhere, but why does that term exist? Where did it come from? Who did this? Why are people assuming people are actually using it, cause I legitimately cannot for the life of me find someone actually using that term in an actual sentence. I searched for at least half an hour, which is half an hour too long. This term should not exist. The source is apparently a cryptid and I am currently very annoyed.

[tombscum]

on aerf shit: okay and ur trying to abolish a group of HIGHLY oppressed individuals  from the only sense of acceptance and community they have, being the lgbt. its fucking pride month, we stand for equality!! what is this??? gay people turning on OTHER GAY PEOPLE?? WHAT THE FUCK??

[hipstersoulgushers]

can the term aerf not be used? like, asexual exclusionary feminism isn’t a thing??? aphobe is a totally fitting term but aerf is just ridiculous. people aren’t being excluded by feminists for being ace. like, plz dont use that word, its a stupid word.