I genuinely think the reason people leave out Black asexuals and aromantics is because we contradict too much. To fully acknowledge Black asexuality and aromanticism means questioning the idea sexual & romantic absence = whiteness. Why do you think asexual and aromantic = sexless and why sexless = white. It means unpacking what is so non-asexual about Blackness. What is so non-aromantic about Blackness. It means unpacking why Black lovelessness is uniquely heartless. It means unpacking why you're comfortable with the exclusion of Black love, but are scared by Black lovelessness. It means unpacking why you think Black asexuality can't exist outside of Black desexualisation. It means unpacking why you think Black aromanticism can't exist outside sexualisation. And vice versa. It means unpacking why don't think Black people have the actual autonomy to be ace and/or aro. It means unpacking why people more marginalised than you can make space for asexuality and aromanticism when you can't, despite it being an 'oppressor' identity. It means unpacking why the only mainstream representations of Black asexuality and aromanticism that could exist are the Mammy and the Jezebel and Mandingo. It means unpacking that sexless and loveless Black people don't benefit from these tropes. It means unpacking why sexlessness and lovelessness is seen as purity and why Black ace and/or aro people don't to be 'pure'. It means not only asking why asexuality and aromanticism is associated with being white, but actively asking why asexuality and aromanticism 'can't' be associated with being Black. It means unpacking why you can't name any Black ace and/or aro characters or public figures. It means addressing what happens when asexuality and aromanticism stop existing in vacuums and start overlapping with the identities you actually 'get'. These are the scary questions you get to ignore when you can just claim being ace and/or aro is 'white and cishet' identity instead.
