default-mode: “if you’re an exclusionist who believes the desexualization of...”
Aren't they the ones desexualizing themselves tho
saying we aren’t sexually attracted to people isn’t desexualizing. the desexualizing I’m talking about here is the removal of another’s sexual agency, the denial of another’s ability to be in charge of their own sex life.
not feeling sexual attraction to others is not the same as saying someone has no libido, doesn’t get aroused from and/or draw pleasure from sexual activities, or has zero interest in sex. while those things can go along with asexuality they can go along with any other orientation as well.
it’s the exclusionist side reducing aces to “people who don’t want to fuck” (as it’s put often enough).
it’s people onthe exclusionist side that have infantilized aces as people who never matured enough to develop a sexuality.
it’s people on the exclusionist side that have stated or implied aces aren’t properly able to consent to sex because sexual attraction is a mandatory part of consent.
it’s people on the exclusionist side that have said LGB aces can’t headcanon LGB characters as being LGB aces like themselves because it erases that character’s sexuality.
it’s people on the exclusionist side that have stated aces can never want sex, are allowing themselves to be abused/raped if they consent to sex, and/or are rape apologists if they state that aces can chose to have sex.
all this, being blared out, with aces who fight to have their sexual agency acknowledged as just as valid as that of anyone of any other orientation being ignored, mocked, or told that they know better than them.
being told we can’t consent to sex, have reasons to want sex, have the ability to enjoy sex, not without having our identity questioned or invalidated, and being silenced when we speak against it.