A lot of gatekeepers will hear “ace people are lgbt+” and they will say “um not cishet ones lmao.”
There are two things you could be trying to say when you say “cishet aces are not lgbt+,” and here they are:
1) “If you are ace, you are inherently lgbt+, unless you are cisgender and heteroromantic.” (That is, until I “discover” that you are cisgender and heteroromantic)
2) “If you are ace, you are not inherently lgbt+, but some lgbt people also are ace.” (That is, being ace is totally irrelevant to being lgbt+)
It’s a very minor distinction, but here’s my point. Let’s say you’re a “cishet ace exclusionist” (that’s aphobia, babey). Somebody walks up to you in lgbt+ space, or messages you on an lgbt+ forum, or whatever, and as a gatekeeping asshole it’s your job to discover if they are really lgbt+.
They say, “Hi, my name’s Skylar, I’m asexual.” (It’s rare that somebody’s sexuality comes up so quickly, but for the sake of ease, let’s leave it like this.)
Is Skylar “not lgbt+”? Or do you not yet have enough information? Skylar could be a trans or nonbinary individual. Skylar could be bisexual or pansexual or gay.
Is your instinct “yes, Skylar is welcome here unless I find out that they are a ‘cishet’” or is your instinct “no, Skylar is not welcome here until they identify themselves using a different lgbt identity.”
If your instinct is the first option, you’ve already essentially admitted that being ace is “enough” to make somebody lgbt. Skylar’s gender and sexuality don’t come up again, and Skylar has a great ace time with other lgbt+ people and carries on their life literally harming nobody, with their romantic orientation never becoming relevant. :) It’s not about “resources” and it’s not about privilege and it’s not about oppression, you’re just making it about hating on other-gender attraction of any kind: would you treat bi and pan individuals with other-gender partners (or attractions) this way? Would you treat trans individuals with other-gender partners (or attractions) this way? Don’t be a gatekeeping asshole, my friend.
If your instinct is the second option, you now have to get Skylar to “prove” that they are lgbt+, because you’re a piece of shit. By your standards, Skylar must be trans/nb or bi/pan/homoromantic to “prove” that they are lgbt+.
“I’m aromantic and cisgender,” Skylar says. “I actually desire no romantic or sexual relationship at all.”
Has Skylar “proved” that they are lgbt? They aren’t heteroromantic, after all.
“Yeah, Skylar’s lgbt, because they aren’t heteroromantic.” So you’ve admitted that ace people are lgbt+ even if they are not also bi, trans, gay, or lesbian.
“No, Skylar’s not lgbt, because they are not bi/trans/gay/etc.” So then your argument “not cishet ones lmao” actually means nothing, because Skylar does not identify as “het” or experience other-gender attraction at all (not heterosexual, not heteroromantic, not het-anything). Hmmmm looks like it was just aphobia all along.
Y’all can take your shitty “um not cishet ones lmao” and go. Y’all have no critical thinking skills.
