[robocourse]

Honestly, it’s incredibly hard to interact with you on “good faith” when you’re so hell-bent on not being called “allo”… which I understand if you’re questioning whether or not you’re a-spec, but there’s nothing wrong with the term itself as a tool for distinguishing a-spec people from other sexualities/romantic orientations. If you’re not allo you’re not allo, so just say that or that you’re questioning. The way you talk now seems wholly dismissive of the term which is uncomfortably close to how some transphobes talk about the word “cis” despite it just being a way to refer to people who most closely align with their assigned gender at birth.

Also… my take, as an ace person, is that the oppression that a-spec individuals face is similar to but also different to the challenges that other lgbtq+ folks experience…. Just like the experiences of different lgbtq+ orientations are similar and different to each other. A-spec people are not cisheteroromantic+sexual, so we always run the risk of being abused and discriminated against when it’s discovered that our orientation is outside of the norm. Of course, a-apec individuals are able to more easily hide their orientation than others, but i think the idea that an individual’s ability to “pass” as cishet determines whether or not they belong in the lgbtq+ community is, at best, silly, and more commonly discriminatory towards more than just a-spec individuals. Bi people in het relationships are still queer, trans people who pass are still queer. What’s the inherent difference here with a-specs, who are still ultimately inclined to hide their orientation around those who might harm them from it?

But, the a-spec experience is also colored by feeling out of place in a world that is highly focused on romance and sex. There’s often not enough recognition of how much it can impact a young a-spec’s life to see wording like “everyone falls in love!” Or “we all want to have sex with our partners”, both of which are common both inside and out of the lgbtq+ space. This alienation, along with the aforementioned points about being outside of the norm, is why many a-specs consider their experience to be inherently queer AND advocate for a more nuanced understanding of sexuality and romantic orientations, especially in conversations around queer liberation. Folks who aren’t a-spec have no idea what it’s like to live our lives and shouldn’t speak for us, just as someone who isn’t trans, bi, gay etc. have no business dictating the actions of those communities.

What we want is understanding and belonging in a community that is all about liberating those who differ from the norm in terms of orientation, and quite honestly? The fact that most people nowadays see us as such means that we are a part of the community, whether some people like it or not. When you listen to people and start to understand how similar they are to you, rather than focusing on their differences, it’s amazing how well you can get to know someone with a life experience you haven’t had. At the end of the day, we’re here, we’re queer, and you better get used to it, because otherwise the back door on the wrong side of history will probably hit you on the way out. Thanks for reading.

You keep comparing me to a transphobe because the asexual presumptive word for "sex-haver" makes me uncomfortable. Like I don't know what else to say here- I asked for a level of respect and you refuse to give it to me. I shouldn't need to air out my personal relationship to sex in order to be treated like a person. So I'm just gonna move on to your other points. Just know that this sort of behavior is very inconsiderate.

You say that the struggles of asexual people are "similar and different" to those of LGBT people- I'm asking how they are similar. You've not provided me any sort of examples beyond a hypothetical situation. Where are asexual people being arrested and murdered for their lack of sex? Where are they losing jobs? Where would it be difficult for an asexual person to adopt a child? When was asexuality deemed illegal? What laws are put in place to limit an asexual's ability to survive and thrive?

That's not me being a dick- I am genuinely asking. In what ways are people who don't have sex just as/more oppressed than LGBT people who do? Because when you use "allosexual" you're implying that straight and LGBT people hold inherent power over aces based on the desire/ability to have sex. How does that power manifest?

I certainly agree that the alienation asexual and aromantic people feel in our society is worth mentioning and doing something about. But one goal of the LGBT community is the normalization of romantic love and sex for gay/trans individuals. Because our love and sex is demonized and used to take away our human rights. Asexual people- as far as I currently understand- are not living with that threat. Therefore their goals are going to be different than ours. Which is not invalid or less than- it's simply a truth. (Saying the asexual community has differing threats and therefore different goals than the LGBT community is not an example of aphobia. It's an observation without judgement.)

The LGBT community is not a community built on "liberating those who differ from the norm in terms of orientation". It's a political coalition created to combat homophobia and transphobia and preserve the rights of the people who experience those forms of active oppression. If the asexual community's goal is to create a space wherein they feel safe and accepted- fine! You've effectively done that with the unification of an asexual community. The LGBT community has wider goals with higher stakes though. So you can ally alongside us and help achieve our goals- one of them being normalization of sex- or you can ally further away and preserve your own goals alongside ours. I got off track though- saying any LGBT person holds power over any ace for having sex is ludicrous unless you can provide examples of systemic oppression based on the act of sex.

[robocourse]

Exactly! It’s an issue for sure- but certainly not just for asexuals. 

[rationalisms]

not to Discourse but if people stopped pretending attraction can be evenly split into sexual and romantic attraction for once instead of accepting that it works and feels differently for everyone maybe they would realize that you can be attracted to someone without wanting to have sex with them right now this second, or ever, and we could all stop pathologizing and micromanaging the particulars of our sexual orientation (the term deriving from sex as a word for gender at the time it was created, not sex as the act) and come to the collective understanding that the labels gay/bi/lesbian/straight on their own already include every single possible relationship to sex you could ever possibly have and absolutely no qualifiers, ace/demi or otherwise, are needed, because attraction as a concept encompasses more than just the urge to have sex with another person

it’d be also super neat if we could stop pretending that it’s somehow more inclusive or easier for people with a fraught relationship to sex to split sexual orientation into Ace and Non-Ace as if it’s any help at all to shove e.g. lesbians who struggle with the sexual aspect of lesbian identification off into their own restricted zone away from Normal Lesbianism that requires a special prefix before lesbian, instead of normalizing a definition of lesbian that includes any and all ways people might feel about sex and that their way of feeling attraction is just as much a normal part of lesbianism as anyone else’s, no qualifiers needed

the idea of a split romantic and sexual orientation is an unhealthy, pathologizing way of looking at sexual orientations that’s just gonna end up alienating people who feel lost in mainstream depictions of sexuality even more and i am done with pretending that i am okay with that kind of rhetoric being spread

[transcephalopod]

do people still think “oh if you make sites censor pedophilia fanfiction they’ll censor lgbt fiction next!” is a good argument. are 28 year old fandom mommies still out there comparing gay people to pedophiles and then patting themselves on the back for owning the Evil Antis.

[transcephalopod]

anyway ao3’s entire “underage” category should be purged and if you write graphic sexual fic about minors you should be on some kind of watchlist

[house-of-crows]

There have been MULTIPLE studies done on this, and the consensus is that allowing people to work out their trauma or attractions in ways that affect literally no one; IE on a site where everything is labelled and incredibly easy to avoid; is good for you mentally.  The entire bloody POINT of AO3 is that it is uncensored so long as you tag appropriately. That means EVERYTHING.  And, jic you were wondering, the “pedophilia fics” they’re referencing is fandom-aged Harry Potter/etc. Antis will literally argue that aged-up fic is “still pedo” because “well but in canon they’re x age so it still counts” they’ll argue straightfaced that more than three years age difference; NO MATTER WHO IS INVOLVED; is “pedophilia.” 

I’ve seen that accusation lodged against fucking Hannibal x Will Graham. I’ve seen it spewed at Chronicles of Narnia fic for some light handholding between Lucy and Tumnus with emotional overtones. Not even sexual or outright romantic. Just emotional depth. 

People forget too easily that we were all teenagers once. Censoring authors exploring what it is to be young and hormonal aren’t the issue. People ascribing real-world ideologies to fic are. 

You curate your own online experience. Learn how to blacklist tags and search appropriately, AO3 literally hands you the tools to do so better than any other fic site on the net. 

[trashsexuality]

Hey! I’m a psychologist and I’m having trouble working out what to search in my research archive to find the kinds of studies you’re talking about. Would you mind sharing them?

[colorisbyshe]

i still think the funniest concept i have seen gain like… fairly widespread credibility is the idea that you can experience NOT experiencing attraction on a spectrum

“yes this is the not experiencing sexual attraction spectrum, we don’t experience sexual attraction except for those of us who do”

and then when you ask where that spectrum of NOT experiencing but sometimes experiencing sexual attraction ends and you get accused of being a bigot. as if it’s wrong to want to know at what point a person who experiences sexual attraction and likes to fuck stops being asexual…

like man i know i’m dumb as shit on a regular day but this shit is next level like maybe i’m smart if this is my competition. people really will say and believe literally anything.

[colorisbyshe]

this is still bothering me so i do want to add another note–

this is a clear symptom of how people feel otherized from their sexual desire. like in a culture that shames sexuality as much as it overemphasizes it, a lot of people feel this obvious need to qualify their sexual desires.

‘i experience less sexual attraction than others, so i’m ace but like… grey’ (didn’t know we had an average but sure) and ‘i don’t experience sexual attraction but i can still want sex’ (ie sex positive ‘aces’) and ‘i’m demisexual so unlike the rest of y’all, i fall in love with the person and only desire sex after’ (even though i’ve seen some of these people claim to also still like casual sex?)

all seem like responses to a society that tells them that plain sexual desire is selfish, gross, deviant, or perverted.

so, it turns into hiding your sexual attraction and sexual desires under language that diminishes them or makes it seem like you aren’t as sexual as everyone else. you want sex or appreciate people’s looks for better, elevated reasons than everyone else, escaping the taint of it all. you want sex but you don’t need it. you don’t get horny, you just ‘have a libido and will find a partner to sate it.’

you can have your repression and eat/fuck it, too.

rather than normalizing your own desires and embracing them, you find ways to act on them and feel them while creating a safe distance so you don’t ever internalize them? they are something removed from the core of who you are. you are other from them and the ‘sex crazed’ society, by choice, because you would never be so low as to be driven by base desires like everyone else.

it’s funny, like i said in the first part of this post, to see how this turns into rhetoric irl, but fuck it’s also depressing too.

[hotvampireadjacent]

Lmaooo oh nooo

[gaybats1999]

I was thinking about how this reminds me of my school and I saw the @ looked familiar so I investigated it and I am BLOCKED ON TWITTER and I remember IT’S BECAUSE THEY ARE AN APHOBE

IT WAS MY SCHOOL I GO TO TUMBLR UNIVERSITY

[trashsexuality]

this is the most embarrassing shit ive seen in a long time..

[achillescourse]

when ur in the lgbt group, looking for support and soildarity against ur significant material oppression, and they start talking about how 'that sometimes gays and lesbians are really mean' and 'oh ur bi,,, interesting,,, im qu**r pan, which is just short because my full id is so complex, thanks for asking' and 'it sucks being binary trans but at least they have binary privilege!'

[transcephalopod]

The way y’all don’t understand asexuality in the slightest is embarrassing for you lmao this level of bullshit exclusionism only exists on the internet and is just not a thing irl so I’m aroace and lgbt+ and you can stay mad. See you at pride lmao😁😁

so you admit you have enough privilege over real lgbt people to take over our spaces and make it so we can't speak out against it in any capacity?

[trashsexuality]

the reason “this level of bullshit exclusionism only exists on the internet” is because people like you (anon) enforce consequences when we speak out in a way that we can’t enforce consequences on you for taking over our spaces. when an offline lgbt space becomes transphobic or homophobic i dont have the privilege of sticking around just to prove a point; i leave for my own SAFETY.

ive had to leave spaces due to very direct and unchallenged homophobia against me, and the same spaces will try to kick people out for showing the slightest exclusionary views. i know you’ve never had to deal with the consequences of your actions, but that doesn’t make you right.

[powerfulwizard]

creating an entire sexuality just to include members of a marginalized group that would already be included in your sexuality doesn’t make any sense. like hello. i’m not a lesbian. i’m davidsexual. i’m attracted to women and jewish women. that sounds like weird bigoted nonsense right?

[powerfulwizard]

bisexuality is just attraction to anybody regardless of gender so why does there need to be a special term for when you like to date trans people?

[powerfulwizard]

also here are my new sexuality definitions, and its always been this way and ill call you a bigot if you say otherwise:

lesbian: liking women for their goyishness

davidsexual: dating all women even if they’re jewish

[powerfulwizard]

defining a sexuality around trans men and trans women feeds into the idea that trans men aren’t men and trans women aren’t women. in fact, it feeds into the idea that they’re not either. which is also a common transphobic view of trans people. that they’re neither gender and they’re both just genderless-things. also defining a sexuality around non-binary people just feeds into the idea that non-binary people are a monolith third gender rather than a large spectrum of people’s individual unique gender experiences.

[powerfulwizard]

the part about defining pansexuality around trans men and trans women is obvious transphobic nonsense. but also… the fact that non-binary people can be lesbians and can be gay kinda contradicts the idea that you need to be pansexual to date them doesn’t it? and if non-binary people can be ANY sexuality and can date gay men, lesbians, and bisexual people…. that kinda means… bisexuality and pansexuality are the exact same thing. the only difference is one is based on not seeing trans men and trans women as the gender that they are, and a misunderstanding of what it means to be non-binary.

[powerfulwizard]

I like how you say “being pan does not mean you’re transphobic”  yet you define pansexuality based off attraction based off not caring whats in peoples pants…. I’m a lesbian and I date women both cis and trans… I don’t care whats in people’s pants either. I am definitely not fucking pansexual. That definition you gave means nothing.

[powerfulwizard]

[tomcats-and-tophats]

Defining your sexuality as uniquely “being attracted to PERSONALITY” is just so condescending and revealing. Like how poorly do you regard your LGBT siblings to cast our experiences in such an ugly superficial light

[colorisbyshe]

every time i say something mean about aces, someone inevitably cites something about ace history that’s pre-Zoe O’Reilly’s 1997 work “My Life as an Amoeba” and literaly all of it is SWERFs (the spinster movement), Radfems (that picture of the girl listing identities like lesbian separatist, bisexual, asexual), or fucking Alfred Kinsey, the dude who excused and defended pedophiles. I hope you know political lesbians go under the radfem umbrella, so that’s part of my demonic ace sources list.

The one non-demonic source of asexuality pre-1997 is a piece about trans liberation, a cut out article removed from context, that talks about how trans liberation must include all trans people—gay, straight, bisexual, or asexual. Which doesn’t say asexuals were LGBT if they weren’t L G B or T but rather that no trans people should be left out of trans liberation. No one argues all straight people are LGBT despite it being listed there.

The fact of the matter is asexuality meant wildly different things before the early 2000s when AVEN came into existence, where there was an entire debate about asexuality should mean (and it was then decided it could mean whatever people want). And that since the early 2000s, the ONLY sources for ace activism and movements is AVEN... the antisemitic, homophobic, racist, bigoted cesspool. So your entire ace history is just “bigoted shit pre-2000” and “bigoted shit, likely lifted from tumblr, post-2000”

not to mention there is no actual... activism attached to any of this to cite. just opinion pieces cause all the ace community seems to do is opine and whine. there’s no tangible activism tied to ending rape culture. just about being considered “queer enough” or adding to “anti-sexual” rhetoric

has ANYONE seen ace work that wasn’t just based in saying “we’re just like the gays I swear” or uncomfortable jokes at the expense of people who have sex (which ironically enough includes large swaths of the ace community)

[colorisbyshe]

i need to clarify before anyone cries on this post, this isn’t me saying ace identity is INHERENTLY tied to “problematic” activism or anything like that. but rather aces in 2020 NEED to be aware of what they are citing when they are “defending” ace history/supposed ace inclusion (not to mention all the SWERF/radfem sources NEVER actually say aces are LGBT considering those aren’t LGBT sources).

Having problematic organizations/movements in your past doesn’t invalidate your current existence, the LGBT community has more than its fair share of those, BUT you can’t use them to make points defending yourself in the present. That’s it!

But that’s hard for aces because there is no real ace past before AVEN.

Asexual as a term meaning non-sexual and what we now call aroace existed before AVEN and was used in a variety of ways BUT it did not exist as a COMMUNITY until AVEN. And no one wants to claim AVEN because... well... it’s AVEN.

The solution to “What the fuck is ace activism if I can’t cite SWERFs, TERFs, and “Oh, Did I cite pedophiles without calling the cops on them??? OOPSY!” Kinsey” is to look to the future rather than the past. Rather than creating ahistorical takes like “Aces were at Stonewall” (they weren’t), talk about what aces CAN be doing RIGHT NOW and in the future.

Talk about what goals you want to have in ending rape culture and how you’ll achieve that. Talk about how those goals mean ALLYING with LGBT AND feminist movements makes sense, cause it DOES make sense to ALLY together. Talk about how the mistakes of AVEN and Zoe O’Reilly can be used to learn to do better in the now.

That’s all it takes to reform your image. Actually DO activism instead of just whining at LGBT people for not including you and being upset when your Radfem #330 source isn’t acceptable to us.

[another-exclus]

its so genuinely fucked up that ace discourse has gotten to the point of propping aces up irl as this sort oppressed class (what rights are they denied??) meanwhile gay men (yes even white cis gay men) still have to fights for real world rights to exist or get married or not have hate crimes committed against them. i cant believe we as a society got this deluded about this. it's appalling.

mhmm. inclusionism has really done damage to the way lgbt groups view privilege, to the point where we're really treating gay men as having privilege over cishet aces.

[colorisbyshe]

I don’t think ace people trying to construct/identify ace culture understand why gay culture… is the way it is?

Like, gay fashion stems from our breaking/challenging of gender norms and as a way to like… recognize one of our own. Which is less about this:

And more about recognizing people who aren’t… inherent violent threats to us. Like, “gaydar” or being able to tell who is/isn’t “one of us” isn’t like a fun “Oh, I’m glad there’s something like me” in the sense of spotting someone with a fandom shirt you like, it’s a matter of going, ”Oh, this person won’t murder if me I mention my gender or sexuality.” Or, “Oh, she’s gay like me… maybe I can hit on her without fearing violence.”

We have gay bars because we literally could not safely go to other bars and be ourselves without facing arrest, being kicked out, being murdered. Gay music come from unique experiences and being unable to relate to straight music.

Our LGBT identities are not significant because we created the gap between gay and straight people, cis and trans people. Our LGBT identities are significant because straight and cis people said they mattered, barred us from their culture, and then we had to build from the ground up. Closed off from mainstream society, we made our own music and fashion and spaces and festivals and clubs and language based off our own experiences, redefined norms, and understanding of the world.

Aces aren’t closed off from anything. There is no communal experience. There are no revelations about the world shared between a cishet man who does not romantically love his sexual partners and a gay trans man who is sex repulsed. 

Ace culture being “IDK, the color purple, hats, and Charlie Weasley” shows how this isn’t functional or necessary. It’s a fandom. And I know that gets a lot of of backlash but like… if your attempts at creating a community are tumblr tags and the focus of your community is headcanons… well… if the shoe fits.

[colorisbyshe]

i’m gonna notification block this post because i literally do not care about aces crying about how hard it is to be ace

and instead i offer every ace trying to make a point on this post an edit i made in under a minute

[another-exclus]

"I like having sex with my partner because I get horny and sex is a better release than masturbation, so I actively seek out sex with my partner, but I'm still ace because I don't experience sexual attraction"

WHAT do you think sexual attraction IS? There's not some secret extra component that allos experience. If you want to have sex with someone and enjoy having sex with them and seek out sex with them, you are experiencing sexual attraction. It's not a bad thing, it just means you're not asexual.

[transcephalopod]

actually it's only Nasty Allo Sexual Attraction if you add the secret Sex Spice and do the Allo Handshake beforehand. otherwise it's non-sexual sex uwu

[achillescourse]

ive been thinking about arguing (as usual) and so the rest of this post is going to be a summary of my logical interpretation of the 'ace discourse'

the lgbt community is

- a community of ppl w interlinked experiences and oppression

- historically linked

- overlapping idenities bc ppl often mistake us for each other and the further u go back the less seperation there is

the purpose of the lgbt community is

- to provide safe spaces (thereby requiring people who are not lgbt to be absent) and resources for lgbt ppl

- to advocate and fight for our rights and goals against our linked oppression (ie laes against us / unemployment / homelessness / medical discrimination / hypervisiblity / ect)

- ensure that secondary spaces, WITHIN LGBT SPACES, exist for lgbt people at intersections of other oppression ie poc, women, disabled ppl, ect

therefore in order to maintain the function and purpose of this group

- lines must be drawn between lgbt people and not lgbt people

- the meanings of our identities must reflect both a. something that ties us together and b. the trait about us that is the source of our oppression on this axis

given all of this, not only does is make sense but it is in fact required that we make the lgbt community exclusive to lgbt people.

the ace / aro community

- exists but hasnt been defined until much more recently and has not faced the same systematic discrimination / oppression that lgbt ppl have - they do however often face a lot of misunderstandings / rejection from ppl who dont get it

- have been big proponents of the split attraction model (SAM) which isnt really a functional model of sexuality and can help further ppls internalised anti lgbt attitudes

the function of the ace aro community is

- to establish a definitin and universal experience? however they do not have seem to have an agreement on a. what being asexual or aromantic means and b. how this changes how you interact with society . if you are ace but still have sex, how can being ace really change how you are treated, for example

- advocate for issues ace /aro ppl deal with, mostly lack of representation and knowledge within the wider community

thus, as the ace/aro community is not functionally/historically similar the lgbt community it doesn't make sense to try 'add a' to lgbt and more importantly.

it historically was not there for ace/aro ppl until they actively boycotted lgbt support groups to get it (as it was leftover from when spaces used it to try give ppl plausible deniability,,,, when being lgbt was illegal and stuff) so one cannot argue that they 'were always in the lgbt community' that is a lie

finally. its a mischaracterisation and a deliberate strawman to act as though a. saying you must be lesbian, gay, bi or trans in order to be lgbt hurts ace/aro people and b. that people somehow want no ace/aro ppl in the lgbt community - 'ace exclusionist' is a misnomer - we do not seek to exclude aces/aros, in fact lgbt ace or aro ppl are an important part of our community

however. being ace/aro isnt a ticket into the lgbt community. there is no need for more letters, its just simple. if ur lesbian, gay, bi, or trans (which obviously includes non-binary ppl) then ur lgbt. if u arent. sucks to be a loser lol

[transcephalopod]

I'm actually sick of seeing the word asperger's. everyone who is classified as having asperger's syndrome is Just autistic you don't need another word for it, especially since that word was coined by a fucking eugenicist to describe the autistics he thought were still, like, useful to society

[trashsexuality]

every now and then i just sit back and rethink ace discourse from the top to make sure my views still make sense (which is good to do with any belief you hold) and i just start thinking about how there's a group of people who genuinely think that needing to form a connection with someone before wanting to have sex with them is somehow equivalent to being gay and it is LUDICROUS

[trashsexuality]

my first post with 1000 notes, im glad y’all agree. it’s always important to reexamine your views every now and then and i standby this post.

[jevilcore]

I think the dumbest example of “aphobia” on this website was when somebody claimed it was arophobic that their boyfriend got upset and felt unloved and lied to when they came out as aro to him. Like imagine thinking that ur boyfriend asking “did you ever love me?” to you, an aromantic person, is arophobia and not the genuine question of somebody who was lied to