allo-dyke-privilege*tumblr*com/post/154347078471 can u explain these things, i cant find anyone in the ace/aro community who can explain these things without being a condescending incoherent dick about it
why straight means being heteroromantic heterosexual so you can’t be straight and ace at the same time but also gay doesn’t mean “h*m*romantic h*m*sexual” because you can still be gay and ace
“straight” as a orientation is not the same as “Straight” as a position of power. an ace can be straight orientation wise, but not be Straight in the sense of implying levels of privilege via orientation.
but straight aces are no more straight than a gay ace is gay; that is, you can’t chop off part of their orientation to try to argue a point. a straight ace is not straight, because they are a straight ace. the ace part is irremovable (unless they choose to remove it themselves,) from their identities; and stating that a straight ace is the same as just a straight by chopping off part of their identity is manipulating words to paint a false picture. asexuals are still asexuals, no matter their other orientations. no one orientation (including asexual,) is “the same thing as” a different orientation, even if they additionally share that orientation too. you with me?
“allos dont know what it’s like to feel broken” actually as a lesbian i do, in fact, know what it’s like to “”feel broken””
this is not a stance of the pro-inclusion side. I’m sure there are assholes who have said it because there are assholes on every side, but honestly the majority would never say this.
what we DO say is that allos do not understand the a-spec experience the way that a-specs do, same as any other group doesn’t understand the specific experience of a different group they are not part of.
“allosexual privilege” explain how people are privileged for feeling sexual attraction? how are, for example, black men privileged for sexual attraction when they have been oversexualized for their race? how are women, ESPECIALLY women of color, privileged for being sexually attracted to others when women’s sexuality (ESPECIALLY woc’s sexuality) has been used as a tool to continue to oppress them?
again, I’m sure there are assholes who say this kind of thing, but frankly in my personal experience, I’ve only ever witnessed aphobes use the term “allosexual privilege” to try to smear the term “allosexual,” which is in fact not an indicator of privilege, merely saying that one is not asexual. it is in fact possible to be both a-spec and allo (as I am.)
but in this particular argument, I do want to point out that I have seen many ace WoC talk about being asexual and say there is a stigma to it that is harder for them personally than being allo. using hypothetical situations is not a good argument tactic, and these women need to be listened to in their personal experiences. it’s not for us to utilize as an argument point.
how there is a “spectrum” of sexual attraction on which there is a “normal” amount that society as a whole views as “socially acceptable” and how falling below that “normal” range makes one oppressed
the spectrum requires a significant amount of time for one to not experience sexual attraction. even if someone on the spectrum eventually experiences sexual attraction, the very nature of their identity invites discrimination (much in the same way that if one of us bisexuals ends up in an “opposite” sex relationship, our identities still invite discrimination.) that does not disappear even if a person seems to be conforming to societal expectations, because heir identities are still viewed as unacceptable, and carry stigma and fear from those that do not understand them.
how lesbians and gay men oppress others on the basis of sexual orientation
frankly, this is a tired old biphobic argument. proper discussion eventually lead round to understanding that gay men and lesbians, while not privileged, can and do actively contribute to the existing structures of oppression of other groups, and can even continue to contribute to the oppression of their own. having an identity that is marginalized removes the benefits of them doing it, but it doesn’t stop them from contributing to the systems of oppression the straights put in place and actually benefit from.
the lack of proper language to express this concept leads to people, unfortunately, saying things like “lesbians and gay men oppress _____ group!” which neither me nor the people I associate with support or defend.
how children can be ace without sexualizing all other children
children can’t be sexual with sexualizing other children, and yet I was. I was a sexually aware, active, and curious bisexual as a goddamn 5 year old.
amazing concept: children exist as they are, and being uncomfortable with the concepts or realities of it doesn’t change them. if a child is self aware enough and recognizes a need to identify as asexual, there is no benefit to restricting their terminology.
a child recognizing they have an experience that benefits from them being able to identify it says nothing about the experiences of their peers; a self identifier never assumes anything about the identities of others. the only problem would arise from assuming all other children are “allo” or sexual(ly aware/curious, etc.,) which, no, a self identifier does not imply without someone jumping to those conclusions for the sole purpose of trying to delegitimize the asexual’s identity.
how the LGBT+ community’s history somehow doesn’t matter to the LGBT+ community today
I’m not 100% sure what this statement is even implying tbh. The two ways I could see why someone would say something like this (though I never have,) is a) they mean that the exclusionary side is actively rewriting and/or ignoring real history, thus “not caring about it,” or b) that the community has evolved over time and the fact the community was one way at a certain time, it does not ean that it matters to how it currently is.
how “the A ALWAYS stood for asexual :)”
the A stood for different things when it was introduced in different regions, the same way the the Q meant “questioning” in some and “queer” in others. The A has always stood for asexual, yes, and it’s also always stood for “ally” (which I don’t like, but it’s true) most arguments of this nature come from people believing their local communities are the same as and represent all communities nation- and even worldwide, but that’s a gross misunderstanding and frankly the LGBT+ has had serious regional differences since it’s inception.
how orientations can be about how often or under what circumstances someone feels attraction rather than to who
the asexual orientation (and any other on the spectrum,) specifically refers to the “who” (that is, no one,) and certain orientations are created to give more specificity to also include “how often” and “under what circumstances” to be more convenient for the person’s using them; but make no mistake, they aren’t solely about that and are all under the ace umbrella that is quite specific about the “who.” misinterpreting that to slander and question them is very rude and shows a blatant prioritization of simply fighting against them rather than making any attempt to understand.
how calling cishet aces out on their homophobia is “aphobic”
it is when those “callouts” are disturbing blanket statements like “the whole ace community is homophobic,” and “asexuality is inherently homophobic,” which I’d personally wager takes up 75% of these “call outs.” Furthermore, I’d wager double that out of every ace they’ve called out, 99% of them have been mislabeled “cishet” and are actually LGBT+ (I have by them numerous times and I’m not even ace.)
how “aphobia” is even a coherent basis of oppression
it’s the same as any other orientation’s…..discrimination and hate fueled acts targeted at a-specs because of their orientation. it’s just as “coherent” as any other’s.
how all the “”””evidence”””” of aphobia is always grounded on how much sex people have, but not having sex is neither an all-ace-encompassing experience NOR an ace-exclusive experience
it’s not at all, which this person would know if they bothered to even look into some of this evidence. personal testimonies can range from being about that person’s sex repulsion, to someone simply despising them based on the nature of their orientation.
in fact, even the studies (that are drastically under studied, unfortunately, due to the extremely small percentage of aces in the population,) focus on people’s reactions and behavior towards the concept of asexuality itself, not the practices of asexuals.
the most common reaction is not “people who don’t have sex are weird,” but a very disgusted, fearful, or simply hateful reaction to the idea that some people just don’t feel the attraction. that usually results in severe dehumanization.
how unless ur aroace ur “”allosomething”” which means shitting on allos means ur shitting on urself?? this gets me every time
this “gets you” because of the willful misinterpretation of “allo.” allo isn’t a bad, shameful, or even “privileged status” title. it literally is just a descriptor. I’m an aromantic, allo-bisexual. saying so isn’t “shitting on myself” (lmao,) it’s saying that my bisexuality is not on the ace-spectrum. that’s literally all it’s saying.
Just all of David Jay is a disaster how can y’all support the movement he started
how is this even a point by itself when most people in this site have never even heard of him until aphobes repeated brought him up out of nowhere, and those of us that have literally left AVEN because of the kind of problems he created? he’s not some “grand lord and leader of asexuality” or something lololol, he’s just some ace dude who happened to start the first online community and take the most initiative in getting the community going, and had long faded into obscurity where the current community is concerned.
this is the major problem aphobes seem to have: they view asexuality as some voluntary “movement” that thus HAS to have a leader (which HAS to be him,) rather than a legitimate orientation. lmao if he had a “movement,” it was “help aces come together to form a community.” if you have a problem with that “movement,” then go suck an egg, I don’t care. everything else that came from him that was fucked was just…shit coming from a shitty person, not some “ace movement.”
how aces belong in the lgbt+ community despite it being filled with their “”””allosexual oppressors”””” but they don’t wanna make their own community to get away from the evil oppressive allos
actually this one makes sense it’s easier to steal lgbt+ people’s resources when you act like ur one of them even if ur a cishet
well, considering aces have been in the community ever since the community expanded to hold more than cis gay people, I really don’t see why anyone expects them to leave now. I mean we have clear evidence of them being considered “bisexual” before the term “asexual” was common, and there is personal testimony of people who knew aces or were aces in the community way back when. aces helped contribute to the community just like everyone else to make it what it is today.
aces also require pretty much the exact same resources, if fewer, and literally get none so frankly this whole strawman argument needs to die. the problem of equally distributing resources has been a longstanding issue in the community, and us bisexuals and trans people have already been bottom of the barrel for community shared resources as it is, much less smaller, more invisible groups getting anything.
what we have are resources tailored specifically to each group’s needs, and ace tailored resources can’t be “stolen” from another group.
everything else is standard that benefits everyone (representation, comprehensive sex education, etc.)
but really I do not want to go into the ridiculously ignorant discussion of “being grouped with oppressors,” because even if I hadn’t already addressed the nonsense “allosexual oppressor” thing, the argument shows a direct ignorance of the state of trans people sharing the community with cis oppressors.
why microidentities surrounding people’s specific and intimate relationships to sex are appropriate to share with people who just wanted to know whether you date boys/girls/nb people
it’s literally only aphobes who decide that microidentities “share too much information” and incorrectly translate how those identities are defined.
a-spec identities are all about attraction, and as I said about, more specific labels on the spectrum help individuals identify their differences from others in the community, but detail absolutely nothing about their sex lives.
honest to god, if we really want to have this discussion, why the hell doesn’t the gay leather or bear or lipstick communities get treated this way? I mean think long and hard about why asexuals with microidentities that literally do not actually detail their sex lives get accused of having identites that do that, but gay communities, some of which that actually do that are not criticized in the slightest?
I hope this was coherent enough for you, but honestly I’m just tired of the word “incoherent” being thrown around at any explanations that discoursers don’t want to accept or listen to, so take this or leave it.