anonymous asked:

Hi, I’m from the UK and as a kid we were never taught about our racist past, only what America had done! And even now, when some of us teens try to talk about the systematic oppression of poc, we are told that we are over exaggerating or making things up!! And even now, some of the older generations talk of the British empire as though it was a good thing, when it was actually one of the most heinous things in British history, like the Congo genocide! Just adding to fact that Europe is racist!

Thanks for this addition! And I do think that people need to understand this, like, it’s messed up that y’all aren’t even taught your history. You’re taught the atrocities of white America but the school systems stay quiet about what you wen through.

The scary thing about British Imperialism is that it was recent. It was still rampant and very alive in the 20th century. And literally English people went to the Congo and enslaved the population/tortured them and killed them. Like English Imperialism is awful. And it’s awful no one pays attention to how awful it is. 

Rromani FAQ

What’s up, fam? For International Rromani Day this year, I thought it would be a good idea to maybe post some basic info. So here is your IRrD cultural crash-course cheat sheet:

  • The word “G*psy” is an ethnic slur. It comes from the misconception that we originated in Egypt (hint: we did not). Basically, white Europeans were like “hey those guys are brown. They must be Egyptians. lol ‘Gyptians. lol ~G*PSIES~”. AKA, they couldn’t be bothered to ask where we actually came from. Some Rroma have opted to reclaim this word and may use it to refer to themselves. That does not mean that it’s okay for just anybody to use it. Friendly tip: do not use this word unless you are actually Rromani.
  • Rromani people trace their roots back to India and some parts of Pakistan (but mostly India?). While many don’t necessarily consider themselves Indian or even South-Asian, we are also not white.
  • We are a diaspora group. That means we were expelled from the country/left nationless.
  • Rroma come in all colours. Some of us are dark-skinned and some are light-skinned. We are all POC. There are certain physical traits that are common in our ethnic group, but that does not mean that we all have these traits. In fact, many of these traits have been used to stereotype us, which isn’t cool.
  • Our culture involves a lot of dancing and music. And food. And our food is generally pretty spicy.
  • We are not Esmeralda (The Hunchback of Notre Dame). In fact, that book is hella racist and the movie isn’t really much better. In the book, Esmeralda was a gadje (non-Rromani) girl who was kidnapped by Rroma (stereotype) and raised in their community (stereotype). As you will know from the movie, she dressed provocatively (stereotype) and danced for coins (stereotype). Rroma women are often portrayed as sexual objects, which is really gross tbh. Although the cute lil’ goat friend is 110% factual. I mean, not really. But I had a goat friend. Her name was Rochelle. More on that later.
  • Rroma men are often stereotyped as lazy.
  • Other stereotypes include fortune tellers, witches, thieves, beggars, and street performers. I am here to tell you that we are honestly no more likely to do these things than any other cultural group so… yeah? And those that do are often forced into these positions by laws and discrimination in their home countries.
  • Speaking of which, forced eviction, mass deportation, sterilisation, systematic impoverishment and oppression, workplace discrimination, segregated education, and TAKING CHILDREN AWAY FROM THEIR FAMILIES are problems that Rroma are still facing TODAY.
  • Rroma are sometimes known as Travellers because we have historically been a fairly nomadic group (by necessity). Rromani people would (and many still do) travel from place to place, looking for work, only to be chased away by prejudiced locals. Think old man on a porch shouting “Get off my lawn!” at the paper boy. Dumb, right? Right.
  • We do not want your children. For some reason, gadje think we want to steal their children? Some even think we eat them??? We do not do this.
  • Gadje is not a bad word. It literally means “non-Rromani person”.
  • Our language is called Rromanes or Rromani Chib. There are like a gajillion different dialects. Those of us who actually speak our chib might not be able to understand another Rrom because of dialectical differences. It’s complicated.
  • We are not a costume. A G*psy is not something you can just become. You can’t convert. You either are or you are not. Wearing long skirts does not make you a ~*G*pSy*~. Being a hippie does not make you a ~*G*pSy*~. Pracitising witchcraft does not make you a ~*G*pSy*~. We are not mythical creatures. You cannot become Rromani any more than you can become Black or Asian or Hispanic. It is especially concerning when people act like we are a style instead of an ethnicity because a) it makes a mockery of our culture, and b) makes it seem like we do not actually exist.
  • Bread.

anonymous asked:

Hi Alice, odd question but: Do you believe asexuals belong in the LGBT community? I have a friend who identifies this way, but as a trans girl, I'm struggling to understand how she has to go through the same things as an LGBT person by being asexual. And struggle aside, I don't even see how asexuality is THAT different from heterosexuality, just with more... hesitation!? Maybe this sounds rude, but I know you've written about asexual people etc, and I wondered what you thought. No shade intended

Hi there. I’m glad you reached out to me about this because you must have really upset your friend by saying stuff like this to them.

It’s easy to see why not only cishet people, but also LGBT+ people, think that asexuality is fake. The world is awash with sex and sexual attraction. It’s everywhere. And everyone is supposed to want it and feel it. It’s so extremely normalised that the idea that someone could be literally UNABLE to feel sexual attraction is, to many people, absolutely bizarre and a joke.

Even if you acknowledge that asexuality is real, it’s also easy to see why you would be so quick to reject and get angry at asexual people who call themselves LGBT+. Because asexual people are not like you, are they. Unless they are trans, asexuals don’t have gender troubles, and unless they experience same-gender romantic attraction, asexuals don’t experience same-gender attraction! Lesbian, bi, gay etc people can all be joined together in their experience of same gender attraction, and all trans folks, binary and non binary, can be joined together in their experience of feeing a disconnect from their assigned birth gender.

The result? No one wants asexuals near them. People can’t relate. No one else feels the way asexuals do and people don’t think they should be part of the group. They’re not the same as you.

But oh god, they are not allowed in the cishet club either.

The first thing you need to try and unlearn is that asexuality is in any way similar to heterosexuality. It’s not. It’s so, so fucking not. It’s painful how different it feels to be asexual compared to being heterosexual. Telling an ace person that asexuality isn’t ‘THAT different from heterosexuality’ is about as accurate as saying being gay isn’t ‘THAT different from heterosexuality’. Being asexual means you do not experience sexual attraction, ever. EVER. And while that might seem easy to you, it’s an extremely painful and terrifying thing to learn about yourself, in a world where everyone is expected to have an array of sexual experiences, fall in love, get married, and anyone who doesn’t do that is strange and a freak.

Learning you are asexual can be terrifying. When you realise you’ve never had a crush, when all your friends have had ten each, you are terrified. When you pass the age where people have started dating and having sex and you still feel nothing - NOTHING - you are terrified. When you think about ever falling in love and the idea disgusts you, or you think about falling in love and you crave it, god you CRAVE it, but you know you can’t ever feel that, you are terrified. When you realise you will never be able to enjoy a normal romantic/sexual relationship, the ones full of passion like you see in the movies, and people will reject you because you can’t fancy them in that way, and there’s a higher chance for you than anyone else that you will simply die alone, without love, without children - you are terrified.

You think being ace is the same as heterosexuality? You think it’s an easy thing to learn about yourself? Explain the terror, then. I’m all ears.

The fact you see asexuality as 'hesitation’ is really horrifying to me. Asexuals aren’t attracted to the opposite gender but 'hesitant’ to act on it. Asexuals DO NOT feel attraction. To anyone. It’s not a choice. It’s not a way of life. It’s not the same as celibacy out of choice, or being a 'prude’, or waiting till marriage. It is ingrained in you, just like being gay is, just like being trans is. It is a part of you that no matter how hard you try to will it away, no matter how hard you try to persuade yourself otherwise, you cannot help it. You DO NOT feel attracted to ANYONE.

And in saying all this, I fully acknowledge that asexuals do not experience the extent of oppression that other LGBT+ folks do. There are no laws regarding asexuality. Lesbian, gay, bi, trans, and other LGBT+ folks no doubt experience a higher level and intensity of systematic oppression to asexuals, more frequently go through hard experiences due to their orientation or gender. But since when did being LGBT+ become a competition for 'who’s the most oppressed’? Is that what LGBT+ is? You’re only allowed in the club if you’re 'oppressed enough’? If you’re 'gay enough’? If you’re 'trans enough’?

If you need persuading that asexuals do experience their own form of oppression, though, consider the number of asexuals who are coerced into sex in order to 'fix’ them. Consider the emotional pain that I have already discussed, of feeling that there is something fundamentally wrong and gross about you because you feel attracted to no one. Consider the number of asexuals who are hounded or emotionally abused by their families for failing to find partners. Consider the number of asexuals who force themselves to have sexual experiences, because it is the norm, because they don’t even know what asexuality is, because THEY think that they are just 'hesitant’, despite finding sex disgusting and feeling no desire to do it. Do you really think asexuals are just running around, free and happy and content in who they are? They aren’t. I’m not.

So go ahead. Cast aside asexuals if you want. Call them attention-seeking, call them special snowflakes. Ignore the pain they feel. Make them go through it alone, in pain, terrified of what they are. Why on earth would the LGBT+ community be a place to support people like that!?

Messages like the one you have just sent me gives me further reason to never talk about that part of myself. To just sit and cry about it at home day after day because I do not like myself. Because I feel that nobody will accept me or understand who I am. I could list the number of things people have said to me to discredit and laugh at this part of myself, but it’s people like you who make me embarrassed to talk about it, too scared to own a label and talk about it freely and openly.

I thought, going into this, that the LGBT+ community was one of total respect, understanding, and empathy. I learnt pretty quickly that it is not.

I send love to your asexual friend. I really, really do.

Disclaimer: I am very aware of the nuances of asexuality, of the differences between romantic/aesthetic/sexual attraction, but sadly it seems that many people can’t even grasp the basic concept of asexuality, so I don’t quite think they’re ready for that yet.

C: I hope you guys know that when it comes to crimes, if it’s a black person who killed a white person they get more time, while a white person who killed a black person get lesser time. And dark skin people get more time in prison then light skin people. Now they wonder why BLM exist? Because they obviously don’t care about black lives. Let that sink in smh.

groovyfunnightmare  asked:

Sorry, but I'm a bit confused. When you say "systematic oppression" what exactly do you mean and how do I as an individual male contribute to it?

…or you don’t necessarily.

This is important guys, because it seems to be the biggest misunderstanding (or intentional misunderstanding) that MRAs and anti-feminists seem to repeat over and over.

The feminists are saying we’re sexist assholes just because of our gender.

No. No, we’re not. IF you are a sexist asshole it’s because of your actions, but the main thing we are talking about is much bigger than that.

Systematic oppression is systematic. It is not some dude with a twirly mustache, it’s a series of laws, cultural assumptions, and societal expectations that privilege one group over another. But a series of laws, cultural assumptions, and societal expectations is not a good villain: it’s not sexy, it’s not simple, and you can’t just shoot it through the heart and be on your way. It’s hard to fight, and it’s hard to understand, and as a result people want to turn it into a simple us versus them, good versus bad. It’s not. Resist the urge to turn life into Star Wars. The real world is more complicated than that. And I’m not just talking to MRAs anymore here.

An example:

The American conception of what it means to have a full-time job and to be a hard worker is based on the assumption that the worker will (a) not become pregnant and have to stop working for several months, and (b) not be the primary caregiver for their children (let alone elderly or disabled relatives). In other words, you’re supposed to be a man with a wife at home or a single person with no responsibilities but work. It’s 2017, but our labor laws and our corporate culture still expect everyone to be fucking Don Draper.

What this means is that, because women are generally the ones who have uteri and are also societally expected to take care of children (or anyone else who needs taking care of), they are, by the definition of our labor system, perceived to be less hard-working, possibly even lazy. Just by virtue of being a woman in society, we are already labeled as bad workers. That’s systematic oppression. However, you will also notice that this hurts someone else: single fathers. Now, single fathers don’t have to cope with regressive attitudes towards pregnancy or gendered assumptions about whether they’re serious or in it for the long haul, but they do have to contend with expectations of overtime and the general assumption that to be a good worker you can’t have caregiving responsibilities. The people this benefits are married men (with or without children) and single men, unattached men, who will get hired and promoted over other candidates based on their “hard work.” And that’s not even getting into less concrete things, like how most people instinctively react more negatively to the same traits in a female boss, etc.

There are thousands of similar systems in hundreds of contexts that all privilege men, “masculine” traits, and male roles over women, “feminine” traits, and female roles. These sexist systems hurt a lot of people (most, but not all of them women) and only help a few people (almost all of them men). That’s what we’re talking about. That’s what we want to change.

It should be obvious by this point that none of this is your fault, @groovyfunnightmare. Groovyfunnightmare did not invent this system. Groovyfunnightmare doesn’t run the world, purposefully maintaining these systems and laughing maniacally. Groovyfunnightmare may not even have a mustache.

By using the words “systematic oppression” or discussing sexism in the culture, we are not talking about you. We have no earthly idea who you are. We are talking about a system that hurts us, just like people who talk about the electoral college or unfair tax laws. It’s not personal.

That’s not to say that you, as an individual man, can’t contribute to it if you agree with the system and take actions to support it, or if you just have a hankering for being an asshole I suppose. In the above example you could, if you were the boss, choose to consistently demote pregnant women or remove some of their duties or power, fire people with children for not being able to work large swaths of overtime, or just generally belittle women who work for you. But you, as a randomly chosen man, are statistically unlikely to be doing any of that. What you are almost certainly doing is nothing, just like most people. These systems were not set up by any one person, they stem from unquestioned cultural assumptions and are fueled by them. There is no intention behind them and there never was. They have no consciousness and do not wish good or ill on anyone. There do exist laws that somebody wrote explicitly because fuck women, but in modern America they are few and far between (and were, mostly, written in the past). Most laws that hurt women are written by people simply not questioning their assumptions or not thinking through the consequences of their actions.

However, these systems will continue to exist until we take them apart, so that doing nothing I mentioned earlier? While it doesn’t directly contribute to the system, it does help allow it to continue. What does directly contribute to these systems is people loudly and angrily attacking those who say “this system is wrong, we need to change it.” Make of that what you will.

When people refer to things like the systematic oppression of women, they are not attacking you as a person, or indeed any one person. It’s about changing (a) the laws, (b) the culture, and ( c) how people think about gender. Systematic oppression is not about anything you personally did. It’s not about you at all. As a man you likely benefit from it in some ways (perhaps not in others), but you didn’t invent it, and you don’t have to like it.

female experiences:

  • being told it’s normal if your clothes hurts you and you have to endure it
  • being told it’s normal if sex hurts you and you have to endure it
  • not finding basic information about your biology and sexual organs through most of your life
  • being told that pain is a normal part of your life
  • being told that if you are a “good girl” you’ll endure it without complaint
  • being told you should be grateful for the rights you have and finding out in the past you wouldn’t even have these rights
  • getting brutally shut down if you try to stand up for yourself
  • getting forced into a role of serving men because “it’s woman’s job”
  • having your labor dismissed as worthless and stupid 
  • but you have to keep doing it anyway or you’ll get punished
  • anything you do is considered worth less and generally dismissed
  • realizing men’s work is praised and glorified even when they do harmful and environmentally destructive work for selfish purposes
  • realizing you can’t do anything about it and feeling less worthy even when you do more work and more necessary and useful work
  • having your compassion used against you
  • having your energy and emotional labor used by men who demand you to listen to them and comfort them and stroke their ego
  • being laughed at and invalidated and called slurs and insults when you try to talk about your own problems
  • being called selfish, dramatic, crazy, delusional and damaged when you expect basic decency and compassion
  • being treated like you’re insane and hysteric if you display any kind of anger at how badly you’re being treated
  • feeling infuriated at double standards and for how harshly you’re judged and punished while men can get away with anything
  • doubting your own senses and considering if you really are crazy
  • being ignored as a human being, your intelligence dismissed, only thing that seems to have any worth is your body but you get shamed, objectified, sexualized, used, violated, predated on and hurt 
  • hating your body and wishing it was a different body, one that nobody would hurt and violate
  • feeling completely helpless and alone

Dear cis people: I wanna see y'all talk about how great life and peace are when your life expectancy is 36 years.

I wanna see you “calm down” about systematic oppression when teenhood IS your mid-life.

You wanna know why you don’t see many old trans people?

Because you killed them, as a society, and you’re still killing us. You’ve never stopped. Us trans people don’t mean shit to this society, so excuse us if we tend to have a bone to pick with the social order.

I got a lot of dreams. I wanna go into psych, I wanna be a rabbi, and I wanna go into politics maybe. I wanna adopt a kid, live a parter or partners, have a home and be fulfilled. Maybe write a book, do some art, be a lifelong advocate. The most unrealistic goal of mine, however, is that I’ll even live that long.

You don’t get to tell me to calm down when your life expectancy is three to four times longer than mine.

“Aroace people aren’t straight but they still have straight privilege!”

Not being able to talk openly about my orientation without fear of ridicule isn’t “straight privilege”.

Not being able to mention my orientation without worry that it will impact my reputation as a professional or as a student is not  “straight privilege”.

Not being able to talk about my orientation in front of most of my family without fear of them rejecting me isn’t “straight privilege”.

Not seeing any representation of people like me in the media isn’t “straight privilege”.

Not having any education that people like me exist isn’t “straight privilege”.

People telling you that you’re making your orientation up to be special or different isn’t “straight privilege”.

People being uncomfortable with you mentioning your orientation and telling you that no-one needs to know isn’t “straight privilege”.

Being told that your orientation isn’t real isn’t “straight privilege”.

Being told that your orientation is probably a symptom of some medical condition isn’t “straight privilege”.

People assuming things about your life and history based on your orientation isn’t “straight privilege”.

Your orientation being treated as a political stance or a lifestyle choice is not “straight privilege”.

No, aroace people are not systematically oppressed for our orientation. As far as the system cares we do not exist. Not existing, as far as most of society cares, is not “straight privilege”.

The only time I have  “straight privilege” is when I don’t talk about my orientation. At all. The only time I have “straight privilege” is when I let people assume I am straight.

And frankly, having to be silent about my orientation to be respected by the straight majority, isn’t a privilege.

C: Really, black people in Europe aren’t as aware of systemic oppression as Americans. Europeans hide their racism compared to the blatant acts of anti-blackness perpetuated in the US. Recently the most obvious racist event that happened in France was a black boy named Theo who was raped, beaten and humiliated by police officers who weren’t punished. Despite that happening, my mixed friend had the nerve to ask me if I experience racism. “Full” black people also act as if racism is over.

Real question tho…

Why are white people so angry? Like, they get mad over shit that didnt have anything to do with them.

Like black lives matter. That statement said literally nothing about white people. Yet they mad.

Black women are beautiful. Still said nothing about white women. Yet one of them just got offended.

I guess the real question is, why yall wanna be oppressed so bad? Take it from me, its not fun.

anonymous asked:

I’m not trying to be inflammatory, I’m just curious. How do het ace/aro people face SYSTEMATIC oppression? Gay/bi/trans people face oppression like difficultly adopting children, finding housing, they may be fired from employment because of their gender or orientation. So they are bared from normal parts of live because of their gender/sexuality. Gay ace/aro people face this too, but what do het ace/aro people experience on a societal level?

If you’d been following my blog at all or even bothered to peruse it a little before dropping this message in my inbox, you’d probably already know the answer to your question. 

You’d ALSO probably know that there are bi and pan aspecs too (e.g., I’m panromantic demisexual) which isn’t “gay” (does this term also include lesbians?) so I feel like your ask erases part of my own identity and that of others in the community.

For these reasons and more, I’d bet money that you’re not here because you’re “curious”. You’re probably here because you figure this is how you’re gonna stop a “self-imposing” aspec from speaking up for herself. 

Well guess what: That’s just hateful & sad.

Regardless though of your intentions, I’m here to say that there is in fact SYSTEMATIC oppression against aspecs. For example, Dr Gordon Hodson wrote this about his 2012 study: 

In a recent investigation (MacInnis & Hodson, in press) we uncovered strikingly strong bias against asexuals in both university and community samples. Relative to heterosexuals, and even relative to homosexuals and bisexuals, heterosexuals: (a) expressed more negative attitudes toward asexuals (i.e., prejudice); (b) desired less contact with asexuals; and © were less willing to rent an apartment to (or hire) an asexual applicant (i.e., discrimination). Moreover, of all the sexual minority groups studied, asexuals were the most dehumanized (i.e., represented as “less human”). Intriguingly, heterosexuals dehumanized asexuals in two ways. Given their lack of sexual interest, widely considered a universal interest, it might not surprise you to learn that asexuals were characterized as “machine-like” (i.e., mechanistically dehumanized). But, oddly enough, asexuals were also seen as “animal-like” (i.e., animalistically dehumanized). Yes, asexuals were seen as relatively cold and emotionless and unrestrained, impulsive, and less sophisticated.

When you repeatedly observe such findings it grabs your attention as a prejudice researcher. But let’s go back a minute and consider those discrimination effects. Really? You’d not rent an apartment to an asexual man, or hire an asexual woman? Even if you relied on stereotypes alone, presumably such people would make ideal tenants and employees. We pondered whether this bias actually represents bias against single people, a recently uncovered and very real bias in its own right (see Psychology Today column by Bella DePaulo). But our statistical analyses ruled out this this possibility. So what’s going on here?

If you’ve been following my column, you’ll recall that I wrote a recent article on what I called the “Bigotry Bigot-Tree” – what psychologists refer to as generalized prejudice. Specifically, those disliking one social group (e.g., women) also tend to dislike other social groups (e.g., homosexuals; Asians). In our recent paper (MacInnis & Hodson, in press), we found that those who disliked homosexuals also disliked bisexuals and asexuals. In other words, these prejudices are correlated. Heterosexuals who dislike one sexual minority, therefore, also dislike other sexual minorities, even though some of these groups are characterized by their sexual interest and activity and others by their lack of sexual interest and activity.

This anti-asexual bias, at its core, seems to boil down to what Herek (2010) refers to as the “differences as deficit” model of sexual orientation. By deviating from the typical, average, or normal sexual interests, sexual minorities are considered substandard and thus easy targets for disdain and prejudice. Contrary to conventional folk wisdom, prejudice against sexual minorities may not therefore have much to do with sexual activity at all. There is even evidence, for instance, that religious fundamentalists are prejudiced against homosexuals even when they are celibate (Fulton et al., 1999). Together, such findings point to a bias against “others”, especially different others, who are seen as substandard and deficient (and literally “less human”). “Group X” is targeted for its lack of sexual interest even more than homosexuals and bisexuals are targeted for their same-sex interests.

From news coverage of a recently published study (2016):

What should the average person take away from your study?

Since I first became interested in the issue, I have come to conclude that U.S. society is both “sex negative” and “sex positive.” In other words, there is stigma and marginalization that can come both from being “too sexual” and from being “not sexual enough.” In a theoretical paper, I argued that sexuality may be compulsory in contemporary U.S. society. In other words, our society assumes that (almost) everyone is, at their core, “sexual” and there exists a great deal of social pressure to experience sexual desire, engage in sexual activities, and adopt a sexual identity. At the same time, various types of “non-sexuality” (such as a lack of sexual desire or activity) are stigmatized.

For this particular study, I identified thirty individuals who identified as asexual and asked them first, if they had experienced stigma or marginalization as a result of their asexuality, and, second how they challenged this stigma or marginalization. I found that my interviewees had experienced the following forms of marginalization: pathologization (i.e. people calling them sick), social isolation, unwanted sex and relationship conflict, and the denial of epistemic authority (i.e. people not believing that they didn’t experience sexual attraction). I also found that my interviews resisted stigma and marginalization in five ways: describing asexuality as simply a different (but not inherently worse) form of sexuality; deemphasizing the importance of sexuality in human life; developing new types of nonsexual relationships; coming to see asexuality as a sexual orientation or identity; and engaging in community building and outreach.

I hope that average people would take away from this study the idea that some people can lead fulfilling lives without experiencing sexual attraction but can experience distress if others try to invalidate their identities.

Some of the social isolation we aspecs experience comes from religious communities. Indeed, the popular myth that religious people revere aspecs is very much NOT TRUE. For example, read “Myth 8″ from the VISION Catholic Religious Vocation Guide:

MYTH 8: Religious are asexual

Question: What do you call a person who is asexual? 

Answer: Not a person. Asexual people do not exist. Sexuality is a gift from God and thus a fundamental part of our human identity. Those who repress their sexuality are not living as God created them to be: fully alive and well. As such, they’re most likely unhappy.

All people are called by God to live chastely, meaning being respectful of the gift of their sexuality. Religious men and women vow celibate chastity, which means they live out their sexuality without engaging in sexual behavior. A vow of chastity does not mean one represses his manhood or her womanhood. Sexuality and the act of sex are two very different things. While people in religious life abstain from the act of sex, they do not become asexual beings, but rather need to be in touch with what it means to be a man or a woman. A vow of chastity also does not mean one will not have close, loving relationships with women and men. In fact, such relationships are a sign of living the vow in a healthy way. Living a religious vow of chastity is not always easy, but it can be a very beautiful expression of love for God and others.

Religious women and men aren’t oddities; they mirror the rest of the church they serve: there are introverts and extroverts, tall and short, old and young, straight and gay, obese and skinny, crass and pious, humorous and serious, and everything in between. They attempt to live the same primary vocation as all other Christians do: proclaiming and living the gospel. However, religious do this as members of an order that serve the church and world in a particular way. Like marriage and the single life, religious life can be wonderful, fulfilling, exciting, and, yes, normal. Yet, it also can be countercultural and positively challenging. It’s that for us and many others.

If you thought religious life was outdated, dysfunctional, or dead, we hope you can now look beyond the stereotypes and see the gift it is to the church and world.

NOTE: YOU CAN BE A GAY CATHOLIC PERSON BUT NOT ASEXUAL, BC ASEXUALITY DOESN’T EXIST (yet somehow we’re also “most likely unhappy” and “oddities”). I sincerely hope and believe that not all religions characterize us aspecs this way. But here are some personal accounts I found on a reddit site answering the question “Do any religions have a negative stance toward asexuals?”:

Please note that the Christian pastor in the last example was fearful (or something?) that an asexual was helping to lead a youth group and kicked them out of the church as a result.

White person making list "disproving" white privilege

- classism
- ableism
- classism
- classism
- classism
- abusive parents that have nothing to do with race
- ableism
- 5 more things related to classism
- homophobia
- black person calling them mayo
- long paragraph completely misunderstand the concept of white privilege and how all of this proof of how crap their life excludes them from white privilege
- and finally acting like the only racism poc face is getting their name wrong and not literal systematic oppression affecting every aspect of there lives