tw: anti ace sentiment

Claiming that the use of split-attraction terminology (n-romantic q-sexual) is inherently homophobic/biphobic/panphobic because it reduces those orientations to who they want to sex with:

  • actively robs aromantic and asexual spectrum people of the ability to speak about our lived experiences (especially those of us who are sex and/or romance repulsed)
  • actively robs all mixed orientation non-aroace people of the ability to speak about their experiences
  • assigns a negative definition to sexual attraction (ie: everyone you’re sexually attracted to is someone you immediately want to jump into bed with, people who feel sexual attraction are all horny pervs) that those of use who use this terminology don’t intend

in conclusion: piss off.

anonymous asked:

Why do some people not like the ace/ark community ?

Because they’re assholes.

Okay no, I’m gonna try to give this a serious answer. But that’s pretty much what it boils down to.

Right. So there are basically two camps of ace hate right now.

The first is the pretty expected cishet° jerks, who hate us for the same reason they hate anyone who isn’t cishet: because we experience attraction in a way that is not the same as they do.

The second, and more unexpected recent source of hate, comes from within the MOGAI (or other acronym of your choice) community. Specifically, usually, from allo & cis gay and lesbian people. (I’m sure that they’re not the only ones, but they’re the most vocal and vitriolic of the ones I’ve seen.) And that tends to break down into a couple of distinct ideologies.

1) “Asexuals are just The Straights trying to invade our spaces.”
The ones who want to earn more sympathy points from this one will limit it to just heteroromantic aces, or to het aces and aro aces, or to cis heteroromantic aces…you get the idea. Now, I sympathize and stand in solidarity with anyone who has had a safe space for them dominated by cishet allies. That is an absolutely shitty thing to have happen, and I want to work with you to make sure it doesn’t happen in future. However, asexuality is not just a “blank” that they can project our romantic orientations onto, and asexuals and ace spectrum people are not just trying to be special. We legitimately feel attraction in a way that is fundamentally different from the way cishet people feel attraction. 

2) “Asexuals aren’t oppressed!”
Okay, laying aside my own history of violence and cruelty enacted upon me specifically because of my asexuality, and the similar experiences of other aces like me, because I hate that I’m expected to use my pain as some kind of ‘gotcha’…

There’s usually an underlying belief with this one that homophobia is the only legitimate way to be oppressed for one’s orientation. Which is simply wrong. To begin with, we could talk about the experiences of bi/pan/other MGA°° people, who experience specific kinds of shit for being attracted to multiple genders that people who are exclusively SGA°°° don’t. Or we could talk about how the sexualities of trans people, especially trans women, get policed and ridiculed specifically because of their genders (and frequently because of the genitalia they are assumed to have), which may tie in to homophobia but is also specifically related to transphobia. There are so many counterexamples to the notion that our oppression must look identical to homophobia to be valid.

If they aren’t using the “must relate back to homophobia” standard, they’re probably claiming that the only true way to be oppressed is if there are laws specifically enacted against your orientation, or if you experience violence because of your orientation. I would remind anyone who feels this way that asexual is not a protected class under US law, or the laws of any other country that I’m aware of. It is perfectly legal to discriminate against an asexual person based on their asexuality. Furthermore, legislation against asexuals is not required for asexuals to be harmed specifically for our asexuality (and if that’s not the definition of oppression, I don’t know what is). For more about this, because law is not my forte: We don’t have to be a legal movement, Employment Discrimination against Aces, Compulsory Sexuality.

3) “Asexuals just want to call themselves queer!”
I’m not even dealing with this one again. Asexual people have every right to call ourselves queer. People who use this argument need to get over themselves.

4) “Asexuals are homophobic by definition!”
Generally what people mean by this is either “I hate the split attraction model and don’t think aces should use it because it doesn’t work for me personally” or “An asexual person said something to me that was homophobic one time so now I get to hate all asexual people” or “I hate the fact that asexuals use a word to describe people that are not asexual, because I don’t see how calling allosexual people ‘non asexual’ is othering and uncomfortable, and I wasn’t around for the big debacle over calling allosexual people ‘sexual’”. Again, people that use this argument probably need to get over themselves. Split attraction doesn’t have to work for you, nobody is forcing it on you, if you don’t like it you don’t have to use it. No individual asexual is a spokesperson for the entire community. Allosexual is a word that does not imply any kind of privilege dynamic (the idea of “allosexual privilege” was brought up and subsequently pretty thoroughly rejected by the ace community two years ago, please stop). It just implies that allos feel something we don’t. Having a word for people that are not like us does not mean we think they have it better than us.

5) “Aces just want visibility (and somehow that’s a bad thing, probably because trans people)!”
Okay so as one of the trans people that gets used as a talking point in this one, I am personally offended by people trying to play one part of my identity off the other. Usually this argument goes that because negative visibility (ie: hypervisibility and how it harms trans people, trans women & trans POC especially) exists, positive visibility is something that nobody can want ever. This one is so deeply illogical I don’t even know where to start debunking it. This is usually the point in the conversation where I roll my eyes, throw my hands in the air, and walk away.

And I think that’s about enough of the “Mod Noel Blogs Angrily From Work” show for the day! Tune in next time for yet-to-be-determined nonsense!

-Noel


° Note: This blog, or at least this mod, uses cishet as short for “cisgender, heterosexual, and heteroromantic,” not as “cisgender and having at least one het orientation” as some people have tried to redefine it.

°° MGA = multi-gender attracted. In other words, someone who experiences attraction to people of more than one gender.

°°° SGA = same-gender attracted or same gender attraction.

anonymous asked:

Ok seriously wtf? You're calling autochorisexual a paraphilia? You're grouping us with pedophiles and zoophiles? What the fuck??? But Lithsexual is somehow moar special and gets to be a sexual orientation. They're pretty fucking similar. But we don't get to be asexual. Got it.

I hope you will forgive me for being slightly more blunt and to the point than usual, I’m trying to type this up quickly because I didn’t want to leave it sit but I also don’t have  a lot of time this morning. We’ve previously discussed this in greater detail here.

Yes. I did refer to autochorissexualism as a paraphilia. This is because that is how it was defined by Anthony Bogaert when it was coined. (The full text of the paper is behind a paywall, but the abstract, in which he defines autochorissexualism as a target-oriented paraphilia, is available at that link.) I do not believe that there is anything deviant or wrong about the sentiment attached to the word autochorissexual. I have an issue with the word, not with the people who identify with it. The asexual community needs to come up with a word for this phenomenon that a) is not being imposed on us from the outside and b) has not been associated with something negative from the beginning. I do not believe that gatekeeping within the asexual community benefits anyone, and if you identify with the sentiment behind that term, that is wonderful and I’m happy you’ve found a description that fits you, and you are just as welcome here as anyone else.

As a note: the lith- prefix is making its way out of common use due to the potential for it to be seen as appropriative. It is being replaced by the prefix akoi- or akoine-. This is exactly what I would like to see happen with the autochoris- prefix. Let’s have our own word for this, something that doesn’t stigmatize part of our community.

-Natalie

@anew742 replied to your post “Daily Affirmation 128.”

What exactly does this mean? Can someone explain?

This is about a tactic that is used to invalidate asexual identities.

Aces are frequently told that our orientations are just a symptom of mental or physical illness, and therefore are not valid identities, but are something that will be cured as we seek treatment for that illness.

This tactic is especially harmful for aces that actually are mentally ill/neurodivergent/disabled/etc in two main ways. One: it is specifically used to say that our identities are not real, and we are made to feel guilty for not seeking treatment for them. Two: we then get thrown under the bus by people who are trying to fight back against this idea, when it gets assumed that aces like us do not exist.

So this affirmation was written to remind neurodivergent/mentally ill/disabled/etc aces that our identities are okay. That we are not hurting anyone, or hurting ourselves by identifying as ace. That our asexuality is real.

-Mod Talie

“I personally have never experienced acephobia, therefore acephobia is not a thing that exists” is one of those arguments that needs to never be used again. Right now, immediately. Cut that shit out.

anonymous asked:

I was recently really offended by an advice post by Auntie SparkNotes- who basically said asexuals shouldn't come out because we face no oppression and we're appropriating gay language by doing so. Now I'm questioning whether I should publicly come out on Facebook in a few months because I'm a heteromantic asexual. What are your thoughts on this? I feel that asexuals should feel safe in LGBTQIA+ spaces and be able to come out as we are part of the LGBTQIA community.

(Trigger Warning: This answer briefly touches on violence against MOGAI people, and particularly against asexual people. Any links I include will discuss those topics in greater detail, and should be read at your discretion.)

I firmly believe the “you must experience this much oppression to ride” rhetoric in the mainstream LGBT+ community is BS. To begin with, short of being killed for my orientation (which, considering that I’m white, would be significantly less likely to happen to me regardless of what my non-straight identity was) I am pretty sure that I can stand up as an example that anything they want to bring up as “well this doesn’t happen to asexuals” has happened to me, specifically because of my asexuality. We can also discuss how invisibility is oppression, or how we are actively disregarded when we try to talk about the hurt done to us.

So, with that “argument” firmly set aside, consider this:

All non-straight, non-cisgender people have the right to come out, and to call what they are doing “coming out”.

Look at it this way. Historically, why has asexuality not been acknowledged as a part of the wider MOGAI family? Because we did not have a word for our identity. I guarantee you that doesn’t mean that there weren’t people in the 60s and 70s and 80s who would have identified as asexual if that label had been available then. I guarantee you there were asexuals in the first “gay rights” movements, and we have the same rights to the language coined back then as anyone else.

Do you know how I know that?

Because if I had never come across the word asexual, I would still identify as bisexual today. Because I am sexually attracted in the same way (ie: not attracted at all) to people of my own gender and to people of other genders. I would still be out there thinking that other bis just exaggerate what they’re feeling, or that there was something wrong with me for not feeling the same kind of sexual things as they did. If I did not have the word asexual, I would be calling myself bisexual right now, because even though that label didn’t fit me perfectly, it felt way more right than heterosexual did. I know I’m not the only person in history to have felt that way. So I’m figuring the odds are good that there have been at least a few of us identifying as non-straight for as long as that has been an option.

Asexuality, in and of itself, regardless of any other facets of your orientation, is not straight. You belong in MOGAI spaces just as much as I do.

-Natalie

Hey guys, I need an advice. 

So, since I was 16, I’ve felt that sex is not for me. I’m 21 now, and I feel the same. It’s hard to explain, but I’ve never felt like I want to try it out, so I never did. I told my best friend last year, and she told me I am asexual. And I think she’s right (because I used to identify myself as grey-A, just to be safe) so, since then, I’ve identified myself as ace. 

The thing is, I’d never told anybody about it. Today I told one of my male friends, and he told me I couldn’t be serious, because I’ve never had sex with anyone. I told him how I felt about sex, and that that was the point: I don’t feel like having sex at all, and never felt any sexual attraction for anybody. He said it makes no sense, and that I’m just confused; that I’m just afraid of sex and that I’m not asexual, I just never tried it out. 

Needless to say, I feel like shit. And now my question is: is it needed for someone to have sex before they identify themselves as ace?

Okay! Let’s call bullshit on his opinion. I’m gonna do a run through of all the reasons what he said is flawed and wrong. You ready?

Firstly, identifying as asexual means you do not experience sexual attraction toward anybody. Having sex will not make you experience sexual attraction. Sexual activity =/= sexual attraction.

Next, you do not need to try something to know you aren’t interested in it. You do not need to have sex to validate your identity. Frankly, that’s a really horrible thing to tell a person who has voiced that they don’t want to have sex. Because nobody should ever have sex when they don’t want to. And it doesn’t matter why a person doesn’t want to, even if it is because a person is scared, that doesn’t make their attitude toward sex any less real.

Finally, it is YOUR identity, not his. He can put away his shitty identity police badge. He doesn’t have the right to invalidate you, so don’t let him. You know what describes your orientation best, and that’s all you need to know to be confident in your identity.

~ Nash (your fellow 21 yr old asexual who has never had sex)

anonymous asked:

You can't identify as ace if you experience sexual attraction. Experiencing no sexual attraction is the ONE rule for IDing as ace.

Ace-spectrum people who experience sexual attraction exist.

People who identify as ace because they have no sex drive, and therefore experiencing attraction is, for them, immaterial to their orientation, exist.

People who identify as ace to feel safe after trauma, regardless of what attraction they may or may not feel, exist.

People who are sex repulsed to such an extent that identifying as ace feels better to them than identifying based on the attraction they feel exist.

There will be no gatekeeping tolerated on this blog, no exceptions.

-Mod Talie

anonymous asked:

I understand the WANT to flirt, but if you are asexual isn't flirting misleading to those around you. Furthermore, while I agree that flirting isn't a sexual contract, I also think that it is mean to purposely misleadi people(I define as misleading with full knowledge, regardless of it being the aim or not) is cruel, especially if you are an attractive person flirting with some in an orientation that is attracted to your sex. I don't think asexuals should be banned, but make it clear, you are 1.

“How dare you be attractive, talk to me, be nice to me, but not have sex with me” is what I got from this message. Go cry about it somewhere else, nobody owes you shit.

I don’t care how much somebody has been flirting with you, they aren’t promising you sex. Flirting isn’t even inherently sexual, flirting can be an expression of romantic interest, or flirting can just be a playful fun way to interact with other people. But really, the point is, I don’t care what their orientation is; people don’t owe you sex. End of discussion.

~ Nash

(I’m choosing to have a good laugh at the last sentence of this ask because I feel like it sums up the absurdity of the entire thing, just “I don’t think asexuals should be banned”, amazing, what a message)

also like jfc if you would all quit coming around with the same tired arguments about het aces not belonging then maybe we would have time to actually focus on something else, instead of having to rehash this over and over and over again. if it looks like the only thing we’re focused on is het aces, consider that maybe it’s because that’s all you will let us focus on, because you keep making us defend their asexuality.

Actual conversation I had once
  • metapianycist: *holding an "Ask an Asexual" sign in a public park with other aces*
  • random dude: Have any of you guys actually HAD sex?
  • metapianycist: *only person in group who has* I have!
  • random dude: You guys need to try it and then you'll realize you like it.
  • metapianycist: ...
  • random dude: Also, are you sure you're not just all autistic?
  • metapianycist: I am, but they aren't.
  • random dude: You should all be tested for autism because you're all just autistic.
  • metapianycist: Are you even listening to me?
Daily Affirmation 209.

While your asexuality does not make you broken, it is completely valid and understandable for you to feel like there is something wrong with you when that is the way society treats you. Please never forget that society is wrong. Your asexuality is not a flaw, a defect, or a tragedy. It is just as amazing as you are, and you deserve to be treated better.

anonymous asked:

starfudge*tumblr*com/post/147565120180/popgothica-if-you-are-heteroromantic-and-ace << is this post right? Now i feel gross about myself for wrongly identifying myself with the LGBTA+ Community

Absofuckinglutely not.

This is an unfortunately common notion on Tumblr, and it is wholly inaccurate, because unlike bi, pan, or gay, straight is not just an identity. It is also a position of power, and it is not a position of power that we get to opt in to. There is a difference between someone who self-describes as a straight ace and someone who has access to the privileges conferred by Straightness as an institution. (I find it convenient to distinguish between lowercase s ‘straight’ as a personal identity and uppercase S ‘Straight’ as a privileged position.)

When aces grow up feeling broken because we don’t experience what we’re told we should, they are not Straight, because feeling broken because of your sexuality is not a Straight experience.

When aces are threatened, in an attempt to force them to conform with expectations of how they should perform their sexuality, they are not Straight, because having to be coerced into proper Straight-seeming behavior is not a Straight experience.

When aces are assaulted, forced into therapy, and medicated to try to change their orientations, they are not Straight, because people do not believe that Straightness needs to be fixed.

Even when aces do not experience any of those things, because they are fortunate, or because they are able to pass for Straight, they are still not Straight, because their experience of their identity does not conform with Straightness, and any privileges they receive are conditional on their behavior, not tied to their identity.

Regardless of any other part of your orientation, asexuality is distinct from Straightness. You may be a straight ace, but you are not Straight.

-Noel

anonymous asked:

im Christian and considering id-ing as asexual--when i googled things like what the bible says about it, it all said that asexuality is against gods will for marriage and a couples intimate connection. any positive articles I found equated asexuality to celibacy or the choice not to marry. i am heteroromantic as far as i know. i don't believe that LGBTQIA+ people are sinning, but sex is "gods gift" and im confused. do any of the mods have any input on all of this ? thank you very much & bless !

I don’t claim to speak for any of the other mods on this one, but here’s some stuff from me as a Christian ace.

For me, reconciling my faith and my asexuality has been a very difficult thing. There are mentions in the articles of my religion (I was raised Methodist) of the “facts” that sex and relationships are what make us human, and implications that they are requirements for someone to be happy and whole. Obviously that does not feel good to me as someone who doesn’t really want any kind of sexual or romantic relationship.

It is important to remember that the articles of our faith — for me, the Book of Discipline that tells me that I am less than human — were not written by God. We are commanded by God to love God, to love our neighbor, to seek justice, love kindness, and walk humbly with God. (This is ignoring the Old Testament law, as it is made clear in the New Testament that Christ’s death on the cross nullified that law for Christians. I’m not as familiar with the law of the Old Testament, so I don’t know if there is relevant scripture there.) None of that tells me that I am required to have sex, or feel romantic love for my neighbor. The writings that do express those requirements are from humans. No matter how holy those humans were, and are, they were, and are, human. They were, and are, fallible. Capable of being wrong.

I am willing to accept that for some people, the act of sex or the sacrament of marriage are sacred things, but they are sacred in the same way that fasting is sacred. If they are things that you feel moved to do, then that is absolutely wonderful! But if they are not things that you are capable of, there is absolutely nothing shameful or unholy about abstaining.

-Natalie

Daily Affirmation 186.

Your attractiveness does not determine your sexuality. Whether you have been told you are too good-looking to be asexual, or that you are only using that word because you’re not attractive enough to find a partner, you deserve so much better. You are amazing, and your identity is valid, regardless of your appearance. You are worthy of love and respect.

anonymous asked:

I recently found out about the ace spectrum and thought it fit me well. However, being a Hetero-romantic ace, I'm afraid to tell people of my orientation for fear that they might think I'm just a straight person tying to fit into LGBT spaces. How can I possibly express myself without people thinking I'm just looking for attention? :/

Honestly?

There are going to be people out there who are assholes. There are going to be people out there who tell you that your asexuality is not enough because you are heteroromantic. I’m not going to sugar coat that for you.

But the thing is? You’re the only one who gets to decide what your orientation means to you. Some het ace people decide that they do not feel that they belong in the greater LGBT+ community. Others feel that their asexuality is enough, regardless of their romantic orientation. That is a personal choice. It’s up to you what your identity means to you. Nobody else has the right to determine that, or question your decision.

However, a caveat: Do respect the fact that you do not face identical discrimination to people who are LGBT+ and not heteroromantic. Some things in LGBT+ spaces are not going to be for you. And that’s okay.

-Natalie

anonymous asked:

People are saying Demisexuality is bullshit...

@novasky13, I am answering your question on my reply to this anon as well, because I absolutely refuse to give more attention to acephobes. I am assuming that this is referencing this post that you tagged me in, since I’ve had my attention drawn to it multiple times today.

Blatant, unapologetic ace hate is all this is.

It’s the same kind of ace hate that says that asexuality is not a real orientation, it’s just celibacy. It’s the same kind of ace hate that says that choosing to have sex immediately invalidates a person’s asexuality. It’s the same kind of ace hate that refuses to acknowledge that sexual behavior is different from sexual attraction.

The simple fact is that not feeling sexual attraction outside of very specific circumstances is an ace-spectrum experience. And that action never, under any circumstances at all, no matter what, invalidates your orientation, because orientation is based on attraction, not action.

As a general rule, friends? If you see the words “special snowflake” or “special sexuality” or “[sexuality] is bullshit” you can assume that I think a) this person is wrong, and b) this person is an asshole, and save me the effort of getting angry.

-Mod Talie