i now know that these people are minimal. like, i used to be an exclusionist back in middle school, i know how they feel. its a totally illegitimate phase, its about being edgy and as cruel as possible under guise.
the more i hung out with older queer people through affiliations from working at local comic publishing titles, or by me meeting established local communities from my soaps, or me reach out to them, i know that ‘ace exclusion’ is such a non-issue for them.
i think its because they’re much less insecure, compared to these exclusionists. they’ve said their piece over and over, they know what words and actions have weight and what doesn’t. its the married, settle-down, and raising-kids queer ppl that gave me confidence to know that ace exclusionism is as shallow as a tumblr troll
ive only ever met two exclusionists in real life, both when i used to habit this chicago fet club bc like many queer young people, im lonely and ill do many things i may not actually desire just to meet more people like me. and both, of course, were young and not very nice people in general
mmhas it occurred to you that no queer person in general is obligated to out themselves at any point. its really not your business despite any ‘righteousness’ you couch thats really only entitlement in disguise.
you know whats actually unfair? someone believing that all ace people fit under a monolith of sex repulsion and sex indifference, that suddenly problems all couples have (sex preferences in particular) are now a Big Problem because its aspec ppl in the picture. now THATS unfair
me not outing myself to someone who has feelings for me is so not comparable.
are you seriously under the impression that ace ppl dont know that others prioritize sex
why do you think we struggle with trusting our autonomy, why do you think we hesitate to date others and come out to allo partners
and no, you are not being ~tricked~. you developed feelings for an ace person that doesn’t view sex the same way you do, thats part of them as a person, the same person you had feelings for in the first place, and if you actually respected them as a person that’s not a trick. ‘being allowed to develop feelings’ are you kidding me what entitlement is this
yeah yeah passionate sex is what you want. but us ace people will stay concerned about our own safety and sexual rights before we begin to worry about your dating preferences. itd be nice if you people began meeting us in the middle 🙂
it’s crazy to me that so many of y’all think that demisexuality is just “being a normal person” bc like….half of the people i know are sexually attracted to randomass stangers so idk what world you’re living in
Not to mention… phrasing demisexual as normal implies that both never feeling sexual attraction and feeling sexual attraction to people you’re not close to are “abnormal”.
Which err. Is anti-ace and sex shaming simultaneously.
So, I’ve seen a lot of exclusionists going on and on about how there are asexual people saying they’re uncomfortable with all PDA at pride. But I’ve seen absolutely no asexual people making posts to that nature. It really seems as if someone decided to either make up this problem or take the existence of one or two posts and blow it up to some enormous and widespread problem, and other people saw those posts made by that someone and thought it is a widespread problem even though there are very few asexual people actually saying that – to the point where I still haven’t seen a single one, while having seen a couple dozen or so posts about this “huge problem.”
honestly, this all stems from the discourse a while ago about sex-repulsed and romance-repulsed people taking part on lgbtqia+ spaces.
the debate was originally about accommodating ace, aro, and traumatized folks who were uncomfortable with pda – often for perfectly valid reasons – in safe spaces, while also accommodating people who sought those spaces as a refuge, who were unable to publicly display their affection to each other elsewhere because they weren’t out, or were in dangerous home/work/personal environments.
i think that the consensus was that this should be handled on a case-by-case basis. essentially… like any other trigger.
i haven’t seen a single person complaining about pda at pride, nor do i think that’s a serious discussion that’s happened. i think some people who deeply misconstrued the original debacle (which was, essentially, about triggers) just anticipated it bleeding into pride month, and started complaining about it before they even had any evidence that it was happening. and then it didn’t happen. and now they look like hatemongers.
i really cannot stress enough that this debate is not even really just about aces and aros, nor does it apply to every ace/aro person. not every ace/aro person is sex- or romance-repulsed! and plenty of otherwise lgbtq+ people ARE repulsed by those things, or triggered by pda specifically, because of their own personal history.
this has been giving me a huge headache because it’s the same misunderstanding that’s made the whole “bars vs cafes” discourse so toxic. there are lgbtqia+ people who need spaces that are alcohol-free, spaces that do not contain sexual undertones, spaces where they will not be hit on, etc etc.
no one was saying that gay bars were any more sexual than any other bar. that’s just realistically what a bar scene is like. it’s a place where people go to relax, indulge in alcohol (and possibly other substances), and be social. people often go to bars to hook up. that’s not specific to gay bars. not one person was saying “get rid of gay bars”; they were saying “lets diversify the spaces that we congregate, so that no one is left without a community” and those words were twisted.
this is the same situation.
i’m not sure where this misconception that ace and aro people all unanimously dislike pda. that’s never been true in any ace or aro space (online or off) that i’ve been a part of. in my city, there’s an ace specific group that marches in the pride parade every year.
the people getting overly aggressive towards the imagined threat of ace people trying to like.. “censor” pride, or whatever it is they’re trying to insinuate, just need to calm down and enjoy pride. they will almost 100% not find a single person at their local pride events who remotely behaves this way.
i can’t even understand the logic here, tbh. pride events are notoriously rowdy events, that people attend specifically to enjoy being queer in public. pda is a given at an event like this. if someone is too triggered by those things, they just won’t attend.
(and besides, it’s not like there aren’t other parts of pride that they can focus on if they do choose to attend. parades, live entertainment, and vendor browsing are all things i enjoy at pride, which have nothing to do with pda)
the thing i do see people complaining about pride is unsolicited kissing, groping, etc, which you’d have to be a terrible person to deliberately NOT address in favor of shitting on ace attendees.
because it’s definitely not just ace people who dislike outright sexual harassment.
it’s very tiresome that everyone is framing these issues through the lens of “ace/aro people don’t belong, that’s why they’re uncomfortable” because that’s literally not true. the issues that were talking about are harmful to a much wider range of people – particularly victims of trauma and abuse – and deserve to be addressed, for the safety of everyone.
tl;dr, nobody is complaining about pda at pride, calm tf down.
Some weirdo on this website who thinks running a discourse blog and mocking asexual people is equivalent of lgbt+ activism : Yes i am an aphobe lol…….Im a proud aphobe……Are you offended about it you little aceJW??????Do my moodboards about aces being like ronald regan and margaret thatcher trigger you snowflake??????go outside you reta**ed fuck and see how the *Real world* is like lol
Their equally weird mutuals and followers who have no individual moral or thinking skills : SNKHJGHJGHFGHGKJKJGH YOU ENDED HER FGHGGHGH IM BLEEDING OUT OF MY EYEBALLS AS IM TYIPNG THIS GHGHGFSDFDSSJGHJGHJD
asexuality and the terminology that is used to describe it is actually really incoherent.
the split attraction model was created for a-spec people whose romantic and sexual orientations are split. this essentially leaves room for a-spec people to identify as “biromantic asexual” or “aromantic heterosexual”, which is fine.
however, in order to understand one’s social location regarding sexual orientation, one needs to specify which gender(s) one is attracted to.
asexuality when used in the SAM acts as a modifier, letting us know the degree of attraction one experiences rather than the genders one is attracted to. aroace is what one would say is a person who experiences no attraction to any gender whatsoever.
so now that we’ve started to figure this out, many people have been saying that asexuality is not a modifier for use in the SAM but is instead a whole orientation that means “feels no sexual attraction [to any gender]”.
this is why asexual terminology is incoherent!! this makes no sense! “asexual” cannot be used as a whole orientation using the split attraction model because it doesn’t specify which genders you’re attracted to, and frankly not using the split attraction model for a-spec identities is confusing bc now you’re switching your own terminology on us.
you cannot pick and choose whether or not asexuality is a modifier. you must specify which genders you are attracted to (“no genders” also is something you should specify) and if you are a-spec then please use the split attraction model or convince everyone else in the community to not use it and come up with an explanation for why “asexual” isn’t a modifier just used to figure out degree of sexual attraction as opposed to which genders you’re attracted to.
this switch on terminology whenever you feel is most opportune for you is unnecessary and confusing for everybody.
wow!! what a hot take. and hey, this reminds me; you know what other sexual identities have been modified to specify unique experiences?
every other sexual identity.
so much so, there’s newfangled and popularized terms for them. like ‘bisexual/pansexual’, for those who are attracted to, say, women, but also another gender (or more)!! they modified their sexual identity to reflect their attractions, and how these attractions affect their life.
my point? if you’re gonna claim ‘asexuality’ as the modifier for – as an example – ‘demi lesbian’, you also have the same claim for ‘demi lesbian’ being its own unique experience and identity on its own. and not split between ‘the REAL thing’ and a mere modifier.
because sure, the words as they exist now are modifying languages, but the ~material reality~ (like you exclusionists always say you have an omniscient understanding of) is that demi(this) or grey(that) and etc, they’re their own unique thing and affect us very differently.
aka – they’re a whole, unique identity of its own. if we gave ‘demi lesbian’ its own, separate name – basically; if we didn’t utilize ‘modifier languages’ to describe aspec identities, your argument falls flat.
whitemanning critical 