Asexual Awareness Week – day six
Oct. 26th, 2013 03:35 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
meridian_roseDay six – queer identity
There's often arguments over whether asexuality can or should be accepted under the queer umbrella (eg QUILTBAG) and in particular by the LGBT groups currently in existence.
Dan Savage is a gay man who doesn't think so, but then he's not a very tolerant person to begin with. He despises the T and the A He's also nasty about the B and there's racism and other isms to go around too.
He gets some credit for being behind the It Gets Better project, but that too has its problems and many non-white, non-male, poor, or non-mongomous individuals in the LGBT community feel he's as toxic as a homophobic politician, using his privilege to insist that there's a "right way" to be gay that excludes all but a few select members of an already marginalised section of society. And he's unapologetic and still acting as spokesperson for a movement he barely represents.
What does it mean to say asexuals are queer?
"On one side you have people saying, “Queer means any non-normative gender or sexual orientation, so asexuals are queer.” On the other side, you have people saying, “Queer just means LGBT, and I don’t see any asexuality in the L, G, B, or T.” Both of these arguments are missing the point.
The meaning of the words isn’t the point. Words don’t have feelings. People have feelings."
"being asexual definitely does not make you queer. being queer makes you queer. i’m not saying asexuals don’t have struggles, i’m saying they don’t have queer struggles because of their asexuality. heteroromantic asexuals have stright privilege, not passing straight privilege, just regular, normal striaght privilege.
being heteroromantic isn’t an aspect of being striaght, it just makes you straight." [horrible grammar and misspellings left intact]. This is from a tumblr post and the reblog with rebuttal is:
"Previous to asexuality’s inclusion into the sexuality discussion, we had queer and straight, a simple dichotomy, and when asexuality was introduced, a lot of people ignored it and lumped it in with not-queer, which lead to associating it with straightness.
That’s flawed. Asexuality is a separate category from straight and queer, and it should be treated as such. Heterom aces aren’t straight because they’re ace - they may identify as straight, because they do have aspects of straightness, as evidenced by their being heterom. I think you’re on the right path with some of what you’re saying, but being straight isn’t just being heteroromantic. If it were, heteronormativity would look a lot different than it does today, and asexuals likely wouldn’t be harmed as they are by current standards of heteronormativity.
Sexuality is no longer a dichotomy, and yet people continue to treat it as such. I prefer to look at it by seeing that many asexuals, including heterom aces, are harmed by heteronormativity on the basis of their being asexual. Some aces, the LGB aces, are harmed further by heteronormativity on the basis of homophobia. That’s the distinction that no one makes. They say, “oh sooper sorry to hear about your struggles” but all they really care about is continuing their dichotomy of queer and not-queer, and that’s unacceptable. I say this as a bisexual person.
Asexuality needs to be separated from heterosexuality, and while yes, some aces share aspects of heteronormative culture, they are not heterosexual and therefore wouldn’t benefit entirely from heteronormativity, and as lived experience of some of those heterom aces would prove, they can and are harmed by it as well.
And even though I say asexuals can be harmed on the basis of heteronormativity is not to say that I think they’re an oppressed class, just that they can and are harmed by it." [emboldening mine]
Does Asexuality Fall Under the Queer Umbrella?
"I should point out that it is possible to identify as asexual and also stake a claim as straight, lesbian, or gay (or genderqueer, or bisexual, or [insert another label from the growing identity list here]), because asexuals define their desires not as sexual but as romantic. Those who identify as asexual generally don't want to have sex, but that doesn't mean they don't seek the closeness of other human beings for love, companionship, shared experiences, cohabitation, and everything else that we all appreciate about partnering up. Distinct from celibacy, asexuality is not considered a choice. "Nonsexual intimacy" might characterize the type of relations asexuals seek, and there are plenty of sites that make it easier for asexual-identified persons to "hook up" with one another: Affectionate Friends, Asexual Pals, Celibate Passions, and Platonic Partners, to name a few. As with all sexual (or, in this case, nonsexual) identities, a spectrum exists. Someone who claims asexuality as his or her predominating preference might have experiences that range from never having had a single sexual thought or fantasy to sometimes engaging in sexual acts, with others or oneself, out of curiosity or for release, or to satisfy a "mixed partner" who might not be asexual.
It might be difficult to wrap one's brain around what it feels like to be asexual (telling me not to think about sex, or to think about not thinking about sex, is a total turn-on for this horny homo), but I can certainly empathize with feelings of being misunderstood, underrepresented, and closeted. Some people just don't want to get it on, and they have my vote to take safe harbor from the heteronormative thunderstorm and join us under the queer umbrella."
And, on the asexuality as a spectrum, people often struggle as to whether they should identity as asexual at all. The asexual education tumblr has often given advice on finding your own labels such as in response to this question:
"I have read the FAQ, but I'm wondering whether the fact that I have crushes on celebrities, but never real people (anymore) counts"
The answer given is "I think it’s not unusual for asexuals to fantasize but never wish to act on those fantasies in real life. Sexual fantasies aren’t really the same as feeling attraction.
I think if you don’t feel sexual attraction to anyone in reality, then I don’t see why you can’t consider yourself asexual. It really depends on what you feel fits you most, though. If you feel that fantasies still count, you could go with gray asexual."
Asexuality is a spectrum and one which most agree is part of a queer identity and should be accepted under the queer umbrella.
There's often arguments over whether asexuality can or should be accepted under the queer umbrella (eg QUILTBAG) and in particular by the LGBT groups currently in existence.
Dan Savage is a gay man who doesn't think so, but then he's not a very tolerant person to begin with. He despises the T and the A He's also nasty about the B and there's racism and other isms to go around too.
He gets some credit for being behind the It Gets Better project, but that too has its problems and many non-white, non-male, poor, or non-mongomous individuals in the LGBT community feel he's as toxic as a homophobic politician, using his privilege to insist that there's a "right way" to be gay that excludes all but a few select members of an already marginalised section of society. And he's unapologetic and still acting as spokesperson for a movement he barely represents.
What does it mean to say asexuals are queer?
"On one side you have people saying, “Queer means any non-normative gender or sexual orientation, so asexuals are queer.” On the other side, you have people saying, “Queer just means LGBT, and I don’t see any asexuality in the L, G, B, or T.” Both of these arguments are missing the point.
The meaning of the words isn’t the point. Words don’t have feelings. People have feelings."
"being asexual definitely does not make you queer. being queer makes you queer. i’m not saying asexuals don’t have struggles, i’m saying they don’t have queer struggles because of their asexuality. heteroromantic asexuals have stright privilege, not passing straight privilege, just regular, normal striaght privilege.
being heteroromantic isn’t an aspect of being striaght, it just makes you straight." [horrible grammar and misspellings left intact]. This is from a tumblr post and the reblog with rebuttal is:
"Previous to asexuality’s inclusion into the sexuality discussion, we had queer and straight, a simple dichotomy, and when asexuality was introduced, a lot of people ignored it and lumped it in with not-queer, which lead to associating it with straightness.
That’s flawed. Asexuality is a separate category from straight and queer, and it should be treated as such. Heterom aces aren’t straight because they’re ace - they may identify as straight, because they do have aspects of straightness, as evidenced by their being heterom. I think you’re on the right path with some of what you’re saying, but being straight isn’t just being heteroromantic. If it were, heteronormativity would look a lot different than it does today, and asexuals likely wouldn’t be harmed as they are by current standards of heteronormativity.
Sexuality is no longer a dichotomy, and yet people continue to treat it as such. I prefer to look at it by seeing that many asexuals, including heterom aces, are harmed by heteronormativity on the basis of their being asexual. Some aces, the LGB aces, are harmed further by heteronormativity on the basis of homophobia. That’s the distinction that no one makes. They say, “oh sooper sorry to hear about your struggles” but all they really care about is continuing their dichotomy of queer and not-queer, and that’s unacceptable. I say this as a bisexual person.
Asexuality needs to be separated from heterosexuality, and while yes, some aces share aspects of heteronormative culture, they are not heterosexual and therefore wouldn’t benefit entirely from heteronormativity, and as lived experience of some of those heterom aces would prove, they can and are harmed by it as well.
And even though I say asexuals can be harmed on the basis of heteronormativity is not to say that I think they’re an oppressed class, just that they can and are harmed by it." [emboldening mine]
Does Asexuality Fall Under the Queer Umbrella?
"I should point out that it is possible to identify as asexual and also stake a claim as straight, lesbian, or gay (or genderqueer, or bisexual, or [insert another label from the growing identity list here]), because asexuals define their desires not as sexual but as romantic. Those who identify as asexual generally don't want to have sex, but that doesn't mean they don't seek the closeness of other human beings for love, companionship, shared experiences, cohabitation, and everything else that we all appreciate about partnering up. Distinct from celibacy, asexuality is not considered a choice. "Nonsexual intimacy" might characterize the type of relations asexuals seek, and there are plenty of sites that make it easier for asexual-identified persons to "hook up" with one another: Affectionate Friends, Asexual Pals, Celibate Passions, and Platonic Partners, to name a few. As with all sexual (or, in this case, nonsexual) identities, a spectrum exists. Someone who claims asexuality as his or her predominating preference might have experiences that range from never having had a single sexual thought or fantasy to sometimes engaging in sexual acts, with others or oneself, out of curiosity or for release, or to satisfy a "mixed partner" who might not be asexual.
It might be difficult to wrap one's brain around what it feels like to be asexual (telling me not to think about sex, or to think about not thinking about sex, is a total turn-on for this horny homo), but I can certainly empathize with feelings of being misunderstood, underrepresented, and closeted. Some people just don't want to get it on, and they have my vote to take safe harbor from the heteronormative thunderstorm and join us under the queer umbrella."
And, on the asexuality as a spectrum, people often struggle as to whether they should identity as asexual at all. The asexual education tumblr has often given advice on finding your own labels such as in response to this question:
"I have read the FAQ, but I'm wondering whether the fact that I have crushes on celebrities, but never real people (anymore) counts"
The answer given is "I think it’s not unusual for asexuals to fantasize but never wish to act on those fantasies in real life. Sexual fantasies aren’t really the same as feeling attraction.
I think if you don’t feel sexual attraction to anyone in reality, then I don’t see why you can’t consider yourself asexual. It really depends on what you feel fits you most, though. If you feel that fantasies still count, you could go with gray asexual."
Asexuality is a spectrum and one which most agree is part of a queer identity and should be accepted under the queer umbrella.
