|
Discussion: Why asexuality is seen as an orientation?
Member Since: 5/27/2016
Posts: 2,555
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Wotamin
A SEXUAL attraction, which asexuals don't have
which means, they aren't straight
|
Literally no one uses that weirdly specific definition.
AVEN, which even popularized the "LGBTQ" acronym, suggests / supports the idea that heteroromantic asexuals are straight folks.
Straight = Sole opposite binary gender attraction
Bisexual = Multiple gender attraction
Gay = Sole same binary gender attraction
Just because the way you experience attraction is different doesn't change who you're attraction is to, which is what social locators like gay and straight reference. Homoromantic asexuals are still gay, so why the **** wouldn't heteroromantic asexuals be straight?
A cis man who specifies he doesn't find anyone sexually attractive, but still wants to date solely women and marry a woman and have a wife because he's heteroromantic is going to be viewed as straight and has straight privilege, and is in no way oppressed for his attractions like gay/same gender attracted people are.
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/7/2015
Posts: 18,105
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Ressti
What?
djfhkser
If you're solely attracted to the opposite gender, whether that be romantically or sexually or both, you're straight.
|
As far as I know, straight people are the ones who are both romantically and sexually attracted to the opposite gender, heteromatic asexuals don't fit this
I've been in this community long enough and there's always been this fight, and many asexuals feel uncomfortable being labeld as straights too
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/7/2015
Posts: 18,105
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Communion
Literally no one uses that weirdly specific definition.
AVEN, which even popularized the "LGBTQ" acronym, suggests / supports the idea that heteroromantic asexuals are straight folks.
Straight = Sole opposite binary gender attraction
Bisexual = Multiple gender attraction
Gay = Sole same binary gender attraction
Just because the way you experience attraction is different doesn't change who you're attraction is to, which is what social locators like gay and straight reference. Homoromantic asexuals are still gay, so why the **** wouldn't heteroromantic asexuals be straight?
A cis man who specifies he doesn't find anyone sexually attractive, but still wants to date solely women and marry a woman and have a wife because he's heteroromantic is going to be viewed as straight and has straight privilege, and is in no way oppressed for his attractions like gay/same gender attracted people are.
|
Sis, just because he is heteromatic doesn't mean he isn't going to be oppressed for his asexuality
When I came out I never even said anything about my romantic attraction yet I got a LOT of awful comments, the worst one is probably "you should pray to god every day so he can cure your asexuality"
Like please......
Heteromantic asexuals suffer too, maybe not as much as the ones who are attracted to the same gender but it doesn't mean we can erase their suffering
|
|
|
Member Since: 5/27/2016
Posts: 2,555
|
You're missing the point.
LGBT = People oppressed under homophobia & transphobia.
Queer = A pejorative solely used against those oppressed under homophobia & transphobia.
No matter how much you try to bend and flip and stretch what "straight" means so hetero aces don't feel as though they're straight, they'll never be queer even we accept your definition of "straight", which started this discussion.
While aphobia might be real, it's in no way connected socially or historically to homophobia & transphobia. There's never been any historical evidence of heteroromantic asexuals being oppressed and disenfranchised by the word "queer" - it's never been aimed at them and doesn't harm them (which is why they have no right to reclaim it).
The idea that a cis straight aromantic dude has the same experiences with sexuality-based oppression as gay men or lesbians or bisexuals just because they're a dude sexually attracted to women but without any romantic feelings ( ) is just violent to LGB/same gender attracted people.
It's like people don't realize words have specific histories attached to them you can't erase just cause you wanna. The point is being ace doesn't inherently make one queer and the idea it does shows a lack of knowledge about LGBT history.
|
|
|
Member Since: 5/27/2016
Posts: 1,477
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Communion
I feel like you're not understanding the history of the word "queer" and its historical context.
Literally queer is intrinsically linked to same gender attraction and non-cis identity.
Being queer isn't about your identity being doubted or misunderstood. It's about being victim to either homophobia and/or transphobia. Those things (being misunderstood) also happen to LGBT people, but because of homophobia and transphobia. Homophobia and transphobia does not affect or impact straight cis aces or aromantics.
The LGBT / Queer community are a coalition of people meant to combat and shelter from and provided resources against 1) homophobia and 2) transphobia. If you don't suffer from either one of those, you're... just cis and straight.
|
The term LGBTQ exists for a reason though and I'm not talking about Q meaning "questioning". I understand the historical context you described above. Equally If as a "straight" "cis" male you described yourself as not being attracted to women in 1970s, you would likely be called a "queer". Queer as a slur stems from the original word meaning different or strange. It's connotations may be steeped in homophobia, but the term queer has always had a more elusive meaning then just lesbian, gay or bi, which itself is completely distinct from being transgender. How is it that that the word comes to represent both those with same sex attractions and those who are non cis? I think the common denominator is oppression from living within a heteronormative society and being asexual is definitely not heteronormative, even if your romantic attractions are. If you & most queer people feel differently I understand, but this personally how I see it
P.S. The word queer as a term specific to LGBT is an appropriation, just so we're clear.
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/7/2015
Posts: 18,105
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Communion
You're missing the point.
LGBT = People oppressed under homophobia & transphobia.
Queer = A pejorative solely used against those oppressed under homophobia & transphobia.
No matter how much you try to bend and flip and stretch what "straight" means so hetero aces don't feel as though they're straight, they'll never be queer even we accept your definition of "straight", which started this discussion.
While aphobia might be real, it's in no way connected socially or historically to homophobia & transphobia. There's never been any historical evidence of heteroromantic asexuals being oppressed and disenfranchised by the word "queer" - it's never been aimed at them and doesn't harm them (which is why they have no right to reclaim it).
The idea that a cis straight aromantic dude has the same experiences with sexuality-based oppression as gay men or lesbians or bisexuals just because they're a dude sexually attracted to women but without any romantic feelings ( ) is just violent to LGB/same gender attracted people.
It's like people don't realize words have specific histories attached to them you can't erase just cause you wanna. The point is being ace doesn't inherently make one queer and the idea it does shows a lack of knowledge about LGBT history.
|
But asexuality wasn't really a "thing" until the 21st century, so of course you won't find anything historically
And nobody is saying that they have the same exact experiences, I think you are missing my point if that's so
|
|
|
Member Since: 3/6/2011
Posts: 7,176
|
Quote:
Asexuality is not a lack of libido.
Libido is also known as a “sex drive”, that is, the desire or impulse to experience sexual satisfaction. Some asexuals do have a libido, it’s just that it’s essentially aimless. Their bits downstairs will activate and call out for attention, but that doesn’t make a person feel sexually attracted toward anyone else.
|
I still hard for me to comprehend thing. How can libido/sex drive be aimless? How do asexuals have sex if they can't be turned on by a penis/vadge? Or is it just the stimulation that make them orgasm?
|
|
|
Member Since: 5/27/2016
Posts: 2,555
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Otter
Queer as a slur stems from the original word meaning different or strange.
|
No, it literally doesn't.
Queer in the Western/American world started out itself as a self-identifier amongst gay men around the early 1900s. It was used to juxtapose "fairy", which feminine gay men / men who lived somewhat as women used, while queer was used to describe men who rejected this labeling of fairy.
It faded out of usage for a few decades and then arose post-WWII and became permanent around the mid-1950s, where its sole usage was directly as a homophobic slur, placed next to slurs like bull****, as more and more people chose instead to identify with 'gay'.
It was only until the late 1990s and early 2000s did people even start to entertain the idea of it being possible to reclaim the slur. And it's still used throughout much of the Western world as a homophobic and transphobic slur. So no, when there's almost 70~ years of a word's main usage being that of a homophobia & transphobic slur, that is the only definition understood.
If you can't grasp why historically the trans community and gay community are intertwined, while neither community are connected to the asexual community (with estimates / studies that suggest 70%-80% of all asexuals in the West are cis AND heteroromantic ), then that's a failure on your part and disrespectful to the millions of LGBT people who have died under oppression.
The "queer means obtuse or weird" argument is so stupid, like stop being dense. Do you try to say a *** is just a cigarette too?
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/7/2015
Posts: 18,105
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Bathomet
I still hard for me to comprehend thing. How can libido/sex drive be aimless? How do asexuals have sex if they can't be turned on by a penis/vadge? Or is it just the stimulation that make them orgasm?
|
This
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/20/2011
Posts: 8,848
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Redstreak
Why is the LGBT+ community obsessed with pruning down the queer tree until there's only L and G left?
|
People like to see things in binaries (gay/straight) because any more is too confusing for them.
[see: gender]
|
|
|
Member Since: 5/27/2016
Posts: 1,477
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Communion
No, it literally doesn't.
Queer in the Western/American world started out itself as a self-identifier amongst gay men around the early 1900s. It was used to juxtapose "fairy", which feminine gay men / men who lived somewhat as women used, while queer was used to describe men who rejected this labeling of fairy.
It faded out of usage for a few decades and then arose post-WWII and became permanent around the mid-1950s, where its sole usage was directly as a homophobic slur, placed next to slurs like bull****, as more and more people chose instead to identify with 'gay'.
It was only until the late 1990s and early 2000s did people even start to entertain the idea of it being possible to reclaim the slur. And it's still used throughout much of the Western world as a homophobic and transphobic slur. So no, when there's almost 70~ years of a word's main usage being that of a homophobia & transphobic slur, that is the only definition understood.
If you can't grasp why historically the trans community and gay community are intertwined, while neither community are connected to the asexual community (with estimates / studies that suggest 70%-80% of all asexuals in the West are cis AND heteroromantic ), then that's a failure on your part and disrespectful to the millions of LGBT people who have died under oppression.
The "queer means obtuse or weird" argument is so stupid, like stop being dense. Do you try to say a *** is just a cigarette too?
|
No, I accept it has multiple meanings and if someone refers to their cigarette as a *** as is common here in England, I don't call them homophobic
And my apologies, I stand corrected in regards to the origin of the word
"The word queer was first used to mean ‘homosexual’ in the late 19th century; when used by heterosexual people, it was originally an aggressively derogatory term. By the late 1980s, however, some gay people began to deliberately use the word queer in place of gay or homosexual, in an attempt, by using the word positively, to deprive it of its negative power. Queer also came to have broader connotations, relating not only to homosexuality but to any sexual orientation or gender identity not corresponding to heterosexual norms. The neutral use of queer is now well established and widely used, especially as an adjective or noun modifier, and exists alongside the derogatory usage."
In regards to the bolded you may feel this exclusivity doesn't extend to asexuals, but I don't see it as a disrespect at all. Heteronormative society and the desire to see gender and sexuality in archetypical binaries is really a key driving force behind oppression of LGBT people. I don't see an oppression threshold which asexuals have to go through before being considered adversely effected by the same society or being a part of the movement. The strides LGBT are making are having a very visible effect on the asexual community. Anyway, semantics are not bound and evolve over time, but I accept that you are right in the classical definition of the Queer.
|
|
|
Member Since: 2/26/2012
Posts: 23,655
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Yndda
you're talking about low to no libido with this, which does not equal asexuality.
asexuality is when you're not attracted to a sex at all. asexuals can still have libidos; that is, they may enjoy the pleasure that comes from sex, masturbation, etc… but they're not actually ATTRACTED.
you should read this (rules 4b, 5, 7)
http://lgbt.williams.edu/homepage/10...ut-asexuality/
|
Thank you!
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/18/2013
Posts: 40,566
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Roman Holiday
I'm lowkey envious of asexual people.
Sex is tiring and I'm not good at it.
|
Mess
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/7/2015
Posts: 23,857
|
Because it is. What is this question?
|
|
|
Member Since: 6/2/2012
Posts: 37,284
|
Homosexuality could be considered a medical disorder too just cause it's different. They're still sexual orientations.
|
|
|
ATRL Contributor
Member Since: 8/19/2013
Posts: 46,848
|
Quote:
Originally posted by SebaMonster
Homosexuality could be considered a medical disorder too just cause it's different. They're still sexual orientations.
|
No it can't. Homosexuality is apparent in nature (animals), asexuality is not. It's a lack of attraction to any sex which kind of goes against how the human body is supposed to work biologically.
|
|
|
Member Since: 5/27/2016
Posts: 2,757
|
No wonder the LGBT "community" is such a mess. Anything other than gay or straight isn't real to some of you, or shouldn't be considered a sexual minority. How ironic
|
|
|
ATRL Contributor
Member Since: 8/19/2013
Posts: 46,848
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Mettaton
No wonder the LGBT "community" is such a mess. Anything other than gay or straight isn't real to some of you, or shouldn't be considered a sexual minority. How ironic
|
I'm getting the feeling that most of yall aren't even reading the OP. Nobody said they shouldn't be included in the community or that asexuals aren't real, simmer down
|
|
|
Member Since: 5/27/2016
Posts: 2,757
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Jet
I'm getting the feeling that most of yall aren't even reading the OP. Nobody said they shouldn't be included in the community or that asexuals aren't real, simmer down
|
Who said I was talking about the OP?
|
|
|
Member Since: 5/27/2016
Posts: 2,208
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Jet
No it can't. Homosexuality is apparent in nature (animals), asexuality is not. It's a lack of attraction to any sex which kind of goes against how the human body is supposed to work biologically.
|
Please. No offense, but gay/anal sex isn't how the human body is supposed to work biologically either. The anus isn't made to serve as an entrance either. Just because ''asexuality'' isn't apparent in nature, doesn't mean it isn't a classified sexuality or goes against nature or w/e.
As a gay person myself, I find the ''animals do it too!'' argument kind of redundant on its own tho, animals also cannibalize each other and whatnot. They're animals. They'll do whatever.
|
|
|
|
|