Something Which Is Bothering Me

[Perissodactyla]

Ok, I feel the need to point out the concept of "asexual elitism" (and why AVEN discourages it) and post a link to this thread on AVEN about it.

It's very good, BrightCancer, that Frigid Pink called your attention to the above discussion.

I think it may take some time for you to absorb the import of the points being made. Hopefully it's not impossible. :)

Since April I've been trying to understand this way of thinking, and while I sort of accept it, it still doesn't make any sense to me *personally*.

Also, I no longer feel that I can identify as 'asexual' because of this way of interpretation.

I suppose I just feel alienated, so now would just say I'm 'sexually apathetic'.

That sounds a bit weird, I realize, but 'apathy' for me seems to cover 'lack of attraction' AND 'lack of motivation (behavior)'.

I'm a newbie at this and still very much confused about consensus terminology.

But that's my own work-around at the moment. :)

I have no idea how others with your perspective adapt to the AVEN paradigm.

But I know that I really dislike the discourse and attitude of so-called 'anti-sexuals', although I also find what they say interesting in a sort of twisted way.

And I'm not referring to you as 'anti-sexual' in any way, but it's a discourse you may probably become more aware of, especially if you consider the history of the asexuality movement over many years.

[CNGB]

Being asexual doesn't mean you can't have an interest in sex. XD That's sort of like saying a heterosexual man can't be heterosexual if he has an interest in lesbian sex. There is nothing wrong with an interest. . . .

Personally, I define asexuality as having the lack of sexual attraction--and that's it. Anything after that is fair game, including those who may want to have sex to please their partner (as something like that is more to do with making someone happy rather than the act of sex itself). Just my opinion.

[BrightCancer]

Ok, I feel the need to point out the concept of "asexual elitism" (and why AVEN discourages it) and post a link to this thread on AVEN about it.

That thread doesn't relate to what i'm saying in anyway....i didn't say that if asexual people had or are having sex that they are not asexual anymore, read it again, i still called them asexuals just i categorized them....so yeah, that thread you linked is talking about totally different thing.

[Sally]

if you consider the history of the asexuality movement over many years.

What? We're not a movement and we certainly haven't existed in history as asexuals for hardly any years, let alone many years.

[SithLord]

Why do we need to be separated into groups based on whether or not we've had sex? An orientation is about innate feelings, not actions, and (forgive me if I'm wrong) by scaling us like you propose you seem to be trying to make some people 'more ace' than others.

I did it because that way it makes more sense to me now,and maybe there are some others who will see it that way also, you don't have to accept it if you don't want...and yes some aces really are more than others....just like not everyone is the same in intelligence or IQ or understanding etc.....this is how i see it, i am not saying that others have to agree with it too.

Ok, I feel the need to point out the concept of "asexual elitism" (and why AVEN discourages it) and post a link to this thread on AVEN about it.

That thread doesn't relate to what i'm saying in anyway....i didn't say that if asexual people had or are having sex that they are not asexual anymore, read it again, i still called them asexuals just i categorized them....so yeah, that thread you linked is talking about totally different thing.

Frigid Pink's link to the ace elitism thread is very relevant because of what you said in the first quote. If you think people are "more ace" than others, that's a sense of elitism. Especially because with the things you compared it to, intelligence and understanding, it's good to be higher on the scale rather than lower, it implies you think more highly of asexuals who don't have sex, have never had sex, and will never have sex than other asexuals, and that's pretty elitist.

Since you've also struggled to understand asexuals who have had sex, do have sex, or are willing to have sex, and have been confused if they're actual asexual at all, that's also a form of elitism though elitism through ignorance. And since you've since acknowledged that they are asexual, I'm not calling you elitist.

I'm not saying you're one of those people on AVEN who thinks that because we're asexual we're better than 99% of the world's population. I'm just saying that the phrases you've been using are getting close to sounding elitist.

[BrightCancer]

Why do we need to be separated into groups based on whether or not we've had sex? An orientation is about innate feelings, not actions, and (forgive me if I'm wrong) by scaling us like you propose you seem to be trying to make some people 'more ace' than others.

I did it because that way it makes more sense to me now,and maybe there are some others who will see it that way also, you don't have to accept it if you don't want...and yes some aces really are more than others....just like not everyone is the same in intelligence or IQ or understanding etc.....this is how i see it, i am not saying that others have to agree with it too.

Ok, I feel the need to point out the concept of "asexual elitism" (and why AVEN discourages it) and post a link to this thread on AVEN about it.

That thread doesn't relate to what i'm saying in anyway....i didn't say that if asexual people had or are having sex that they are not asexual anymore, read it again, i still called them asexuals just i categorized them....so yeah, that thread you linked is talking about totally different thing.

Frigid Pink's link to the ace elitism thread is very relevant because of what you said in the first quote. If you think people are "more ace" than others, that's a sense of elitism. Especially because with the things you compared it to, intelligence and understanding, it's good to be higher on the scale rather than lower, it implies you think more highly of asexuals who don't have sex, have never had sex, and will never have sex than other asexuals, and that's pretty elitist.

Since you've also struggled to understand asexuals who have had sex, do have sex, or are willing to have sex, and have been confused if they're actual asexual at all, that's also a form of elitism though elitism through ignorance. And since you've since acknowledged that they are asexual, I'm not calling you elitist.

I'm not saying you're one of those people on AVEN who thinks that because we're asexual we're better than 99% of the world's population. I'm just saying that the phrases you've been using are getting close to sounding elitist.

No that thread doesn't relate to what i said or am saying, and if someone fails to understand that then that's not my problem.

and yes i do think high of some aces than the others, how is that anything wrong even???..... if you think highly of your mom but not your dad does that makes you elitist? ofcourse not, that is something which is not even in your control, if you like someone more than the others you will think highly of them naturally, and that is something very normal and natural.....i would be elitist if i say that people who had sex are not asexuals anymore, and that is what the linked thread is talking about.....i don't care if you agree with what i think or not, you can disagree all you want, that wont change how i think about it and see it.

[Sally]

After reading all the replies i came to this result, that asexuality should have categories and it is not enough just to say that a person is asexual to understand,

from what i understood i divided asexual people in 3 main groups

1- Asexuals who never had sex and never want to ever in any circumstances or for anyone no matter how deep their relation is with someone.

2-Asexuals who had sex in the past but now they don't desire it anymore or want it.

3- Asexuals who had sex in the past and still having, either it's to please someone or they are forced to do so.

from these 3 categories the 3rd one is the hardest for me to understand especially people who say they have sex just to please the other person but they don't desire it or enjoy it, because i can understand if you do something to please someone you like if it's something other than sex, but sex is not something you just do to please someone, and how is that relationship even healthy?? if one person is sacrificing and unhappy and the other is being selfish and don't even care if they are happy or not.

so now everyone can see which one of 3 groups they belong to, i am in the first category, maybe there are more than 3 categories but for now these 3 are which i could think of after reading all the posts.

No, you don't really understand, although we've tried to explain it. Category 2) doesn't exist; asexuaals don't want sex, period, it's not that they wanted it in the past and now don't. And when I was having sex for years, I wasn't "sacrificing and unhappy", and my partners weren't selfish.

You really have no right to categorize or group asexuals in any way, because you aren't living their lives. What you were doing above was telling ME about MY life. Don't do that. LISTEN TO US, instead.

[BrightCancer]

After reading all the replies i came to this result, that asexuality should have categories and it is not enough just to say that a person is asexual to understand,

from what i understood i divided asexual people in 3 main groups

1- Asexuals who never had sex and never want to ever in any circumstances or for anyone no matter how deep their relation is with someone.

2-Asexuals who had sex in the past but now they don't desire it anymore or want it.

3- Asexuals who had sex in the past and still having, either it's to please someone or they are forced to do so.

from these 3 categories the 3rd one is the hardest for me to understand especially people who say they have sex just to please the other person but they don't desire it or enjoy it, because i can understand if you do something to please someone you like if it's something other than sex, but sex is not something you just do to please someone, and how is that relationship even healthy?? if one person is sacrificing and unhappy and the other is being selfish and don't even care if they are happy or not.

so now everyone can see which one of 3 groups they belong to, i am in the first category, maybe there are more than 3 categories but for now these 3 are which i could think of after reading all the posts.

No, you don't really understand, although we've tried to explain it. Category 2) doesn't exist; asexuaals don't want sex, period, it's not that they wanted it in the past and now don't. And when I was having sex for years, I wasn't "sacrificing and unhappy", and my partners weren't selfish.

You really have no right to categorize or group asexuals in any way, because you aren't living their lives. What you were doing above was telling ME about MY life. Don't do that. LISTEN TO US, instead.

category 2 does exist, they are the asexuals who had sex in the past because of any reason either to please someone or peer pressure or just to blend in, can be any reasons, but they really didn't want it or liked it, but then they decided and learned that they don't have to do it anymore under any pressure or for anyone if they don't want it, so they stopped.....that what i meant by number 2.

and you didn't even read all what i said before replying, read my 6th post i said you don't have to accept or agree with what i said or with the categories i made, i made them because it makes more sense to me that way, you can reject it all you want i have no problem with it, so you shouldn't have problem with what i think either...i am not forcing my opinions on anyone so they shouldn't force theirs on me also.....like i said before i don't agree with many things which many people here say about asexuality, and they can do the same with me and disagree.

End of discussion.

[Hardly any]

Discussions on the Internet are never over. Thread ownership is a lie propagated by the liberal media.

OK so

Granted I'm demi so of course I'm a "lesser" person in this convo and on AVEN, but re: why I'd have sex when not desiring it, why does anyone have sex when they don't desire it? It's not unusual for a sexual person to not want sex every time their partner does. "Really? *sigh* OK honey, I don't want you to be miserable." For an asexual (or inactive demi) that'd be the reason every time. Love and wanting to do something for your partner are still things for asexuals. For some, it's not traumatic, it's just not something they enjoy or desire in general. And for others it's traumatic. Neither of these are "more ace".

Besides my being a piece of trash anyway, I had sex the first time not because I particularly wanted it or enjoyed it but because I thought that's just what you do. It's how relationships are done, innit? That instance is what made me realize that I'm actually different, not just an inexperienced scaredy-cat.

That experience isn't what pushes me over the edge into the garbage bin of lesser assholes.

[DannyFenton123]

There's no 'three categories' of aces. We're all equal here ;)

[Raina.]

While there's several identifications on the ace spectrum, I don't understand why you'd think higher of some more than others. That's just ignorant in my opinion? Basically you think your identification is more accurate or real. That's a really unhealthy vision and probably very insulting.

[binary suns]

those categories as a whole don't exist at all because humans are individual.. and such broad categories don't consider the plethora of exceptions that invalidate the categories altogether. additionally, attempting to categorize humans is something that has for a long time been considered immoral in general. people take statistical surveys and sort the resulting information into meaningful groups, but that's a very different thing than attempting to put a human individual into a category.

[Snao Cone]

BrightCancer, if you need to establish these categories to grasp the distinction in your own mind, that's a part of your thought process and not something to be established in the community. Use whatever arguments you want to defend your opinion/level of respect for the aceness of others, but hold yourself accountable for the consequences of your tone. If you make declarations about who is what according to your taxonomy of humans, people are going to push back.

[Perissodactyla]

Sally, are you serious?

If you are, I'm surprised.

Maybe you could consider the historical perspective towards the emergence of the asexual community/movement over many years.

Wasn't AVEN founded in around 2001/2002? And there was a discourse around 'asexuality' long before that, although not so well organized perhaps?

I've spent a 'little' time trying to appreciate some of the history, although not enough to be able to represent what happened.

But many people here at AVEN seem to have been rather intrumental and influential, of course.

I just wonder if there are forum discussions referencing a proper history of the asexuality community/movement.

if you consider the history of the asexuality movement over many years.

What? We're not a movement and we certainly haven't existed in history as asexuals for hardly any years, let alone many years.

[SkyWorld]

Making judgments about other users, especially the validity of their asexuality (in which case who is "more" asexual and who is not), is strongly discouraged. We are here to figure ourselves out, not put each other in boxes.

SkyWorld

Asexual Q&A Co-Moderator

[Sally]

Sally, are you serious?

If you are, I'm surprised.

Maybe you could consider the historical perspective towards the emergence of the asexual community/movement over many years.

Wasn't AVEN founded in around 2001/2002? And there was a discourse around 'asexuality' long before that, although not so well organized perhaps?

I've spent a 'little' time trying to appreciate some of the history, although not enough to be able to represent what happened.

But many people here at AVEN seem to have been rather intrumental and influential, of course.

I just wonder if there are forum discussions referencing a proper history of the asexuality community/movement.

Oval, I don't say things unless I seriously think them. You really don't know enough about me to wonder about that, or be surprised at what I say.

I've been on AVEN for about 9 years now. I don't consider the short time that AVEN has been around to be "history". As I said above, maybe that's a function of my age.

If you can find a forum discussion of a "proper history" of the asexual community, or referencing it as a movement, please let us know. Until then, don't sound shocked when people disagree with you.

[Perissodactyla]

:)

Sally, I guess I was just matching your 'What?' with my 'surprise'? :D Sorry.

There is indeed a historical perspective and chronology of significant texts and activism/movement.

Also the term 'community' is used somewhat interchangeably with 'movement'.

Someone help me out here, since I'm not knowledgeable enough just yet, but later, I could be.

For the culture of the internet and technology, 5 - 10 years is a significant period of historicity.

I just mentioned the historical angle, since it's relevant for the OP to be aware of as they have expressed their understanding so far. Understanding anything usually comes down to history, of course.

It helped ME a lot. :)

if you consider the history of the asexuality movement over many years.

What? We're not a movement and we certainly haven't existed in history as asexuals for hardly any years, let alone many years.

[Sally]

There is indeed a historical perspective and chronology of significant texts and activism/movement.

Tell us about where you found that chronology/history, please -- cites, specifically about asexuality, not celibates or spinsters or other such groups. We already know about Kinsey and Bogaert. (And the latter's most recent book might clear some things up for you.)

Also the term 'community' is used somewhat interchangeably with 'movement'.

Not really. Community is a group of people; movement means an organized activity by a group of people. Asexuality is a group of people who are just beginning to find each other.

[Perissodactyla]

Sure. For starters, I was referring to webpages I discovered a couple of months ago when I made a first attempt to understand how AVEN had developed over the years and how concepts and language had evolved, as well as the community and its activism.

I'm pretty certain you're aware of this kind of informal historical investigation, so I am a bit mystified about the nature of your challenge. I suppose I'm missing something obvious. Sorry.

A brief history of antisexuality

http://skepticsplay.blogspot.ca/2010/12/brief-history-of-antisexuality.html

History: Asexuality & the Nonlibidoism society

http://apositive.org/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=448

This is simply what I had in mind when I referred to history earlier in this thread.

Since I'm a member since April, I haven't focused adequately on appreciating historical developments related to asexuality.

But I sense there is a lot of material to work with, if I were to make a research project, analyzing and interpreting the various discourses and attitudes that have evolved over the past 10-20 years, both publications and informal textual productions, conversations, web essays and blogs, etc.

As for my conflation of 'community' with 'movement', you have a right to be picky about linguistic accuracy, of course, but in practice, I think people commonly interchange the words. And 'movements', while sometimes organized for activism, are sometimes more effective when they just flow in a somewhat chaotic way... generating gradual changes in norms and language about norms.

Okay?

[Nea Rose Symphony]

For the 3 categories there are already categories like that

Sex repulsed: wanting nothing to do with sex whatsoever and/or disgusted by it

Sex neutral: so so with sex. Doesn't care if sex happens or if it doesn't. If it does, it isn't a big deal

Sex positive: happy to have sex with partner, enjoys the sensation, overall attitude towards sex is positive

[Sally]

OK, I've looked at your cites. They do not comport with what you were talking about in your posts, because they're not actual histories but blog entries, and what they discuss happened in the last 10-15 years. That's just not history.

I'll again say I think it would be good if you'd read a lot more in AVEN before you make any more statements about asexuality -- statements in the sense that you are telling us what we are/think/feel/how we're grouped.