Jump to content

A message about AVEN's values


ithaca

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, (Guest) said:

Didn't you already do that a few months ago, and came back just to do it again?

No, I didn't. You're confusing taking a break with having ones account permanently voluntraily suspended. If you can't tell the difference - one is like going for a sleep, the other is more like self-euthanasia.

 

But please, keep the baseless accusations (ah look, another one right above this very post, neat :D... but let's not be needlessly cruel, maybe Maya's text comprehension really is that atrociously poor for innocent reasons *shrug* ) and attempts at ridicule coming, folks. It shows exactly what kind of place AVEN has become.

Link to post
Share on other sites

After receiving some additional information, I rescind my statement and it does seem AVEN has taken a stricter standpoint on the labeling idea. Rather than simply stating what has always been the rule. Since things that used to be acceptable are now receiving action, can the staff or BoD expand upon the thing that caused them to post this thread? Also, expand upon how to avoid getting in trouble for invalidating, while still being able to give detailed information about sexuality and advice that the person may want to keep looking? 

 

Also, when did it become invalidating identity to question a person who adopted the label for someone else using it? We used to question people who threw the asexual label onto other people without any fear of being punished for it, because it's actually not nice to label others. A person should adopt the label themselves, not be given it by someone else. We also used to be able to make our non-support for certain ideas we don't agree with clear. As long as it wasn't aimed at a specific user who identified as that thing, it was always OK to state you didn't really believe in (insertlabel) for orientations. Now, that's against ToS? 

 

A bit confused. It seems things have changed a little since I resigned.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Mystic Maya said:

Do you really need me to quote it:

Yes, it says "fascists" in there. Cool. Not related to your claim, though. I don't see any reference to people choosing their own labels.

 

Feel free to PM me on the matter, I won't contribute to further derailment of this thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Clumsy Fairy

I just want to chime in here with something I feel strongly about, and I will break with tradition and try and keep it as short as I can.

 

I believe that many young people are mis-labeling themselves as asexuals. Especially young women. I have spent quite some time looking in to this, and I really feel it is something that AVEN should look in to seriously. 

 

The reason is that many younger people seem to treat a label in a similar way to a religion, and consciously or otherwise let that label define them, and not just use a label as a description of a feeling.

 

I believe that this has the potential to do harm in the social development of young people, and I think it is important to define asexuality, and also inform people that there are other more hormonal causes of apparent asexuality. 

 

Many young women do not start to desire sex at all until their mid to late 20s, and there is plenty of research to show this. If someone has cognitively latched on to asexuality as a way of life, rather than a description who is to say what effect this may have on someones life or development. 

 

I have always been very curious as to why AVEN's demographics are the way they are, and while I have some theories, surly as a community we have a responsibility to make sure that we are not inadvertently doing any harm in effectively promoting asexuality. This is not to say I am convinced AVEN is negatively influencing anyone, just that even the most well meaning policies can have unexpected effects.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Homer said:

Yes, it says "fascists" in there. Cool. Not related to your claim, though. I don't see any reference to people choosing their own labels.

 

Feel free to PM me on the matter, I won't contribute to further derailment of this thread.

They called Aven Fascists for the issues in this topic, just because it doesn't directly say it plainly doesn't mean that's any less what it's saying.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, (Guest) said:

I'd happily go to sleep right now though....for a very long time. Wake me up if and when AVEN becomes a better place for most (not inc. the improvement by me sleeping)....^_^

Ain't gonna happen, bub. That's the point of this thread, right from the OP - the BoD conclusively stated that they ain't ever gonna let it happen, they just did so with more palatable language.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Lord Grep said:

I just want to chime in here with something I feel strongly about, and I will break with tradition and try and keep it as short as I can.

 

I believe that many young people are mis-labeling themselves as asexuals. Especially young women. I have spent quite some time looking in to this, and I really feel it is something that AVEN should look in to seriously. 

 

The reason is that many younger people seem to treat a label in a similar way to a religion, and consciously or otherwise let that label define them, and not just use a label as a description of a feeling.

 

I believe that this has the potential to do harm in the social development of young people, and I think it is important to define asexuality, and also inform people that there are other more hormonal causes of apparent asexuality. 

 

Many young women do not start to desire sex at all until their mid to late 20s, and there is plenty of research to show this. If someone has cognitively latched on to asexuality as a way of life, rather than a description who is to say what effect this may have on someones life or development. 

 

I have always been very curious as to why AVEN's demographics are the way they are, and while I have some theories, surly as a community we have a responsibility to make sure that we are not inadvertently doing any harm in effectively promoting asexuality. This is not to say I am convinced AVEN is negatively influencing anyone, just that even the most well meaning policies can have unexpected effects.

This post reminds me so much of the comments talked about on Swank Ivy's videos

"it's just a phase" "you'll grow out of it" "you should get your hormones checked" ect.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Mysticus Insanus said:

Ain't gonna happen, bub. That's the point of this thread, right from the OP - the BoD conclusively stated that they ain't ever gonna let it happen, they just did so with more palatable language.

Your ideas wouldn't make it better

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Mystic Maya said:

This post reminds me so much of the comments talked about on Swank Ivy's videos

"it's just a phase" "you'll grow out of it" "you should get your hormones checked" ect.

Yet all of these are things to take into consideration. That doesn't mean that getting hormones checked will change anything, it doesn't mean that asexuality doesn't exist, but it could be and it would be fatal not to provide all of this as a point to look at when seeking education. It's a collection of things to look at before jumping to a conclusion. Whatever the final result may be.

Link to post
Share on other sites

How many people in this thread, have previously argued that Aven needs to be more inclusive?  I know of at least one for a fact. 

 

Grep, you can't just exclude young women out of the asexual community. You're basically stating that women don't know their own minds while men do. 

 

You can be female and Asexual.

You can be of any race and Asexual. 

You can be gay and Asexual. 

You can be trans* and Asexual. 

You can be disabled and Asexual. 

You can enjoy sex, not care or be repulsed by it, still asexual. 

 

Guess what else? You can support this BoD statement or resent it and I will still support your right to identify as you choose. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Ciri said:

How many people in this thread, have previously argued that Aven needs to be more inclusive?  I know of at least one for a fact. 

That one definitely wasn't me, though. :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Ciri said:

Grep, you can't just exclude young women out of the asexual community. You're basically stating that women don't know their own minds while men do.

That's why he didn't do that :) What makes you say so? It's a ridiculous claim to make. He said that there is scientific evidence that a significant amount of women only develop interest in partnered sexual activity at some point in their 20s, hence a greater possibility to mis-label ladyself before that. That doesn't exclude anyone and it certainly doesn't evaluate the ability of knowing one's mind.

 

I believe that "being inclusive" is another term terribly misunderstood on here. To me it means: Come and join us, ask questions, provide insight, try to figure stuff out, feel welcome. It does not mean that anyone is encouraged to join and call themselves ace.

Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Mystic Maya said:

This post reminds me so much of the comments talked about on Swank Ivy's videos

"it's just a phase" "you'll grow out of it" "you should get your hormones checked" ect.

Showering your friend/colleague/relative/... in half knowledge about hormones upon hearing the word "asexual" is an inconsiderate thing to do, but just cause it's one of these statements people rant about in youtube videos doesn't mean all aven needs to play dumb and pretend like medical science is a fairytale.


Same goes for development. Nothing wrong with encouraging young members to question things in a respectful and supportive way. That really got nothing to do with "you'll grow out of it". 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Clumsy Fairy
23 minutes ago, Ciri said:
 

Grep, you can't just exclude young women out of the asexual community. You're basically stating that women don't know their own minds while men do. 

 

31 minutes ago, Mystic Maya said:
 

This post reminds me so much of the comments talked about on Swank Ivy's videos

"it's just a phase" "you'll grow out of it" "you should get your hormones checked" ect.

 

This is NOT what I mean at ALL... I am not saying anyone should be excluded from any community, or saying that anyone will "grow out of it", or that all asexuality is causal. I know, and have mentioned before that mine is. I have very low testosterone because of long term morphine usage. I do not experience any sexual desire what so ever, however I understand that, that is not the same as other people describe their asexuality. See the whole Chemo-Asexuality thread. 

 

I have concerns about just ignoring the causation (or possible causation). I am not saying even the people with causation should be excluded. I have posted many many times about this. I use the label myself "asexual" but I know it is different to those people who have a "healthy" libido but no desire for intimacy. 

 

If you read the thread I mention above you will see people saying that I am "not asexual", and while I disagree, I feel strongly they had the right to express it. I learned so much from that thread. 

 

I single out young women as just 1 example where I can see a clear possible chain of events that could negatively effect someone, and as AVEN apparently has a very high demographic of young women, it is something that concerns me. 

 

AGAIN... I am not advocating the exclusion of ANYONE. I wish we would all figure out a way to more clearly define things so that meaningful discussions can take place that don't just end up arguments about definitions. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
ChillaKilla

I love SwankIvy tbh

Link to post
Share on other sites
Anthracite_Impreza

The worst part for me is I'm hardly commenting on a lot of 'am I ace?' threads just because I'm worried I'll get warned. This is a ridiculous state of affairs where even when you write 'I (don't) think you're ace because...' is seen by some people as invalidation. We can't just tell people what they wanna hear otherwise what's the friggin' point? No, we shouldn't be saying 'you're (not) ace' but we shouldn't be afraid to educate on what asexuality is and whether we think they are!

 

Can we please have some guarantee that as long as we're polite we aren't going to get warned for telling it as we see it? Even if it ends up as a debate (not an argument)? Otherwise I'm gonna stop bothering with help threads and so is everyone else who doesn't just post 'only you can tell! :cake:'.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/13/2017 at 9:55 PM, ℃å℞t☉☧hℹĿẹ• said:

Yeah but if someone said "I'm a gay man, I only desire sex with women and would never have sex with a man" almost anyone anywhere (especially in the gay community) would take massive issue with that. If someone said "I'm a straight woman, I only desire sex with women and would never have sex with a man" almost every person alive would tell her she's confused about what straight means and is not, in fact, straight. The same standards do not apply to asexuality though which causes it to lose a lot of value as a true orientation in the eyes of almost all sexuals and many people within this community. It's more a label you can identify with for whatever reason if you feel like it, which isn't something that applies to homosexuality, heterosexuality, or bisexuality. 

 

I haven't been part of the asexual community very long but its seems like most people treat asexuality as a mental state that has nothing to do with a set of physical actions or criteria. I get that we don't want to tell people who they are or what to believe but isn't that the point of labels? We want to be all inclusive but labels are by nature exclusionary. A certain set of criteria is usually met and the label is based on that criteria. if you can say you're something and be that without meeting any criteria or there is no criteria to meet then why have labels?  If labels are going to be so ambiguous do they still count as labels? We're in a community where no one knows what asexuality means because we are not allowed to define it even in the most basic terms. The OP says "AVEN uses a “lack of sexual attraction” definition as default, but there is no requirement every member has to agree with this.". In that sentence it says there's a definition of asexuality but you don't have to meet that definition to be asexual. Then why have the definition in the first place? Or perhaps we want asexuality to be an ambiguous term. If that's the case every time I see a "Am I asexual?" post. I'll say "yes, you are if you believe you are" like a crappy motivational speaker offering empty, nonsensical advice. I know when I came here I was lost on my own and "yes, you are if you believe you are" offered me no help. I wasn't looking for someone to tell me what I was. I was looking for someone with more information about this topic to help guide me to a better understanding of asexuality so I could decide what I was for myself. To do that I needed to be given real information and a lot of it had labels that I fell into or didn't. Without those exclusionary labels I would have never found what I was looking for. The more ambiguous something is the harder it is to understand.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, michaeld said:

First thing is, there are different views on asexuality even within the board, admods and PT - although we respect our different opinions and it's never caused an issue when doing joint visibility projects. Some hold to something similar to the collective identity model (see AVENwiki for details) - by which asexuality is fundamentally a collective phenomenon, defined by the people who self-identify as asexual. I think it might be fair to call this view the "asexuality is anyone who identifies that way" point of view.

 

There's also the view that asexuality is a tool not a label. This is held by some board members. (I respect this view though it isn't necessarily my own.) By this reckoning asexuality is a word that people should use as long as it has a use to them.

 

There are also people, such as myself, who are on the more "objectivist" wing. I consider asexuality to not be defined by self-identity. The notion of asexuality I use is an objective phenomenon (note objective... NOT the same as precisely defined or measurable - I might expand on this point in future). I view asexuality as a sexual orientation. I actually think it's possible to incorrectly self-identify as asexual (according to my word usage) and it's quite possible for someone to be asexual even if they've never heard the term before.

So the board can't even agree on what Asexuality is? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Clumsy Fairy

Asexual -=- Defined as anything.

Visibility -=- <waves & throws glitter>

Education -=- What exactly is the message, and to whom are we attempting to deliver said message?

Network -=- Well I guess this is the internet.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Amnesiac said:

So the board can't even agree on what Asexuality is? 

Just that it's a totally legit orientation, and totally not a choice, nuh-uh. (Even when everyone with half a brain can clearly see that you most definitely can choose to fulfill or not to fulfill AVEN's criterion, of saying the magic words or not. "I'm ace" - poof, asexual. "I'm not ace" - poof, no longer asexual. Sensible people will draw their own conclusions about the legitimacy of this entire "asexuality" thing from that, and how much of a clue AVEN has about how legitimate sexual orientations even work.

 

Beyond that... yeah, there's woefully little to base the "E" in AVEN on anymore. But that's the price to pay for worshipping at the altar of a core value of total inclusivity, which is how the Head Honchos want this site to be, so... *shrug*

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Lord Grep said:

Asexual -=- Defined as anything.

Visibility -=- <waves & throws glitter>

Education -=- What exactly is the message, and to whom are we attempting to deliver said message?

Network -=- Well I guess this is the internet.

 

I hereby propose renaming this site to N.

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Mysticus Insanus said:

Just that it's a totally legit orientation, and totally not a choice, nuh-uh. (Even when everyone with half a brain can clearly see that you most definitely can choose to fulfill or not to fulfill AVEN's criterion, of saying the magic words or not. "I'm ace" - poof, asexual. "I'm not ace" - poof, no longer asexual. Sensible people will draw their own conclusions about the legitimacy of this entire "asexuality" thing from that, and how much of a clue AVEN has about how legitimate sexual orientations even work.

 

Beyond that... yeah, there's woefully little to base the "E" in AVEN on anymore. But that's the price to pay for worshipping at the altar of a core value of total inclusivity, which is how the Head Honchos want this site to be, so... *shrug*

Aven offers definitions but also lets people choose if or not they want to use a label for themselves, your exaggerated argument against it makes no sense.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, CakeSpadeAce said:

@Mysticus Insanus I envy you being able to say whatever you want until your account gets suspended xD

I'm still not Skulls (much that I love her)... so even in my last two weeks here, I will still try my best not to break TOS, because I want to leave this place on my own terms with my head held high, not due to the ban hammer.

 

But am I going to criticize AVEN for having lost its way while I 'm still here?

 

You. Frickin'. Bet. :) 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Clumsy Fairy
58 minutes ago, Mystic Maya said:
 
 
 

Aven offers definitions but also lets people choose if or not they want to use a label for themselves, your exaggerated argument against it makes no sense.

 

T2Bpdcc.png

 

{EDIT] There is a prize for who ever works this joke out BTW.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Adamant Vitriol and Egregiousness Network

 

(I'm kidding. Mostly.)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Anthracite_Impreza

@Mystic Maya; I get that ultimately we can't tell people how to identify, I mean, literally, we can't, but if we don't have a core definition we can all agree on how the hell can we ever be taken seriously? Would gay people ever have been if their definition was 'you can be gay if you say so!'?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...