Fitzsimmons ♡

A message about AVEN's values

Recommended Posts

Homer   
Homer

You claimed that

21 minutes ago, Mystic Maya said:

calling Aven fascist for letting people choose their own labels

has happened. Where?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Skycaptain   
Skycaptain

AVENistes seem to have one core value. Derail threads whenever possible :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest   
Guest
On 14/03/2017 at 7:38 AM, Mysticus Insanus said:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
michaeld   
michaeld

Thanks all for the interesting comments. I have just a few remarks - this is me speaking as a member not as a member of the BoD (or as PT for that matter).

 

(1) As many have pointed out, the no-labeling rule is not at all new. It has always been the case here, certainly well before I joined (in 2009).

 

(2) Offering advice and information to people asking whether they are asexual is OK as long as one is respectful of their own thoughts and feelings on the matter. Saying for example that sexual identifying people experience something that might be similar to what they're describing (might - because language isn't a totally precise way of identifying experiences) is OK, but being dismissive of their reasons (whether provisional or otherwise) for identifying how they do, is not ok. Support and general information is fine.

 

(3) Some have raised the point AVEN allows many different definitions of asexuality. Since the default definition we use is lack of sexual attraction (a definition I support - I plan to make a detailed post about this at some point), if we didn't allow people to use their preferred definition, then we would be enforcing everyone uses the lack of sexual attraction definition. Would that be a good outcome? I don't think so.

 

(4) Lastly I would like to make the point that the no-label rule is not an ideology about asexuality. Neither is it a definition of asexuality. It is not "asexuality is whatever anyone wants it to be". This point has come up a few times in different threads so I think it's worth expanding on somewhat.

 

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 what gives? Well what I believe is that even though it's possible for someone to misidentify as asexual (relative to my personal notion of what asexuality is), the harm in contradicting their self-identity on a personal level far outweighs any possible benefit. They know their own experiences better than I do. They know how their words translate to their own personal experiences better than I do. They are also entitled to not agree with my personal notion of asexuality. (If everyone had to agree with me, everyone would use the sexual attraction definition for one thing.)

 

Contradicting people's self-identity is potentially a type I error. People have often had a lifetime of dismissal and invalidation. It's not for me or anyone else to continue that here even if I personally believe that their sexual orientation is something else, based on my personal understanding of the language they use to describe their experiences, according to my personal notion of what asexuality is.

 

That is why we draw a clear line between offering general information, advice, support, possible definitions (and yes, that includes alternative definitions to the no sexual attraction definition - we've been clear that agreeing with this definition isn't in the rules, even though it is the default definition AVEN uses) and labelling or invalidating people's identity.

 

If people later decide they're wrong about their self-identification, they'll do so at their own pace, but contradicting people on an individual level is not doing anything for visibility and education, and could be doing a lot of harm to individuals, and making AVEN a less accepting and welcoming area.

 

Again thanks all for your input,

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member44496   
Member44496

 

14 minutes ago, Homer said:

You claimed that

has happened. Where?

Do you really need me to quote it:

2 hours ago, Mysticus Insanus said:

And if disavowment of values you firmly disagree with, up to and including the point where one physically distances oneself from places and organizations where such values are espoused, is beginning to be a thing not to be accepted on here - well, congrats, AVEN - you folks may pat yourselves on the back for still continuing to ban words starting with N, F, and K, but you have nonetheless become unapologetic fascists, who just happen to personally have nothing against the usual suspects that most other prominent fascists dislike. So proud of you for being all liberal and enlightened, because heck, you obviously totes like blacks, Jews, and the LGBT! *slow clap*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mysticus Insanus   
Mysticus Insanus
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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Serran   
Serran

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest   
Guest
On 15/03/2017 at 1:09 PM, Mysticus Insanus said:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Homer   
Homer
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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
G0D   
G0D

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member44496   
Member44496
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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mysticus Insanus   
Mysticus Insanus
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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member44496   
Member44496
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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member44496   
Member44496
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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Homer   
Homer
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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ciri   
Ciri

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. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mysticus Insanus   
Mysticus Insanus
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:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Homer   
Homer
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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
fiѕh   
fiѕh
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". 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
G0D   
G0D
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. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ChillaKilla   
ChillaKilla

I love SwankIvy tbh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Anthracite_Impreza   
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:'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
aeimquy159   
aeimquy159
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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Amnesiac   
Amnesiac
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? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
G0D   
G0D

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.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mysticus Insanus   
Mysticus Insanus
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*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mysticus Insanus   
Mysticus Insanus
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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member44496   
Member44496
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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now