Jump to content

Are asexuals officially queer? Is the A for asexuals, instead of (or along side) ally?


Recommended Posts

I just went to college orientation and they gave us speech after speech about acceptance and awareness. My group leader mentioned the LGBTQA community. I got really excited, I thought  Finally! Somebody will at least say the word 'asexual' so curious people can look it up later. At high school (once I found out I wasn't repressed and in need of fixing), I asked the sexual and gender alliance and they said the A is for asexual....but the orientation leader said A is ally. Does that mean Asexuals are queer? If not, could it be a mistake on his note card? I thought it was a mistake until I looked at their lgbt+ website and found the same thing. So, are we officially queer or what?

 

Also note, 5 years of my preteen and teen years were seriously screwed up by my lack of information on the topic. I thought I repressed my sexual desires and then I thought I needed fixed, my friends said I'd mature eventually so I left it at that. I was always left out of groups cause I didn't understand what they were talking about. I eventually met somebody who used the term and it all made sense to me, now I'm trying to find where I fit within the college life.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Queerness tends to be more of an individual perspective among AVENites. I personally am for sure, simply because I'm definitely not straight.

Some people outside the a-spec communities take a very hostile view to the thought that someone who isn't trans and doesn't experience same gender attraction could be queer though.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, queer pretty much just means "not heteronormative" which by default if you are ace or somewhere on that spectrum, you are probably queer (even if you're heteroromantic ace). Because heteronormative means being straight (meaning heterosexual and heteroromantic). Also, what college are you talking about? Most schools I know of -- or just groups in general -- consider asexual to be the A in LGBTQIAP. Some people within the community think that we don't count because where as most of everyone within that experiences sexual attraction, we don't. But, pretty sure that in most communities that I know of, A stands for asexual (and also aromantic, don't forget that because that's important too). Our community plus the intersex and pansexual community don't get a lot of visibility but we're working on it. What I would do is ask your group leader about asexuality, and ask them if they know what it means, as well as ask them why asexuality isn't a but ally is. Make sure to remind them that ally, regardless of the fact that people want to put it on there, is not related to anything in the community, it just simply means "Yeah, I support you." And I'm pretty sure that support and sexual orientation/romantic orientation/gender and sex have 0% relation with each other.

Link to post
Share on other sites

FramciumSenpai, it's Penn State University Park. Also, I can't ask the guy because orientation is over and I don't know how to contact him

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no official consensus because there can't be. The LGBT+ community isn't a unified organization. There is a lot of disagreement on the issue. 

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, this issue has come up a lot so I'm just copy-pasting stuff and it's a lot, sorry:

All of this is just my personal opinion. There is a lot of disagreement on this topic, but I hope this helps understand the issue more in depth.

 

First off, we need to make the distinction between belonging in the community and belonging in the acronym.

I think distinguishing two different ways people can belong to LGBT+ would help make more sense of this controversy.

1. They have an identity that technically makes them included under the LGBT+ acronym.

2. They participate in or even organize LGBT+ events and go to LGBT spaces that make them (feel like they are) part of the community.

Allies can have number 2, but not number 1. People who don't feel LGBT+ but technically would count as LGBT+ have number 1, but not number 2.

 

So allies belong in the community, not in the acronym. Just like being active on AVEN forums and going to ace-meetups doesn't make you asexual, being an ally doesn't make you LGBT+, it makes you part of the community. Being an ally is an action, not a fixed identity. (http://everydayfeminism.com/2016/08/lgbtqia-shouldnt-include-ally/) It's something you need to keep doing in order to keep belonging to the LGBT+ community.

Being part of the acronym isn't like that, you don't need to do anything to be part of the LGBT+ acronym. You will just be 'technically' included based on your identity. Aces will need to put in as much effort as allies to be considered a part of the LGBT+ community though. Those are simply two different ways of belonging with different sets of criteria and different people who are included.

I don't think they should be conflated, because that usually leads to infighting about whether aces or allies have more rights to be in the LGBT+ community and acronym, while to me it's obvious that allies belong in the LGBT+ community more than aces, and aces belong in the LGBT+ acronym more than allies. These are two different ways of belonging and I don't think it would make sense to put one above the other, or to exclude people who only have number 1 or number 2.

 

People of all kinds of different identities don't really feel part of the community even though they technically are included. There's actually even some binary transgender people like that (Kat Blaque would be an example).

 

Second, we need to make a distinction between LGBT+ and LGBT, which I don't think should always be used interchangeably.

Aces aren't considered LGBT (unless they're also gay or trans or bi), but I'd assume they're included in LGBT+.

If someone says 'LGBT' I'll think that person didn't mean to include aces, and if someone says LGBT+ I'll know aces probably are included.

I use these two acronyms separately. They mean slightly different things by including different groups of people. That doesn't make one of them wrong.

In the end LGBT(+) is just a shorthand for talking about a group of people (that may not really have that much in common). If you want to make a movie about the history of gay, bisexual and trans people, but don't intend to talk about any of the other identities, then why would you put LGBTQIA+ in the title? Wouldn't that be misleading?

 

I think you should be able to choose whether you want to include aces at that particular moment. When you're talking about LGBT history, or something else specific to those four letters, there's no reason to include asexuals. When you're talking about the collection of all sexual minorities, you should include aces.

And honestly I think thát (whether we're a sexual, romantic or gender minority) should be the main criteria for whether or not we belong in the LGBT+ acronym. That acronym should include all gender and sexual minorities, regardless of whether they're oppressed or not.

 

So, LGBT = no aces

LGBT+ = yes aces.


Third, I think the issue of whether asexuality falls under LGBT or LGBT+ is a different issue than whether it can be called queer.

I have more difficulty with the word 'queer' because that word was reclaimed by people who personally had it used against them, and the word was (as far as I'm aware) not used against asexuals. Some older gay people, who have personally been hurt by this word, would rather have nobody use that word at all, so you have to be careful using it anyways. This first video is about reclaiming the word queer. The second video has too much info for me to summarize.

Spoiler

 

 

In the end I simply don't know whether aces should call themselves queer based on their asexuality alone (in the absence of other queer identities), but I think not allowing them to would be wrong. My asexuality certainly makes me feel queer. That's the most queer thing about me.

 

I think whether individual aces and aros consider themselves part of the community should be up to them, but the issue of whether asexuality as a whole should be included in the acronym is harder to tackle.

 

Arguments against the inclusion of asexuality in LGBT(+)/queer communities or acronyms:

 

1. One of the arguments people use is that they don't want the asexual community to be completely integrated into the larger umbrella community for fear of losing independence and for fear that ace-specific interests would be dismissed as niche interests. That's a fair argument, but is there really such a thing as a singular LGBT (+) community? Or are there separate communities for each of the letters that just happen to be put together in one alphabet soup but don't actually have that much in common? (I think it's the latter). 

 

I think that all of the letters in LGBT(+) are basically largely separate communities. I don't think they have merged that much. I think of all of the letters as fairly independent subcommunities of an LGBT+ umbrella community. It would be completely possible for the ace/aro community to keep its independence while also being placed under that umbrella. I don't think that much would really change.

 

Let's not forget that the needs and experiences of the trans community are completely different from the ones of the gay community, the lesbian community and the bi community. Same goes for the other letters. My sister is very much into this whole bi community thing (she's bi) and according to her one of the largest issues her community faces is the dismissive attitude of gay people. Apparently a lot of lesbians aren't even wiling to consider dating bi girls because of the 'bicurious' stereotypes. Apparently most bi guys are being told by gay guys that "Yeah I was bi too before I had the courage to come out. Don't worry, you'll get there."

 

I think we wouldn't be out of place, and we wouldn't need to give up any independence.

 

2. There are some aces who don't want to be considered queer or LGBT+ because they don't want all of the baggage that would come with it, which is a fair argument, not only because I'd rather not have homophobes hate on us for no reason, but also because the LGBT community has some serious internal issues, for example with racism, sexism, fatphobia and just intersectionality in general.

 

https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/no-fats-no-femmes-documentary-lgbt#/ 

http://www.pride.com/firstperson/2016/4/28/no-fats-no-fems-shirt-everything-thats-wrong-gay-community 

 

And I can't be the only one to have noticed that the rainbow flag seems to have been claimed by gay males, while every other subcommunity has its own flag now. Google 'gay flag' and you'll see rainbow flags pop up, google 'lesbian flag' and suddenly your screen turns pink, google 'bisexual flag' and you'll have yet another set of colours fill your screen, and so on with every other identity that's supposedly represented by the rainbow flag. Why are gay males the only ones not to have their own flag? Why do they get to claim the rainbow? Why are they always the most visible within the community and on gay prides?

 

Maybe the ace community can be more inclusive on its own? Maybe it's better off without the LGBT community? I feel like AVEN is doing a better job at the whole intersectionality thing than the LGBT community in general.

 

3. We should decide on what we mean by 'belonging in the community'. What do we want out of it?  If aces can lay claim to some of the LGBT specific resources, that may create animosity, since in effect you are taking away resources from the other letters in the acronym. I don't know whether that animosity is justified or not. That's a difficult question.

What would it even mean to have asexuality included in the LGBT+ community/acronym? Would anything actually change? I personally think the ace community would stay as isolated from the rest of the community as it is now.

  • Is it about whether we should be considered a sexual minority?
  • Or whether we should be considered queer?
  • Is it about whether we should have access to specific resources (such as community spaces, specific suicide hotlines etc)?
  • Is it about whether an A should be added to the acronym?
  • Is it about being more integrated into the larger LGBT+ community?
  • Is it about gaining legitimacy and spreading awareness? 
  • Is it about gaining respect from the community?
  • Is it about finding a place we belong? (Asexuality isn't well understood by the general population, but I don't feel much more at home or understood in the LGBT community)
  • Is it about sharing research academic theory and discourse? The ace community might have a lot to offer to the general LGBT community with all of the new concepts and words it has coined.
  • Is it about sharing activist tactics? Or about working together as activists? We could have a lot to learn from older and more experienced gay and trans activists.

What do we really want out of this? 

The answer to whether we should belong in the LGBT+ community depends on what we're trying to achieve, doesn't it?

My answer (on whether or not we belong) sure would depend on what you want to do once you're in the community, or acronym or whatever.

 

4. Maybe it would be good to mention the hypersexualization of queer identities too. Queer identities are considered inherently sexual and inappropriate by a good chunk of mainstream society:

Spoiler

 

And I don't think gay prides help with that either. The ones I've been to (in Amsterdam) celebrated sex and all sorts of fetishes more overtly than they celebrated diversity, gay/trans identities or their specific struggles. 

I can't be the only one to say that I don't feel much for being hypersexualized. Not being associated with the LGBT community can be a good thing in some ways.

 

This video by the author of The Invisible Orientation is really helpful for understanding this topic more:

Spoiler

 

 

Opinion videos on the topic of whether aces belong in the LGBT+.

Spoiler

 

 

Threads copy-pasted from, included so you can read people's criticism on what I wrote:

 

 

 

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

LGBT+ and queer aren't entirely synonymous. There are lots of LGBT+ who don't at all identify or interact within the subculture of 'queer', and would rather not be differentiated from 'non-queers' in that way.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

If you aren't a cis heteromantic heterosexual then you're part of the community, period.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm 99% certain that the "A" stands for asexual/aromantic.  I think it's usually seen as just LGBTQ or LGBT+, but if there is an A, then it should stand for asexual/aromantic.  I think aces are included in the +, maybe the Q too, I honestly don't know.  But I don't think anyone is going to say, "Your letter isn't in our acronym, so you can't be friends with us!"

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, AceAlexa said:

Your letter isn't in our acronym, so you can't be friends with us!

I've had a few people (online) do something like this, but the vast majority of the time I would agree with you.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, AceAlexa said:

I'm 99% certain that the "A" stands for asexual/aromantic.  I think it's usually seen as just LGBTQ or LGBT+, but if there is an A, then it should stand for asexual/aromantic.  I think aces are included in the +, maybe the Q too, I honestly don't know.  But I don't think anyone is going to say, "Your letter isn't in our acronym, so you can't be friends with us!"

That's what I thought too, but I guess these guys categorize us under queer? If they said asexual and allies, I'd be fine. But they don't mention it at all. They have a chance to inform an entire class of students (roughly 8000 people) about something I wish was better known and they only said ally. If I had known what this was I wouldn't have suffered years of teasing and being confused about crushes and sexual stuff. They could have informed so many people...

https://studentaffairs.psu.edu/lgbtqa/mission.shtml 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Lirpaderp said:

That's what I thought too, but I guess these guys categorize us under queer? If they said asexual and allies, I'd be fine. But they don't mention it at all. They have a chance to inform an entire class of students (roughly 8000 people) about something I wish was better known and they only said ally. If I had known what this was I wouldn't have suffered years of teasing and being confused about crushes and sexual stuff. They could have informed so many people...

https://studentaffairs.psu.edu/lgbtqa/mission.shtml 

Maybe you should shoot them an email and tell them.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Lirpaderp said:

That's what I thought too, but I guess these guys categorize us under queer? If they said asexual and allies, I'd be fine. But they don't mention it at all. They have a chance to inform an entire class of students (roughly 8000 people) about something I wish was better known and they only said ally. If I had known what this was I wouldn't have suffered years of teasing and being confused about crushes and sexual stuff. They could have informed so many people...

https://studentaffairs.psu.edu/lgbtqa/mission.shtml 

Did you notice they have "straight talks"?  That seems ironic.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
To Each Their Own

The Trevor Project has started to incorporate training and education about Asexuality. This is incredibly important!

Many of us have said that if we had know about asexuality we could have avoided (in my case) decades of pain and confusion. When I heard about this, I literally cried tears of joy!!  

 

People can bicker over resources all day long. But the fact is, we are stronger together. We can save more lives together. 

 

Love Wins. 

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
The_Reluctant_Dragon
On 7/19/2017 at 1:52 PM, Just Me, Myself and...Zie? said:

LGBT+ and queer aren't entirely synonymous. There are lots of LGBT+ who don't at all identify or interact within the subculture of 'queer', and would rather not be differentiated from 'non-queers' in that way.

That is true, not everybody who can identify as queer don't identify as queer. But, at least I believe, is that if your not a cisgender male or female, heterosexual and heteromantic you can, but don't have to, identify as queer. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...