Jump to content

Should asexuality be included in LGBT?


ryan10242

Should asexuality be included in LGBT?  

  1. 1. Check all that you agree with

    • Yes, it should be LGBTA (plus maybe others)
      47
    • We should identify with the queer movement
      56
    • No, LGBT is very different to asexuality
      33
    • Asexuality is very separate from the queer movement
      24
    • Maybe
      27
    • Other (Please Explain Below!)
      5

This poll is closed to new votes


Recommended Posts

I know this is a debate that has surfaced before- but I want figures to see what people think.

Should we go with the LGBT (or any rearrangement of those letters) movement, or should we stay seperate?

IN COMMON- not 'normal', misunderstood

NOT IN COMMON- sex drive, more persecution than us

What are your thoughts?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Asexuals should be under the Queer banner, because we're "odder" than homosexuality, which is now mainly recognised, if not accepted. I think that acronyms need to stop, because there's a huge heap of gender and sexuality variations that should be under LGBTetc. I'd be happy having asexuality added to the stack of acronyms, but I think other things deserve to be added to the stack first.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I say no, because asexuality is more of a subcategory of those categories. Like you can be straight and asexual, or bi-asexual, and so on.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Asexuals should be under the Queer banner, because we're "odder" than homosexuality, which is now mainly recognised, if not accepted. I think that acronyms need to stop, because there's a huge heap of gender and sexuality variations that should be under LGBTetc. I'd be happy having asexuality added to the stack of acronyms, but I think other things deserve to be added to the stack first.

I agree with you, perticularly about the acronyms, which could go on forever. I'm just not a big fan of the "queer" banner.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I voted for We should identify with the queer movement and Other because I think the acronym should just be shortened to an umbrella term such as SVA (Sexuality Variations Alliance) or just call it a Queer Alliance.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Asexuals should be under the Queer banner, because we're "odder" than homosexuality, which is now mainly recognised, if not accepted.

Ha, I agree with that... at 1% to their 10%, we're MUCH queerer! I think the use of "queer" might vary by country. Am I right that it's more of an insult in the UK? I also agree that the acronym can get out of control, so that's why I like something like "queer" for all of us, and for people who don't fit into categories as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I think the use of "queer" might vary by country. Am I right that it's more of an insult in the UK?

Yup, it is. Generally only used for homosexual too as opposed to non-heterosexuals.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yup.

As far as I'm concerned, I personally have always felt a part of the LGBTetc movement, I think that ase can definitely be a part of that. I *don't* think that it *should* be, or ase people *should* be, since some don't wish to be included, but I think that they should be embraced by the organisation, and I'll very happily call myself queer (esp since my mode of asexuality is getting harder to think through, as people tend to say ase = no sex these days - the label of 'queer' is fluid, so I find it more useful).

I am quite angry that I am actively discriminated against by the very people I want to represent - current National Union of Students policy means I'm not allowed to go to conference, because I don't exist. I'm angry. The minor queer movement in the UK is very accepting of me though! :D

Link to post
Share on other sites
SlightlyMetaphysical

I'm with Jibun. I don't think we really need an extra letter, as long as they recognise us as part of them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I voted yes and maybe.

As emmarainbow said, people have the right to choose their identity labels and as I see it, the a/sexual question comes as a fork in the tree trunk before you hit all of the different branches for preference. Some people are asexual and straight so they might not place themselves in a community based on sexual diversity when they consider themselves pretty normal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No. There are many straight asexuals. Much more-so than so than gay I would say. So that alone would rule us out of the LGBT (or non-straight) grouping.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I say no, because asexuality is more of a subcategory of those categories. Like you can be straight and asexual, or bi-asexual, and so on.

I agree. I think it's an entirely different thing: we aren't attracted to CERTAIN people, we're not attracted to ANYONE. And I think hitching a ride on a bus that's been moving fast for years would dilute what we're trying to say. We're not just another letter.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've seen it written as GBLTIQ

Link to post
Share on other sites
No. There are many straight asexuals. Much more-so than so than gay I would say. So that alone would rule us out of the LGBT (or non-straight) grouping.

So that means you're heteroromantic-- not heterosexual, which is what "straight" is usually defined as. I think those two things are different, but your mileage may vary.

Link to post
Share on other sites

For what it's worth...

...my thinking is this: there is no reason for asexuals to be made to feel uncomfortable under a "queer" label. As a gay man, I think that all the various groups force a certain amount of re-thinking among the general population about things that might never have been so regarded otherwise.

As for the alphabet soup ("LGBTA," or whatever,) I say: suit yourself, but for me, I think that a single umbrella term (such as "queer") can suffice for all sexual minorities. If we insist on a letter for each group, then stop and consider:

--lesbians

--gay men

--bisexuals

--transsexuals

--transvestites (...yep, a second "T"...)

--asexuals

--other queer, such as pomosexuals, for example

--questioning individuals (...and a second "Q" to go with the second "T"...)

You see? It's already clumsy. I say just choose one word (and "queer" works for me) and identify all groups that way. Then, as discussions progress, individual people can use more specific terms (gay, asexual, etc.,) to identify themselves more specifically. What say the rest of you?

Conor

Link to post
Share on other sites

There's yet another "T" - transgendered. Or is that covered in transsexual? I don't think so, think they're two separate things.

Putting everyone under "Q" would be confusing publicly, because of the former "We're queer, we're here, get used to it" campaign (in the 80s/90s). Most people think of queer as homosexual, so we'd still have to explain.

Why not just asexual? If we have to explain the whole thing anyway, there's no point in having to do that AND having to correct peoples' assuming we're part of another group.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why not just Q.

Questioning, Queer, Quirk, Qool :P

Link to post
Share on other sites

'Cause when the general population (among whom we are forced to live, unless we are independently wealthy) consider Queer or Q to be homosexual, then as I said we've got even more explaining to do...

Link to post
Share on other sites
I know this is a debate that has surfaced before- but I want figures to see what people think.

Should we go with the LGBT (or any rearrangement of those letters) movement, or should we stay seperate?

IN COMMON- not 'normal', misunderstood

NOT IN COMMON- sex drive, more persecution than us

What are your thoughts?

I am making an assumption here..LGBT means Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transsexual?

If that is the case I have come across posts that make comparisons such as this numerous times and I fail to make the connection. Those are sexual orientations and how is asexual a sexual orientation?

Sexual Orientation

noun

"The direction of one's sexual interest toward members of the same, opposite, or both sexes."

How does asexual fall into sexual interest? I joined this site thinking 'fantastic' people who don't spend their time talking about sex and sex and also a little bit on the topic of sex. So far it seems just like most of the planet, most discussions are about nothing else but sex. I have to admit though there are a few discussions about sex aswell so it's not just all about sex.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Sexual Orientation

noun

"The direction of one's sexual interest toward members of the same, opposite, or both sexes."

How does asexual fall into sexual interest? I joined this site thinking 'fantastic' people who don't spend their time talking about sex and sex and also a little bit on the topic of sex. So far it seems just like most of the planet, most discussions are about nothing else but sex. I have to admit though there are a few discussions about sex aswell so it's not just all about sex.

For an asexual interest is directed toward neither, that makes it an orientation. Most point west, some east, some north, we point south. And south is a direction.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Sexual Orientation

noun

"The direction of one's sexual interest toward members of the same, opposite, or both sexes."

How does asexual fall into sexual interest? I joined this site thinking 'fantastic' people who don't spend their time talking about sex and sex and also a little bit on the topic of sex. So far it seems just like most of the planet, most discussions are about nothing else but sex. I have to admit though there are a few discussions about sex aswell so it's not just all about sex.

For an asexual interest is directed toward neither, that makes it an orientation. Most point west, some east, some north, we point south. And south is a direction.

I like that description. Dictionary definitions tend to lag behind popular usages. "Neither" will probably be added in time, but it'll take awhile...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks to everyone who's voted so far. the genral consensus is... there is no consensus view :lol: ! but serouisly, most seem to be against the alphabet soup that is LGBT and opting for a more suitable name "the queer movement". There is a sizeable amout that diagree. I'm still unsure though.

I don't think this is an issue to agree to disagree on, we either need to reach out and get involved with the queer movement, or not. Please keep the viewpoints coming in!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 months later...

The kind of LGBT representatives who counsel 'questioning' people who're unsure of their sexualities or lack thereof should certainly be made aware of Ace issues and be able to talk about the subject of asexuality at length.

How otherwise will they be able to provide full support to people who're LGBT who aren't interested in the sex side of things?

I'm in under the LGBT umbrella 'cos I'm trans and panromantic. A lot of ace people aren't LGBT

should asexual come under queer? I'm not sure. Queer is a reclaimed term that's meant to encompass people who are happier not trying to fit in with society's psychosexual 'norms'. Most of the queers I know are sexual though -so queer seems to have that connotation one -or at least in certain circles -so I'm not entirely sure. Some people don't like the word queer becuase of the connotation of oddness that word has in it's more mainstream use. It's up to the individual.

Nevertheless I think the profile of asexuality should be raised at LGBTQ events! becuase some LGBTQs are also A.

Link to post
Share on other sites
mort paradis

I said yes and maybe...

LG and B are minority sexual orientations which have tended to be looked down on, asexuality has been the same way - which can set asexuality further apart from heterosexuality.

Personally, at the moment I don't feel a connection to the LGB part of the equation, even though I'm panromantic. I think that it should be included but that doesn't mean that I need to be included. Not all LGB people feel like they are part of the LGBT movement, and I know that a good number of trans people, myself included, feel like it is more of a LGB movement. Which brings me to another point. Just having another A tacked on (in LGBTA the A typically stands for ally) doesn't mean we would be any more included. Adding another letter to the alphabet soup is just that, adding a letter, it doesn't really do much. Also, outside of LGBTetc communities, there are still a lot of people that don't know what LGBT stands for in the first place.

Link to post
Share on other sites
KayleeSaeihr

I learned a new term a week or so ago: DSG.

It means 'Diverse Sexuality and Gender'

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 months later...
SilverCandleKid

i like the idea of BLAGT. just think of it. BLAGT!

Link to post
Share on other sites
KayleeSaeihr

DSG is better, smaller and covers everything.

(Diverse Sexuality and Gender)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
LittleMermaid
DSG is better, smaller and covers everything.

(Diverse Sexuality and Gender)

I agree. I like DSG; it's short but covers everything. If extra letters were added to LGBT it would be way too long and lose meaning and impact.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...