Are we really part of the queer movement?

[Sally]

From what I understand of DADT, if you are a queer serviceperson and someone goes to your superior officer and claims you are queer, then they will make an investigation. Thus, someone else can simply "tell" on you as retaliation for some imagined slight, or simply because they're prejudiced against gays, even though you've kept completely quiet (in action and word) or not. That's pretty shitty and certainly doesn't protect anyone.

[Gatto]

Statistically speaking 6% of rapists will ever see a day in jail, I believe this figure represents convicted/non-convicted and reported rapes, however I do not think it represents non-reported so the figure is probably lower, but I could be mistaken. You can check out rainn.org for some really good information on statistics.

I'm sure the incidence of rape varies, but in a South African survey, one quarter of men admitted to rape. That's just the portion who admitted it. And of course, many of them had done it many times. It's really sickening to consider how common that is.

:(

Here's the article.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jun/1...ica-rape-survey

[TheMuffinMan]

From what I understand of DADT, if you are a queer serviceperson and someone goes to your superior officer and claims you are queer, then they will make an investigation. Thus, someone else can simply "tell" on you as retaliation for some imagined slight, or simply because they're prejudiced against gays, even though you've kept completely quiet (in action and word) or not. That's pretty shitty and certainly doesn't protect anyone.

What? Good Lord, no. If a soldier made that accusation, THEY would be the one getting in trouble.

DADT is used sparingly by most of the units I work with, but then I do work with probably the most liberal segment of the military. You wouldn't only have to directly tell someone you were gay, you would have to say you were gay and you wanted to get kicked out.

[Queue]

What? Good Lord, no. If a soldier made that accusation, THEY would be the one getting in trouble.

DADT is used sparingly by most of the units I work with, but then I do work with probably the most liberal segment of the military. You wouldn't only have to directly tell someone you were gay, you would have to say you were gay and you wanted to get kicked out.

But at least in my understanding, that certainly isn't true across the entire military. By DoD policy, if someone presents "credible evidence" to your commanding officer that you're engaging in homosexual conduct, the commanding officer is authorized to start an inquiry into the validity of that claim. And if they find reason to believe that you're gay, even if it's not connected to what you were supposedly doing or saying originally, you can be brought before an administrative discharge board.

The thing that really infuriates me is that it's not just saying you're gay or having gay sex that can get you booted out, it's "any bodily contact which a reasonable person would understand to demonstrate a propensity or intent to engage in [homosexual conduct]." Which means as little as holding hands. People have lost their jobs for allegedly holding hands.

[AVENCakes]

What? Good Lord, no. If a soldier made that accusation, THEY would be the one getting in trouble.

DADT is used sparingly by most of the units I work with, but then I do work with probably the most liberal segment of the military. You wouldn't only have to directly tell someone you were gay, you would have to say you were gay and you wanted to get kicked out.

But at least in my understanding, that certainly isn't true across the entire military. By DoD policy, if someone presents "credible evidence" to your commanding officer that you're engaging in homosexual conduct, the commanding officer is authorized to start an inquiry into the validity of that claim. And if they find reason to believe that you're gay, even if it's not connected to what you were supposedly doing or saying originally, you can be brought before an administrative discharge board.

The thing that really infuriates me is that it's not just saying you're gay or having gay sex that can get you booted out, it's "any bodily contact which a reasonable person would understand to demonstrate a propensity or intent to engage in [homosexual conduct]." Which means as little as holding hands. People have lost their jobs for allegedly holding hands.

I don't know anything about the military- but I believe it depends on how liberal your segment or the people in it are. If your higher up is homophobic enough, then you'll probably be getting in trouble just because they want an excuse to get rid of a gay person or get one in trouble.

[kitchenwitch]

Wow, what an intense debate.

I don't know if the ace community is ready to join the LGBT community as a whole (and certainly, by the sound of it, the ace community itself isn't sure either). What I do know is that asexual community has a few common goals, which makes us able to become a movement. As far as I can tell from AVEN and the other asexual websites I read, we share these goals:

- To remove asexuality as a disorder from the DSM V.

- To educate about asexuality in many communities so that it is better understood.

- To increase awareness of asexuality within the medical profession, so that quality of care can increase (specifically related to mental health, but I've met a few primary care physicians who could benefit from some asexuality awareness)

- To use many forms of media to talk about asexuality in an effort to accomplish the aforementioned goals.

Now, these goals could be accomplished by joining with the LGBT movement (as I think we're eventually destined to do) or they could be accomplished by a smaller, different movement that targets education.

I have to say that personally, my experience with the LGBT community has been mixed. While I work very closely within the LGBT community with regards to equality issues, I do feel separate from them. Not so separate that I feel we need different movements, but certainly separate. There is an over-sexualization within the LGBT community, so much so that occasionally I feel out of place (I certainly don't go dancing with the gay men anymore -- I've never been bumped and grinded so much). I typically hang out at straight bars with my girlfriend (who's heterosexual, but homoromantic). While I work with the LGBT movement, I always speak up for asexuality. However, I still get mixed reactions on coming out as asexual. Some people are fully accepting and others still think it's a phase.

I'd even argue that the LGBT community has both a sexual side and an asexual side -- for instance, there are sexual lesbians, sexual gays, bisexuals, and sexual transgendered people. And there are also ace lesbians, ace gays, ace biromantics, and ace trans people. The alphabet applies to both sides of the sexual spectrum.

&To the person who says that current American protests aren't the dignified marches of the 1950s and 1960s, well, I'd urge you to watch some of the video from the post-proposition 8 protests in California, which have been largely peaceful and largely productive. There has been a large increase in civil disobedience, including sit-ins, that has been peaceful. While I agree with you that most American protests are unfocused and uncivilized, I think that the LGBT movement's current rash of protests have been some of the most unified we've seen in a long time in a movement. Just my .02.

[98slbrookes98]

I'm not sure. I'm actually in that tricky spot where I am asexual but homoromantic. That's why I identify with both the asexual movement and the gay one. I'm just hacked off by the fact that gay societies can be sexualised and aggressive and I wonder why. For as long as I can remember I have always believed that whether you fall in love with members of the opposite sex or your own sex it is exactly the same and as there isn't any over sexualising with straight people (at least I assume not) I would have thought it was the same with gay people. I always assumed sex was a matter of choice - you could have it if you wanted but didn't need to if not. I don't like the taste of alcohol so never drink it but anyway back to the point, I'm surprised again at the over sexualisation and possible aggressiveness of gay societies. Actually whatever your choice of partner, everything seems exactly the same - the risk of running into someone aggressive/violent, the careful choice of someone suited to you, etc etc.

[mykell2]

Hello.

I read a blog post referencing this thread, was very interested, read the whole thing, and felt the need to respond to some points here.

I personally am not asexual; I am bisexual and transsexual. It is obviously not my place to say who asexual people should or should not align themselves with; but it is my place to clarify some misunderstandings some people have about the LGBT community (in particular, the B and the T).

Not all of the LGBT movement is about sex, sex, and more sex. One of the common stereotypes about bisexuals is that we are promiscuous, and would have sex with anybody. As bisexuals may be anywhere from extremely promiscuous to barely sexual, a major part of bisexual activism is to combat this stereotype. In a way, the bisexual movement is about making it clear that we have less sex than people think we do.

Issues about sex and promiscuity are bigger when it comes to transgender activism. Much of society only knows about us through porn and through the news depicting us as prostitutes; clearly we are more diverse than that. Certainly there is a higher portion of transgender people in sex work than cisgender people in sex work; that is because we are pushed into it because of employment discrimination, or because most countries and most insurance companies will not help us out in covering the tens of thousands of dollars it costs to physically transition. Also, many of us are sexually different from that depicted by porn; many of us are sexual but will not use our birth genitals, some of us will use our birth genitals only in certain ways, and some of us are asexual. And possibly more noticeably, some of us are female-to-male. We also are constantly fighting the fact that people like to mislabel transgender as a sexual orientation. There is debate in the transgender community about whether the "T" belongs in LGBT at all. (I personally feel that it does, because we need the support of the LGB community to get any rights whatsoever - the association helps us more than it hurts us.) All in all, society hypersexualizes transgender identity, and transgender activists are constantly fighting that image.

Also, another person claimed s/he "knew" that transgender-related surgeries were shoddy. That is not the case. Chest reconstruction surgeries (creation of a masculine chest in female-to-male people; often little more than a mastectomy) are absolutely not shoddy; mastectomies are frequently done. Hystorecomies are frequently performed as well. Vaginoplasty, the genital male-to-female surgery, produces such quality results that most doctors cannot tell the difference between a neo vagina and a natal vagina! Some surgeries, such as phalloplasty, are not of such high quality. It is also important to note that a common concern from cisgender people is about whether post-op people can orgasm; they do not realize that being able to urinate is a much higher priority. These surgeries are often necessary for mental health; transsexual people have an alarmingly high suicide rate in part because we cannot live with the bodies we were born with.

[Kin]

Wow, what an intense debate.

I don't know if the ace community is ready to join the LGBT community as a whole (and certainly, by the sound of it, the ace community itself isn't sure either). What I do know is that asexual community has a few common goals, which makes us able to become a movement. As far as I can tell from AVEN and the other asexual websites I read, we share these goals:

- To remove asexuality as a disorder from the DSM V.

- To educate about asexuality in many communities so that it is better understood.

- To increase awareness of asexuality within the medical profession, so that quality of care can increase (specifically related to mental health, but I've met a few primary care physicians who could benefit from some asexuality awareness)

- To use many forms of media to talk about asexuality in an effort to accomplish the aforementioned goals.

Now, these goals could be accomplished by joining with the LGBT movement (as I think we're eventually destined to do) or they could be accomplished by a smaller, different movement that targets education.

I have to say that personally, my experience with the LGBT community has been mixed. While I work very closely within the LGBT community with regards to equality issues, I do feel separate from them. Not so separate that I feel we need different movements, but certainly separate. There is an over-sexualization within the LGBT community, so much so that occasionally I feel out of place (I certainly don't go dancing with the gay men anymore -- I've never been bumped and grinded so much). I typically hang out at straight bars with my girlfriend (who's heterosexual, but homoromantic). While I work with the LGBT movement, I always speak up for asexuality. However, I still get mixed reactions on coming out as asexual. Some people are fully accepting and others still think it's a phase.

I'd even argue that the LGBT community has both a sexual side and an asexual side -- for instance, there are sexual lesbians, sexual gays, bisexuals, and sexual transgendered people. And there are also ace lesbians, ace gays, ace biromantics, and ace trans people. The alphabet applies to both sides of the sexual spectrum.

&To the person who says that current American protests aren't the dignified marches of the 1950s and 1960s, well, I'd urge you to watch some of the video from the post-proposition 8 protests in California, which have been largely peaceful and largely productive. There has been a large increase in civil disobedience, including sit-ins, that has been peaceful. While I agree with you that most American protests are unfocused and uncivilized, I think that the LGBT movement's current rash of protests have been some of the most unified we've seen in a long time in a movement. Just my .02.

^ This. (Although I don't think that the current protests are comparable to the ones from the 60s, just for the record. Dignified, yes. (Well, sometimes.) Unified, yes. Just not really on the same scale, IMO.)

Also, I don't know if I really identify with the LGBT movement, but I certainly support it. If only about 1% of the population is asexual, then we're going to need sexual allies, and who better to ally with than other groups that were once (or are still) marginalized? That is, I don't know if we would be considered the same, but I do think that we should support each other. (Which, of course, answers nothing, but I'd like to add that I wouldn't really mind being part of the LGBT movement, even if it's not a perfect fit.)

[SecretSaucer]

I don't consider myself a heterosexual so it's comforting to know that there's a blanket term like queer out there reminding me that there are lots of people who are sick of heteronormativism even if they're not aces. So I do consider myself queer and I would love us to be associated with any group that doesn't think heterosexuality is better just because it's more common.

[Zygote]

I don't think of myself as heteronormative. Does that mean I'm queer? By definition, probably. But I don't know what it means to be "queer", or to have people treat me differently because I'm "queer". I'm not part of that community, unless AVEN counts. I'm cool with not being straight, but I don't know if I'm actually queer, if that makes any sense.

The whole point of being asexual for me is that I really don't want to talk about sex. I'm not going to join a movement just to say that I really don't want to talk about sex.

Best wishes to the LGBT community.

[Min Farshaw]

Also, another person claimed s/he "knew" that transgender-related surgeries were shoddy. That is not the case. Chest reconstruction surgeries (creation of a masculine chest in female-to-male people; often little more than a mastectomy) are absolutely not shoddy; mastectomies are frequently done. Hystorecomies are frequently performed as well. Vaginoplasty, the genital male-to-female surgery, produces such quality results that most doctors cannot tell the difference between a neo vagina and a natal vagina! Some surgeries, such as phalloplasty, are not of such high quality. It is also important to note that a common concern from cisgender people is about whether post-op people can orgasm; they do not realize that being able to urinate is a much higher priority. These surgeries are often necessary for mental health; transsexual people have an alarmingly high suicide rate in part because we cannot live with the bodies we were born with.

Very well said.

I don't consider myself a heterosexual so it's comforting to know that there's a blanket term like queer out there reminding me that there are lots of people who are sick of heteronormativism even if they're not aces. So I do consider myself queer and I would love us to be associated with any group that doesn't think heterosexuality is better just because it's more common.

I agree, I like the idea of a non-normative group. Part of the problem with homogenising several varied groups of people is that we're all bringing our preconceptions and ideologies to the table, and they don't always mix well. Certain gay people don't like the idea of transgendered people, because they feel that a transgendered person is only doing it because they're gay, and are seeking the acceptance of a relationship within traditional gender roles. Some highly sex-positive aspects will naturally reject Asexuality as being nonexistant, etc. I'm probably oversimplifying or being outright naive, but I feel that, since we're all lumped together due to our differences from the norm, we should be embracing and celebrating those differences, rather than attempting to tear each other down for being inconvenient to each other's ideologies. That way lies just creating a second norm, separate to the first but every bit as stifling.

[oneofthesun]

I don't consider myself a heterosexual so it's comforting to know that there's a blanket term like queer out there reminding me that there are lots of people who are sick of heteronormativism even if they're not aces. So I do consider myself queer and I would love us to be associated with any group that doesn't think heterosexuality is better just because it's more common.

Ditto!

[Sciatrix]

Hello.

I read a blog post referencing this thread, was very interested, read the whole thing, and felt the need to respond to some points here.

Out of curiosity, would you mind linking the blog post? I'd be curious to see what they had to say.

[ColBrandon]

Vaginoplasty, the genital male-to-female surgery, produces such quality results that most doctors cannot tell the difference between a neo vagina and a natal vagina!

I mean absolutely no disrespect to transgender AVENites, but I have always doubted the scientific validity of this claim. It doesn't seem credible that a trained physician would fail to recognize the result of a major invasive surgery. Is there any scientific study of physicians to support the finding? Of course whether it's true or not has no bearing on the right of the transgendered to transition, and the value of their choice.

[sinisterporpoise]

Hello.

I read a blog post referencing this thread, was very interested, read the whole thing, and felt the need to respond to some points here.

Out of curiosity, would you mind linking the blog post? I'd be curious to see what they had to say.

I have a feeling it was my own Examiner.com post, although I can't be sure. Follow the link in my signature to find it. (It isn't always about me despite my best efforts to make it so.)

[Flyin'Solo]

I realize I'm a bit late to this thread but it has been a topic that I've been interested in for quite some time. Me being a grey A and having grown up around a lot of queer people, having been a fluidly transgendered (if I can say so) youth for my first 18 or so years and then coming around into being more gender conformative to what I was born/assigned with. I've always considered myself an ally to the GLBT and queer movement and community because I had so many close friends that were GLBT and Queer. I simply grew into being part of the community and my friends unanimously have included me in that community as well. However, when I chose to start being open and vocal about my own identity as an asexual I've found that I've been devalued and often degraded by the people I felt an alliance with for so many years. My experience has been more than heart breaking.

Although I recognize that the struggles faced by asexuals and GLBTQ... are different, the thing that we really have in common is that we want the right to be ourselves and be respected for who we are. Be it legally, culturally, or whatever. Whether its a politician making laws about sodomy or a douchebag of a boss who invalidates us in the workplace, we want an end to other people thinking that dictation of our sexuality or amorousness is any of their business. And when I say sexuality that includes asexuality. As asexuals, we don't conform to heterosexual-normative standards. In spite of the frustration I've had with queer people not understanding me, I will continue to support and align myself with the interests of the GLBTQ community as long as they don't interfere with my right to be freely asexual and aromantic in my own life; And I can't imagine how someone else's right to date/fuck/marry/fall in love with someone else, or identify as a different gender than they were born with, is going to impede my right to not do those things.

I believe that historically, people under the GLBT and Queer banner have dealt with much more open oppression than asexuals have, but that doesn't mean that asexuals couldn't face similar bouts of oppression in the future, especially now that we have become much more visible. Oppression starts with other people thinking they have the right to say who you are or aren't. To the asexual community, I can only ask you to think about your future when thinking about your decision to align with the GLBTQ movement or community. I think we need to be here for each other.

[Sally]

The whole point of being asexual for me is that I really don't want to talk about sex. I'm not going to join a movement just to say that I really don't want to talk about sex.

Best wishes to the LGBT community.

Exactly. I had to explain to my ex-partner why I didn't want to have sex or talk about it. I don't want to have to explain the same thing to a whole new group of people who are sexual and likely won't understand, just in the name of mutual support.

[Brackets]

I've said it before on AVEN, but I consider myself an ally of and not part of the LGBT community. But everyone's free to make their own decision about whether they do or not, obviously.

[Wineblood]

I'm going to echo a sentiment which has been expressed a few times here already. I don't think we should be a part of the whole queer community but that an asexual movement would be allied with them. We share some goals in the sense that we want recognition and respect from the heteronormative majority of the society we live in, but there is still the big sexual/asexual gap that we face against heterosexuals.

When it comes to visibility and education, tagging along with the queer movement can be a good thing because of the great number of audiences they can reach that we can't on our own. What we want everyone to know isn't that different from what they're saying in the first place. Someone else did point it out :

- To remove asexuality as a disorder from the DSM V.

- To educate about asexuality in many communities so that it is better understood.

- To increase awareness of asexuality within the medical profession, so that quality of care can increase (specifically related to mental health, but I've met a few primary care physicians who could benefit from some asexuality awareness)

- To use many forms of media to talk about asexuality in an effort to accomplish the aforementioned goals.

However there are other issues that aren't that important to the queer community, but they do affect us more directly. For these issues we need our own movement to fight for them, as they are more asexual things rather than sexual orientation specific. Some of these have already been mentioned :

-Spousal rape

-Consummation of marriage

-Health professionals

-Social bias

Definately we can gain a lot from being allied with the queer community and help it become a more understanding community for all the non-hetero people out there, but there are still some things which aren't part of the queer thing just because they aren't heteronormative and they need their own place and people to work on them.

Another reason why I think this way is because when I try to talk about asexuality-related things to my sister (who is bi), she doesn't seem to care that much. I get the feeling that because we're not experiencing anything sexual, there's nothing to talk about so it's not a big deal.

[sindi]

Being asexual, panromantic and genderless I feel pretty queer myself...

I'm not sure if we should be a part of the movement, though - probably if the concept of queer became more "open", we'd fit in better Or probably we could be a part of the movement and try to stretch the concept of queer from within?

But at least we should be allies...

[Georgia]

Personally, I feel very connected to the "queer" movement. There's lots of common ground, and personally I preach freedom and openness about sex, love, and sexuality just like the movement does. The troubles with conventional society often being unacceptive exists for asexuals as well, and among asexuals it is very common to find people who are otherwise out of common sexual or gender norms. Transsexuality is just as related to homosexuality as asexuality is, perhaps even less so, but it is rarely disputed that transsexuals are part of the "LGBT" community. Hell, they have their own letter.

Personally, I think it's very good to identify with the movement, although I can definitely see the objections people that are antisexual may have, as opposed to myself, for I am simply apathetic to sex. If anything, associating with the movement is very practical. Already the split communities and definitions are causing people to reject the issue as some sort of trend, and if it is all kept under a single banner of sexual and gender freedom from the current conventions then that can only strengthen the cause.

[AnyOtherName]

To me the question of whether "we" are part of the queer movement seems a bit pointless and silly. (No offense meant to anyone, and it DOES make for an interesting conversation.) Every individual asexual is going to have their own opinion on it, ranging from “absolutely” to “who cares” to “absolutely NOT”. And that’s just fine. It’s the same for straight allies and LGBTQ people as well. Not everyone who falls under the label likes the word “queer”, because of certain connotations the word has, and not all LGBT individuals feel the need to be a part of a community and activism. At the university I’m going to, the regular members of our GSA (recently renamed “Queer-Ally Coalition” to be more inclusive) are by no means the only LGBT students on campus; some don’t care, some think we don’t have enough activism or too much activism for their personal tastes, some can’t work it into their busy schedules, and so on. The point is, even within the queer community the desire to be involved or not, and whether or not they even want to be associated with the movement, varies from individual from individual.

As for myself, I tentatively count myself a member of the queer/LGBT community for reasons completely unrelated to my own sexuality or orientation. When I started college and began attending QAC meetings two years ago it was as a straight ally. (I already suspected I was asexual but it wasn’t until I read the “sexuality is fluid” bit on AVEN’s FAQ that I decided that, potential late bloomer or not, I would call myself asexual until proven otherwise. I really doubt the "otherwise".) Now, I attend QAC meetings as an asexual ally of unknown romantic orientation. Since I’m definitely not a lesbian and therefore can't truly know what it's like to be one, sometimes wonder if I I’m allowed to count myself as a member, but that’s just my own insecurity bothering me. Certainly nobody has told me I "don't count", and I'd something to say to them if they did. Most of the friends I’ve made since graduating from high school are members of the queer community in one way or another, and I figure if an ally is actively involved they're an honorary member by default. But that's just my own personal experience. Personally, I was disappointed to find out that the "A" in LGBTQA stood for Ally and not Asexual. Until I saw the debate here (on AVEN, since I don't believe this isn't the first topic to raise the question), I had assumed it was because of a lack of awareness. But I prefer the debate to the alternative; I'd much rather we all be allowed to have our own opinions, considering the heart of the debate seems to be how we identify ourselves.

EDIT: mykell2 is absolutely right about the LGBT movement not being about sex. Sure, one of their goals is better sex education/awareness, but mostly it’s about civil rights and acceptance. I hope that misconception isn’t common, I have no idea where people would get that idea. (Baseless stereotypes aside, obviously.)

[sonofzeal]

IMO, "Queer" is a community/philosophy, rather than a category. There are gays who I wouldn't call "queer". Many Trans also resist the label. It makes perfect sense to me if only a minority of aces embrased "queerness". Some can, if they want to. The rest shouldn't feel the need to, though.

As for "allying" ourselves, events like LGTB groups and Pride parades can be good ways to raise visibility. I marched in Pride this year with a sign about asexuality, and I think it really helped our cause. I've also given several seminars through Brock Pride. At the same time, we can also make use of other forms of expression. I've talked about asexuality in churchy religious settings as well, and those were decidedly un-queer conversations.

The Pride movement is about gaining understanding and acceptance for things that fall outside the standard norm (not all of which are sexual - see the Trans community), and that's something we're looking for as well. We don't need them, but the avenues of expression and visibility that they paved can be of use to us. I would love to see aces embraced by the Pride community, if they wish to go there, because Pride is part of our market for visibility and acceptance too. That doesn't mean that asexuals are necessarily Queer, or that we can't hope for non-Queer visibility and acceptance as well. I think we can have our cake and eat it too.

*noms cake and wanders off*

[Mage]

I have to agree with sonofzeal here, and I want to take it further.

I think many of us may be conflating LGBTQ with queer, which are two separate things. The LGBTQ movement is all about obtaining rights for people who identify as something other than heterosexual. The queer movement encompasses people who are LGBTQ, but it is NOT about obtaining rights. Rather, queerness is about "nonheteronormative" or "deviant" sexual acts OR identities, and people who identify as queer (some people only identify as queer and not as lesbian, gay, etc) are not necessarily interested in having the right to marry or other legal rights. Many queers, like myself, are actually against the institution of marriage and we believe that "gay marriage" is ultimately about making queer people heteronormative. But that's my personal stance and neither here nor there.

My point is, asexuality could be considered queer because the orientation is NOT heterosexual, and regardless of whom one is romantically oriented towards, the lack of sexual attraction is the significant factor in determining queerness.

However, if one does have heteronormative relationships as an asexual person, meaning basically that a cismale and cisfemale are in a monogamous romantic and sexual relationship which leads to marriage and children, this individual is not queer.

So a heteroromantic asexual could legitimately state that they are not queer if they have monogamous relationships leading up to marriage, following the heteronormative scripts, etc. But otherwise asexuality as an orientation is queer.

By the way, check out this wikipage which will describe queer theory far better than I am capable of doing.

queer theory

[C M]

I am among the people whom believe that asexuality should not be a part of the gay/lesbian/bisexual/transgender community or movement. Asexuality is about not being sexual. The gay rights movement is based on the idea of sexual relations with people of the same sex and there is also another idea to it that people whom want to change their gender and/or sex are interested in doing so for the purpose of experiencing sex and sexuality like a member of the opposite sex.

I am in New York City and there have been slight rumors that in the Gay Pride parade there was an "Aven" float and/or there had been in recent years. I shudder to think of it. It would be so un-fitting and inappropriate.

Hey, if you are reading any books or anything atm, do me a favour; fucking burn them.

[bluebanana2014]

We're Asexual, we're not part of the Homosexual movement cause we're not Homosexual, we are the Asexual movement.

[asexual cake]

We're Asexual, we're not part of the Homosexual movement cause we're not Homosexual, we are the Asexual movement.

"Queer" is more than just gay.

[Sojourner]

I don't think aces are part of the GLBTetc. community. That's not to say we shouldn't be. It could potentially be a great thing to become part of their movement--but, in my own experience at least, they're not often happy to have us. And I'm not sure I disagree when they say asexuality doesn't really belong.

I'm pretty active in my local GLBTetc. community as a transperson, and only as a transperson. When I bring up asexuality, they tend to shrug it off with a "not my problem" attitude, or even one more like "What are you whining about? You're not civilly oppressed and socially harassed." On a small level, say, supporting an ace teen who wanders into a GLBTetc. youth group, they have no qualms, but they're not interested in taking up arms on our behalf. Asexuals are fighting more against ignorance than discrimination at this point; while our issues can easily overlap with theirs, they're not identical, and perhaps we'd best handle them on our own.

That said, I'm aware that joining the GLBTetc. community could be a wonderful kickstart for asexuality awareness--if they were willing to have us.

[Pandoren]

I don't think the LGBT group is obliged to include everyone who wants to be included under their acronym. They have defined themselves as a group for Lesbians, Gays, Bisexuals and Trans. It's other people who try to include themselves when there's nothing to stop them from forming a new, more inclusive group (I've heard of DSG groups- Diverse Sexuality and Gender) but possibly the mental block at coming up against LGBT as such a large and famous group- they are THE group for non-hetero-cis-normative people. Yes, I can see how being welcome in the acronym can be helpful to the lone asexual if they are looking for support, but the LGBT is under no obligation to accept us.