Jump to content


Photo

House M.D. - Asexual couple


  • Please log in to reply
322 replies to this topic

#271 Corwin

Corwin

    Junior Member

  • AVEN Members
  • 20 posts

Posted 28 January 2012 - 02:23 AM

“I did a lot of research on asexuality for the episode. My original intent was to introduce it and legitimize it, because I was struck by the response most of you experience, which is similar to the prejudice the homosexual community has received. People hear you’re asexual and they immediately think, ‘What’s wrong with you, how do I fix you?’ I wanted to write against that. Unfortunately, we are a medical mystery show. Time & again, my notes came back that House needed to solve a mystery and not be wrong. So in THIS CASE, with THESE patients, it was a tumor near the pituitary. But I hoped I could (now it seems unsuccessfully) introduce asexuality to the general public and get them asking questions. All they need to do is one google search and they can see for themselves it’s a real community of great people. Originally, part of my dialog included thoughts about whether as a species we’ve grown past sex. Any time we tackle a subject, we risk the possibility of not doing it justice. I apologize that you feel I did you a disservice. It was not my intent. Asexuality is a new topic for me and definitely one I find fascinating. It is a subject I would like to continue to explore here or on future shows I write for. I think it speaks to where humans are now and where we are going. I will do my best in the future to do it justice.”
— House writer Kath Lingenfelter on writing the eighth episode of season nine

I saw that on tumblr. Her heart was in the right place?


This is not an adequate response from the writer. There is rather a large difference between not doing justice to the topic of asexuality, and insinuating that asexuals have something medically wrong with them (House is of course fiction, but Dr. House is cast to be a medical expert, and people do take the show seriously). I am reasonably sure that this writer would not have written a about a tumour or other medical problem causing a character's homosexuality, since I am sure that doing so would quite rightly have generated significant outrage. To me, that says that the author does not consider asexuality as a valid sexual orientation in the same way as homosexuality, bisexuality and heterosexuality are considered valid orientations.

Wilson's line was annoying too 'according to this article, at least'. It makes it seem that Wilson is also rather less convinced about the validity of asexuality as an orientation. A more convincing argument from Wilson could definitely have improved this episode.

I do appreciate that medical shows have to have medicine in, but if this was truly the best the House writers could come up with, then it would have been better for them to have stayed away from asexuality altogether.

#272 Meph

Meph

    Too Asexy for this Site

  • AVEN Members
  • 691 posts
  • Gender:male
  • Location:01151
  • A/Sexuality:Demisexual

Posted 28 January 2012 - 02:25 AM

I think people care too much what Television says.
Posted Image

#273 Corwin

Corwin

    Junior Member

  • AVEN Members
  • 20 posts

Posted 28 January 2012 - 03:01 AM

I think people care too much what Television says.


Yes, that's why this is such a bad thing.

#274 Chopper

Chopper

    Amoeba Colony

  • AVEN Members
  • 173 posts
  • Location:somewhere over the rainbow

Posted 28 January 2012 - 03:15 AM

EDIT: I'm not saying that someone can become asexual by hanging out with asexuals. I'm just saying that doing so can, in some cases, mess with someone's brain.


Very true :ph34r:
(づ。◕‿‿◕。)づ ლ(ಠ益ಠლ)

(づ。◕‿‿◕。)づ ლ(ಠ益ಠლ)

(づ。◕‿‿◕。)づ ლ(ಠ益ಠლ)

#275 Ace Amoeba

Ace Amoeba

    Mitosis to the Max

  • AVEN Members
  • 356 posts
  • Location:Filly-delphia,. Equestria
  • A/Sexuality:Heteroromantic Asexual

Posted 28 January 2012 - 04:59 AM

Is this storyline going to continue? They never revealed if the surgery affected his asexuality.

#276 Lady Heartilly

Lady Heartilly

    A-gent

  • AVEN Members
  • 1,929 posts
  • Location:In a magical land, far, far away
  • A/Sexuality:asexual heteromantic

Posted 28 January 2012 - 07:02 AM

I'm not too familiar with this show as a whole. Do they usually bring back previous patients? As a medical mystery show, I would assume they'd solve at least one case in each episode and be done with it before the next. If that's the case, we certainly shouldn't expect them to have a recurring patient if none of the others ever came back before this.
Once upon a time, in a faraway land, there was a beautiful princess who lived happily ever after. What makes her happy? Well, that's entirely up to her.

#277 The Great WTF

The Great WTF

    Causer of horrible fairy genocides

  • Moderators
  • 6,167 posts
  • Gender:Tomboy
  • Location:Buried in a pile of plot bunnies
  • A/Sexuality:Asexual

Posted 28 January 2012 - 07:11 AM

Recurring patients are rare to non-existent on House unless it's a two part episode (or that one arc involving a vindictive cop that House pissed off.)

Las Vegas now has a weekly asexual group! Whether you live in the area or are just passing through, please feel free to stop in and say hi!

 

We invite you to join the A/Sexy Tango, aka The Great WTF's asexual/sexual relationship blog. Warning: Snark ahead.


#278 cleuchtturm

cleuchtturm

    A-gent

  • AVEN Members
  • 1,780 posts
  • Location:a nondescript arm in the Milky Way galaxy

Posted 28 January 2012 - 10:11 PM

Recurring patients are rare to non-existent on House unless it's a two part episode (or that one arc involving a vindictive cop that House pissed off.)

Or the patient is a personal friend of a character, like Wilson's girlfriend that time.

DISCLAIMER: My people skills are non existant. I am a frequent user of tough love. You have been warned.


#279 Regista

Regista

    Newbie

  • Members
  • 1 posts

Posted 30 January 2012 - 04:31 AM

To the asexuality.org community:

This is my first post on these forums so I would like to introduce myself. I'm not certain what percentage of this forum identifies as asexual and what amount is made up of family members, friends, and people generally interested in asexuality, but I fall into the latter. I am a heterosexual male student who was first introduced to the concept of asexuality as a college freshman last year as part of an attempt by my university to eliminate ignorance and abuse directed toward people of all sexual orientations. I consider myself an accepting person, and despite having never heard of asexuality before, I was not surprised to learn that some people identify themselves as asexual. As a student at university that is nationally recognized as liberal and progressive, I was not surprised to find that many of my peers were equally accepting, but immediately considered how the people in my rural, conservative home town would react to learning about asexuality, even my own parents. After this event, the topic hadn't entered my mind again until hearing it in "Better Half" which I just finished watching on Hulu. As an avid fan of "House", I thought this was an intriguing topic to research and found these forums. I'd like to share my perspective with you, but please understand that I will be the first to admit that, although I am probably more educated than the average person on this topic, I still no very little about asexuality so if I come off as offensive in any way, it is probably due to ignorance and is by no means an attempt at discrimination of any kind. If I say something wrong, please correct me as I am open to changing my perspective.

Much of the discussion in this topic seems to be about how "House" has seemingly "disproved" asexuality in the eye's of the average viewer and I think I understand your concern. As a generally unknown topic, it is important that the first time people are introduced to it, it is portrayed in a positive light so that prejudice doesn't form before acceptance can start. With regards to that, I understand the potential danger this episode has caused. Although I left the episode feeling that Dr. House had disproved asexuality in one specific person, (the wife did not actually identify as asexual) it was simply a specific case and by no means disproves asexuality. Will the general public share my view? That is much harder to judge, but I share what seems to be the generally accepted view that they won't. In just the small number of posts I have read, it seems that many of you who identify as asexual struggle with acceptance amongst those closest to you, those who claim to understand you, and those who have seen you grow into the people you are. If their minds are difficult to sway, then I can see the danger this episode may cause. Although I felt like I left the episode with an open view, that may not be the case for many.

In regards to the actual episode itself however, I would like to defend the writers, because it is in my nature to defend those without a voice in any situation (I would happily attempt to defend the asexual community if the topic were to come up anywhere in my life). After reading this topic, it seems like many of those who watched this episode are not persistent viewers of "House", but took interest because of the plot of this specific episode. With that in mind I would like to clarify a few things about Dr. House's character along with his connection to the writers of the show. Dr. House is a sadistic and relatively simple person, but because most people are more complicated than him, they find him difficult to understand. Dr. House tries to always take on the analytical side of every situation and rule out absolutely nothing as a potential clue to his diagnosis. In many ways he is modeled after Sherlock Holmes and is equally as tragic and flawed a "hero" as the traditional detective. In his analysis of situations, he attempts to remove his human element and look at things in as logical a way as possible. In this particular case he essentially consults Darwinism as a reason why asexuality is a flaw. I assume most of you are aware of the Charles Darwin's On the Origin of Species, but for those who are not, he essentially claims that is within the nature of all animals to seek the survival of their species. During this struggle to survive, those with beneficial differences from others are more likely to reproduce and therefore more likely to pass off beneficial traits when compared to their peers. Naturally, an asexual person is less likely to produce offspring through natural means (although I imagine asexuality is independent of one's desire to raise children so artificial insemination is probably entirely possible to an asexual couple today). Assuming asexuality is, at least in part, related to genetics, Dr. House would view this as a flaw in the same way he would consider being below average in height or having narrow hips a flaw (for females) and is not intentionally prejudice.

In this animalistic and Darwinistic way I agree with Dr. House, but I would like to make it clear that I do share the writer's view that mankind has come to a point that asexuality need not be viewed in the same way. Culture is built around many of Darwin's ideas. In the same way the sexism has a basis in the effectiveness of the classic family model that technology has helped show is not necessary. Despite no longer needing the classic family model however, sexism persists by those to ignorant to see that typical male/female roles are no longer necessary to efficiently and effectively prosper as a species. A related stigma exists with single parents. Many people consider sex outside of marriage and divorce as wrong because it is historically difficult to raise a family without a standard family model. Similarly, the stigma associated homosexuality is unconsciously rooted in the belief that it is impossible to advance our species without a heterosexual relationship given traditional means make it impossible for those who are not heterosexual to reproduce. I think the writer was trying to say that our society is in a position where even at a Darwinistic level, it no longer logically makes sense to attach a stigma to asexuality because mankind has evolved to be capable of reproducing without necessary heterosexual relationships. Whether this is correct or not, she seems to have had no intention to come off offensive, but may have done so out of ignorance.

I remind you that Dr. House is a character who intentionally has flaws and those same flaws are not necessarily indicative of similar flaws in the writers. That does not completely excuse them for how they have likely portrayed the asexual community to many less critical and accepting viewers, but I would like to think their intentions were just. I imagine they will introduce the topic again in a future episode and hope Dr. House comes to a different conclusion. Despite not condemning Dr. House while viewing this episode, alarm bells did go off in my head when considering how others may react to this plot so I do see your concern. Hopefully I was able to show that not everyone unfamiliar with the topic shares a similar prejudice and doubt to what many of you have encountered. Finally, I remind you that I will be the first to admit my ignorance so please address any inaccuracies promptly as I am willing to adapt my views. I apologize in advance if I have offended anyone.

Sincerely,
Regista

#280 Lady Heartilly

Lady Heartilly

    A-gent

  • AVEN Members
  • 1,929 posts
  • Location:In a magical land, far, far away
  • A/Sexuality:asexual heteromantic

Posted 30 January 2012 - 06:52 AM

Although I left the episode feeling that Dr. House had disproved asexuality in one specific person, (the wife did not actually identify as asexual)


I would just like to point out here that not nearly as many people would have been upset if the wife had not identified as asexual as you claim in this post. She, in fact, did at the beginning of the episode when she stated "No, neither of us [are celibate]. Celibacy is a choice. This is our orientation." Later, she took it back, claiming to have been lying to her husband for ten years of marriage, causing those of us who are fully healthy as she was to look like liars to the general public. The husband having a medical cause wasn't nearly as bad as the wife being an outright liar. When House proved that she was lying, it made it look like anyone identifying as asexual who does not have a medical reason to be so is dishonest.
Once upon a time, in a faraway land, there was a beautiful princess who lived happily ever after. What makes her happy? Well, that's entirely up to her.

#281 cleuchtturm

cleuchtturm

    A-gent

  • AVEN Members
  • 1,780 posts
  • Location:a nondescript arm in the Milky Way galaxy

Posted 30 January 2012 - 07:18 AM

To the asexuality.org community:

This is my first post on these forums so I would like to introduce myself. I'm not certain what percentage of this forum identifies as asexual and what amount is made up of family members, friends, and people generally interested in asexuality, but I fall into the latter. I am a heterosexual male student who was first introduced to the concept of asexuality as a college freshman last year as part of an attempt by my university to eliminate ignorance and abuse directed toward people of all sexual orientations. I consider myself an accepting person, and despite having never heard of asexuality before, I was not surprised to learn that some people identify themselves as asexual. As a student at university that is nationally recognized as liberal and progressive, I was not surprised to find that many of my peers were equally accepting, but immediately considered how the people in my rural, conservative home town would react to learning about asexuality, even my own parents. After this event, the topic hadn't entered my mind again until hearing it in "Better Half" which I just finished watching on Hulu. As an avid fan of "House", I thought this was an intriguing topic to research and found these forums. I'd like to share my perspective with you, but please understand that I will be the first to admit that, although I am probably more educated than the average person on this topic, I still no very little about asexuality so if I come off as offensive in any way, it is probably due to ignorance and is by no means an attempt at discrimination of any kind. If I say something wrong, please correct me as I am open to changing my perspective.

Please use the Welcome forum to introduce yourself. Not a big deal, just FYI.

Much of the discussion in this topic seems to be about how "House" has seemingly "disproved" asexuality in the eye's of the average viewer and I think I understand your concern. As a generally unknown topic, it is important that the first time people are introduced to it, it is portrayed in a positive light so that prejudice doesn't form before acceptance can start. With regards to that, I understand the potential danger this episode has caused. Although I left the episode feeling that Dr. House had disproved asexuality in one specific person, (the wife did not actually identify as asexual) it was simply a specific case and by no means disproves asexuality. Will the general public share my view? That is much harder to judge, but I share what seems to be the generally accepted view that they won't. In just the small number of posts I have read, it seems that many of you who identify as asexual struggle with acceptance amongst those closest to you, those who claim to understand you, and those who have seen you grow into the people you are. If their minds are difficult to sway, then I can see the danger this episode may cause. Although I felt like I left the episode with an open view, that may not be the case for many.

See Lady Heartilly's post. :)

In regards to the actual episode itself however, I would like to defend the writers, because it is in my nature to defend those without a voice in any situation (I would happily attempt to defend the asexual community if the topic were to come up anywhere in my life). After reading this topic, it seems like many of those who watched this episode are not persistent viewers of "House", but took interest because of the plot of this specific episode. With that in mind I would like to clarify a few things about Dr. House's character along with his connection to the writers of the show. Dr. House is a sadistic and relatively simple person, but because most people are more complicated than him, they find him difficult to understand. Dr. House tries to always take on the analytical side of every situation and rule out absolutely nothing as a potential clue to his diagnosis. In many ways he is modeled after Sherlock Holmes and is equally as tragic and flawed a "hero" as the traditional detective. In his analysis of situations, he attempts to remove his human element and look at things in as logical a way as possible. In this particular case he essentially consults Darwinism as a reason why asexuality is a flaw. I assume most of you are aware of the Charles Darwin's On the Origin of Species, but for those who are not, he essentially claims that is within the nature of all animals to seek the survival of their species. During this struggle to survive, those with beneficial differences from others are more likely to reproduce and therefore more likely to pass off beneficial traits when compared to their peers. Naturally, an asexual person is less likely to produce offspring through natural means (although I imagine asexuality is independent of one's desire to raise children so artificial insemination is probably entirely possible to an asexual couple today). Assuming asexuality is, at least in part, related to genetics, Dr. House would view this as a flaw in the same way he would consider being below average in height or having narrow hips a flaw (for females) and is not intentionally prejudice.

House's personality was already pointed out before the episode aired, in this topic. We all knew what he is like going into it, regardless of past viewership.
Also there are asexuals who have sex for whatever reason (it's in the wiki), and quite a few here who have children.

In this animalistic and Darwinistic way I agree with Dr. House, but I would like to make it clear that I do share the writer's view that mankind has come to a point that asexuality need not be viewed in the same way. Culture is built around many of Darwin's ideas. In the same way the sexism has a basis in the effectiveness of the classic family model that technology has helped show is not necessary. Despite no longer needing the classic family model however, sexism persists by those to ignorant to see that typical male/female roles are no longer necessary to efficiently and effectively prosper as a species. A related stigma exists with single parents. Many people consider sex outside of marriage and divorce as wrong because it is historically difficult to raise a family without a standard family model. Similarly, the stigma associated homosexuality is unconsciously rooted in the belief that it is impossible to advance our species without a heterosexual relationship given traditional means make it impossible for those who are not heterosexual to reproduce. I think the writer was trying to say that our society is in a position where even at a Darwinistic level, it no longer logically makes sense to attach a stigma to asexuality because mankind has evolved to be capable of reproducing without necessary heterosexual relationships. Whether this is correct or not, she seems to have had no intention to come off offensive, but may have done so out of ignorance.

What show where you watching, because I got none of that from it. It showed that asexuals are either sick or lying...


DISCLAIMER: My people skills are non existant. I am a frequent user of tough love. You have been warned.


#282 kitchenwitch

kitchenwitch

    Asexy

  • AVEN Members
  • 401 posts
  • Location:Sacramento, CA
  • A/Sexuality:panromantic asexual

Posted 31 January 2012 - 01:21 AM

The petition has almost 1,000 signatures on it so far. Keep spreading it around!

#283 thylacine

thylacine

    Asexy Authoritay!

  • AVEN Members
  • 7,286 posts
  • Gender:lady
  • Pronouns:hippie princess
  • Location:the boring suburbs
  • A/Sexuality:Go away. Don't want any.

Posted 31 January 2012 - 05:54 PM

I helped someone with a "research project" months ago. Recently I emailed her & asked her to sign the petition.
"War! What is it good for? Absolutely nuthin!"

#284 kitchenwitch

kitchenwitch

    Asexy

  • AVEN Members
  • 401 posts
  • Location:Sacramento, CA
  • A/Sexuality:panromantic asexual

Posted 31 January 2012 - 08:42 PM

I helped someone with a "research project" months ago. Recently I emailed her & asked her to sign the petition.


Awesome. :cake:

David, Christina (who we met at the conference, don't know her forum name), and I worked on this press release about the House campaign because of the large amount of response (a lot of which was here on AVEN and also on Tumblr) and the fact that this is a defining moment for the asexual community. This won’t be the last time that network television gets it wrong — and we have to make sure they hear from us every time it’s wrong. This is how we stop stereotypes, folks — so spread the word and get others to sign the petition.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

January 31, 2012

Contact:
Sara Beth Brooks, sbb@asexualawarenessweek.com
Christina Bischoff, chrismb@email.arizona.edu

On January 23, 2012, “House:MD” became the first major network television show in history to feature characters who openly identify as asexual. Scientific studies show that 1% of the human population is asexual. The episode presented damaging misinformation about the asexual community by presenting asexuality as a condition to be cured rather than as a healthy part of human sexual diversity. The episode portrayed two characters whose asexuality was dismissed as being caused by either medical pathology or deception.

“This misinformation could have severe negative consequences on asexual people around the world, especially youth, who are struggling to come to terms with themselves and find acceptance,” said David Jay, founder of the Asexual Visibility and Education Network (AVEN). “This episode encourages viewers to meet asexuality with skepticism rather than acceptance, to probe asexual people for causes of our ‘condition’ rather than to accept us as a part of the natural spectrum of human sexual diversity.”

Sara Beth Brooks, an organizer with Asexual Awareness Week, added, “The writer of the episode opened a dialogue with the community immediately after the episode aired and we appreciate the research and effort that she put into portraying asexuality positively.” Asexual Awareness Week has launched a Change.org petition that has gathered nearly 1,000 signatures in only five days. The petition asks the Executive Producers of House to reconsider their portrayal of asexual characters in the future. The petition can be accessed here: http://www.change.or...xual-characters

Members of the community expressed disappointment, but little surprise at the misrepresentation by Fox. According to Jay, “There’s a strong message out there that something is broken if you experience sexuality differently, a message that Fox is helping to promote. The asexual community is working for the day when we can talk openly about how asexual people live happy, healthy lives.”

Scientific studies estimate that more than 1% of the population is asexual. Since 2002, the asexual community has been organizing on- and offline in more than 150 countries. 80% of the community identifies as LGBT or an ally to the LGBT community, and 20% identify as transgender or questioning their gender identity. The Asexual Visibility and Education Network (AVEN) and Asexual Awareness Week are two of the largest asexual organizations in the United States.

Asexual Visibility and Education Network (AVEN) is the world’s oldest asexual organization. Founded in 2002, AVEN has grown to encompass 150 countries, 13 languages, and close to 50,000 members. For more information please visit www.asexuality.org. Asexual Awareness Week is an international organization dedicated to raising awareness and visibility about the asexual spectrum around the world. Statistics quoted are from the asexual community census; data is available online at http://www.tinyurl.c...yCensusResults. For more information, please visit www.asexualawarenessweek.com.

#285 Lunamoth

Lunamoth

    A-gent

  • AVEN Members
  • 1,879 posts
  • Location:existing somewhere within the few cubic centimetres inside my own skull (which, in turn, appears to be located at a particular point in space-time)
  • A/Sexuality:Asexual (Demi-hetero-romantic?)

Posted 31 January 2012 - 10:58 PM

I haven't read this yet, but I see that there's an article about how "House Got it Wrong" on asexuality:

http://www.salon.com...rong/singleton/

Most of the comments are pretty ignorant though, as usual.
私は魚の心臓でLunamoth侍です。

We don't need MORE people on this planet, we need BETTER people on this planet.

A FRIENDLY SERVICE REMINDER:
"Keep down the human population, spay or neuter your human."

What we do to nature we do to ourselves.

#286 Faelights

Faelights

    ~Royal Chat Kitteh~

  • AVEN Members
  • 6,858 posts
  • Location:The Chat Room

Posted 31 January 2012 - 11:11 PM

Asexual Visibility and Education Network (AVEN) is the world’s oldest asexual organization. Founded in 2002, AVEN has grown to encompass 150 countries, 13 languages, and close to 50,000 members. For more information please visit www.asexuality.org. Asexual Awareness Week is an international organization dedicated to raising awareness and visibility about the asexual spectrum around the world. Statistics quoted are from the asexual community census; data is available online at http://www.tinyurl.c...yCensusResults. For more information, please visit www.asexualawarenessweek.com.

Wait, I was pretty certain AVEN is not the oldest asexual organization. It may be the world's oldest still-existing asexual organization, I guess. =P

#287 kitchenwitch

kitchenwitch

    Asexy

  • AVEN Members
  • 401 posts
  • Location:Sacramento, CA
  • A/Sexuality:panromantic asexual

Posted 01 February 2012 - 01:03 AM


Asexual Visibility and Education Network (AVEN) is the world’s oldest asexual organization. Founded in 2002, AVEN has grown to encompass 150 countries, 13 languages, and close to 50,000 members. For more information please visit www.asexuality.org. Asexual Awareness Week is an international organization dedicated to raising awareness and visibility about the asexual spectrum around the world. Statistics quoted are from the asexual community census; data is available online at http://www.tinyurl.c...yCensusResults. For more information, please visit www.asexualawarenessweek.com.

Wait, I was pretty certain AVEN is not the oldest asexual organization. It may be the world's oldest still-existing asexual organization, I guess. =P


If there's an older one than AVEN, I don't know about it (and neither did David)?

#288 Faelights

Faelights

    ~Royal Chat Kitteh~

  • AVEN Members
  • 6,858 posts
  • Location:The Chat Room

Posted 01 February 2012 - 01:13 AM



Asexual Visibility and Education Network (AVEN) is the world’s oldest asexual organization. Founded in 2002, AVEN has grown to encompass 150 countries, 13 languages, and close to 50,000 members. For more information please visit www.asexuality.org. Asexual Awareness Week is an international organization dedicated to raising awareness and visibility about the asexual spectrum around the world. Statistics quoted are from the asexual community census; data is available online at http://www.tinyurl.c...yCensusResults. For more information, please visit www.asexualawarenessweek.com.

Wait, I was pretty certain AVEN is not the oldest asexual organization. It may be the world's oldest still-existing asexual organization, I guess. =P


If there's an older one than AVEN, I don't know about it (and neither did David)?

http://www.asexuality.org/wiki/index.php?title=Haven_for_the_Human_Amoeba

DJ was a part of that group. o.o

#289 sinisterporpoise

sinisterporpoise

    Asexy Samurai

  • AVEN Members
  • 910 posts
  • Location:PA

Posted 01 February 2012 - 01:19 AM

I hate to nitpick, but Haven for the Human Amoeba was a Yahoo group. AVEN is the oldest and largest Asexual organization.
Asexual News -- I own it or something


I'm the Terre Haute Ace Examiner (Unlike Philadelphia, I have actually been to this city.)

#290 Sketchpad

Sketchpad

    Too Asexy for this Site

  • AVEN Members
  • 706 posts
  • Gender:Cisgirl with genderfluid tendencies (she/her/hers)
  • Location:The country under Canada and above Mexico
  • A/Sexuality:hetero-romantic, demiromantic asexual

Posted 01 February 2012 - 01:24 AM

Against my better judgement, I left a long, semi-detailed comment on that article Lunamoth linked to. I'm not sure it'll do much good at this point, but it doesn't hurt to try, right? :)
Warning/Disclaimer: I apologize in advance if anything I say gets under your skin. I'm not the best at tactfully wording things I say sometimes; I tend to be sarcastic and say things humorously without really meaning it. If I say anything that offends you or strikes a nerve, please forgive me. Also, I'm prone to making typos... lots and lots of typos, some of which shouldn't even be possible. Be prepared for that. >___>

"Let's suppose someone sat you down and said, very frankly, 'I know it may not make sense now, but someday, very soon, you will have a very strong desire to cut off your foot. no, don't give me that look like you won't, everyone does. It's normal. You'd be hard pressed to find anyone my age who hasn't. Anyway, since it's going to be so important to you, and I know I can't stop you, I want to tell you how to do it safely. Let me give you some little plastic covers so that the stump where your foot was doesn't get infected, since that can happen sometimes. Also, if you wait until you're married, then you can both cut off your feet together, and it'll make you feel closer as a couple. Just remember, it's always best to wait until then, since this is a big deal. Now, when you're cutting off feet, you can get a lot of fluids everywhere, so be sure to clean it up. You can catch diseases from that stuff too, you know. I'm telling you this because cutting off feet is probably the most beautiful and enjoyable thing you'll ever do, but I want you to do it safely. I mean, you don't want to get hurt, do you? Oh, and by the way, this is where babies come from too' And the whole time he's saying this, everyone around you is completely enthralled - they're nodding, they're writing down notes, they're asking whether a saw or hatchet works best, etc." -Shinearoth, on Sex Ed.

#291 Faelights

Faelights

    ~Royal Chat Kitteh~

  • AVEN Members
  • 6,858 posts
  • Location:The Chat Room

Posted 01 February 2012 - 01:25 AM

I hate to nitpick, but Haven for the Human Amoeba was a Yahoo group. AVEN is the oldest and largest Asexual organization.

I hate to nitpick as well, but what counts as an organization? How is a Yahoo group any less an organization than AVEN? They're simply different platforms for forming communities.

#292 sinisterporpoise

sinisterporpoise

    Asexy Samurai

  • AVEN Members
  • 910 posts
  • Location:PA

Posted 01 February 2012 - 01:30 AM

I don't think the Yahoo group was intended to be anything more than a place to discuss Asexuality or Nosexuality. AVEN developed a real-world presence, which is something many other Asexual groups still lack.
Asexual News -- I own it or something


I'm the Terre Haute Ace Examiner (Unlike Philadelphia, I have actually been to this city.)

#293 Faelights

Faelights

    ~Royal Chat Kitteh~

  • AVEN Members
  • 6,858 posts
  • Location:The Chat Room

Posted 01 February 2012 - 01:52 AM

Without knowing who the founders were, I don't think the Yahoo group was intended to be anything more than a place to discuss Asexuality or Nosexuality. AVEN developed a real-world presence, which is something many other Asexual groups still lack.

Well, I can't argue with that. :P

#294 Pobblebonk

Pobblebonk

    A-gent

  • AVEN Members
  • 1,965 posts
  • Location:Townsville

Posted 01 February 2012 - 03:13 AM

Haven't read the thread yet, but popping back briefly after a long absence to share thoughts on the episode itself.

Yes, the treatment was fairly negative, predictably so both because of the nature of the series and because of lack of understanding.

I was particularly struck that the producers equated asexuality with lack of libido and resultant erectile dysfunction, to the extent that the asexual character himself jumped to the conclusion that if his libido was restored, he'd become interested in sex. That's not my own experience of asexuality, and to me it doesn't strike a realistic chord to present an asexual character reacting that way. My own experience is that physical 'symptoms' of sexuality (to turn the case made in House on its head) such as arousal and libido exist, but are not associated with any corresponding desire to have sex with anyone.

Despite that I think Wilson's perspective gave some balance to the episode, and it did highlight such things as asexuality being considered a valid orientation. The difficulty I think mainly lies with the kind of show House is - anything unusual is necessarily a medical problem, to make the show work. And the situation presented wasn't, I think, necessarily unrealistic as an individual case study. That doesn't imply that it's the norm - a House episode not long ago had a closeted gay guy in a heterosexual marriage, a situation which turned out to be related to his medical condition. No one would take that to imply House was suggesting that heterosexual relationships are, in the words of a petition I noticed on AVEN, "built on medical conditions and deception". That's because heterosexual relationships are much more common and widely-recognised; asexuality is not, so this case is more likely to be presented as typical. That was, in all likelihood, the producers' intent in this instance, however I would have preferred something in the dialogue that acknowledged that the guy might remain asexual after the treatment, and that it's not invariably the case (it would have been quite in character for Wilson, for instance, to argue "even though you were right in this case, that doesn't mean asexuality isn't a real orientation").

The other striking thing, I felt, was the asexual character's final line, his indignant exclamation "I'm not like them!" - insofar as asexual stereotypes yet exist, it seems to be one (and supported from memory from a lot of past posts in these forums) that asexuals are seen as elitist, considering themselves inherently superior to the majority with animalistic sexual urges; more than anything else presented in the episode this, I think, was the most negative portrayal of asexuality it presented.

I was aware from the posts that it would give him a libido, but I didn't know they told him it would name him want to have sex! How does that work, exactly? Even people with low libidos still want to have sex as long as they experience sexual attraction. Am I to believe that removing a tumor would completely change his personality?


You don't watch enough House. Its medical conditions exist in a parallel universe of their own; most things are ultimately cancers or liver problems of some sort, and tumours usually change personalities.

Edited by Arca nine Huggles, 01 February 2012 - 05:18 PM.
Merged double-posts, now they can live happily ever after!

"Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth" - Albert Einstein

"I know where I should be, and I'm gonna make it there" - Joe Bonamassa, "My Mistake"

"Hey, do I look like a guy who's had sex?" - Eric Forman, That 70's Show

#295 Lady Heartilly

Lady Heartilly

    A-gent

  • AVEN Members
  • 1,929 posts
  • Location:In a magical land, far, far away
  • A/Sexuality:asexual heteromantic

Posted 01 February 2012 - 04:13 AM

ne, his indignant exclamation "I'm not like them!" - insofar as asexual stereotypes yet exist, it seems to be one (and supported from memory from a lot of past posts in these forums) that asexuals are seen as elitist, considering themselves inherently superior to the majority with animalistic sexual urges; more than anything else presented in the episode this, I think, was the most negative portrayal of asexuality it presented.


Hey, I watched this episode several times, and I'd like to clarify here that the line was actually "But I know who I am! I'm one of them!" While that could also have elitist implications, it sounded more to me like he was just saying that he felt like he fit in and belonged to the asexual community and would be unsure of his identity if he were forced out. If he had actually said "I'm not like them!" I think he would have sounded far more elitist. I'm glad that wasn't the actual line.
Once upon a time, in a faraway land, there was a beautiful princess who lived happily ever after. What makes her happy? Well, that's entirely up to her.

#296 sinisterporpoise

sinisterporpoise

    Asexy Samurai

  • AVEN Members
  • 910 posts
  • Location:PA

Posted 01 February 2012 - 06:13 AM

I am a huge fan of House and new that the character would be an ass. House only has one redeeming value. He will do anything to save the lives of his patients, despite anything else he says.

I expected House to act as he did, having watched the show from the second or third season onward. I did not expect the writers to leave this particular plot line fully resolved. I expected both House and Wilson to have each of their viewpoints proven. Technically, House *lost* the bet. The bet was that House could find a medical reason for the Asexuality of Wilson's patient. The husband was not Wilson's patient. Lying is a moral issue, not a medical issue. If the writers wanted to work Wilson realizing he didn't owe House $100 into the plot of a remaining episode, it would be an excellent opportunity to bring up the Asexual patients again.

People are concerned about how House portrayed Asexuality because a lot of people receive their only source of medical information from medical dramas. If House finds medical causes for Asexuality, that means Asexuality always has a medical cause. It does not matter if the show is intended to be a fictional show about a deeply flawed character.(If you have read The Sword of Truth, this is an application of the wizard's first rule.) People deeply want Asexuality to be explained away easily, and this show did little to challenge people's preconceived notions. It gave them more ammunition.
Asexual News -- I own it or something


I'm the Terre Haute Ace Examiner (Unlike Philadelphia, I have actually been to this city.)

#297 vervain

vervain

    Mega Mitosis

  • AVEN Members
  • 231 posts
  • Gender:Agender
  • A/Sexuality:Aro ace

Posted 02 February 2012 - 12:44 AM

I haven't read this yet, but I see that there's an article about how "House Got it Wrong" on asexuality:

http://www.salon.com...rong/singleton/

Most of the comments are pretty ignorant though, as usual.


I find the comments terribly ironic. The posters don't understand why we could possibly be upset. They assume we have some kind of medical problem, are lying, don't really exist. And with that they claim that we don't suffer any kind of oppression or erasure of identity...

To the mysterious Elizabeth G., :cake: for your patience and level-headedness !

#298 Faelights

Faelights

    ~Royal Chat Kitteh~

  • AVEN Members
  • 6,858 posts
  • Location:The Chat Room

Posted 02 February 2012 - 03:18 AM

To the mysterious Elizabeth G., :cake: for your patience and level-headedness !

Agreeeeed :cake:

I would help out, but I hate making random internet accounts. XD

#299 kitchenwitch

kitchenwitch

    Asexy

  • AVEN Members
  • 401 posts
  • Location:Sacramento, CA
  • A/Sexuality:panromantic asexual

Posted 04 February 2012 - 04:38 AM




Asexual Visibility and Education Network (AVEN) is the world’s oldest asexual organization. Founded in 2002, AVEN has grown to encompass 150 countries, 13 languages, and close to 50,000 members. For more information please visit www.asexuality.org. Asexual Awareness Week is an international organization dedicated to raising awareness and visibility about the asexual spectrum around the world. Statistics quoted are from the asexual community census; data is available online at http://www.tinyurl.c...yCensusResults. For more information, please visit www.asexualawarenessweek.com.

Wait, I was pretty certain AVEN is not the oldest asexual organization. It may be the world's oldest still-existing asexual organization, I guess. =P


If there's an older one than AVEN, I don't know about it (and neither did David)?

http://www.asexuality.org/wiki/index.php?title=Haven_for_the_Human_Amoeba

DJ was a part of that group. o.o




I hate to nitpick, but Haven for the Human Amoeba was a Yahoo group. AVEN is the oldest and largest Asexual organization.

I hate to nitpick as well, but what counts as an organization? How is a Yahoo group any less an organization than AVEN? They're simply different platforms for forming communities.


The comment that I made about David not knowing about an earlier organization: he proofed the press release pretty thoroughly and didn't change that part of it. I did not know about organizations prior to AVEN and he did not correct me.

Re: the Haven for the Human Ameoba vs. AVEN conversation, I don't know much about that period in acey history. I feel like a message list is probably an organization if it is calling itself one but I wasn't around to know if it did. It wasn't my intention at all to exclude pre-AVEN asexuality/nonsexuality groups, it was meant to highlight to the press that this isn't some new fad, the community has been organizing for 10 years, etc etc. Maybe I missed that mark. :/

#300 Faelights

Faelights

    ~Royal Chat Kitteh~

  • AVEN Members
  • 6,858 posts
  • Location:The Chat Room

Posted 04 February 2012 - 10:55 AM

The comment that I made about David not knowing about an earlier organization: he proofed the press release pretty thoroughly and didn't change that part of it. I did not know about organizations prior to AVEN and he did not correct me.

Re: the Haven for the Human Ameoba vs. AVEN conversation, I don't know much about that period in acey history. I feel like a message list is probably an organization if it is calling itself one but I wasn't around to know if it did. It wasn't my intention at all to exclude pre-AVEN asexuality/nonsexuality groups, it was meant to highlight to the press that this isn't some new fad, the community has been organizing for 10 years, etc etc. Maybe I missed that mark. :/

I think it did hit the mark, so no worries about that.

But just as an explanation of my reaction: that particular sentence stood out to me because it seems like a pretty bold claim to make, especially as the very first sentence in that paragraph. If asexuality is a natural phenomenon as we tend to describe it, I can't help but feel skeptical when I read "the world's oldest asexual organization". How do we know that there aren't others out there, or that there haven't been others out there?

If qualifiers such as "online" or "still-existing" or "best known" or "most cited" were included, I definitely would've felt less skeptical. :P


EDIT: Oooo, a good way of emphasizing that an organization has been around for a long time is by pointing to its anniversaries. For example, AVEN's 10th anniversary was last year, and the forum's is this May. Things always seem that much older when people realize they've been around for a full decade (or more). ^_^




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users