Jump to content

Archived

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

Ballore

Resource Kits for Ace Inclusion in High Schools - Help Us Make These Happen!

Recommended Posts

Ballore

An exciting announcement for all of you asexy folk out there!

Asexual Outreach is in the draft stage of its high school (secondary school) resource kit information guide, and we're looking for your help in developing these. Specifically, this information guide aims to:

  • Help GSAs (Gender & Sexuality Alliances - ie. LGBTQ+ Clubs) include aces in their clubs and events
  • Help these GSAs run Asexual Awareness Weeks and other ace events
  • Encourage ace friendly school environments
  • Help educators include aces in their curriculum (and not alienate aces through their teaching)
  • Help school guidance counselors support struggling ace students
  • Help administrators understand ace students and better deal with ace related bullying
  • Help sex-ed (sexual education) teachers include aces in their curriculum

These information guides will be printed on half-letter booklets and will accompany Ace 101 informational flyers, ace friendly posters, and other useful materials.

To help us out on this project, we are fortunate to have a wonderful graphic design team (who will make sure the booklets look super fancy!) as well as a fabulous content editing team (who will ensure grammatical correctness and consistency)! These kits will be printed and shipped in the last weeks of August in time for the fall school term!

So how can you help?

For high school students:

You know best how schools can support you because you spend much of your time there! We would love to hear from you regarding how LGBTQ+ clubs at your school could better support you, how teachers, counselors, and administrators could create a more supportive environment for you, and how curriculum could be updated to better include and not alienate aces. We are available for text-based messaging (such as email or AVEN messages), Skype calls/Google Hangouts, and in-person meetings if you are located in Toronto. Additionally, you can help contribute directly to our resource kits through our kit wiki (info below).

If you would like us to send your school a resource kit of its own this September, feel free to let us know that as well!

Get in touch with us through a reply to this post, or through an email to contact@asexualoutreach.org.

For educators:

We'd love your input on how to bring ace education and inclusion into the classroom. Get in touch with us through email (contact@asexualoutreach.org) or through a reply to this post, and we'll make sure to continue the conversation with you there! Additionally, you can help contribute directly to our resource kits through our kit wiki (info below).

If you would like us to send your school a resource kit of its own this September, feel free to let us know that as well!

For content creators and activists:
We'd love your help in developing ace activities that high school LGBTQ+ groups can run to educate about asexuality in their clubs and schools. Additionally, we'd love your contributions to our kits in general, so feel free to contribute directly on our kit wiki (info below). Get in touch with us through email (contact@asexualoutreach.org) or through a reply to this post, and we'll make sure to continue the conversation with you there!
For everyone in general:
Our information guides are being collaboratively written on our resource kit wiki. Much of our first draft is finished, but there's always room for improvement, and we can always fit more content (we have quite a sizable budget, so there is no maximum length on these booklets). Keep in mind that the last day to make changes to this document before it is submitted for final editing is July 26th, 2015.
We already have 35 schools who have requested these kits from us. However, we're always looking to make a greater impact, and there are always more schools to connect with. If you know of a school who would like this resource, let us know!

You can contact us through email (contact@asexualoutreach.org) or through a reply to this post and we will certainly get back to you!
If you have any questions or concerns at all in this process, please get in touch with us and we will make sure to get back to you in a timely manner!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Star Bit

I assume you'll be sticking to the "no sexual attraction" definition of asexuality/won't be elaborating on what sexual attraction is. I think it should be done because many people don't understand what it's supposed to mean. Though i have some definition gripes. Also, allosexuals can benefit from this information too; such as finding out they're demiromantic or which people they should get in a relationship with because they may never develope romantic feelings and end relationships due to that. Aromantics should be just as included. You're probably going to try to keep it simple and not include the other 4 types of attraction (6 total and 4 because you're probably going to clarify that asexual=/=aromantic and mention romantic attraction). But i think this should also be done too because people can confuse them for other attractions. Perhaps state in some way that we are not separating all these things by choice but because of the fact that there are people who do experience these things separately.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kman

^^^^Cuz if not, I highly recommend you do. Elaboration is what we need. Nah, simplicity won't get the point over unless they already understand. I mean, we could say everything in a simple way to help, but we still should say everything. I haven't read it yet, but I will later. Now, I shall go to sleep ^_^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ballore

I assume you'll be sticking to the "no sexual attraction" definition of asexuality/won't be elaborating on what sexual attraction is. I think it should be done because many people don't understand what it's supposed to mean. Though i have some definition gripes. Also, allosexuals can benefit from this information too; such as finding out they're demiromantic or which people they should get in a relationship with because they may never develope romantic feelings and end relationships due to that. Aromantics should be just as included. You're probably going to try to keep it simple and not include the other 4 types of attraction (6 total and 4 because you're probably going to clarify that asexual=/=aromantic and mention romantic attraction). But i think this should also be done too because--the reason escapes me atm, will post later. Perhaps state in some way that we are not separating all these things by choice but because of the fact that there are people who do experience these things separately.

Great ideas, Star Bit. We will definitely elaborate on what sexual attraction is, and will generally expand the intro chapter as it seems to be somewhat lacking at the moment (and because we certainly have room to expand). We will make a chart of the six types of attraction, and will certainly note that asexual does not equal aromantic. The primary focus for these kits is on the asexual spectrum, though aromanticism will certainly be widely discussed.

^^^^Cuz if not, I highly recommend you do. Elaboration is what we need. Nah, simplicity won't get the point over unless they already understand. I mean, we could say everything in a simple way to help, but we still should say everything. I haven't read it yet, but I will later. Now, I shall go to sleep ^_^

We will certainly be elaborating on our content. The booklet is set to be about 100 (half letter) pages in length, so while much of that will be imagery and formatting, there is still ample room for an indepth discussion of all relevant topics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Star Bit

I’ll list the definitions I had gripes with and other information I think is important. The [ ]s are elaborations; on my gripes or needed info.

There are 6 different types of attractions; they can all be felt separately and in different combinations. Other than romantic attraction; obviously, these attractions can also be felt platonically. I’ve found that people who say they can’t distinguish between attractions (excluding the romantic and platonic comparison) just feel them together.

· Sexual attraction: the impulse to have sex with a specific person; to do sexual thing to or with that person (excuse vulgarity, but this seems to help people see the line: desiring to have contact with their genitals or hump them). In Allosexual people, this desire is triggered by someone’s presence being sexually arousing.

Sex-drive: the undirected desire to have sex or frequency in desiring sex

· Romantic attraction: an emotion; which do not translate well into words, but it’s basically soft/fuzzy feelings with some degree of fixation (at least out of comparison to how they are with other people). Some people react to it with butterflies, blush, dreamy mind set, etc., and others don’t. There are other attractions typically felt with this attraction but they are not must haves. [some also confuse it with meaning in-love; love comes later.]

Romantic-drive: the undirected desire to act romantically or frequency in desiring romance [Or is it to be in a romantic relationship? Sex-drive isn’t about being in an ongoing sexual relationship but just to have sex. But what is acting romantically is subjective and if someone doesn’t have the exact same romantic desires then someone can say they have no romantic-drive]

· Aesthetic attraction- a fixation on someone because of their looks and or mannerisms; having a pull to look at them. It is different from recognizing good looks/what is "aesthetically pleasing" with no fixation. This does not mean a romantic or platonic relationship is desired but attractions can be felt with other attractions. [i mention this because I’ve seen many people previously mistaken romantic attraction or even sexual attraction as aesthetic attraction.]

· Sensual attraction- an urge to have non-sexual physical contact; to cuddle, hold hands, etc. [Yes, the term sensual refers to all physical contact, but just as we separate romance from sex, we also separate it here. There are technically 3 types of sensual attraction platonic, romantic, and sexual. The first two differ by chaste kissing. Sexual sensual attraction is when you do non-genital physical contact with the intent of sexual arousal; which can validly be an asexual’s kink.--so should it be edited to non-genital instead of non-sexual?] Platonically displaying this more than the norm can qualify as a type of queerplatonic relationship (QPR). This would probably only differ from romantic sensual attraction with chaste kissing and be best compared to the same desired display toward a pet. But this word is typically applied toward other humans.

· Emotional attraction- a fixation on someone because of their emotions; and by extent personality; how they are stoic, optimistic, etc. I would compare it to admirance or a favorite character. This does not mean a romantic or platonic relationship is desired but attractions can be felt with other attractions. [i mentioned because people can mistake this for romantic attraction too.]

· Platonic attraction- a strong desire to know or befriend someone (aka a squish; a play on the romantic word crush, but a desire to know someone is also typically felt with romantic attraction). Many Aromantics misinterpreted this as romantic attraction before knowing their orientation. Romantics and Aromantics can have squishes.

I’m not sure how far your terms will go, but:

· Some people take offence to the wording of "gender-blind" in Pansexual/romantic's definition, so just say that a person's gender/sex is not a contributing factor in their attraction to someone.

· Gray-Asexual/Gray-A: anything between having sexual attraction and not; having characteristics of both simultaneously (i.e. Lithsexual and Cupiosexual) or at different times (Demisexual). It can also include the attraction being rare and having a low sex-drive. Some people are closer to the sexual end of this spectrum and wish to specify it with Gray-sexual [yes, for some reason I never see the s capitalized; discriminatory, and the same goes for Gray-romantic, but i never see any of the other Grays abreviated like they are with Gray-A].

· Demisexual: sexual attraction after a certain bond [and because I see this oftenly needed to be clarified], it is not being ok with sex after a certain bond or the theory of either and should not be used unless sure because a partner may be waiting for a day, or at least of reciprocation if they're already compromising, that may never come. It's also not when someone has sexual attraction but is only comfortable with the reciprocation after a certain bond, although this is a far batter inaccurate way to use it. I think demi-consent should be a used term but it currently isn't. [some specify the definition as a close bond, but this would exclude people who need a bond but just not a close one/friendship but not best friends before becoming attracted; the prefix literally means half/partially, not closeness or even bond. The term would have been better off as Liensexual/romantic (French for bond/the only English source for words that wasn’t too long)]

· Quoiromantic: unable to distinguish between platonic and romantic emotions. It sounds like something that should be super obvious, but when you put it in terms of “how is really caring about a friend and really caring about a significant other different?” or “how is wanting to spend time with a friend and wanting to spend time with a significant other different?”, then it becomes more understandable.

· Lithsexual/romantic aka Aposexual/romantic (which I prefer because its prefix isn’t a metaphor): [some people define this as “not requiring reciprocation” but that’s too vague/leaving things out. If you don’t desire reciprocation that either means you’re indifferent or the reciprocation is downright unwanted.] an umbrella term for a negative to indifferent reaction to reciprocation. More specifically it causing (over time or immediately) indifference, loss of interest, or repulsion. Some Apo people can be in those relationships but can only keep the emotion as long as the partner is unreciprocating (not to be confused with rape but the partner would more so be indifferent) so a good partner for an Aposexual/romantic would be an Apathsexual/romantic or an Aromantic/Asexual ok with someone feeling that way about them.

· [i warn you that some people are against the existence of these terms/find them unneeded, their suffixes ridiculous, or find them tumblr BS, but I protest that the wide umbrella of gray is simply getting its deserved titles just as everything else already has. Most of which gripe that these reactions are normal/don't seem to understand that these conditions are 24/7 for these people; which is a way Allosexual people also write off Asexuality by saying "everyone feels that way sometimes". To me it's like people are reacting to Bisexual being a new term with "Just say you're heterosexual and homosexual, not this new word Bi. Making up words, sheesh." These terms are defined so people like it can find others who are too; so they don’t have to sit in a sea of vagueness and try to spot someone like themselves.]

Fraysexual/romantic, Burstsexual/romantic, and Requisexual/romantic can be subsets of/overlap with Lith/Apo but aren't entirely it. Fraysexual/romantic means sexual/romantic attraction fades away. [some specify that this is only to strangers and once they get to know them it fades away, but the prefix does not denote this and would exclude Demi-Fraysexuals/romantics and people who lose it later in the relationship.] Burstsexual/romantic means the attraction comes in bursts. What are bursts can be subjective; they are relatively short periods of time, but this could also apply to someone, who in comparison, has longer periods of being unattracted to their partner in that way than being attracted. Requisexual/romantic is basically an introvertive response to reciprocation and they need a break for this developed negative emotion to wear off. It may be stress, repulsion, etc. Even slight action in that regard can set back their recovery period. Some Requiromantics can't even see the partner while in this period. But this is not to be confused with an introvert's response to reciprocation, which may be similar, is extreme in comparison. Some may only desire to be with their partner in that way 3 times a month or even once a month or longer. The reason this is not fully Lith/Apo is because they don't typically mention that the attraction for that person returns.

· Cupiosexual: [People seem to understand the romantic side of this far easier than the sexual side so I’ll put it in a way that seems to clear up the confusion.] someone who desires sex but finds no one sexually enticing; acting without the enticement. They technically have no sexual attraction but have a sex-drive. They can have preferences or standards for other reasons.

· Cupioromantic: incapable of romantic feelings but desires to be in a romantic relationship. They can feel platonic love. They have love to give but unfortunately cannot feel romantically attracted to people. They technically have no romantic attraction but have a romantic-drive. They can have preferences or standards for other reasons.

· Hyposexual: low sex-drive or infrequently feeling sexual attraction [Yes, it was originally a medical term but the official title is Hypoactive Sexual (this part sometimes shortened to Hyposexual or Hypo Sexual) Desire Disorder/HSDD and is only diagnosed when the patient has distress over this fact. The public seems to just call it Hyposexual, however, the prefix just means low, so it’s perfectly fine as an orientation. Plus, HOCD exists; which is where someone is obsessed with the plausibility of themselves being gay, so just because a sexuality is in a disorder does not mean the sexuality is a disorder.]

Not to be confused with Hypersexual; addicted to sex. There can also be Hyperromantics.
Also not to be confused with being indifferent.

· Sex indifferent aka Apathsexual (prefix being apathy): this can either be an Allosexual person indifferent of satisfying their sexual attraction/indifferent of sexual reciprocation (not to be confused with rape; which many don’t even happen out of sexual attraction but for power or sex-drive), or an asexual with no sexual compromise limit. The latter is obviously not on the Gray-A spectrum, but the former is.

· Romance indifferent aka Apathromantic: this can be a romantic person indifferent of satisfying their romantic attraction/indifferent of romantic reciprocation (not to be confused with a stalker; which many want reciprocation), or an Aromantic who doesn’t mind acting romantically; perhaps out of platonic love for the sake of someone else (not to be confused with Cupioromantic, which desire these relationships).

· Queerplatonic relationship (QPR): [Many debate that it is its original meaning/the first example, but there are many types of QPRs and the term literally means oddly-platonic.] an emotionally platonic relationship that has characteristics of a romantic/sexual relationship. It can be an importance/closeness stronger than the best friend norm, displaying platonic sensual attraction above the norm (only differing from romantic sensual attraction with chaste kissing, although preferring chaste kissing or no kissing does not make one’s feelings unromantic), friends with sexual benefits, romantically pleasing someone you platonically love (QP to one and romantic to the other), or any combination of those. They may or may not have monogamy, live together, or look like a couple to the public. Romantics and Aromantics can have QPRs. [Examples seem to be good at getting people to understand so maybe put a few of those. The only one that comes to mind that many would know is JD and Terk from Scrubs.]

There are more orientations but do you want to list them all/overwhelm people?

· It’s possible to find someone charming while not being romantically attracted to them. [Perhaps looking up its definition will help that distinction. If you look at its synonyms they can be applied romantically, but they can also not. I mention this because feeling this way can confuse people on their orientation. Perhaps the example of an aunt finding their pubescent nephew charming is a good example?]

· Asexuals can have sex and even enjoy it for different reasons, they just don’t have the impulse to have it. Some of these reasons include obvious pleasure, moral satisfaction from pleasing their partner, the bond/oxytocin it produces, etc. [i think phrasing it like this helps people relate:] Some Asexuals are ok with sexually compromising, and others aren’t comfortable receiving something they don’t reciprocate. Some have a sex tolerance level, others don’t/are indifferent.

· I also think that mentioning that not everyone is into kissing, or into specific types of kissing, is important, as many people don’t know this and that there’s nothing wrong with it.

· Sex-repulsed does not equal sex-negative or antisexual; repulsion is not always a choice. And there is a less intense version called sex-averse.

· Technically there is no word for masturbation-drive. Libido and sex-drive are synonyms, but this mix-up is to be expected of the Allosexual norm which experiences both at the same time/they influence one another/thinking a desire for pleasure is the same as a desire for that pleasure with another person. In the asexual community we use libido to refer to masturbation-drive since it does not literally denote sex.

· Physical attraction is an inaccurate word and can be intended and interpreted as three different attractions; aesthetic, sensual, and sexual. The Allosexual public uses this and coined it because they feel all of their attractions at once, as well as it being a fundamental emotion to them which enforces their inability to see a point in looking any deeper. (Much like people not knowing that the faint taste in water is due to minerals, and pure H2O is literally tasteless-- though actually unhealthy because it will then absorb minerals from whatever it touches; i.e. damaging your mouth.)

· What is sexual involves sexual arousal in any direct or indirect way. [as some people think unarousing kissing is sexual because it can lead to sex] An act should not be called sexual unless it’s desired to be done for the sexual arousal. Just because it can lead to sex or happen during sex does not make it sexual by default. (i.e. just because having a foot fetish is common does not make feet sexual)

· Some Asexuals can have kinks and fetishes.

· It is possible to be Asensual; to have no sensual attraction, and have a romantic orientation. As well as Gray-sensual and Demisensual.

· Alot of people complain about the labeling everything part and i think if you separate what they think should remain simplistic with another title then it'll calm them down. So i think you should put the orientations as the sex/gender someone is attracted to and the remaining ones that are more so details as sub-orientations.

· Include why people realized they were ace late; thinking everyone was exaggerating/copying the sex-crazed ones, never stopped to ask if they desired what they felt was expected, etc. Perhaps hearing other people’s brief stories will help them understand it/see it’s a real thing. I think them knowing that many people react to hearing that it’s a real sexuality with tears of joy. This will show them how personal an issue this can be for people. Though I’ve only seen the older Aces mention this. Probably because they’ve been at it for so long.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
nikarose7

Are these going to be supplied to universities as well? Lots of counseling and psychology students take courses in human sexuality. I would love to see this information get to them as well. If we can raise awareness for counselors, teachers, and those teaching our kids, that would go a long way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ballore

I’ll list the definitions I had gripes with and other information I think is important. The [ ]s are elaborations; on my gripes or needed info.

There are 6 different types of attractions; they can all be felt separately and in different combinations. Other than romantic attraction; obviously, these attractions can also be felt platonically. I’ve found that people who say they can’t distinguish between attractions (excluding the romantic and platonic comparison) just feel them together.

· Sexual attraction: the impulse to have sex with a specific person; to do sexual thing to or with that person (excuse vulgarity, but this seems to help people see the line: desiring to have contact with their genitals or hump them). In Allosexual people, this desire is triggered by someone’s presence being sexually arousing.

Sex-drive: the undirected desire to have sex or frequency in desiring sex

· Romantic attraction: an emotion; which do not translate well into words, but it’s basically soft/fuzzy feelings with some degree of fixation (at least out of comparison to how they are with other people). Some people react to it with butterflies, blush, dreamy mind set, etc., and others don’t. There are other attractions typically felt with this attraction but they are not must haves.

Romantic-drive: the undirected desire to act romantically or frequency in desiring romance [Or is it to be in a romantic relationship? Sex-drive isn’t about being in an ongoing sexual relationship but just to have sex. But what is acting romantically is subjective and if someone doesn’t have the exact same romantic desires then someone can say they have no romantic-drive]

· Aesthetic attraction- a fixation on someone because of their looks and or mannerisms; having a pull to look at them. It is different from recognizing good looks/what is "aesthetically pleasing" with no fixation. This does not mean a romantic or platonic relationship is desired but attractions can be felt with other attractions. [i mention this because I’ve seen many people previously mistaken romantic attraction or even sexual attraction as aesthetic attraction.]

· Sensual attraction- an urge to have non-sexual physical contact; to cuddle, hold hands, etc. [Yes, the term sensual refers to all physical contact, but just as we separate romance from sex, we also separate it here. There are technically 3 types of sensual attraction platonic, romantic, and sexual. The first two differ by chaste kissing. Sexual sensual attraction is when you do non-genital physical contact with the intent of sexual arousal; which can validly be an asexual’s kink.--so should it be edited to non-genital instead of non-sexual?] Platonically displaying this more than the norm can qualify as a type of queerplatonic relationship (QPR). This would probably only differ from romantic sensual attraction with chaste kissing and be best compared to the same desired display toward a pet. But this word is typically applied toward other humans.

· Emotional attraction- a fixation on someone because of their emotions; and by extent personality; how they are stoic, optimistic, etc. I would compare it to admirance or a favorite character. This does not mean a romantic or platonic relationship is desired but attractions can be felt with other attractions. [i mentioned because people can mistake this for romantic attraction too.]

· Platonic attraction- a strong desire to know or befriend someone (aka a squish; a play on the romantic word crush, but a desire to know someone is also typically felt with romantic attraction). Many Aromantics misinterpreted this as romantic attraction before knowing their orientation. Romantics and Aromantics can have squishes.

I’m not sure how far your terms will go, but:

· Some people take offence to the wording of "gender-blind" in Pansexual/romantic's definition, so just say that a person's gender/sex is not a contributing factor in their attraction to someone.

· Gray-Asexual/Gray-A: anything between having sexual attraction and not; having characteristics of both simultaneously (i.e. Lithsexual and Cupiosexual) or at different times (Demisexual). It can also include the attraction being rare and having a low sex-drive. Some people are closer to the sexual end of this spectrum and wish to specify it with Gray-sexual [yes, for some reason I never see the s capitalized; discriminatory, and the same goes for Gray-romantic, but i never see any of the other Grays abreviated like they are with Gray-A].

· Demisexual: sexual attraction after a certain bond [and because I see this oftenly needed to be clarified], it is not being ok with sex after a certain bond or the theory of either and should not be used unless sure because a partner may be waiting for a day, or at least of reciprocation if they're already compromising, that may never come. It's also not when someone has sexual attraction but is only comfortable with the reciprocation after a certain bond, although this is a far batter inaccurate way to use it. I think demi-consent should be a used term but it currently isn't. [some specify the definition as a close bond, but this would exclude people who need a bond but just not a close one/friendship but not best friends before becoming attracted; the prefix literally means half/partially, not closeness or even bond. The term would have been better off as Liensexual/romantic (French for bond/the only English source for words that wasn’t too long)]

· Quoiromantic: unable to distinguish between platonic and romantic emotions. It sounds like something that should be super obvious, but when you put it in terms of “how is really caring about a friend and really caring about a significant other different?” or “how is wanting to spend time with a friend and wanting to spend time with a significant other different?”, then it becomes more understandable.

· Lithsexual/romantic aka Aposexual/romantic (which I prefer because its prefix isn’t a metaphor): [some people define this as “not requiring reciprocation” but that’s too vague/leaving things out. If you don’t desire reciprocation that either means you’re indifferent or the reciprocation is downright unwanted.] an umbrella term for a negative to indifferent reaction to reciprocation. More specifically it causing (over time or immediately) indifference, loss of interest, or repulsion. Some Apo people can be in those relationships but can only keep the emotion as long as the partner is unreciprocating (not to be confused with rape but the partner would more so be indifferent) so a good partner for an Aposexual/romantic would be an Apathsexual/romantic or an Aromantic/Asexual ok with someone feeling that way about them.

· [i warn you that some people are against the existence of these terms/find them unneeded, their suffixes ridiculous, or find them tumblr BS, but I protest that the wide umbrella of gray is simply getting its deserved titles just as everything else already has. Most of which gripe that these reactions are normal/don't seem to understand that these conditions are 24/7 for these people. To me it's like people are reacting to Bisexual being a new term with "Just say you're heterosexual and homosexual, not this new word Bi. Making up words, sheesh." These terms are defined so people like it can find other who are too; so they don’t have to sit in a sea of vagueness and try to spot someone like themselves.]

Fraysexual/romantic, Burstsexual/romantic, and Requisexual/romantic can be subsets of/overlap with Lith/Apo but aren't entirely it. Fraysexual/romantic means sexual/romantic attraction fades away. [some specify that this is only to strangers and once they get to know them it fades away, but the prefix does not denote this and would exclude Demi-Fraysexuals/romantics and people who lose it later in the relationship.] Burstsexual/romantic means the attraction comes in bursts. What are bursts can be subjective; they are relatively short periods of time, but this could also apply to someone, who in comparison, has longer periods of being unattracted to their partner in that way than being attracted. Requisexual/romantic is basically an introvertive response to reciprocation and they need a break for this developed negative emotion to wear off. It may be stress, repulsion, etc. Even slight action in that regard can set back their recovery period. Some Requiromantics can't even see the partner while in this period. But this is not to be confused with an introvert's response to reciprocation, which may be similar, is extreme in comparison. Some may only desire to be with their partner in that way 3 times a month or even once a month or longer. The reason this is not fully Lith/Apo is because they don't typically mention that the attraction for that person returns.

· Cupiosexual: [People seem to understand the romantic side of this far easier than the sexual side so I’ll put it in a way that seems to clear up the confusion.] someone who desires sex but finds no one sexually enticing; acting without the enticement. They technically have no sexual attraction but have a sex-drive. They can have preferences or standards for other reasons.

· Cupioromantic: incapable of romantic feelings but desires to be in a romantic relationship. They can feel platonic love. They have love to give but unfortunately cannot feel romantically attracted to people. They technically have no romantic attraction but have a romantic-drive. They can have preferences or standards for other reasons.

· Hyposexual: low sex-drive or infrequently feeling sexual attraction [Yes, it was originally a medical term but the official title is Hypoactive Sexual (this part sometimes shortened to Hyposexual or Hypo Sexual) Desire Disorder/HSDD and is only diagnosed when the patient has distress over this fact. The public seems to just call it Hyposexual, however, the prefix just means low, so it’s perfectly fine as an orientation. Plus, HOCD exists; which is where someone is obsessed with the plausibility of themselves being gay, so just because a sexuality is in a disorder does not mean the sexuality is a disorder.]

Not to be confused with Hypersexual; addicted to sex. There can also be Hyperromantics.

Also not to be confused with being indifferent.

· Sex indifferent aka Apathsexual (prefix being apathy): this can either be an Allosexual person indifferent of satisfying their sexual attraction/indifferent of sexual reciprocation (not to be confused with rape; which many don’t even happen out of sexual attraction but for power or sex-drive), or an asexual with no sexual compromise limit. The latter is obviously not on the Gray-A spectrum, but the former is.

· Romance indifferent aka Apathromantic: this can be a romantic person indifferent of satisfying their romantic attraction/indifferent of romantic reciprocation (not to be confused with a stalker; which many want reciprocation), or an Aromantic who doesn’t mind acting romantically; perhaps out of platonic love for the sake of someone else (not to be confused with Cupioromantic, which desire these relationships).

· Queerplatonic relationship (QPR): [Many debate that it is its original meaning/the first example, but there are many types of QPRs and the term literally means oddly-platonic.] an emotionally platonic relationship that has characteristics of a romantic/sexual relationship. It can be an importance/closeness stronger than the best friend norm, displaying platonic sensual attraction above the norm (only differing from romantic sensual attraction with chaste kissing, although preferring chaste kissing or no kissing does not make one’s feelings unromantic), friends with sexual benefits, romantically pleasing someone you platonically love (QP to one and romantic to the other), or any combination of those. They may or may not have monogamy, live together, or look like a couple to the public. Romantics and Aromantics can have QPRs. [Examples seem to be good at getting people to understand so maybe put a few of those. The only one that comes to mind that many would know is JD and Terk from Scrubs.]

There are more orientations but do you want to list them all/overwhelm people?

· It’s possible to find someone charming while not being romantically attracted to them. [Perhaps looking up its definition will help that distinction. If you look at its synonyms they can be applied romantically, but they can also not. I mention this because feeling this way can confuse people on their orientation. Perhaps the example of an aunt finding their pubescent nephew charming is a good example?]

· Asexuals can have sex and even enjoy it for different reasons, they just don’t have the impulse to have it. Some of these reasons include obvious pleasure, moral satisfaction from pleasing their partner, the bond/oxytocin it produces, etc. [i think phrasing it like this helps people relate:] Some Asexuals are ok with sexually compromising, and others aren’t comfortable receiving something they don’t reciprocate. Some have a sex tolerance level, others don’t/are indifferent.

· I also think that mentioning that not everyone is into kissing, or into specific types of kissing, is important, as many people don’t know this and that there’s nothing wrong with it.

· Sex-repulsed does not equal sex-negative or antisexual; repulsion is not always a choice. And there is a less intense version called sex-averse.

· Technically there is no word for masturbation-drive. Libido and sex-drive are synonyms, but this mix-up is to be expected of the Allosexual norm which experiences both at the same time/they influence one another/thinking a desire for pleasure is the same as a desire for that pleasure with another person. In the asexual community we use libido to refer to masturbation-drive since it does not literally denote sex.

· Physical attraction is an inaccurate word and can be intended and interpreted as three different attractions; aesthetic, sensual, and sexual. The Allosexual public uses this and coined it because they feel all of their attractions at once, as well as it being a fundamental emotion to them which enforces their inability to see a point in looking any deeper. (Much like people not knowing that the faint taste in water is due to minerals, and pure H2O is literally tasteless-- though actually unhealthy because it will then absorb minerals from whatever it touches; i.e. damaging your mouth.)

· What is sexual involves sexual arousal in any direct or indirect way. [as some people think unarousing kissing is sexual because it can lead to sex] An act should not be called sexual unless it’s desired to be done for the sexual arousal. Just because it can lead to sex or happen during sex does not make it sexual by default. (i.e. just because having a foot fetish is common does not make feet sexual)

· Some Asexuals can have kinks and fetishes.

· It is possible to be Asensual; to have no sensual attraction, and have a romantic orientation. As well as Gray-sensual and Demisensual.

· Alot of people complain about the labeling everything part and i think if you separate what they think should remain simplistic with another title then it'll calm them down. So i think you should put the orientations as the sex/gender someone is attracted to and the remaining ones that are more so details as sub-orientations.

· Include why people realized they were ace late; thinking everyone was exaggerating/copying the sex-crazed ones, never stopped to ask if they desired what they felt was expected, etc. Perhaps hearing other people’s brief stories will help them understand it/see it’s a real thing. I think them knowing that many people react to hearing that it’s a real sexuality with tears of joy. This will show them how personal an issue this can be for people. Though I’ve only seen the older Aces mention this. Probably because they’ve been at it for so long.

Thank you so much for your feedback! I won't have time to go over all of these until Thursday morning, but I will certainly do so. The definition list that we have at the moment is a splice of several other lists, which was done to ensure the list is comprehensive. Of course, we will be rewriting most of the definitions as a lot of them either aren't updated/accurate, or do not align with Asexual Outreach's anti-oppressive mission. This will be worked on over the upcoming weekend, though I will certainly take all of these points into consideration when we rewrite the list.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ballore

Are these going to be supplied to universities as well? Lots of counseling and psychology students take courses in human sexuality. I would love to see this information get to them as well. If we can raise awareness for counselors, teachers, and those teaching our kids, that would go a long way.

These kits are aimed at high schools, and the majority of their content will be aimed at students and student leaders in those schools. As such, the information isn't explicitly relevant to university students (as the information is somewhat less nuanced and theoretical), but online versions will be available for all. However, the kits will have quite a large focus on high school teachers and guidance counselors.

A number of our staff and volunteers are quite active on university campuses, and are already working to bring ace content to relevant university courses. However, we may focus this effort more in the future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Star Bit

I'm sorry it took me this long to think of reading over the wiki page; i assumed it would be fine but there are problems. At the start of the first chapter you say many aces have disabilities. People will most likely interpret this as you saying most asexuals have a disorder. I know it would be repetition, but you need to change that to "some aces can". I also think phrasing anything with the word spectrum immediately turns people off. Probably because although they understand what the word means they don't get how it applies and ignores anything else that follows. So i suggest different wording. These are judgmental high school students after all. By specifying gender in asexual's definition you exclude beastiality and objectumsexuals, which most certainly experience sexual attraction and would not be ace. The phrasing on demisexual is unclear past its basic definition. You say Fraysexual is the opposite of demi but then further to explain and don't finish/say it fades away. Most people reject Cupiosexual and lesser often Cupioromantic because their definitions sound like an oxymoron and these kids will mostlikely reject it too if you don't make it clearer with "no one is sexually enticing but they desire sex" and "they have love to give but unfortunately cannot feel romantically attracted to anyone, although they're capable of platonic love." Everyone I've talked to can understand it when it's put that way. You didn't include Aposexual under Lithsexual's alternative titles. It's far more accurate than a metaphoric prefix. O-o WHERE THE HELL DID Z-sexual come from, I've been on here a year and a half and never heard of it and it makes no sense. Everyone on here says Allosexual and the prefix for it is completely accurate; meaning other. Please do not keep that in it, it's already the beginning of the thing and you're already sounding ridiculous. You'll make the whole thing a joke before it even really starts. If you want to include it then make Allo the first sentence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ballore

Hi Star Bit.

I’m going to do my best to reply to each of the points you’ve brought up. Please know that I only wish for the best of intentions, and that I do not intend to turn this thread into one of argument. I will preface this with saying that Asexual Outreach has different politics from a lot of other groups, and so this information may be counter to what you’ve seen in the past.

To begin, we make great efforts to center those who are often left out of ace activism and advocacy. This especially includes trans aces, aces of color, and aces with disabilities/disable aces.

At the start of the first chapter you say many aces have disabilities. People will most likely interprit this as you saying most asexuals have a disorder. I know it would be repetition, but you need to change that to "some aces can". I also think phrasing anything with the word spectrum immediately turns people off. Probably because although they understand what the word means they don't get how it applies and ignores anything else that follows. So i suggest different wording.

It is indeed true that many aces do have disabilities. A lot of activism up to this point and continuing today focuses on distancing asexuality from disability – people often emphasize that asexuality isn’t a disorder (which is true), and additionally emphasize that asexuality is not a result of what society deems a deficiency or disability (not always true). This enormously adds to the stigma that disabled aces face, and often makes the ace community and ace label inaccessible to those with disabilities.

By doing so, we are leaving out some of the more marginalized members of our community, and this is not a good way to advance our visibility and education efforts. Sure, this may be okay for the nondisabled ace student who looks to join their school’s GSA, but what does this do for an ace who does have a disability and tries to join the same group, but is turned away because the group leaders assume they cannot belong or assume that their asexuality can be explained away.

By specifying gender in asexual's definition you exclude beastiality and objectumsexuals, which most certainly experience sexual attraction and would not be ace.

The original text for this definition was: “a person who experiences little or no sexual attraction to anyone, and/or does not experience desire for sexual contact.” I’m not sure when this was changed (as Wikis can be changed by anyone), but I have reverted it. Keep in mind that some people do not identify with/have a gender, and so specifying gender is not a perfect solution. I unfortunately do not know enough about bestiality and objectumsexuality to comment extensively; however, from my limited understanding, some do take the asexual definition to be exclusively human-focused, and so I imagine some who experience sexual attraction to non-humans could potentially identify as ace. Again, I am not educated enough in the area to comment further, but I would avoid needlessly excluding people from our community which is meant to be inclusive.

The phrasing on demisexual is unclear past its basic definition. You say Fraysexual is the opposite of demi but then further to explain and don't finish/say it fades away. Most people reject Cupiosexual because its definition sounds like an oxymoron and these kids will mostlikely reject it too if you don't make it clearer with "no one is sexually enticing but they desire sex." Everyone I've talked tocan understand it when it's put that way. You didn't include Aposexual under Lithsexual's alternative titles. It's far more accurate than a metaphoric prefix.

We will be reworking these definitions, and I am not yet sure how the list will be presented – especially because I do not identify on the gray spectrum, and thus am not in a place decide how they are presented. I will consult with members of our team who are more knowledgeable of this area to better figure out this section.

O-o WHERE THE HELL DID Z-sexual come from, I've been on here a year and a half and never heard of it and it makes no sence. Everyone on here says Allosexual and the prefix for it is completely accurate. Please do not keep that in it, it's already the beginning of the thing and you're already sounding rediculous. You'll make the whole thing a joke before it even really starts. If you want to include it then make Allo the first sentence.

I will refer you to this post on the word “z-sexual” as the poster explains its use incredibly well – better than I would be able to.

http://rotten-zucchinis.tumblr.com/post/105421963160/some-reflections-on-sexual-and-allosexual-ace

But yes, we will be sticking with “z-sexual”. (I really do encourage you to read the post I’ve linked, as is an excellent resource)

Again, I do not want to start an argument on these points, but am open to friendly discussion if you wish to further the conversation. However, I will note ahead of time that – in line with Asexual Outreach’s mission and politics – we will not deemphasize aces with disabilities, and we will continue to use “z-sexual” (And will not use allosexual except as a historical term in our glossary).

Thank you though for your feedback – we do appreciate all the help we can get!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Star Bit

This is so long... but I've divided it up by topic.

I didn't say remove the people with disabilities from being mentioned, but put the word Some and not Many because 99% of people will read that and generalize it to mean all if not most. I get your point and I'm for it but the worst is what we don't want. Especially on the scale this information is going to be spread. Also, the post you linked me to is tumblr. Do you know how hated tumblur is and how many aces on here hate the terms it creates, let alone the rest of the world?? And the term has only been around for 7 months! It would've been far better if the new term was a type of Gray-A but a term you're supposed to refer to everyone else by, no. It could've worked if it was incredibly popular with its short life span but it's not. Alone, the term Z-sexual sounds like sexual attraction to Zs or the alphabet (or maybe even zombies; sorry, World War Z came to mind). Just no. It should not be that easily misinterpretable. Z does not have a preexisting prefix meaning, unlike A. If it's supposed to refer to A-Z then why not AZsexual? Which is still ridiculous. How is Allosexual any more inaccurate than this term? How is A-Z and Other any different? Eventhough Allosexual doesn't mean this, it could be looked at as meaning All Other. Perfectly accurate and nothing vague about it!

I suppose the reason you don't include "sexual/sexuals" or "a sexual person" as an alternative to non-ace is because it can be taken offensively or that "a sexual" can be heard as "asexual"? Btw, a good way to verily avoid that problem is to say "an asexual."

Also, put Cupioromantic something as/clarified as "they have love to give but unfortunately cannot feel romantically attracted to anyone, although they're capable of platonic love."

You don't include emotional attraction when listing different attractions. I really think it's useful because people can misinterpret it (and charming) as romantic attraction and it can be very confusing when they go to get into one out of that expectation and it not feel right but not fit into the definition of a squish. Allosexuals even use the term emotional attraction, as well as sensual attraction (but include romantic attraction, which is no surprise because they also don't typically see sex and romance separately, among other attractions)--wait, did you just forget to include it, you say six attractions and start to include it later but never define it. But i suppose you left it blank because few people talk about it/have a definition on it. But the Allosexual definition of emotional attraction is prettymuch the same thing i defined in the definition list. (Just removing their assumptions of romantic/sexual attraction with it; just as it is with the other attractions.)

Androromantic; in your note section, does not mean attraction to masculinity. That would be Mascuromantic/Mascromantic. Andro literally means male. Same mishap with gynoromantic (and its definition actually being femromantic). Gyno literally means female. Fem and Mascu aren't actual prefixes but shortenings of the words masculine and feminine.

Nearly 30% of aces are trans? What's the survey's participant number? Also, most people assume trans to mean desiring a transition and it needs to be clarified on what you mean by that. And i think that information is skewed because the asexual community is very gender informed/the public ratio of it is less because they don't know of it and thus your given percentage is inaccurate.

After that, i think you made typos; gen-er should be gender. The next sentence also has Additionally and compulsory with the same typo. In the next paragraph you misspell Latino with an x. At the end of the next paragraph i think it should be "in asexuality." Unless you just didn't finish the sentence. In/at the end of the Pathologization section i think you need to include that homosexuality used to be treated in the same way so they understand why that view is inaccurate. And I'm not sure what you intend to do with the... jotted down ideas(?) before "to be extended!"

Also, is the Wiki not up to date? According to your first post the deadline is in 4 days, it's supposed to be about 100 pages long, and the wiki is very short (at least until the 8th chapter but I'm still not sure that would fill it).

You say libido in Gray-A, but we use libido to refer to masturbation-drive and thus would make no sense. Once again, the allosexual norm is impairing definitions while they already have a word to describe what they want; sex-drive. Please remove it, they can get the obvious by leaving it at sex-drive. You also include aroflux but not aceflux in Gray-A's definition.

You kind of go over this in chapter 3, but there are 2 words in "asexual reproduction" for a reason; they are not synonyms. If they were/any form of reproduction was not a valid sexuality then heterosexuality would not be valid.

Perhaps knowing this will help: Sexual attraction actually starts to develop in late elementary but they only have clarity of what those feelings are in junior high to early high school. It's only after having these urges for at least a few years that teens finally act on them and typically lose their virginity at 16.

An Allosexual's point in a mixed relationship is also important. Yes, this booklet is about asexuals, but this also helps asexuals. You need to clarify that an allosexual's sexual desire is just as valid as an asexual's nonexistant desires or inability to compromise and are a valid and unshallow reason for breakingup. Allosexuals and married couples break up due to sex as well, and it's a leading cause. I also want to emphasize that any couple should have sex sorted out before marrying; too many people assume that it will smooth itself out. And the asexual is not/should not feel obligated/owe/deserve to give the other person sex. Look up FOG in relationships; Fear Obligation and Guilt and what healthy relationships actually are. Allosexuals seem to relate sex to self worth and their partner loving them/no sex or reciprocated emotions means the opposite eventhough their relationship is to them "great otherwise." This can obviously result in clinical depression, among other things. Even if they understand their partner is asexual, they seem to still react this way and seem to need time to adjust; if they can. I don't think you mentioned that some asexuals are fine with sexual compromise and others aren't comfortable receiving what they don't reciprocate (putting it that way makes people relate). So the relationship options are 1) the allosexual partner is ok without sex (some of which think they are but find out otherwise), 2) the asexual will sexually compromise to a degree both partners can agree apon; and there are many ways to have sex; most of which do not require the other partner's arousal (very important to the asexual because it eases their mind in this unmutual demand), and 3) an open relationship. Alternatives to traditional sex are hand jobs, blow jobs, anatomical sex toys (there are sex toys for males; people seem to not know; a male recieving anal and a male giving anal to his girlfriend do not make him gay; just as a guy giving a girl a hand job or oral does not make her gay either; it's a form of sex and nothing more, and if he wants vaginal then there are “fleshlights”), dry humping, and inserting male genitals into makeshift insertion points/body crevices (i.e. what oral and hand jobs are but also include the butt crack, armpit, breasts, etc./separately called mammary intercourse, intercrural sex, and axillary sex aka bagpiping). I'd suggest anal; even for women, but it poses risks (i suggest looking getting that info from a medical site and not hearsay articles). Aparently mutual masturbation and assisted masturbation aren't the right terms for the following eventhough masturbation is defined as self stimulating. There is also masturbating in the same room and one partner masturbating while the other non-genitally stimulates their body (i.e. kiss, lick, bite, grope) or does something sexy they can masturbate to) and mutual masturbation (masturbating in the same room). Also include that people don't have to come out. I forget if i mentioned this, but not all repulsion is voluntary/an opinion. Obviously you can't put the vulgar things in a high school booklet, but they cover handjobs and blowjobs in sex-ed right? So you can mention professional names for types of sex or at the very least suggest they look up alternative ways to have sex (the most helpful actually being wiki). Perhaps you think looking up alternatives to sex would be an obvious thing to a compromising asexual, but aparently not. Googling that also doesn't seem to come up with the best results.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ficulnean

This will be an as I go thing:

0, line 1: Current- ace (asexual spectrum). Edit- the convention is to do long land first and then introduce the relevant abbreviation. This convention exists because it means that literally the first thing you are doing is not confusing the reader with a term the do not know.

0, line 2: See above.

0, line 2: LGTBQ+ actually does stand on its own, but, umm . . . Shouldn't we add A, for ace, in there? If we need to unpack this acronym, I'd suggest as a footnote.

0, line 2-3

0, paragraph 3, line 2: glossies usually are lengither. I'd suggest paying attention to using long terminology that may alienate readers, given that it really isn't required there. Alienation can occur simply because of style choices. Look up that Carlyle guy, just for fun, to see how he abused that.

*Everything else was paragraph 1.

Onto the next chapter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ficulnean

Ch 1, line 1, word one: Asexuality. I'd further suggest the addition of "type of" between a and sexual within the same sentence. Otherwise the word religion is jarring. Also, to slightly lengthen newinformation allows more time to process it, but that's more of an aside.

Ch 1, line 1: I'm rather jarred reading this with the transition from being told about asexuality to being told that sexuality is a spectrum, all the while not being told what asexuality is. Either add the definition after your first sentence, or remove the first sentence and change that sections header. If you honestly don't want to do either, than change th first sentence as such "asexuality is a [type of] sexual orientation, and sexuality is a spectrum." That way when you continue one, you're immediately explaining one of the first concepts introduced. Also, using the word umbrella instead of general already sounds a bit dismissive, but that may be because I've rarely seen the words umbrella term in writing.

Ch 1, heading 2, line 1:simply saying that the following are [some] examples removes the need to diverge about how you can't list everything, which adds to ease of information.

I also don't find the addition of gender specifics within demisexuality to be enlightening. Merely to say that they can be of any additional sexual orientation once a bond manifests, in closing, wouldn't confuse the core definition.

Also, on the asexual and demisexuality descriptions, removes the words before experiences. I mean, if you're going to capitalize on structural repetition for ease of information, you need to stick to structure.

. . . Did you honestly include the variant spellings on the word grey/gray. Granted, it may make sense to read, but a wall of text will discourage active participation.

Also, is plying adding an extra indent on those your unsure about adding in that section will serve as a cue to the reader to take a mental pause. Overwhelming avoided.

I'm

Next section. Non-ace implies that ace is the default, and you claim the opposite. That explanation can cut off right before the comma, actually. People have an implicit understanding that happy/unhappy are oppositional, simply because that's the way we think.

Next heading: please don't mix tones. "Attraction is a common basis for determining orientation" matches with the latter use of "said attraction". The current words do not.

Line 2: "however, it's [orientation]." The desire to use the shorthand of it doesn't work as well when introducing new information. Replace it with what the it is actually referring to anytime you move on to a new sentence, if such replacement doesn't end up overusing a word.

You know, actually, I think Know what to expect from the rest of this resource kit. I do tend to overedit, and have already given an example of those things which lessen my engagement as a reader. That ought be enough. I appreciate the project and wish you the best.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ballore
Thanks for the feedback Ficulnean!


Just a note on how this project has progressed thus far: the wiki that you've been looking at is not a finalized edit, but rather a collection of ideas of what should and should not be added. Most of the issues that you have pointed out are just a result of collaborative editing - we do have a content editing team, and so these will be resolved. As I've begun creating a finalized version (in a separate, non public wiki), most of the issues that you have brought up have been resolved.


I will be updating the wiki that you see now at the end of the day with more finalized text.






And thank you again, Star Bit. My reply will be brief, as I don't currently have time for a more detailed reply.


1) I think that your argument about the disabilities sentence is off - not grammatically, but because it assumes that aces with disabilities are a lesser, or that in order for nondisabled aces to be validated, they need to be distanced from disabled aces. This is entirely not the case, and if used, would only further stigmatize and marginalize disability. Regardless, the sentence has been shifted on the page in a way that prevents the confusion you fear.


2) Yes I do know that I linked you to a Tumblr post. Just because the platform itself isn't

always respected, doesn't mean that content on it cannot be. I encourage you to take the

arguments independently of any biases you may have against the platform - I think you'll see that

they make a lot of sense. (And without revealing the identity of the user who runs that blog - as

it is not my place to do so (I'm sure you could search through it to find out if you really

wanted) - I can absolutely confirm that the poster is very knowledgeable in the area and comes from what most consider to be a very reputable background)


3) I don't think it's appropriate to state that cupioromantics *unfortunately* cannot feel romantic attraction, as that heightens romanticism to an incorrect ideal and lessens aromanticism (when romanticism is not objectively better, and should not be seen as such)- we are reworking definitions though, so I think things will work out alright.


4) I have included emotional attraction in the reworked version.


5) I will take a look at androromantic to see if there is any misdefinition


6) The survey that we cite (the largest and most recent in the ace commmunity) had a sample size of 14,210 people (which, as you can imagine, is not an insignificant sample size). There is no need to artificially lessen the 28% trans figure, especially because it is placed in context.


7) Thank you for noticing those typos - that section was copied off of a pdf document and did not translate correrctly. I like your suggestion about the past pathologization of homosexuality and will look into including it. And finally, much of this wiki is jotted down ideas. As I've mentioned above, that was the point of this draft, and we are turning those ideas into complete sentences and paragraphs in the updated revision with the help of our content editing team.


8) The gray-a definisions are being reworked


9) Asexual reproduction refers to the biological process that many organisms undergo to reproduce. It was noted there because that is the only time many people hear "asexual" - thus, it could be a great time to note their difference.


10) There is an extensive ongoing discussion over consent in mixed relationships, and as such, it would be inappropriate for us to "declare the correct position" while there isn't one at this point. We will likely link to an online resource for this information so that we can keep it up to date.




And finally, given the current expansion we are working on (ie. turning those ideas into complete sentences/paragraphs), we look to be hitting around the 100 page mark. (Keep in mind that these pages are half the size of a standard page (ie. A5), and that much of a lot of the pages will be filled with graphics and formatting).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
echidna

I think this is a great idea and congratulate you on actually doing something rather than just talking about it. However, I would like you to think very carefully about your inclusion of numerous definitions of different asexual "identities" rather than just introducing the idea of diversity within asexuals by giving some key characterisitics which may vary between asexuals e.g. subject and strength of romantic attraction.

I suggest this for two reasons. First, many of these words are not well-known, even amongst people who are very familiar with queer issues, so there is no great need for the readers to understand them. It comes across like a boring school lesson learning terminology, and is likely to reduce understanding of the key message. Second, dividing people into smaller and smaller named categories rather than using a mixture of broad terms and actual descrption has social implications. How many people have had the wide range of experiences required to accurately label themselves in the way Star Bit suggests? How many people need to be able to describe themselves that precisely with a single word rather than a phrase? What if your particular combination of experiences doesn't fit one of the numerous categories so you feel even more excluded? This is like the problem of adding more and more letters to LGBT. At some point it becomes ridiculous and re-embracing terms like queer is the most inclusive way ahead. By including numerous definitions, realise you are not just being informative, you are taking a philosophical stance.

Having sufficient budget is not a reason to create a long leaflet. People are overloaded with information so you need to produce something that they will take the time to read, and that will actually have an impact on their thinking. Every single sentence needs to justify its presence to strike a balance between the impact of simplicity and the greater understanding from detail. Be very clear what you want your 'take home messages' to be and don't allow them to be diluted by the temptation to include everything someone suggests.

I wish you well with the project.

Echidna

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ballore

I think this is a great idea and congratulate you on actually doing something rather than just talking about it. However, I would like you to think very carefully about your inclusion of numerous definitions of different asexual "identities" rather than just introducing the idea of diversity within asexuals by giving some key characterisitics which may vary between asexuals e.g. subject and strength of romantic attraction.

I suggest this for two reasons. First, many of these words are not well-known, even amongst people who are very familiar with queer issues, so there is no great need for the readers to understand them. It comes across like a boring school lesson learning terminology, and is likely to reduce understanding of the key message. Second, dividing people into smaller and smaller named categories rather than using a mixture of broad terms and actual descrption has social implications. How many people have had the wide range of experiences required to accurately label themselves in the way Star Bit suggests? How many people need to be able to describe themselves that precisely? What if your particular combination of experiences doesn't fit one of the numerous categories so you feel even more excluded? This is like the problem of adding more and more letters to LGBT. At some point it becomes ridiculous and re-embracing terms like queer is the most inclusive way ahead. By including numerous definitions, realise you are not just being informative, you are taking a philosophical stance.

Having sufficient budget is not a reason to create a long leaflet. People are overloaded with information so you need to produce something that they will take the time to read, and that will actually have an impact on their thinking. Every single sentence needs to justify its presence to strike a balance between the impact of simplicity and the greater understanding from detail. Be very clear what you want your 'take home messages' to be and don't allow them to be diluted by the temptation to include everything someone suggests.

I wish you well with the project.

Echidna

Thanks for the suggestions, Echidna,

The wiki that you may have read is a little out of date (We've created an updated on a private server as there were complications arising from people inserting incorrect information). We have since opted to include fewer identities in the initial 101, presenting only asexual, demisexual, and gray-asexual, but have included other identities in our glossary for reference as well as an online supplementary reference for more elaborate information. In fact, we have removed a lot of the present unnecessary information, again opting to leave it for reference in our glossary.

Once I figure out how to make our new wiki uneditable by others, I will make that new text available.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Star Bit

Then can you at least put before it that there have been many terms suggested? At least Z-sexual won't be the first thing they read and they have it in their mind that there are other terms instead of reading that later and already having the assumption/thinking it's the major one used. I get the reason you can misread Allo as meaning that asexuality is the default, but Heterosexual does the same thing and that's obviously not its intention; Hetero oddly enough means other/different and thus you could also interpret it as saying something else is the default but there was nothing else when the term way created.

I forget if i included this, but some people confuse romantic attraction with love/being in love. I've seen ew people say they think they're aromantic because they've never been in love with their crush before the relationship even starts or early in the relationship. Love comes later. If someone is incapable of that then its a type of gray-romantic. I think this misconception comes from love at first sight; which is not love but infatuation with assumptions that end up being right.

I honestly don't care if something comes from tumblur, i was saying that many people would dislike it for that fact though. Reguardless of its source, no one would willingly refer to themselves or others as Z-sexual. "I'm Z-sexual" "They're Z-sexual." No. No one will adopt that. Why can't your first suggestion be "sexual people/person?" "I'm a sexual person" "They're sexual people" Yup, i can totally see that being immediately accepted.

I suppose stating Cupioromantic as unfortunately is degrading, but i wasn't using in reference to the romantic norm, but that they desire something they cannot feel in the way they want to.

@ your 9th comment, yah, i know that, i meant include what i said under it; the two words are not synonyms to clarify to people, and that their own (obviously don't put it that way but since heterosexuality is the majority) is a type or reproduction too; making it more personal to them and easier for them to understand/relate to, which is important in a situation in which they will mostly unrelate.

Also, by the time you update the wiki your deadline; as you state the 26th, will have past. So how are we supposed to help with it at this point?

(and lol your accidental cool face)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...