Kumoku

On gatekeeping and LGBTQIA

Recommended Posts

anisotropic
8 minutes ago, TheAP said:

The answer to that depends on whether one defines asexuality of "lack of sexual attraction" or "lack of desire for sex". Which is a debate that has been going on for a long time on here, with no clear resolution.

It's very unclear to me how someone could claim a desire for partnered sex is not "sexual attraction" or "sexual". And @FictoCannibal. isn't sounding reassuring that these identities, when conversations are had, are based on a mainstream sense of what the spectrum of sexual behavior entails.

Which means there may be unusual interpretations of sexuality that are liable to confuse people that are trying to understand asexuality.

So I think these conversations about labels and spectrums matter, and I think it would be nice if we could balance respect for people wanting to feel belonging and community with how much confusion this causes people trying to understand asexuality, and, I hope, our shared interest in promoting understanding and education about asexuality.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Anthracite_Impreza

If we continue to allow asexual to mean "may or may not want sex with anyone for any reason or lack of reasons", no one will have a clue what being ace means in the real world and we will have utterly failed the education part of AVEN. That's the point isn't it? To be understood and accepted by people outside Tumblr? No one will take "I'm asexual and I desire sex with whoever. No, I'm not sexual, I have special reasons for wanting sex, not like everyone else" seriously, and we'll all look like elitist snobs. And those of us who don't ever want sex? We're gonna feel like strangers in our own community.

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CBC

@Anthracite_Impreza YES. Thank you. More folks who identify as ace need to be saying that stuff. It always sounds like it's us sexuals attempting to police how people identify, and that's so not the point. It's about clarity of communication, accuracy, understanding what's within the realm of being a sexual person. It's about making sure that asexuality has a clear definition so that the rest of humanity can actually begin to understand it. It is a real thing and asexuals deserve recognition. It's also about making people who are sexual but have a lower or more limited level of interest realise they're still normal and you don't have to be 24/7 horny and ready to shag everything that moves in order to be a sexual person. If everyone can be anything, what's the point in having any words at all? It's kind of funny how AVEN seems fixated on micro-terminology to describe every little preference someone has whilst at the same time opening up the tent so wide that almost anyone can fit inside in one way or another.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CBC

Gosh I love autocorrect. :lol: That post just sat there for a few minutes reading "a lower or more limited level of internet". Thank you, phone.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
R_1

The issue is that sexuality has never been coherent.  Some may even deliberately go against their identity under the logic off sex is just sex,  and then there are those threshold.  I could very well be considered a dormant heterosexual even almost 10 years after my sexuality has died,  but in practice I'm asexual as I lack the ability to have that spark and will likely never feel it again. So,  some say I'm gray because I have felt sexuality,  others say I'm heterosexual as it was my primary orientation and the fact I still have emotional attraction,  and others say I'm asexual because I am functionally no different than other asexuals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FictoCannibal.
1 hour ago, R_1 said:

The issue is that sexuality has never been coherent.  Some may even deliberately go against their identity under the logic off sex is just sex,  and then there are those threshold.  I could very well be considered a dormant heterosexual even almost 10 years after my sexuality has died,  but in practice I'm asexual as I lack the ability to have that spark and will likely never feel it again. So,  some say I'm gray because I have felt sexuality,  others say I'm heterosexual as it was my primary orientation and the fact I still have emotional attraction,  and others say I'm asexual because I am functionally no different than other asexuals.

I'd say you're functionally asexual at least based on the things we've discussed in the few years I've known you. Haven't seen you around for ages!! (though just last week I saw someone new with the yellow snake face you used to have in your ava and I thought they were you with a new name for a while! hah) :cake: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Star Lion

@asshole @Anthracite_Impreza @anisotropic

Guys, sexual attraction is to desire sex from a person where that desire is aimed at someone. It’s possible for an asexual to want sex but not desire it from anybody. They just know that sex requires 2 or more people and some would probably rather have sex and get another person involved than to just masturbate. Some asexuals don’t go out looking for sex but like the feeling of sex and/or the idea of it. That doesn’t mean they desire it from any specific person

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68

How is wanting sex but not with anyone different to not wanting sex? Sex - as distinct from masturbation - requires more than one person. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Philip027
Quote

It’s possible for an asexual to want sex but not desire it from anybody. They just know that sex requires 2 or more people

You kinda need to desire it from somebody in order to desire sex.  Sex doesn't happen unless there's a second person.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Serran
2 hours ago, Philip027 said:

You kinda need to desire it from somebody in order to desire sex.  Sex doesn't happen unless there's a second person.

Yeah...

 

I desire sex means you desire an activity with another person. Sex by default is with someone. Doesnt have to be a specific person. A lot of sexuals go out to bars and stuff for hookups cause they dont care what person, as long as the person is willing and attractive enough to not be repulsive. 

 

But if you dont want to actually do it with another person, you arent desiring sex, since that requires another person. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Anthracite_Impreza
5 hours ago, Star Lion said:

It’s possible for an asexual to want sexual relief but not desire it from anybody.

Emphasis mine. As soon as you start wanting other people (or objects, or animals, yes I'm covering all bases here) involved then that's literally no different to any other sexual person. Being non-picky doesn't mean ace, it's kinda the exact opposite!

 

We aren't gatekeeping, it's just that we need a definition that makes sense and is understandable to society at large. Someone may be annoyed when I tell them what they thought was a jaguar is a leopard, but that's not gatekeeping is it? A leopard is a leopard, a jaguar is a jaguar, Panthera pardus vs Panthera onca. Should I just allow that sort of misinformation to spread too? Can leopard now mean any furry carnivore with spots? Since I care about scientific accuracy, no, it can't, and since I care about asexuality I can't let go of that either.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Dryad

Either you are something, or you're not.

 

You may be Grey, but that doesn't make you a literal asexual....and it doesn't make you fully sexual... that's the whole point.

 

If people stop defining things by what they literally mean for the sake of sparing some poor unfortunate confused soul, then we're all going to end up confused. These definitions exist for a reason.

 

Grey may not be asexual (therefore not ace, but grace), but you're still valid in the terms you identify yourself by.

 

Either you're something or you're not.

 

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Coby Asola

Okay here’s the deal. There’s a lot wrong with this initial post. First of all, you do not have the right to reclaim the word queer as and ace/aro person. It is a slur and it was never used against people like you. Now that we’ve got that out of the way, I wanna talk about the harm in micro labels. I know one big argument against gatekeeping is that it’s “harmful”, but why? Gatekeeping protects us from just anyone entering the LGBT community. Micro labeling within the community just makes us excessively divided and it encourages a lot of negative splitting. Instead of one collaborative community, we become a hot mess of tumblr identity playing the oppression game. As “cupioromantic” there is NO ONE who you need a safe space from. Who’s gonna threaten you for that? Literally no one cares. Personally, I don’t think labels like cupioromantic are real things or necessary. However if you wanna use them I won’t stop you, just don’t act like it makes you LGBT.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now