Exclusion of asexuals from LGBT community

[iyote]

I encountered this video titled "ASEXUAL IS NOT LGBT!!!!" and I was wondering what some of your opinions on it are.  

I personally strongly disagree, but I saw people who are asexual in the comments section agreeing with it.  It made me curious what a larger group of ace people generally thinks.  

So, what would you say in response?  

www.youtube.com/watch?v=wqTd_F4aGh4

[iyote]

For anyone curious, here's my personal response: 

Quote

It's funny how quickly people forget history.  

The LGBT community has changed a lot over the years.  It used to be just the "gay community", focused only on gay rights.  Then there was discourse over whether bisexuals could be included.  Many people were very opposed to this because they felt that bisexuals were not oppressed by society, since they could form relationships with people of the opposite gender and escape social oppression (an option that gay people entirely lacked).  Thus, they felt that bisexuals weren't oppressed enough and didn't deserve a part in the movement.  But eventually, bisexual support won out and the gay community became the LGB community.  

Notice anything missing in that initialism?  Yep, transgender people were still excluded.  This was a movement about sexuality, after all.  When people began arguing for the inclusion of transgender people, some LGB community members opposed it.  They claimed that transgender rights just wasn't what the community was about - that it didn't fit with the movement regarding rights of sexual minorities.  They also tried to justify the exclusion by saying that transgender people can have their own separate movement.  Luckily, inclusivity prevailed and "LGB" became "LGBT."  

 

The gatekeeping that bisexuals and transgender people faced is generally accepted as ridiculous by now.  The initialism "LGBT" is so widely used that it seems weird NOT to accept them as a part of the community.  But if this video existed at a different point in time (if YT existed), the title easily could have been "BISEXUAL IS NOT PART OF THE GAY COMMUNITY!!!!" or "TRANSGENDER IS NOT LGB!!!!"  

And scrolling through the comments, it's almost funny how apparent these parallels are!  I've seen people saying that the LGBT community is only about sexuality.  

That asexuals aren't oppressed and therefore don't deserve inclusion in pride movements.  

That there's a separate asexual movement, so inclusion in the LGBT movement is unnecessary (regardless of whether it's right).  

That the initialism is "LGBT" not "LGBTQIA+" (which is funny because these people are apparently fine with the transition (pun) from LGB to LGBT but are completely opposed to anything else.)  

 

[Mx. Who]

I disagree with him. Asexuals are discriminated against. I'm constantly told that I'm not asexual, I'm heterosexual, I just haven't met the right guy yet. I'm told that I'm too young to know. I'm told that being asexual isn't real. That asexuality shouldn't exist and is a bad thing. I'm told that I'm not really asexual, I'm confused. I'm invalidated, made fun of, criticized, disbelieved, and excluded because except at home and church, I'm out and proud about my asexuality. While there are quite a few people who, even though I don't trust them (trust issues, am I right), support me in my asexuality, there are many who most definitely do not. Two of which are my own parents. To have people say that I don't belong in a place where I thought I could be myself, that hurts a bit.

[Guest]

There’s always so much bigotry from within the LGBT+ community that I’m surprised anyone even wants to be part of it. One group fighting off against another all the time. It’s the same thing now as asexuals try to seek recognition. I’ll support those that want to be part of the LGBT+ community but for myself I want to be as far away as possible from it.

 

Miss Who is right though, we are discriminated against.

[Firefly8]

Some people have harmful opinions. That shouldn't deter us from trying to educate them and others, it should motivate us. We need to work together toward acceptance and representation in broader society for ALL gender/sexual minorities. 

[Galactic Turtle]

*shrugs* It's whatever. 

[Knight of Cydonia]

I don't think asexuality should be included. It's not like we need any additional rights.

 

Sure there is some stigma, but a lot of things that aren't "the norm" get that too. Doesn't mean we need to be part of the LGBT community.

[Mx. Who]

2 hours ago, Little Bear said:

There’s always so much bigotry from within the LGBT+ community

I'm starting to realize that 

[iyote]

Quote

I don't think asexuality should be included. It's not like we need any additional rights.

I think of the community as being about more than rights - also raising awareness, fighting stigma, pride etc.  All things that asexuals could use.  There's a lot of confusion around the validity of asexuality, stigma of asexuals as heartless or broken + mistreatment by partners, a lot of doubt and insecurity within asexuals themselves (speaking from personal experience & also experiences I've heard of).  

That's why I think there is value in being part of the unified group.  

 

I also just don't get the exclusion, given that asexuals are a minority in terms of sexuality/gender identity, which is what the community's been (re)defined as.  I don't get the point of the distinction between asexuals and allosexuals, because they are both identities in regards to sexuality.  It just ends up dividing similar stigmatized groups w/o reason.  

 

That's how I see it at least.  But yeah, I'm glad I posted this b/c it seems worth discussing.  I was a bit worried that the responses would be all one opinion or all the other and that my post would be pointless; nice to see some diversity in thought and constructive discussion even if I don't agree.  

[SithLord]

54 minutes ago, Knight of Cydonia said:

I don't think asexuality should be included. It's not like we need any additional rights.

I'm not big on legal stuff, but I'm pretty sure some places still have consumation laws. Like a marriage isn't valid unless the couple has sex. That's kind of fucked up.

 

Other than that, yeah I don't know if we really need any additional rights. I still think we should be included, however, because a lot of the community isn't treated the same as heterosexuals. It matters to me that I can't date just anyone and most people will see my inability to reciprocate attraction as a big deal. Or any of the aces who fit into LGBT+ on the romantic spectrum.

 

I'm cool with agreeing to disagree. I'm not going to die on this ledge. 

[Dr. Beat]

Conversion therapy is definitely still a thing that affects aces as well as other LGBTQ+ people in certain areas. That's certainly discrimination.

[Duke Memphis]

I'm indifferent on the issue of whether or not we're included in the alphabet soup.

[Guest]

I couldn't care less, seeing as I'm not LGBT nor do I want to be.

[Techie]

I personally do not feel that I fit in. 

[Homer]

Why does that video title yell at me? Now I have a hard time taking it seriously.

 

I said it before and I'll say it again - it all depends on how you get along with people in your local community. Either they're happy to have you around or they're not. No point in trying to force your way in.

[Tja]

9 hours ago, Little Bear said:

There’s always so much bigotry from within the LGBT+ community

There's so much bigotry everywhere, including here, on AVEN, when it comes to LGBT, so, it's only natural.

[alien.hedgehog]

I don't really have a fixed opinion on the topic. I belive that it would be nice if asexuals would be included in the LGBT soup for some reasons, but at the same time I think that we should stay on our own for another reasons(one of them being the fact that asexual cishets would be attacked like crazy by triggerd LGBT members). 

 

 

 

And btw, I'm the only one who thinks that the fact that there are two letters who refer to homosexuality in LGBT is kinda stupid, I mean why you need to have letters for gay and lesbian when you can just put H in theire place, if they do that why there is not a letter for every non-binary gender? Someone plese explain this to me.

[Guest]

2 hours ago, Tja said:

There's so much bigotry everywhere, including here, on AVEN, when it comes to LGBT, so, it's only natural.

True. Hence, I stay away from it all. It just seems to be in people's nature to be horrible about things they don't personally understand.

[To Each Their Own]

9 hours ago, Knight of Cydonia said:

I don't think asexuality should be included. It's not like we need any additional rights.

Well, would it surprise you to know that asexuals experience conversion therapy, as well? Four years of it couldn’t make me into a heterosexual. And what’s worse is not even knowing that you’re an asexual. So you are subjected to even MORE “therapy” because you’re just not getting it right. In fact, things got so bad I ended up in a mental hospital. 

[Lonemathsytoothbrushthief]

26 minutes ago, To Each Their Own said:

Well, would it surprise you to know that asexuals experience conversion therapy, as well? Four years of it couldn’t make me into a heterosexual. And what’s worse is not even knowing that you’re an asexual. So you are subjected to even MORE “therapy” because you’re just not getting it right. In fact, things got so bad I ended up in a mental hospital. 

It sucks but it seems to me like aces who are better off aren't aware of the experiences of those worse off than them at all. I'm sorry you went through that that's horrible.

[Lonemathsytoothbrushthief]

2 hours ago, dark.entity said:

I don't really have a fixed opinion on the topic. I belive that it would be nice if asexuals would be included in the LGBT soup for some reasons, but at the same time I think that we should stay on our own for another reasons(one of them being the fact that asexual cishets would be attacked like crazy by triggerd LGBT members). 

 

 

 

And btw, I'm the only one who thinks that the fact that there are two letters who refer to homosexuality in LGBT is kinda stupid, I mean why you need to have letters for gay and lesbian when you can just put H in theire place, if they do that why there is not a letter for every non-binary gender? Someone plese explain this to me.

I actually feel the opposite way, I think in addition to T for trans there should also be N for explicitly including non binary people. Gay and lesbian people have pretty different experiences, and so do binary and non binary trans people. Though it would get weird if there were further divisions, like trans men and women. I think it's more for political reasons than anything, because in second wave feminism political lesbianism was a big thing(and considering some of them were genuinely kind of awful to men, I suspect they'd have been pretty terrible places for gay men to take part in).

Here's an extract from wiki on it:

"As lesbians forged more public identities, the phrase "gay and lesbian" became more common. A dispute as to whether the primary focus of their political aims should be  feminism or gay rights led to the dissolution of some lesbian organizations, including the Daughters of Bilitis, which disbanded in 1970 following disputes over which goal should take precedence. As equality was a priority for lesbian feminists, disparity of roles between men and women or butch and femme were viewed as patriarchal. Lesbian feminists eschewed gender role play that had been pervasive in bars, as well as the perceived chauvinism of gay men; many lesbian feminists refused to work with gay men, or take up their causes.

Lesbians who held the essentialist view, that they had been born homosexual and used the descriptor "lesbian" to define sexual attraction, often considered the separatist opinions of lesbian-feminists to be detrimental to the cause of gay rights. Bisexual and transgender people also sought recognition as legitimate categories within the larger minority community."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT

[Tja]

2 hours ago, Little Bear said:

True. Hence, I stay away from it all. It just seems to be in people's nature to be horrible about things they don't personally understand.

Couldn't agree more! I stay away, also. Makes life simpler.

[Knight of Cydonia]

14 hours ago, iyote said:

I think of the community as being about more than rights - also raising awareness, fighting stigma, pride etc.  All things that asexuals could use.

Then we have a different perceptions of the goals of the LGBT community. I've always considered it to be primarily about rights - historically and currently. They focus on awareness of course, but the awareness is intrinsically related to the fact that they have been subject to legal discrimination and crime specific to their identities. The kind of stuff LGBT is mainly fighting for is things like making gay marriage legal and legal recognition of reassigned gender. Some places still even have death penalties for homosexuality. 

 

 

14 hours ago, iyote said:

I also just don't get the exclusion, given that asexuals are a minority in terms of sexuality/gender identity, which is what the community's been (re)defined as.

Has it? I don't think the LGBT community should be used as a "one-size-fits-all" for just any sexual or gender minority. What about fetishists? People who practice polyamory? Polygamists? People who practice BDSM? Otherkin? All of the above face stigma, too. Some even have specific laws against them.

 

The "alphabet soup" of the ever-expanding LGBTTQQIAAP acronym has become a bit of a joke. People take it less seriously, and it's confusing. I think keeping it as the LGBT is best for the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and trans people who are fighting for necessary rights, and who deserve the attention.

 

To be clear, I definitely think asexuals deserve more visibility and awareness. I just don't think achieving that under the guise of the LGBT community is the best way to do that.

 

14 hours ago, sithgirlix said:

I'm not big on legal stuff, but I'm pretty sure some places still have consumation laws. Like a marriage isn't valid unless the couple has sex. That's kind of fucked up.

And some places still make pre-marital sex illegal too. Still, neither of these examples are specific to asexual or sexual people; they can affect anyone. Unlike LGBT-specific rights.

 

[gisiebob]

my understanding is that the actual physical communities were largely formed as places of acceptance, understanding and support. internet armchair heros (such as I) don't actually have control of who these places ostracize, but at the very least we could pretend less that we are masters of the universe.

[Verb]

I tried to watch the video, but after it hit 40 seconds and was still just plugging irrelevant LIKESHARESUBSCRIBE stuff I gave up.

 

Short answer, I personally agree: Asexuality doesn't fall under LGBT. Just how I feel about it, I'm not backing this up with any evidence or anything.

[iyote]

5 hours ago, Knight of Cydonia said:

Has it? I don't think the LGBT community should be used as a "one-size-fits-all" for just any sexual or gender minority. What about fetishists? People who practice polyamory? Polygamists? People who practice BDSM? Otherkin? All of the above face stigma, too. Some even have specific laws against them.

 

I didn't mean "sexual minority", I said "minority in terms of sexuality."  (And by "sexuality", I meant the definition of "sexual orientation."  Something you're born with.)  

I guess I'm too ace for my own good, b/c I forgot sexual minorities like fetishists existed.  Sorry for the confusion.  

I guess it could be argued that asexuality is lack of sexuality and therefore doesn't get to be part of the community of minority sexualities, but it's really just arguing semantics at that point.  It's still an identity that people are born with in terms of their sexual orientation.  

Quote

The "alphabet soup" of the ever-expanding LGBTTQQIAAP acronym has become a bit of a joke. People take it less seriously, and it's confusing. I think keeping it as the LGBT is best for the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and trans people who are fighting for necessary rights, and who deserve the attention.

Kinda agree, but simply LGBT+ or LGBTQIA+ (one that I've heard pretty commonly) solves the problem of not being taken seriously.  Plus, it's always been growing.  That doesn't mean we should revert to LGB or something.  

I get the prioritization of those who are still being killed for their sexuality/gender in many places though.  (Which is why I like the LGBT+ solution - it acknowledges others but keeps the concise focus.)  But in my opinion it's not a valid reason for the complete exclusion of asexuality.  

[Knight of Cydonia]

34 minutes ago, iyote said:

Plus, it's always been growing.

That depends on who you ask. Many people - including in the LGBT community - want to just keep it as the LGBT, so they'd say that's the acronym. Others have opinions more in line with yours and would say LGBT+ or one of many variants.

 

I see LGBT as more of, say, a political coalition that fights for rights, not just a big lumping of anything not heterosexual or cisgender. I consider myself an ally of the LGBT community, not a part of it. But you're free to consider yourself as part of the LGBT as you choose.

 

We'll just have to agree to disagree, I think.

[iyote]

Quote

Plus, it's always been growing.

The LGBT community used to be the LGB community.  The widely-accepted inclusion of transgender people in the community is what I was referring to.  Not that many people still use "LGB community" these days.  It's an example of successful expansion of the acronym.  

 

Quote

I see LGBT as more of, say, a political coalition that fights for rights, not just a big lumping of anything not heterosexual or cisgender. I consider myself an ally of the LGBT community, not a part of it. But you're free to consider yourself as part of the LGBT as you choose.

Absolutely fine.  I can understand that perspective.  

[SithLord]

14 hours ago, dark.entity said:

And btw, I'm the only one who thinks that the fact that there are two letters who refer to homosexuality in LGBT is kinda stupid, I mean why you need to have letters for gay and lesbian when you can just put H in theire place, if they do that why there is not a letter for every non-binary gender? Someone plese explain this to me.

Oh, I totally don't get it either. Someone tried to explain it to me before but I legitimately have no idea when females/women/girls claim the title of "gay" as well. It's why 10 year old me was able to be confused how there's both the L and the G. I thought they meant androsexual and gynesexual, not the gender of the person identifing as homosexual.

[SithLord]

10 hours ago, Knight of Cydonia said:

Has it? I don't think the LGBT community should be used as a "one-size-fits-all" for just any sexual or gender minority. What about fetishists? People who practice polyamory? Polygamists? People who practice BDSM? Otherkin? All of the above face stigma, too. Some even have specific laws against them.

 

The "alphabet soup" of the ever-expanding LGBTTQQIAAP acronym has become a bit of a joke. People take it less seriously, and it's confusing. I think keeping it as the LGBT is best for the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and trans people who are fighting for necessary rights, and who deserve the attention.

 

To be clear, I definitely think asexuals deserve more visibility and awareness. I just don't think achieving that under the guise of the LGBT community is the best way to do that.

I totally get where you're coming from. Personally I think I'd prefer if sexual orientations were separate from gender orientations because of the weirdness of blending them together and then thowing in the whole alphabet trying to find terms for everyone. 

 

I also understand you were mostly making a joke, similar to those who added a letter to the acronym for Pedophilia as a joke, but in terms of polyamory, I wouldn't be opposed to adding that to the list. They're legitimately discriminated against in terms of laws where all participants are consenting adults. Polygamy is still illegal in many places and while I recognize the historical background of it being polygyny but with marriege (ploygamy meaning multiple-marriage, but in practice was one man being married to multiple women) and certainly unhealthy and representing an ownership of women, I also understand it as being completely capable of not being horrible.

 

As for otherkin, I'm going to risk being offensive here so please forgive me: 

Spoiler

I legitimately believe they have some kind of issue with their mindset. Either reincarnation is totally a thing and their memeories weren't entirely erased, or they're living out a fantasy role-play scenario and are determined to have it be taken seriously. I do not know any in real life, so I would legitimately not mind a conversation with a person who identifies as such, but I don't understand how someone can claim to be a dog and wish to be treated as such, claiming discrimination if they are not.

 

I also have to say that including people who think they are dragons or unicorns is also not helping with us taking you seriously.