Guardian newspaper on demisexual pride cups

[Anthracite_Impreza]

I don't think I can even start replying to all this, I don't have the energy (and I'm a weirdo who doesn't belong anywhere...)

[Dreamsexual]

On ‎6‎/‎9‎/‎2019 at 7:48 PM, Anthracite_Impreza said:

I don't think I can even start replying to all this, I don't have the energy (and I'm a weirdo who doesn't

;

[Anthracite_Impreza]

I can agree with not having otherkin etc. at a sexuality/gender pride thing, that's fair enough, but the implications I read here just make me sad and feel even more like I should probably just never speak of this again...

[Dreamsexual]

On ‎6‎/‎9‎/‎2019 at 8:07 PM, Anthracite_Impreza said:

I can agree with not having otherkin etc. at a sexuality/gender pride thing, that's fair enough, but the implications I read here just make me sad and feel even more like I should probably just never speak of this again...

 

[Dreamsexual]

On ‎6‎/‎9‎/‎2019 at 8:13 PM, Telecaster68 said:

even participation should be policed.

 

[Dreamsexual]

On ‎6‎/‎9‎/‎2019 at 8:13 PM, Telecaster68 said:

demand that history is forgotten

 

[Dreamsexual]

On ‎6‎/‎9‎/‎2019 at 8:22 PM, Telecaster68 said:

As you pointed out, participation is hard to police, and trying it would piss people off so much for no effect, it's better to let it go... 

 

[LeChat]

(reads Guardian article)

 

Ooh, now I understand why people were upset in this thread; that last sentence in the third paragraph (from the end) definitely read like a dig against gray-sexuals, as though the author was subtly claiming that gray-sexuals don't experience being called slurs, like some in the gay community.

 

The author could've educated themselves about gray-sexual people instead of choosing to subtly mock them like that. It's one thing to complain about how companies who didn't openly align themselves with the LGBT+ community, decades ago, seem to only show support now that it's more acceptable for companies to do so, without experiencing much of a backlash and a loss in sales from the public; it's another to go after LGBT+ people, playing the "oppression Olympics."

[Dreamsexual]

On ‎6‎/‎9‎/‎2019 at 8:32 PM, Telecaster68 said:

You said exactly that. 

.

[Dreamsexual]

On ‎6‎/‎9‎/‎2019 at 8:37 PM, Telecaster68 said:

Do you have some examples of people being fired, beaten up, evicted, etc. because they identified as demisexual?

.

 

 

 

 

[Dreamsexual]

On ‎6‎/‎9‎/‎2019 at 8:42 PM, Telecaster68 said:

Clearly I misinterpreted that. 

.

[Dreamsexual]

On ‎6‎/‎9‎/‎2019 at 8:43 PM, Telecaster68 said:

Wasn't a question to you. 

.

[LeChat]

28 minutes ago, Telecaster68 said:

Do you have some examples of people being fired, beaten up, evicted, etc. because they identified as demisexual? 

 

Snarky comments and not having your relationship recognised by the state aren't good, but they're simply not in the same league. You can call it oppression Olympics if you want, but trying to maintain they're equivalent is ludicrous. 

I don't mind that @Dreamsexual gave a response.

 

Not all gay people are still fired, beaten up, evicted, etc. (and those that aren't are still allowed at Pride parades). A gay psychologist who has interviewed gay youth for decades has pointed out that, for more of them, nowadays, in the U.S., they've experienced acceptance from their families, communities, etc. and are popular in their schools (because being seen as LGBT+ is seen more as "cool," now, by youth).

 

Demisexuals and gray-sexuals have mentioned that they grew up feeling similar to asexuals: lonely and different from others, (which, it seems society underestimates the importance of the effects of being lonely, due to not experiencing attraction to others, like sexuals: health professionals have reported that those who experience loneliness have more health problems, such as depression.

 

TW:

Spoiler

Some asexuals have admitted that this caused them to feel suicidal in their teens/20s because they hadn't heard of asexuality, growing up, so they'd thought something was wrong with them, that they were the only ones who didn't experience a sexual attraction, like their friends, classmates, etc. That is a big deal.

 

The point of my earlier post wasn't to claim that what demisexuals/gray-sexuals experience is equal to gay people, just that the author of the article, who admitted she's gay, didn't need to write a subtle insult about a group of people she'd admitted that she didn't know much about. (Especially, since she's gay, she, definitely should've known that's not cool to insult people.)

[LeChat]

Ugh, I forgot to explain: it's not a choice that some asexuals experience being excluded by others [because others assume that they want to be left alone and aren't interested in getting to know them or date them, since the asexual doesn't show interest (e.g. sexual interest) in them or others].

 

It's a pretty big deal to some asexual/demisexual, etc. youth when they're in their teens and 20s, being ignored, while watching or hearing about others having several friends, dating, having sex, etc. It hurts a lot when others assume you're either unfriendly, don't care to know others as friends, don't want to date, are stuck up, want to be left alone, etc., when it's really just due to your lack of a sexuality and/or romantic attraction. It can affect a person, socially, economically (due to not having as many friends for networking purposes), etc.

 

I don't know about others, but I've noticed that I was seen as an easy target for bullies, growing up, because I was alone and others didn't invite me join their group of friends. And, even today, as an adult, I feel like some young drivers have chosen to verbally cat-call me or chosen to vent their road rage on me (even though I'm not doing anything illegal) because I'm alone, walking/jogging or cycling, whereas, I don't see couples who walk together or groups of kids who play together, harassed by passing drivers. Luckily, youth don't seem to laugh at my gender-nonconformity, anymore, although it's still not fun and easy, slightly worrying about whether I might overhear a comment from someone.

 

So, there seems to be a natural privilege that couples (particularly heterosexual couples) experience, one of safety, simply by being partnered with someone else (due to them experiencing attraction to another person).

[Dreamsexual]

On ‎6‎/‎9‎/‎2019 at 9:04 PM, Telecaster68 said:

So we're agreeing that demis don't actually get oppressed in the same way that gay people do? 

..

[BeakLove]

3 hours ago, Dreamsexual said:

So not true.  Tell that to polygamists, objectums, robos, same genetic attractees, otherkin etc etc.  Indeed, some of those other minorities (why the scare quotes?) face current legal restrictions LGB don't.  Gay marriages?  Fine.  Marry your two brothers and a doll - triple no!

I honestly have no idea what you're talking about at this point. If you want to make the case for four-way marriages between three siblings and a roomba, I suppose, feel free. Call me bigoted but I think the state restricting marriage to humans is a reasonable requirement.

 

Quote

But why is this oppression olypmics rather than a chance for everyone to come together?

A rather sniffy dismissal of the actual problems that LGB people have to deal with. No wonder many people feel offended when they see people claiming to be nonsense like "otherkin" stuffing themselves into the queer space after it's become a party. The first LGBT marches weren't fun days out with Budweiser cups, they were struggles and sometimes even riots. Your bland appeal to "come together" comes off as extremely ignorant, honestly. 

[Dreamsexual]

On ‎6‎/‎9‎/‎2019 at 9:13 PM, BeakLove said:

restricting marriage to humans/ claiming to be nonsense like "otherkin" 

 

[Homer]

Folks, could we please not? Thanks.

[Dreamsexual]

.

[Dreamsexual]

On ‎6‎/‎9‎/‎2019 at 9:39 PM, CBC said:

I really don't think I've conducted myself particularly poorly this time, tbh. I responded to someone else's joke about a vacuum cleaner, in a playful way, but I feel like I've been respectful. Unless simply disagreeing passes for disrespectful now.

.

 

[Dreamsexual]

On ‎6‎/‎9‎/‎2019 at 9:52 PM, CBC said:

I'm no objective authority on what comprises being a bigot, but I do sincerely believe that not including everyone in everything doesn't automatically make one a bigot.

.

[Dreamsexual]

On ‎6‎/‎9‎/‎2019 at 9:58 PM, CBC said:

Possibly I might've. Can't answer that. If you feel like explaining with precision, feel free. 🤷🏼‍♀️

.

[AceMissBehaving]

I can understand why someone might get upset at the article, it’s perhaps a little stingy, but it’s also not untrue.

 

This is only my personal experience, but the effect my asexuality has had on my life has in all honesty been similar to the effect my being straight edge has. Some

people make sweeping unflattering assumptions, some people might exclude me from certain social events, and there has been some tumultuous personal stuff, but I still have all my rights.

 

When I travel through the red parts of this state I don’t need someone to come with me as an escort to the bathroom like my trans friends do. We live in a time when in Dallas alone 3 trans women of color have been found dead in recent weeks. When I fell in love with an American guy (I’m British) and we wanted to get married I was given a visa no question, and eventually a marriage license etc, something that at the time I was very well aware my gay friends couldn’t. No one is going to beat me up if I show affection to my SO in public etc.

 

This isn’t about “oppression Olympics”, it’s just a simple fact that some facets of the LGBTQ+ community are still fighting for their very basic human rights, and the right to exist at all.  .

 

Does representation matter to the young confused and bullied Ace? Yes, but I can’t blame someone fighting a high stakes battle for feeling snarky.

 

Some LGBTQIA spaces are very open to the A people, and that’s great we can go Wild there. Some are not. Representation is important, but that’s on us to do, no one has to share their space with us.

 

I didn’t enjoy the tone of that article, I felt a little hurt, but it’s an opinion piece, and I couldn’t disagree with what was actually being said by the person writing it.

[BeakLove]

 

6 minutes ago, Dreamsexual said:

I regret starting this thread, I should have known better.  I apologise to all I've offended, and I hope all those hurt by anything anyone said on this thread will forgive me my part in all this.

For clarity: I have nothing against you, personally. I don't know you (or anyone on here for that matter). I'm old enough to not really care if someone calls me a "bigot" on the internet.

 

All I would offer as a final thought is that perhaps you could try looking at it from the perspective of LGB people, who were/are frequently subject to ridicule for their perfectly just and acceptable desire to love those of the same sex, and against which common arguments included that it would be slippery slope to people marrying their cats, or sister, or children, etc. Having clawed their way over years to having their relationships respected more widely, it's a bit hurtful to have their love compared to that between items of furniture, or incest. And it's an easy target for the genuine bigots. I'm open to a sincere argument on the non-ridiculous things on that list like polygamy, for example.

[Dreamsexual]

On ‎6‎/‎9‎/‎2019 at 10:15 PM, BeakLove said:

it's a bit hurtful to have their love compared to that between items of furniture, or incest. 

.

..

[Dreamsexual]

On ‎6‎/‎9‎/‎2019 at 10:33 PM, CBC said:

Yeah, see, that's an attitude I think could be seen as being offensive. The idea that the love experienced between two real people of the same sex and the persecution they faced as a result is being equated with being in love with a refrigerator or a character from Twilight. Just... no.

.

[bare_trees]

46 minutes ago, CBC said:

Yeah, see, that's an attitude I think could be seen as being offensive. The idea that the love experienced between two real people of the same sex and the persecution they faced as a result is being equated with being in love with a refrigerator or a character from Twilight. Just... no.

Yes, and I want to add (to risk stating the blatantly obvious) that it's not because one shouldn't have those feelings, or that those feelings should be discouraged or shunned.  It's because machines and fictional characters (and minors, since that did come up at some point earlier in the thread) can't consent to the relationship, nor can they reciprocate in the manner that other humans do.

[Dreamsexual]

On ‎6‎/‎9‎/‎2019 at 11:22 PM, bare_trees said:

can't consent to the relationship, nor can they reciprocate in the manner that other humans do.

I.

[Dreamsexual]

On ‎6‎/‎9‎/‎2019 at 11:32 PM, CBC said:

You can ask mods to lock it if you want, FYI

.

[Dreamsexual]

.