AVEN's policy on invalidation

[Guest]

17 minutes ago, Road said:

What I see as an angry mob - others will see as effective education. The point of this thread is to establish AVEN's position on this so everyone is on the same page going forward as to what the expected behaviour is going to be.

I don’t think there can be a one rule fits all approach to it though. I can appreciate that some new members are going to be seeking 101 answers, that is the point of the form, to guide, to help, etc. But I don’t see an issue with members being authoritative when individuals are deliberately ignorant of the widely accepted definition of asexuality.
 

17 minutes ago, Road said:

Sexuality is also quite a bit more complex than the colour of the sky. I don't believe - and I could be wrong - science has given us a definitive definition of what exactly asexuality is. And if psychologists can't give a definitive answer, then I don't think random people on the internet should be either.

My personal view is that gray-A should be seen as part of the sexual spectrum, not the asexual spectrum (for another thread), but I accept that is a view. Gray-A people may see asexuality as support for refraining from or de-prioritising (is that a word?) sex, and I can certainly appreciate that, and thus why they’d want to be seen as a part of asexuality. Ultimately though, I find them respectful of asexuality, regardless of what side of the fence they sit. When you get individuals who take the absolute urine and define asexuality as whatever they see fit, why can’t members of the Asexuality Visibility & Education Network, not random members of the internet as you put it, stand up for themselves and what I think most would agree is again the very widely accepted definition.

 

17 minutes ago, Road said:

I also think it's possible to guide someone - to share experiences and ask questions to help them better understand themselves - without telling them what they are or aren't. If you approach the problem with tact and empathy, I doubt you'll end up in much trouble.

I agree, but I can see why more argumentative folk (such as myself) can become increasingly frustrated on the non-committal nature of it all when more extreme individuals take the definition and skew it entirely.

 

EDIT: I repeated myself a lot (and have done for years) so I’ll leave it at that. I can see from a site perspective why it is, I just think it’s catering to those that don’t care in the long run, instead of those that do.

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, Philip027 said:

1) "chasing off" is a bit disingenuous, don't you think?  Unless it's the case of an obvious troll or something, nobody "chases off" anyone here on this forum without the chaser getting told off by everyone else.  We usually say over and over that anyone is welcome here on AVEN, even if they're not asexual

 

I'm not saying anyone explicitly says "get out," but having a bunch of people tell someone that they are wrong about who they are after having the bravery to share their experiences - rather aggressively in some cases - wouldn't exactly make them want to stick around for the scones.

 

Quote

2) Education requires that sometimes, people are wrong.  Do you think schools giving out As to everyone like they're candy because they're afraid to offend anyone would be a "success" of the education system?

The goal of a school and the goal of AVEN are completely different. Last I checked, AVEN doesn't administer exams to certify people as asexual. AVEN's measure of success, in my opinion, is giving people the space to explore who they are so they can reach their own conclusions. That might take awhile, and they might be "wrong" for part of it, but they'll be better off from it, in the long run. 

[Guest]

12 minutes ago, Firefly8 said:

Is affirming sexuals as asexual not invalidating to asexuals?

I understand this sentiment, but it's very easy to go down a rabbit hole that I doubt anyone wants to go down. For example, if I say that an asexual can't masturbate, then all of a sudden everyone who identifies as asexual and masturbates is invalidating me. Asexuality is a very complex thing and not everyone is going to experience it the same. How one person experiences asexuality, shouldn't invalidate others who experience it differently.

[Karst]

I think the idea of there being an "asexual spectrum" and a "sexual spectrum" is flawed.  If I had to model it visually, it would be a single, huge gradient.

[Karst]

2 minutes ago, Road said:

I understand this sentiment, but it's very easy to go down a rabbit hole that I doubt anyone wants to go down. For example, if I say that an asexual can't masturbate, then all of a sudden everyone who identifies as asexual and masturbates is invalidating me. Asexuality is a very complex thing and not everyone is going to experience it the same. How one person experiences asexuality, shouldn't invalidate others who experience it differently.

You have a point.  Different individuals who identify as straight, for example, or pansexual, are going to have different desires and preferences, so it's only logical that asexual people would have the same degree of variation.

[NickyTannock]

Okay then, I'm going to use @Gotye's example of a new member announcing the sky is green to explain how I see invalidation:

 

The sky appears blue most of the time because the atmosphere scatters the light.

But during sunsets/rises the same light hits the atmosphere at a different angle, causing the sky to become orange.

And an Aurora Borealis causes the sky to become Green as ironising radiation passes through the atmosphere in the Earth's electromagnetic field.

 

When someone joins the forum and announces that the sky is green, no one who argues with them that the sky is blue can see their sky.

This person would not only feel invalidated but would be invalidated.

 

Instead of arguing with them, perhaps the better course of action would have been to explain, how for most people the sky is blue, and then suggest an Aurora.

Because then, you're taking their experience seriously.

That is the welcoming thing to do.

[Firefly8]

15 minutes ago, Road said:

I understand this sentiment, but it's very easy to go down a rabbit hole that I doubt anyone wants to go down. For example, if I say that an asexual can't masturbate, then all of a sudden everyone who identifies as asexual and masturbates is invalidating me. Asexuality is a very complex thing and not everyone is going to experience it the same. How one person experiences asexuality, shouldn't invalidate others who experience it differently.

Right, but there comes a point where the identity itself loses meaning. My point is that invalidation can happen in both directions and only one direction is being addressed by the policy.

[Guest]

6 minutes ago, Gotye said:

My personal view is that gray-A should be seen as part of the sexual spectrum, not the asexual spectrum (for another thread), but I accept that is a view. Gray-A people may see asexuality as support for refraining from or de-prioritising (is that a word?) sex, and I can certainly appreciate that, and thus why they’d want to be seen as a part of asexuality. Ultimately though, I find them respectful of asexuality, regardless of what side of the fence they sit. When you get individuals who take the absolute urine and define asexuality as whatever they see fit, why can’t members of the Asexuality Visibility & Education Network, not random members of the internet as you put it, stand up for themselves and what I think most would agree is again the very widely accepted definition.

 

I understand and partly agree with you. My question to you would be - who gets to decide what definitions are respectful, and which definitions "take the absolute urine"? That's a hard line to draw and, if you don't draw it, you end up with threads that devolve into arguments over which definitions are valid and which aren't - something everyone seems sick and tired of.

 

 

[Guest]

Just now, Firefly8 said:

Right, but there comes a point where the identity itself loses meaning. 

I don't think AVEN is big enough or important enough, in the wider view of asexuality, that how a few people identify on here will cause any lasting harm to the asexual identity as a whole.

 

 

[Guest]

15 minutes ago, MichaelTannock said:

Okay then, I'm going to use @Gotye's example of a new member announcing the sky is green to explain how I see invalidation:

 

The sky appears blue most of the time because the atmosphere scatters the light.

But during sunsets/rises the same light hits the atmosphere at a different angle, causing the sky to become orange.

And an Aurora Borealis causes the sky to become Green as ironising radiation passes through the atmosphere in the Earth's electromagnetic field.

 

When someone joins the forum and announces that the sky is green, no one who argues with them that the sky is blue can see their sky.

This person would not only feel invalidated but would be invalidated.

 

Instead of arguing with them, perhaps the better course of action would have been to explain, how for most people the sky is blue, and then suggest an Aurora.

Because then, you're taking their experience seriously.

That is the welcoming thing to do.

This is beautiful.

 

People don’t need to dive head first into No you aren’t ace or yes you are ace.  But if somebody is wrong then steering them towards other definitions like this is better.

 

Y’all don’t get it.  It doesn’t matter who’s right or why they are right.  What matters is that AVEN is a safe and welcoming environment for people to explore their orientation and learn from people who are nice to them when they mess up.  So what if a newbie says something you disagree with about their own orientation.  That’s on them.  If it offends you, explain why nicely and move on.

 

Be kind to each other.  Stop yelling at people

[Firefly8]

2 minutes ago, Road said:

I don't think AVEN is big enough or important enough, in the wider view of asexuality, that how a few people identify on here will cause any lasting harm to the asexual identity as a whole.

 

 

I meant for the people that come to this site. 🙄 If invalidation is wrong in one direction it is wrong in the other direction too.

[crazy ace]

@Pumpkin Spice Kale Chips

Can I like this comment more than once?

 

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Firefly8 said:

I meant for the people that come to this site. 🙄 If invalidation is wrong in one direction it is wrong in the other direction too.

How would you address invalidation in that direction, then?

[Firefly8]

1 minute ago, Road said:

How would you address invalidation in that direction, then?

Have a more clear definition of asexuality. Allow open conversation about definitions... Allow someone to say why, based on their definition, something doesn't fit that they disagree with and then allow the other person to say their ideas too. Allow open dialogue with opinions, even if it hurts someone's feelings. I don't mean allow rudeness or hate, but allow critical discussion. Someone should be able to say "I don't think what you described fits asexuality because..." without fear of being reprimanded.

How would you address it?

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, MichaelTannock said:

 

 

Instead of arguing with them, perhaps the better cause of action would have been to explain, how for most people the sky is blue, and then suggest an Aurora Borealis.

Because then, you're taking their experience seriously.

That is the welcoming thing to do.

And how does that translate? If you explain how most people don't see a big difference between "I wanna bang that person over there cause they are hot" and "I wanna bang that person over there cause I feel like sex would be fun now and so that is who I pick", then suggest it is a sexual experience, you would be invalidating. You can't really suggest anything without doing so, if they proudly declare their experience (which matches many, many sexuals) is an asexual one. You can only say "Well, I ID as this and I don't experience that". Which, doesn't much say anything. And doesn't correct misinformation much. 

 

I rarely see someone outright say "you are sexual/asexual", they just say "that is an experience that is shared by most sexuals... so its a completely average experience" and people yell invalidation over even that. In the cases of outright saying you are this or that, then mods are quick to act so obviously this issue isnt about that. It is about those of us who disagree with "I love sex, I would do everyone in the bar right now cause it is so amazing. But I am totes ace" ... even though it tends to be done respectfully, but the fact the majority of posts tend to agree that experience is more in line with sexuals than asexuals, so the person feels "invalidated". 

 

As for sex favorables leaving... so have many asexuals that never desire sex because they feel like their label is being taken away by people who love sex and they cant relate to at all. They feel not sexual enough to be asexual. They feel totally broken by people who love sex claiming the ace label, since if asexuality isnt the why they dont desire sex with their spouse they love, it must be they are broken, right? And now AVEN says they have no right to be offended by it. So... we are effectively announcing people who need the asexual label to describe to the world why they dont desire an active sex life that they really should go else where if they aren't comfortable with very sexually active individuals yelling to the world aces love sex too, because they have to accept these people are ace. And why should they be comfortable with that ? If aces love sex, then these people dont fit and haven't found their place and are still in the "broken" category. 

 

And, honestly, I feel much more protective of the people who have gone their whole lives feeling broken and losing people they love because sex isnt a thing they can do due to their very natural orientation than people who go out to bars for ONS cause they love sex but declare not finding people they choose "hot" means they cant be sexual. 

 

So what measures are in place for those people to feel safe and like they actually have an orientation? Trans forums I am part of don't force their members suffering deep dysphoria to just blindly accept "I hate pink so im totes trans" without pointing out trans isnt about hating pink as a girl, so no, they dont fit and it is offensive to them to say such a thing. LGBT forums I am on dont force their members to accept "I kissed a girl once, so im lesbian" without comment. Why are aces forced to accept such things and silently suffer and leave feeling broken all over again, feeling like the orientation they had found is not one that fits anymore? 

 

I just feel bad for aces who have to put up with it without even being given a chance to have a voice about how they feel. And since they feel "wrong" for not wanting sex, since obviously aces love it as much as sexuals, they probably arent emailing the BoD to raise a fuss. But, now if they post about how they feel they will... have their post deleted and get a warning? So where can they go to get a safe space to voice how hurt they feel over loving sex becoming such a widely accepted ace experience, so they have nowhere to belong anymore, since it isn't here? 

[Philip027]

Quote

The goal of a school and the goal of AVEN are completely different.

I think that's indicative of a huge problem then, considering they're both supposed to be about education.  AVEN even supposedly has it in its name.

 

Not that this aforementioned problem is some sort of grand revelation to anyone who has been paying attention around here the past few years, but it's rather telling to hear it coming straight from the admods' mouths.

[crazy ace]

.

[RoseGoesToYale]

13 minutes ago, MichaelTannock said:

Instead of arguing with them, perhaps the better cause of action would have been to explain, how for most people the sky is blue, and then suggest an Aurora Borealis.

Because then, you're taking their experience seriously.

That is the welcoming thing to do.

I think we're getting into a false equivalency here. The bulk of empirical evidence suggests that the sky is, in fact, blue. But the issue isn't subjective interpretation of the observable earth, it's the unobservable experiences of socially, culturally, and psychologically variable humans. There is no bulk of evidence explaining why people are ace, or gay, or straight, or whatever, or what exactly these look like.

 

(Also there are number of things that could be going on with this green sky user... maybe they have schizophrenia and don't realize it, maybe they're on drugs, maybe they're trolling or flaming. I mainly just leave it up the mods to make sure such things don't turn into bloody skirmishes)

 

If somebody waltzes into this forum and proudly declares that driving without a seatbelt is perfectly safe and never results in deaths, I am not going to qualify that. That is not part of their identity. It's not their own experience, it's them not acknowledging empirical evidence to the contrary. If that user feels unwelcome because I disagreed, I don't really know what can be done. You can try your best to be civil, to debate and present evidence in a respectful manner, to follow the rules, keep a cool head, but at the end of the day, there will always be some person offended who wants to feel offended and will storm out of here angry. You can't please everybody.

 

Really, identity is something rooted within you that others can't influence or touch, definitions be damned. Even if your identity changes, the change occurs from within as you reflect and deal with experiences and information. Nobody else can change your identity, validate or invalidate it. A jerkface could come rip all your clothes off, burn your home down, steal your car/bike/shoes, kidnap you and stick you in another country against your will... and you'd still be you. Ok, I swear I was going somewhere with this, but I lost it. I'll have to come back.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, crazy ace said:

I think you may have answered this in your question: Just like "I kissed a girl once, so im lesbian" isn't necessarily true, "I occasionally choose to have sex, even though I don't actually feel attracted to the person I'm doing it with, so I must be sexual" also isn't always true.

I would happily point out that as a sexual I have done this before in one of those threads.

[daveb]

I'd like to make 2 points:

1. People are allowed to self-identify and we are not here to judge that nor to tell them they are wrong. That goes for people who self-identify as sexual just as much as it goes for people who self-identify as asexual. We can provide them with resources to help them.

2. People are allowed to talk about their own experiences, such as how they experience their own sexuality or asexuality.

 

As mod I will do my job and support this clarified policy to the best of my ability. After reading the background and history behind it I understand why this has been put forward by the Board of Directors, and I support the premise of AVEN being a welcoming and non-judgmental place. I also agree with comments like this:

44 minutes ago, Pumpkin Spice Kale Chips said:

It doesn’t matter who’s right or why they are right.  What matters is that AVEN is a safe and welcoming environment for people to explore their orientation and learn from people who are nice to them when they mess up.  So what if a newbie says something you disagree with about their own orientation.  That’s on them.  If it offends you, explain why nicely and move on.

Treat people with respect and civility. This goes in all directions. No one is being singled out to be treated differently. We're all in this together, aces, non-aces, allies, partners, family and friends of aces. Let's focus on helping each other or at least being respectful.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Pumpkin Spice Kale Chips said:

So what if a newbie says something you disagree with about their own orientation.  That’s on them.  If it offends you, explain why nicely and move on.

That's not what the issue is though.

 

The issue here is when members discuss the definition itself, and say that loving and desiring sex is a common sexual experience (not saying this to a newbie, but in a general discussion) and everyone who loves sex here starts screaming about invalidation, gatekeeping, and identity policing. Even though no one was saying "you can't personally identify as asexual". Having partaken in many such discussions myself over the past few months (and hundreds since joining AVEN) I can tell you that any attempt to discuss what the average sexual person experiences (ie a desire for sex, for varying reasons) will be met with indignation and claims of elitism and bigotry towards 'sex-loving aces'. It's endlessly frustrating, it's invalidating and offensive to those aces who have gone their whole lives feeling broken and outcast due to their lack of desire for sexual intimacy... and it's actually bloody offensive to sexuals too. It's pretty much saying that to be a sexual you have to be a raging horndog who will literally screw anything that walks and if you're not like that, you're some kind of asexual.

 

It's just ridiculous at this point.. But it's been ridiculous for years unfortunately Y_Y

[Snao Cone]

37 minutes ago, crazy ace said:

I think you may have answered this in your question: Just like "I kissed a girl once, so im lesbian" isn't necessarily true, "I occasionally choose to have sex, even though I don't actually feel attracted to the person I'm doing it with, so I must be sexual" also isn't always true.

Someone who comes to AVEN to ask about what it means that they occasionally choose to have sex but don't actually feel any sexual connection to the other person is likely going to ask a series of questions and share things about their experiences for other AVEN members to chime in on to help them figure that out better. If someone posted that I would ask them something like what their thought process is when pursuing sex. Here are two examples of possible answers:

a) "I assume it's going to feel good. It's supposed to, right? I'm supposed to want it. I'm young and open minded. People tell me I'm missing out. Everyone's had bad sex, so I just need to have good sex and then I'll be set."

b) "I just want to express to my partner how much they mean to me, that I want to include them in a deeply personal experience based on our personal connection. It's not about finding them hot. It's about who they are as a person and what they mean to me."

 

Answer a) is pretty much what I went through. I would tell the person that, and tell them why I came to the point of identifying as asexual. I would end that with something like "It sounds like you're in a very similar boat." Am I dictating what their orientation is? No. Because this is affirming/promoting an asexual label, though, it's seen as a positive thing.

 

Answer b) is something I don't relate to as much. I might ask more questions, like if they feel fulfilled by the sex, or if this is a need they feel internally, or if it only comes from how they've been told romantic love is expressed. If they say that it does come naturally to them to express their affection this way, and there is something about their partner that inspires such intimacy, then I would say something along the lines of "A lot of sexual people feel this way. It's not always about hotness, or spontaneous arousal. Sexual attraction isn't simply being attracted to people because they qualify as 'sexy' by some standards. It's about what draws you to express your feelings and fulfill yourself through sexual intimacy." Am I dictating what their orientation is? No. But because I'm not affirming asexuality, this is the kind of comment that could spiral into an accusation of invalidation. 

 

So you're right that it's not always true, which is why it's important to ask questions and make sure things are understood - both in the situation the member is asking about, and in the information given to them. Discouraging people from identifying as sexual, though, can be just as damaging to a person's understanding of their feelings and identity as invalidating an asexual label. I personally think constructive conversation over time is more effective in affirming a person's identity and giving them clarity of self than blunt answers thrown at them right away - but it's not uncommon for that constructive conversation to eventually lead a person to identify as sexual. I've seen the question asked in other threads here why there are so many sexual people on AVEN and what they're even doing here, and for most of them the answer is that they thought they were asexual, found this forum engaging, enlightening, and useful - to the point that they determined they were to some degree sexual people. I know that sometimes the messages of "this is what sexuality is" can be blunt and seem forceful. That's really where I think the feeling of invalidation comes from - not that the information is wrong, but the person who's going through a very confusing period of time feels overwhelmed with cold and hard messages that disqualify them from something they haven't really had a chance to absorb yet. I think patience and tact are crucial in avoiding invalidation, and they are better tools to help people figure themselves out than open arms and agreeing with everything they say just to make them feel good.

[Guest]

11 minutes ago, Pan Ficto. (on hiatus?) said:

That's not what the issue is though.

 

The issue here is when members discuss the definition itself, and say that loving and desiring sex is a common sexual experience (not saying this to a newbie, but in a general discussion) and everyone who loves sex here starts screaming about invalidation, gatekeeping, and identity policing. Even though no one was saying "you can't personally identify as asexual". Having partaken in many such discussions myself over the past few months (and hundreds since joining AVEN) I can tell you that any attempt to discuss what the average sexual person experiences (ie a desire for sex, for varying reasons) will be met with indignation and claims of elitism and bigotry towards 'sex-loving aces'. It's endlessly frustrating, it's invalidating and offensive to those aces who have gone their whole lives feeling broken and outcast due to their lack of desire for sexual intimacy... and it's actually bloody offensive to sexuals too. It's pretty much saying that to be a sexual you have to be a raging horndog who will literally screw anything that walks and if you're not like that, you're some kind of asexual.

 

It's just ridiculous at this point.. But it's been ridiculous for years unfortunately Y_Y

Then tell a mod.  Everyone should be civil including sex-favorable aces.  If the mod doesn’t do their job report them to an admin

[Guest]

46 minutes ago, daveb said:

No one is being singled out to be treated differently. We're all in this together, aces, non-aces, allies, partners, family and friends of aces. Let's focus on helping each other or at least being respectful.

Firstly, of course I agree with being respectful to each other and not throwing insults or anything. 

 

But where does total acceptance without question leave everyone else who feels invalidated, broken, and outcast as a result of the sex-loving asexuals definition? It's like they're being alienated in their own community because suddenly they're surrounded by people who are no different than the people they felt so different from all their lives. Now suddenly they feel again like something must be wrong with them, because if aces can love and desire sex like anyone else, then what the heck do you call someone who has no desire to connect sexually with others? Suddenly they're back to square one, seeing themselves as broken and defective in a happily sexual world (a world which the suddenly very happily sexual ace community is part of......)

 

I'm of course not saying that we directly to say to people "nah you love and desire sex so you're not ace" but we must at least be able to explain how actual sexuals feel? They're not all raging horndogs that will screw anything that walks but it seems like many people who come here believe that to be sexual, that's what you must experience. And if you experience anything other than that, you're some kind of ace. It's an utter misconception perpetuated right throughout that needs to be dealt with, but it seems that instead of dealing with it, we are pushing further in the other direction (ie yeah sexuals suck, they're all dirty horndogs who will screw anything. If you're not like that then you're definitely asexual even if you can't be happy without sex in your life/only want sex with people you respect/love how pleasurable and intimate sex is... those are all definitely asexual experiences, not sexual at all.. sexuals couldn't possibly desire sex for any reason other than because hot people make them horny. Sigh)

[Guest]

23 minutes ago, Pumpkin Spice Kale Chips said:

Then tell a mod.  Everyone should be civil including sex-favorable aces.  If the mod doesn’t do their job report them to an admin

Wait. No. That's not what I was saying.

 

I was saying that it's automatically seen as invalidating when we try to discuss the definition of asexuality and include examples of normal sexuality. The opening post here literally seems to be referring to the way we discuss the definition itself here: people who love sex literally see such discussions as automatically invalidating of their experience so it would appear such discussions are being discouraged. So it's a huge issue because if what's being said is that these things can't even be discussed, then where does that leave everyone else who feels invalidated as a result of our utter and unquestioning acceptance of the idea that asexuals can love and desire sex just as much as anyone else? Because it leaves a LOT of people all the way back at square one: Lost and confused in a sex loving world (while also utterly misrepresenting the way that actual sexual people feel: because suddenly to be sexual you have to be a shallow horndog that wants sex with everything that looks good, and if you're not like that then you're an asexual. That's what the sex-loving definition of asexual means. It means sexuals are horny, sex-obsessed scum pretty much).

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Gotye said:

, I just think it’s catering to those that don’t care in the long run, instead of those that do.

 Exactly! You worded it perfectly.

[Guest]

6 hours ago, MichaelTannock said:

@Pan Ficto. (on hiatus?) I think the idea here is to give someone a definition of Asexuality so that they can figure out if they're more or less likely to be Asexual, instead of telling people that they are or are not Asexual, as the latter would invalidate them.

Quote

You can provide a definition of Asexuality without invalidating people, so why would that be the same as having a nebulous definition?

 

But isn't that what we do?

 

We say: asexuals don't have an innate desire to connect on a sexual level with other people for pleasure.

 

They say: HOW DARE YOU? I love sex and couldn't be happy without it, but I just do it because it feeeeels so gooood and it's so intimate and emotionally rewarding..  I don't look at people and want to have sex with them though like those appearance obsessed sexuals so I'm asexual. You're invalidating my identity!!!!

 

We say: oh you can identify however you want, we are just saying that what you're describing is a very normal sexual experience. In fact, most sexuals have sex for the very reasons you outlined. It's only some sexuals who see hot people and want to bang them.

 

They say: INVALIDATION!!!! GATEKEEPING!!!! IDENTITY POLICING!!!! ELITISM!!!!! REPORTED!!!!!!!!!

 

 

...that's literally how it goes. Every. Single. Time. Y_Y

[Guest]

Hey, uhm, ...

 

Can't we all just accept each other for whom they are, uhm... be kind.. and that stuff? :S please?

 

 

[SithLord]

I respect the desire to all just get along, but we're talking about very personal things. We can't all just hold hands and agree when we quite fundamentally don't agree. The only way to do so would be to ignore the problems. 

[AceMissBehaving]

2 hours ago, Road said:

I don't think AVEN is big enough or important enough, in the wider view of asexuality, that how a few people identify on here will cause any lasting harm to the asexual identity as a whole.

 

 

This is one place I would disagree. A very large percentage of articles written on asexuality will frequently mention AVEN as a source, resource, and as the place they came to to pick up their stats. Not all journalism is good journalism, and I think there is an enormous amount of power held here in terms of how information about asexuality is ultimately disseminated.

—————————

 

I will say as the profile of asexuality has grown, it does seem like the voices further towards the more sexual end have started to eclipse the more asexual end of the larger spectrum. It does get depressing, for those who’s lives are greatly impacted by the lack of attraction towards, and desire for sex, to again find themselves becoming secondary in a word that is supposed to represent them, and I worry that some of this move could place a further gag on those voices. 

 

I agree everyone should feel welcome, and I do not believe angry mobs are helpful. I’ve found myself looking at some threads and feeling uncomfortable with the level of vitriol coming from a camp I might personally agree with. 

 

The issue sometimes feels like the “I’m not like other girls” statement, which often is more about how the speaker failing to see themselves in the very reductive female characters portrayed in  media, starts to feel out of step with the actual complexities of women in the real world, and so, erroneously believe they are in fact different from the other girls. I feel sometimes people who may be sexual find they feel like they aren’t because they don’t see themselves in the way sexuality is portrayed in media, and the brags of people trying, and maybe faking living up to that portrayal. They feel out of step, while at the same time being in step. The question is, does it serve people better to jump on something that is supposed to be there to aid and represent a different group, or are we better served by honest dialogue towards better understanding themselves as a sexual person?

 

Either way, I do feel it’s important that people have a safe space to learn about themselves, and I do believe there is common ground always in terms of community, but I also think it’s important to make sure we, remain a safe space for those marginalized outside of here for their lack of sexual and romantic interest, and that if education is part of the mission, that aspect is given the same amount of attention and protection.