Jump to content
HikaruBG

Yet, another evidence that you guys do not belive in your own definitions.

Recommended Posts

CBC
4 hours ago, KYON. said:

All that can happen at this point is another thread gets made every few days and the same people argue in circles until we inevitably all perish as a result of global warming. 

I understand why people are passionate and why they care, but surely people can see it’s a losing battle by this point. 

Yep.

 

Having these discussions about "sex favourable aces" (as one example, amongst some other common topics) seems to be achieving nothing. Doesn't mean we can't have them, but they go almost nowhere because AVEN refuses to put logical limits on its own definitions.

 

As a certain recently-banished member said to me this morning , "it'll die a death". I'm sure the community won't disappear, but it's bordering on a ridiculous level of watering down of definitions, acceptance of "almost anything goes", and clamping down on expressions of dissent, so thank goodness AVEN certainly isn't all there is to asexuality, because some of this recent nonsense isn't doing the education and visibility components much good. AVEN may indeed die some degree of death as far as its relevance to the global asexual community. Or, worse yet, understanding of asexuality by the wider world will regress (however I'm going to choose to believe that AVEN doesn't carry that much weight).

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MichaelTannock

AVEN has clear definitions.

 

You can read them here: https://www.asexuality.org/?q=general.html

Quote

Asexual: Someone who does not experience sexual attraction or an intrinsic desire to have sexual relationships (or the adjective describing a person as such).

Quote

Sexual attraction: Desire to have sexual contact with someone else or to share our sexuality with them. (Note: sexual attraction does not need to be based on appearance, and can also develop gradually over time.)

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CBC

Not of things like "sex favourable" we don't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MichaelTannock
3 minutes ago, CBC said:

Not of things like "sex favourable" we don't.

 

That's here: (Link).

Quote

Sex-favorable - people who find sex a pleasant/favorable activity even if they don't have any desire for it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nowhere Girl
1 hour ago, HikaruBG said:

Again, I'm not talking about policing stuff outside of AVEN. I'm talking about that you guys don't believe in your own definitions, that you yourself listed here.

Again, whom do you mean by "you guys"? (And please, don't use the word "guys" to mean "people". I'm not a guy, I am a woman.) You're using some random Reddit post to show that - asexuals in general?? AVEN users?? - don't believe in the definition they use?

I believe that asexuality is best defined as "consistently (long-term) experiencing no desire for partnered sex". So I certainly believe in the definition I use. I didn't write that Reddit post. The only thing I have in common with the "aces who desire sex" crowd is that I believe that: 1) "desiring sex with a specific person" ("sexual attraction" par excellence) and "desiring sex as sex" should be differentiated; and 2) that there are people whose selection of sexual partners is based on criteria other than gender and saying that "OK, so they are effectively bisexual" waters down the issue and isn't particularly respectful.

And I'm 100% sex-averse myself.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CBC
4 minutes ago, MichaelTannock said:

 

That's here: (Link).

How come we still don't really seem to know exactly what that means then? Why aren't we telling the people who say "I really like sex and actively seek it out for that reason but I'm asexual" that they're wrong?

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
HikaruBG
1 minute ago, Nowhere Girl said:

Again, whom do you mean by "you guys"? (And please, don't use the word "guys" to mean "people". I'm not a guy, I am a woman.) You're using some random Reddit post to show that - asexuals in general?? AVEN users?? - don't believe in the definition they use?

I believe that asexuality is best defined as "consistently (long-term) experiencing no desire for partnered sex". So I certainly believe in the definition I use. I didn't write that Reddit post. The only thing I have in common with the "aces who desire sex" crowd is that I believe that: 1) "desiring sex with a specific person" ("sexual attraction" par excellence) and "desiring sex as sex" should be differentiated; and 2) that there are people whose selection of sexual partners is based on criteria other than gender and saying that "OK, so they are effectively bisexual" waters down the issue and isn't particularly respectful.

And I'm 100% sex-averse myself.

I'm not talking you specifically but the people that say the same stuff like that person in that screenshot in that post.

 

I didn't think that I needed to be more specific. That screenshot was self-explanatory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MichaelTannock
1 minute ago, CBC said:

How come we still don't really seem to know exactly what that means then? Why aren't we telling the people who say "I really like sex and actively seek it out but I'm asexual" that they're wrong?

 

Because of this: (link to ToS).

Quote

Making judgments about other users, especially about the validity of their asexuality, is disallowed. We are here to figure ourselves out, not to put each other in boxes.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CBC
5 minutes ago, MichaelTannock said:

Because of this: (link to ToS).

Oh, well yeah of course I know the ToS is the reason. My point is that the ToS allows for completely nonsensical levels of acceptance in terms of people fitting themselves into labels. By which I don't mean that we should tell people "You can't call yourself X", because there's no way to police that. But I don't know why it's a problem to say "Based on [whatever the person has said], you're not asexual."

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nowhere Girl
8 minutes ago, HikaruBG said:

'm not talking you specifically but the people that say the same stuff like that person in that screenshot in that post.

OK, but why do you generalise? It doesn't mean that "you guys don't believe in your own definition", it just means that "some people misunderstand the definition of asexuality or don't care about it".

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
HikaruBG
21 minutes ago, Pumpkin Spice Eggnog Latte said:

and...your point?  I'm actually kind of okay with that here.

So you are fine with people spreading misinformation and misconceptions that are potentially harmful? Got it.

 

That's why the educational systems and science exists.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
HikaruBG
26 minutes ago, Pumpkin Spice Eggnog Latte said:

 

.

Edited by HikaruBG
double post. sorry AVEN glitched on me

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
HikaruBG
11 hours ago, Nowhere Girl said:

OK, but why do you generalise? It doesn't mean that "you guys don't believe in your own definition", it just means that "some people misunderstand the definition of asexuality or don't care about it".

Because if there is something that I can gather from that screenshot is that it could be a Mod that's saying it.

Again, I don't know who said that, nor do I want to know because I have seen enough to know that they are by far the only one who says that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
pook
31 minutes ago, CBC said:

As a banished member said to me this morning , "it'll die a death". I'm sure the community won't disappear, but it's bordering on a ridiculous level of watering down of definitions, acceptance of "almost anything goes", and clamping down on expressions of dissent, so thank goodness AVEN certainly isn't all there is to asexuality, because some of this recent nonsense isn't doing the education and visibility components much good. AVEN may indeed die some degree of death as far as its relevance to the global asexual community. Or, worse yet, understanding of asexuality by the wider world will regress (however I'm going to choose to believe that AVEN doesn't carry that much weight).

i feel like if this 18 year old rule was going to kill asexuality and AVEN it would have happened by now

 

 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
thyristor

I was with the same partner for nine years. For about eight years and nine months I couldn't feel any desire for sex. He was a nice goodlooking guy and I certainly trusted him (and still do) to the bone. Without reflecting upon it, it seemed normal to me that couples have sex a few times a week. But I just didn't feel like it. Not that I was repulsed by my partner as a person, as in, I didn't find him groce or anything like that, and I had no issues with him checking on the pimples in my private areas.

 

But he was wilking like a flower without water. I gave him sex from time to time, just because I felt sorry for him and thought that it was me being not normal. He would have needed sex maybe once a week or once every two weeks not to wilk like a flower. In his best dreams, he would have been glad to have sex, say, twice a week.

 

During all this time, neither of us flirted with any other person outside our relationship. He was true to me. He loved me, I was the only one he wanted to have sex with. Still, he wanted to have sex. It was not enough for him just to live together with me and share the same bed and bathroom. I did not flirt with any other person because I didn't have the desire for someone that I would feel sexually attracted to or for someone who could give me sexual satisfaction in a way that I could enjoy. I wasn't wilking like a flower due to the lack of sexual joy. I did not feel any happier either the mornings after we had sex.

 

I'd say, this story bears witness to there being two ends of a scale, and why wouldn't one have two different words for that?

 

And why would you want to argue which points on the scale are worthy of having their own word? It's like arguing about the difference between languages and dialects.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CBC
1 minute ago, pook said:

i feel like if this 18 year old rule was going to kill asexuality and AVEN it would have happened by now

 

 

Oh nothing is going to kill asexuality, no. As long as there are humans, there'll be asexual humans. The phrase was a bit of an exaggeration, of course. But AVEN isn't all there is to asexuality, and I imagine AVEN itself will become less relevant over time as awareness increases and resources diversify. Which is good. But anyway, we're having debates we didn't have 18 years ago (which isn't inherently bad, but could mean there's more confusion being created) and cracking down on dissent more than we used to and opening up the definition of asexuality more. There's something wrong when someone claims (this was a reddit post) that something like a third of their friends and acquaintances are identifying as ace spectrum now (and no, not because most of their friends are AVENites).

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Puck

Actually... I felt really happy reading a lot of those comments in the comments section.

 

Looked to me like posting that screenshot led to a lot of good conversations and explanations. Some people had wrong ideas of how to think about asexuality which made them question this, but there were a lot of ace folks and allies that stepped in to explain calmly and with care.

 

I’d rather see a more united front on AVEN’s end, sure. And I do think there are some who id as ace who I would suggest they weren’t if asked. But this seemed to be a case where the ace community on reddit was more than happy and willing to explain and explore topics. Which is so impressive; internet back and forths aren’t always ended with respect and understanding. It’s great that asexuality is being talked about enough that people are being challenged in their beliefs about it, and I’m proud that the community is doing so with care and understanding.

 

Also: I’m just confused. Why is a AVEN post on a sub reddit dedicated tumblr? 🤨

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
KYON.
5 minutes ago, Puck said:

Also: I’m just confused. Why is a AVEN post on a sub reddit dedicated tumblr? 🤨

It’s pretty much a general “point and laugh at this silly SJW on social media” sub. Tumblr is/was the main location for such people, so that’s where the name came from. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Puck
5 minutes ago, KYON. said:

It’s pretty much a general “point and laugh at this silly SJW on social media” sub. Tumblr is/was the main location for such people, so that’s where the name came from. 

Gotcha. Too many small sections of the interwebs to keep track of them all :P

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
thyristor
35 minutes ago, CBC said:

How come we still don't really seem to know exactly what that means then? Why aren't we telling the people who say "I really like sex and actively seek it out for that reason but I'm asexual" that they're wrong?

I have a strange feeling that asexuality and aromanticism are creating a bit of confusion. I find them to be very different yet so related to eachother. If you feel aromantic but have sexual desires, you might go by the word "ace". Or so I have understood it during my little time spent on this forum. And then there is the phenomenon that you can be

  • asex-aro,
  • asex-ro,
  • sex-aro or
  • sex-ro

OOOOORRRRR you can be like me:

  • sex with some,
  • asex with people I trust,
  • ro with people I hardly have met and
  • aro with people I trust.

For me, it means I can't get my act together, dumping people that love me, messing with someone who is not trustworthy, and clinging too long with people who are not showing interest.

 

All because my sexuality is not mainstream, that is (to me), aroused by intimacy and unleashed by trust.

 

So, although I have sex with this guy (note: I enjoy phantasizing about him alot more than actually doing it), I define my sexuality to be pretty absent in everyday life, and its absence doesn't bother me. (While that guy is so sexual, he would drive three quaters of an hour one-way to get sex and then drive home again).

 

The best thing here is, that there actually ARE words to use and there ARE people who also need those words in their lives.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FaerieFate
57 minutes ago, CBC said:

Oh, well yeah of course I know the ToS is the reason. My point is that the ToS allows for completely nonsensical levels of acceptance in terms of people fitting themselves into labels. By which I don't mean that we should tell people "You can't call yourself X", because there's no way to police that. But I don't know why it's a problem to say "Based on [whatever the person has said], you're not asexual."

Because the way people say it and the tone they use runs people off. Michael had seen several new members leave because of how they're treated when they use definitions and terms we don't agree with. 

 

Strictly speaking (not gonna name names), I've seen regulars act like assholes to new members because they disagreed with their labels. So all of this tip-toeing about "be careful how you word your disagreement" is basically saying "don't be an asshole when you disagree with them".

 

Again this isn't about anyone specifically, but a general statement. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CBC

That's fair enough, however it goes both ways in the sense I've seen some new folks lose their shit when they're told "Hey, that's not what that means" and they get indignant as though they can't bear to be told they're probably incorrect about something. (Note: I definitely said "some", not all or even most.) In my observation, many of the new people who end up flouncing out were being just as combative themselves.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FaerieFate
1 minute ago, CBC said:

That's fair enough, however it goes both ways in the sense I've seen some new folks lose their shit when they're told "Hey, that's not what that means" and they get indignant as though they can't bear to be told they're probably incorrect about something. (Note: I definitely said "some", not all or even most.) In my observation, many of the new people who end up flouncing out were being just as combative themselves.

That's why I always tell people if the other person is getting heated don't engage, just ignore them or step back. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Snao Cone
1 hour ago, CBC said:

Not of things like "sex favourable" we don't.

 

1 hour ago, MichaelTannock said:

 

That's here: (Link).

Also here: https://asexuality.org/?q=attitudes.html

 

Anyway, if this is a systemic failure about definitions and information provided by AVEN, then I've failed. And I've not failed because I was lazy or incompetent (though perhaps I could've done more and could've done it better, but that's the case for anything anyone attempts). I've failed because conflict is unfixable, and people will grasp at straws to shout out what's invalidation and they will grasp at straws to shout out what's misinformation, as long as they look and feel better. It's 90% righteousness, not even about educating people. Forum activity doesn't really care about what resources are available elsewhere; it cares about who's getting recognition for making what point in a current thread. And that's why I'm going to sacrifice myself by diving into a volcano (though I do not live near one, so it might be a while).

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
daveb
2 minutes ago, Snao van der Cone said:

failure

Oh, no, you can't claim any failure in this stuff as your own. :P 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Snao Cone
1 minute ago, daveb said:

Oh, no, you can't claim any failure in this stuff as your own. :P 

The mistake was thinking I could help. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pan Ficto. (on hiatus?)
1 hour ago, MichaelTannock said:
1 hour ago, MichaelTannock said:

Asexual: Someone who does not experience sexual attraction or an intrinsic desire to have sexual relationships (or the adjective describing a person as such).

 

1 hour ago, MichaelTannock said:

Sexual attraction: Desire to have sexual contact with someone else or to share our sexuality with them. (Note: sexual attraction does not need to be based on appearance, and can also develop gradually over time.)

 

1 hour ago, MichaelTannock said:

Sex-favorable - people who find sex a pleasant/favorable activity even if they don't have any desire for it.

That's here: (Link).

Genuine question here: If someone is saying "I'm asexual and I love and desire sex, I can't be happy without sex. But I don't care what people look like, I have sex with them because I just love sex" (which is quite a common example of someone calling themselves 'sex-favourable'), can we post all those definitions like you just did, and say "you can call yourself whatever you want, but this is the accepted definition of sex-favourable, sexual attraction, and asexuality on AVEN" ? 

 

Yes they will yell and shout about invalidation, gatekeeping, elitism etc, but it's not our fault if the actual definitions AVEN uses (the accurate ones) are different than how that person is personally defining them.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pan Ficto. (on hiatus?)
Just now, Snao van der Cone said:

The mistake was thinking I could help. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I think in the long run it will help. :)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CBC
4 minutes ago, Snao van der Cone said:

And I don't see anything wrong whatsoever with the definition of sex-favourable given there. Why are some people confused about what it means then? Is there an issue with members not accessing any other part of the site besides the forums? Certainly not blaming you for anything.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Snao Cone
1 minute ago, Pan Ficto. (on hiatus?) said:

I think in the long run it will help. :)

Thanks for the optimism. Still tempted by that volcano. :P 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...