Jump to content
HikaruBG

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

Recommended Posts

Snao Cone
17 minutes ago, Pan Ficto. (on hiatus?) said:

edit: and once the new FAQ etc is all finalised and made public etc, hopefully we can have an @Snao van der Cone appreciation thread or something to show our gratitude ^_^

I think the shitposting threads to help blow off steam are gratitude enough. :P But seriously, keeping information updated and relevant will be an ongoing process. Part of the reason for that is things are evolving - even meanings of words/terms. Asexuality will always center around something that makes people different enough from the typical experiences of sexual people to feel like they need language and community to express themselves, but the wording of definitions may evolve as necessary, to communicate clearly to new people coming across the term for the first time (or re-examining it again). Even your definition has evolved over time, as you've come across new perspectives - both ones that explain sexuality from a sexual perspective, and from people who identify as asexual and provide their reasons for doing so. I'm not always going to be in this role, and anyone else who takes over this position can choose to review whether the FAQ/definitions are missing anything or not accurately reflecting the community.

 

I think one of the most important things I've learned in this role is that AVEN is held up by volunteers who are experienced but not experts. I have a bit of tangentially related education, but mostly my wisdom, common sense, and critical thinking skills to rely on for this. You apply the same for the information and advice you give members here. As far as what people are looking for when they come to AVEN - whether the main site or the forum - it's going to be more along the lines of perspective and understanding than absolutes. Asexuality wasn't something that science discovered and people then decided to make websites about. It's something people bonded over and formed a community around, and most of the research on it has happened since. The "what makes asexuals different from sexuals" question is always going to be a part of the dialogue, and there will always be a need to keep a realistic and informative voice on the diverse range of sexuality. I forgot where I was going on this because my dog keeps pawing at me for attention ( 🐶 ), but I think the basic point is that the word will never be final and the discussions will never cease because it's about individuals' learning opportunities and self-discovery that we're trying to help with. The same questions will come up with different twists for each person, so there will be ongoing challenges to how we word things and how we perceive things and the way that asexuality is commonly understood. It's frustrating to have to go through that time and time again, but the invalidation rule and the definition issue are based around constructive dialogue instead of dismissal. That's what most of us are aiming for, but it gets jumbled up in giant messes of the level of built up frustration every time a conversation about the meaning of asexuality goes sour and we don't feel listened to anymore.

 

(lol @ 9 posts since I started typing this)

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Snao Cone

I would like to add that I find a lot of things are being exaggerated in these discussions and the conflicts on the forum that unleash them. I get why people perceive/express things this way. I'm currently going through a similar thing with an off-AVEN issue, so I'm by no means judging anyone on this. But I think the tensions and frustrations are leading to worse comparisons or perceptions of worse divides than there actually are. I think we can get along much better if we keep in mind that this is affecting us all in some emotional way, because we all have a lot invested in this site that has been so incredibly helpful to us in finding ourselves and a sense of community.

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MichaelTannock

I think a part of the problem is that people can interpret a clarification of someone else's position as a response to their own.
So when someone says that they don't want to tell others how to identify, as I've said, then it can be taken as accusing others of doing that.
Or if someone says that they will give suggestions, again as I've said, then it can be taken as accusing others of not doing that.
Of course, that's just from my perspective.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LeChat
1 hour ago, Knight of Cydonia said:

...If someone says "Hey, I don't find people hot but I desire and love sex with others. Am i still asexual?" it is counterproductive to education for staff members to be jumping in and saying "You could be asexual, because asexuals can still desire and love sex - they just don't find people hot!" when that goes against the very definition AVEN lists in its FAQ (and further, reinforces a very misleading (and harmful) view of sexual experiences, and reinforces the "asexuality can mean anything" mentality)...

Personally, whenever I come across others' questions like in bold, here, I feel unsure of what to say because I don't know what they personally feel or mean by "desire" and "love sex with others," because for all I know, they could be talking about say, occasional libido they randomly experience, but like to choose to get rid of it by having sex with others. (An example of what I mean is in the spoiler.)

 

TW: discussing sexual abuse

Spoiler

For example, in the case of those who've been sexually abused, health professionals have pointed out that, regardless of sexual orientation, it's common for survivors' bodies to become aroused, even though the survivor didn't personally like or want the sexual abuse that was happening to them.

 

(e.g. a male heterosexual survivor's body becoming aroused throughout being abused by another male doesn't indicate or automatically mean that they're homosexual; it's a common misconception that some survivors worry about, but it's something that health professionals on websites for sexual abuse support have debunked).

 

So, I don't know if by "love sex with others," it's possible that the person might be describing their body's enjoyment of sex, more than or rather than mental enjoyment, the way, perhaps, a sexual person might. I don't know if their feelings and desires are like an asexual's with a libido or, perhaps, a sexual person's.

 

So, perhaps, it's possible that this is why the BOD has it's invalidation policy, why they don't want to give a certain definition because it's possible that a person could be using a term in a different way from what others might think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Snao Cone
36 minutes ago, MichaelTannock said:

I think a part of the problem is that people can interpret a clarification of someone else's position as a response to their own.
So when someone says that they don't want to tell others how to identify, as I've said, then it can be taken as accusing others of doing that.
Or if someone says that they will give suggestions, again as I've said, then it can be taken as accusing others of not doing that.
Of course, that's just from my perspective.

That is a very very good point. I am definitely guilty of this from time to time, though I try to work through it before posting anything or letting things sink in.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pan Ficto. (on hiatus?)
3 hours ago, daveb said:

Maybe it would help if we talked about some of the things we all agree on? With civility. No name-calling, no impugning other people's motives, no mis-characterization of what other people are saying. Just some mutual understanding all around.

 

1) @Snao van der Cone has done a wonderful job with the new FAQ

 

2) the fact that there is a new FAQ isn't well-known enough on AVEN yet (I've been asking for a clearer FAQ for years, but had no idea it was getting updated and only found by accident a couple of weeks ago). More people should know about it because it will be very beneficial for this community!

 

4) There should be an @Snao van der Cone appreciation thread if there isn't already.

 

3) I don't think anyone should be directly invalidated. I can't help it if someone feels wronged because a definition of asexuality doesn't match their own, but I also don't think anyone should be allowed to yell at anyone else saying something like "you're not asexual, deal with it" or whatever.

 

(edit: I see my dyscalculia reared it's ugly head again, based on my basic number fail above, lol!!)

 

2 hours ago, LeChat said:

So, I don't know if by "love sex with others," it's possible that the person might be describing their body's enjoyment of sex, more than or rather than mental enjoyment, the way, perhaps, a sexual person might. I don't know if their feelings and desires are like an asexual's with a libido or, perhaps, a sexual person's.

 

It's important to remember that with sexuality, there isn't one-box-that-fits-all. Sexual people desire and enjoy sex for all kinds of different reasons, as well as because it's just a pleasurable way to relieve their libido. If they didn't actively desire the partnered act (at least sometimes) they'd just masturbate to relieve said arousal, but there are times when they actively prefer to have a partner involved, or at least would prefer that if it was possible. 

 

Seeking sex because you enjoy the way it feels to have your libido relieved by someone else is a very valid way that some sexual people experience their sexuality (regardless of what it is that's causing them to feel that arousal) and if it is somehow distressing for them due to past abuse, then seeking the help of a therapist would be the best approach. 

 

However what you described has never been the case in my 6 years here, seeing many comments and threads from these specific people. When they say "I love and desire partnered sex" they mean they enjoy the way sex feels and would be unhappy without it, BUT they believe there is only way that sexual people desire sex (because of looks) and if you don't experience that, you're asexual. This isn't just a guess on my part. People always ask them to explain and the answer is literally always the same: "well I like partnered sex, but I looks don't matter to me like they do to sexual people" or "I don't get aroused by people but I enjoy partnered sex" (which is very common for plenty of sexual people, especially women, but yeah). One even said they see asexuals kind of like human sex dolls, someone you can have indiscriminate sex with who has no judgement of the way you look because they desire sex with you but they don't care about you yourself as a person Y_Y I know a lot of asexuals who get extremely uncomfortable by such discussions, and have been in personal contact (through Skype groups etc) with many who have left AVEN over that whole side of the debacle. It makes many asexuals very, very uncomfortable to think they may end up at an ace meet or something with someone who thinks asexual means "I'll bang anyone and love it because I literally don't care what you look like, and you feel the same way!" or whatever..But that's a different topic that is persistently brushed over by certain staff and the BoD sadly. Been that way for years. Because for a long time here, it has been preferable that asexuality is anything one wants it to be regardless of how that makes other asexuals feel.

 

I've never come across someone identifying as sex favourable based on the circumstances you described above. And again if that was actually the case I think what would be best for them is to seek therapy if it's actually causing them distress!

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

They are both sexual minorities. It has nothing to do with the LGBT community (there have been gay people, and ace people, forever. The LGBT community was only invented recently).

 

 Not one person is saying they should be excluded from AVEN or the ace community, only that asexuality is one specific thing (a lack of sexual attraction ie no desire to connect sexually with others). There is an entire grey area to cover those who don't quite fit perfectly into that definition.

 

Then you get people like me who thought I was ace for years, and all my experiences matched that, then I found out actually I can desire some forms of sexual intimacy under the right circumstances. So I stopped identifying as ace. And no one has excluded me. No one has kicked me out. No one has said I don't belong here. Same with people like @CBCand @Serran, then all the others who are grey or some other variation of in between. No one is saying anyone should be excluded.

 

But asexuality is a specific thing (just like homosexuality is) and it's not exclusive to define that thing. 

 

If you do literally want some catch-all phrase for any human sexual experience under the sun though (as some want asexuality to be) why don't you make one? That's what confuses me. Asexuals generally have a pretty hard time in the sexual world and feel very excluded and alienated as it is among a population that places great importance on sex, without suddenly having to share their orientation with every sexual variation of person under the sun. That was WHY they felt so outcast in society in the first place. So if people want this all-encompassing umbrella that includes every variation of sexuality that is possible, they should just make their own term for it. They should not hijack a term that already exists to define a very specific (and already very alienating) experience!! 

It's not a specific thing because sexual attraction is subject to a person's experience. We regularly get posts here where people are struggling to match feelings to certain definable attraction terms. People experience arousal and they don't understand it, they don't know what's happening in them, they don't know what's going on. They describe their experiences and we do our best to understand them, guide them and help them. But it's not specific, because the human experience is incredibly diverse and that's why we're consistently having definition debates. I cannot tell a person for sure what is arousing them, nor point out what is going on inside their minds when they speak of their experiences. How on Earth am I going to know for sure, with certainty, whether another person is experiencing sexual attraction or not, based on what they've typed on an internet forum? It's difficult.

 

We've accepted that people can experience sensual attraction and be asexual. A sensual experience can become a sexual experience and we can be indifferent or even favourable to that, as sex-repulsion and likes don't define a persons asexuality. Nor does whether they masturbate, nor does whether they enjoy masturbating or not. It's all about what they want and are attracted to, right? So my feeling is that asexuality will always remain complicated. That in these experiences, it's very difficult to draw a threshold that defines ace / not ace.

 

So, the best we can do is to help people make sense of their feelings whilst letting people self-identify as what brings them most comfort. I don't see anything wrong with this particular strategy but should point out that I am not as protective as others. I know that asexuality is predicated on having to not be something in order to be something, but I am also unsure how that works with regards the actions taken to preserve its sanctity. Isn't this what created the entire invalidation furore in the first place? Staff cannot really moderate what asexuality is and what asexuality isn't, but you know that some aces are going to be more passionate than others, so... it's complicated. 😕

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moonman

I think the problem we have, overall, is that a vaguer definition covers more bases but with less rigour. But, a more detailed definition can be less representative of the community we presently have.

 

We should remember that when people come here, it is a community of self-identifying people. Nobody is policing it and that is for the better in my opinion.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
daveb
34 minutes ago, Pan Ficto. (on hiatus?) said:

1) @Snao van der Cone has done a wonderful job with the new FAQ

 

2) the fact that there is a new FAQ isn't well-known enough on AVEN yet (I've been asking for a clearer FAQ for years, but had no idea it was getting updated and only found by accident a couple of weeks ago). More people should know about it because it will be very beneficial for this community!

 

4) There should be an @Snao van der Cone appreciation thread if there isn't already.

 

3) I don't think anyone should be directly invalidated. I can't help it if someone feels wronged because a definition of asexuality doesn't match their own, but I also don't think anyone should be allowed to yell at anyone else saying something like "you're not asexual, deal with it" or whatever.

Yep, I agree with those points. :) 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LeChat
5 hours ago, Snao van der Cone said:

...Still tempted by that volcano. :P 

It's been doused by rain ( 🌧️ ) and snow ( ❄️) by now, right? :P

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

It's been doused by rain ( 🌧️ ) and snow ( ❄️) by now, right? :P

Soon to be doused by Snao (🥨🤳) as well

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
daveb

Snao vs the Volcano

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
thyristor

Oh well, I just wrote this loooong comment. They who are amused, have a go, but I'll cover everything in read-more's except the music-part. Sometimes I get carried away and can't seem to stop writing even if I'm down to a rate of one sentence per hour...


 

Spoiler

 

I'm quite new to all this. some breezes of general feelings I get:

 

(not statistics or facts in any way, and I'm aware that I haven't read but a very tiny itsy bitsy little fraction of this forum)

 

People come here and ask: I'm so confused, could it be the case that I'm asexual?

 

It's the moment in their life when they go from feeling negatively about themselves because they feel they are not functioning in a normal way, to when they realize there is a word for it, and at first it scares them, because they still think it is negative to be something other than mainstrem, and then they start to feel positive about it because everyone says that it's okay and that they are proud of being ace, and because they see it as a relieving insight.

 

There's a whole lot of emotions going on over some period of time. Wow.

 

And definitions debate, I guess, they mix up all these emotions.


 

Am I a musician? Well, I engage in playing various instruments regularly. But not on stage. Whenever I play for others, I do hick-ups. When I play for myself it can sound quite okay for the stuff I've been playing alot. But I'm confined to a small subset of certain pieces in certain keys that I play well, I cannot play anything right away in an acceptable manner. Well, I'm certainly musical. But when I applied for a teacher's job at some extra curricular afternoon guitar class, I didn't even get an answer, I guess because the demo I sent them showed that I'm just not a professional musician. But that time when I in fact played the drums in a church service I could certainly call myself one of the musicians.

 

Spoiler

 

What has been striking me reading this thread is, that a lot of defining is debated, but not so much why people think they are, or want to be, or need to be asexuals. I don't mean 'why' as in due to what symptoms (liking or disliking thus and that). I mean 'why' as in what difference does it make to them? Someone who says "I'm a musician although I play hick-ups all the time" or someone who says "I'm not a musician although I can play several instruments, just not in all keys" may have certain expectations as to what will happen to them, what their feelings will be like, when finally they are accepted as being or not being a musician.

 


 

If it were biologically standard that all people easily learn instruments when they are young and all people easily record a christmas song every year to send to their friends and relatives so that it were expected that everyone does that; if then there were some people who were a-musical, who don't learn instruments easily or who can play them for themselves but make mistakes whenever they try to record it, or who have too high expectations, or too low confidence in their own music; for whatever reason, they want to identify as "a-musical" and get acceptance for not sending these recordings that _everyone else_ sends for christmas, they don't want to get labled as careless or forgetting. Maybe they like recieving recordings from their friends, maybe they themselves get hurt if one friend doesn't send one one year. Or maybe they also don't like listening to those recordings, because they don't like music at all.


 

Spoiler

 

Or maybe there are those that don't send recordings because they don't like adhering to social rules. And there are those that don't send recordings cos they don't like any friends or relatives that much that they could be bothered to sacrifice the time it takes to make a recording. I guess these last two variations would also not fall under my definition of a-musical. They could record something. They occasionally record things not seasonsgreetings-related. Why would anyone call them a-musical? Except for themselves when they need it as an excuse.

 

I think THAT is exactly the point where you could ask: _why_ do you want to call yourself a-musical? Why are you not just honest and question the social norm that you don't like or why are you not just honest and tell your friends that you are not the affectional type of person that cares for others, that you just want friends for company, just for your own winnings. Maybe it would result in another label: a-affectional, instead of a-musical for those people. Or it would result in bringing other things to daylight, like why they are so grumpy on their friends. Would they be okay with fullfilling the social norm in a different way, like sending a painting or giving a call? Maybe then they are after all a little bit a-musical, since it's that extra downside of it being musical that resulted in them not making the effort. If it is time-consuming or boring or whatever like engaging in musical stuff, they will do it only for their own sake.

 

Would it help to introduce a distinction between the definition for actually 'being asexual' and the more open collocation of 'feeling asexual'? (I guess some people will still argue that the acceptance of loosely identifying with some label of importance will make them feel taken less seriously).

 

I'm not quite sure what my contribution will be to this thread (except an alternative to the food metaphor), maybe what I'm trying to say is that the human body and brain are complex, and so is the human soul or emotionalilty, so, does someone want to identify as ace in order to have the right not to be flirted with by anyone, just as probably someone identifying as gay should be somewhat safe from being flirted with by females, or does they want to prove eligible to an adoption process, or is they just going through a period of struggle and confusion and need some shelves and boxes to store away some of the confusion for a while?


 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Philip027
Quote

his patience is being abused here by people who aren't listening

News flash: He ain't the only one.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Snao Cone
4 minutes ago, elisabeth_II said:

I'm quite new to all this. some breezes of general feelings I get:



 

(not statistics or facts in any way, and I'm aware that I haven't read but a very tiny itsy bitsy little fraction of this forum)

 

People come here and ask: I'm so confused, could it be the case that I'm asexual?

 

It's the moment in their life when they go from feeling negatively about themselves because they feel they are not functioning in a normal way, to when they realize there is a word for it, and at first it scares them, because they still think it is negative to be something other than mainstrem, and then they start to feel positive about it because everyone says that it's okay and that they are proud of being ace, and because they see it as a relieving insight.

 

There's a whole lot of emotions going on over some period of time. Wow.

 

And definitions debate, I guess, they mix up all these emotions.

 

Yup, this is what I try to keep in mind when people are asking if they're asexual. I think it's most beneficial to make them feel like they're welcome here and will benefit from sticking around to learn more. This is often done by telling them there's nothing wrong with them and there are many people like them. Even if they're likely not asexual, they still need that kind of validation. "Whether you identify as sexual or asexual, you're not alone in feeling this way, and you may find many people on AVEN who have had similar experiences. I encourage you to explore the forums to see what other people are going through. I'm sure you'll find a number of things you can relate to, and you'll learn a lot along the way."

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
thyristor

Btw, my first impressions of AVEN are that it is an awsome place full of thoughtfulness and positive energy, the exact opposite of all the frustration and hate-stuff that's around on the internet. This is the first thread that makes me aware that there are issues, but it seems to be handeled in good tone. 😃 *really* *gotta* *sleep* *now* 3 am here... 🤐

  • Like 8

Share this post


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

Yep, I agree with those points. :) 

 So apparently I don't know what order 3 and 4 go in, lol! I only just noticed when I saw your quote :P

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pan Ficto. (on hiatus?)
2 hours ago, Moonman said:

How on Earth am I going to know for sure, with certainty, whether another person is experiencing sexual attraction or not, based on what they've typed on an internet forum? It's difficult.

I'm not sure if you were just asking a rhetorical question or not but I'll answer just in case!!! 

 

The way to tell is by whether someone is drawn to have sex with other people for pleasure (whether that's because they find other people 'sexy', they enjoy the intimacy of sex with someone they love, they enjoy the physical feelings, there are many reasons!!). Whatever the underlying reason, they are feeling something that is pulling them towards someone else, to share a sexual experience with that person, as opposed to just masturbating to experience an orgasm. They are needing to seek something outside of themselves.

 

Asexuals don't experience that 'pull' to need to seek sexual release with another person, nor a preference for sexual release with someone else.   Whereas sexual people (in some circumstances, to varying degrees) are drawn to/have a preference for sharing a sexual experience with another person.

 

Asexuals (even ones who can enjoy the feelings of sex) have a preference to not engage in partnered sexual intimacy, and are happiest without it (even if they do it for external reasons like to have a baby, to try to keep a sexual partner happy, to try to 'fit in', as a form of self-punishment, etc).

 

That's why the term sexual attraction is problematic (because people get confused over what it means) but AVEN clarifies in the FAQ that it's "a desire for sexual contact with someone else, to share our sexuality with them".

 

For people who fall outside of that 'no desire for sexual contact' definition, but still feel they have a lot in common with asexuality, the grey area exists for that purpose. It's somewhere in the foggy area between sexuality and asexuality.

 

Or if they still feel the asexual label is best for them (even if they don't exactly fit the definition) they're still allowed to call themselves ace if they feel most comfortable with that. No one is stopping them, as long as they aren't trying to twist it around to try to manipulate people into sex of course (because like I said earlier I've seen that here before and it's not okay no matter what the circumstances!!).

 

So yeah, if you were asking rhetorically you can ignore all that. But that's a good way for someone to distinguish whether they're experiencing sexual attraction or not.

 

(we'd just explain all that to the person and let them decide for themselves. Issues only arise when they're like "um no, you're totally wrong about how sexuals feel. They're aroused by attractive people, that's why they're sexual and I'm not". Or someone else jumps in and says that, because that happens too. That's when the conflict starts because sexual people are generally instantly offended and annoyed, and aces also get upset as many can feel strong aesthetic attraction so it seems like the person is implying they're not ace, and suddenly everyone is arguing! And admods just see the argument and often instead of trying to clarify for the angry person they just post warnings in the thread until it gets locked Y_ That happens all the time here and it's one of the main reasons these debates just continue perpetually! But other than that particular scenario it's generally a very welcoming and accepting atmosphere!!)

 

edit: some of my writing is huge and some is tiny and I can't fix it on mobile Y_Y

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Janus DarkFox
17 hours ago, CBC 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.

17 hours ago, HikaruBG said:

I think that's the case too because I don't see "Attitudes" in the menu where it should be listed. You can't even access the menu from that "Attitudes" link.

Is the front page accessible from the forums anywhere? I’m sure in the old software all FAQ’s and that of the front page where internally forum accessible before...

15 hours ago, MichaelTannock said:

It's no secret that I'm also on the side of the BoD, and I'll tell you right now that for me, it's never been about avoiding a definition.
For me, it's always been about having a definition, but relaying it without telling someone how they must or must not identify.

Over the years, definitions change, whole threads are rebuilt from scratch to cover the best what’s known, for internal links I give for members wanting that, reflect what should be internally known, props to the staff past and present reading back on the history :cake:

 

I see that what could people do is take a look at the definitions and make changes to them until everyone’s comfortable, this includes and front page FAQ question that is or vaguely or not already covered.  Someone not just staff take the Initiative to get things going on these matters.  Over long stretches these debate schisms happen every few years, some become its own forum to develop some new area.

 

Once everyone is happy, come back to Site Comments, suggest these changes, defend without debating and maybe staff can do something more, maybe even the BOD.  This has been the process for what I’ve seen for years reading back.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
HikaruBG
22 hours ago, Janus DarkFox said:

Is the front page accessible from the forums anywhere? I’m sure in the old software all FAQ’s and that of the front page where internally forum accessible before...

 

There is a massive difference between the forums and the front page (and the FAQs).

 

Does the "Attitudes" page looks like something that shouldn't be accessed from the front page or that menu to you???? Especially when a lot of people, outside of AVEN, now use sex-positivity/sex-favouritism and sex-neutrality/sex-indifferent (and I have also seen some people implying sex-repulsed asexuals are anti-sexual/sex-negative as well) almost as synonyms?

And no, I already addressed issue in a different topic.

 

There is literally 3 pages of FAQs (General FAQs, Family/Friends FAQs and Relationship FAQs). Logically, when visitors have some sort of questions about asexuality, they should be looking for those pages. That's what "FAQ" means - Frequently Asked Questions.  If these visitors are still not satisfied with the FAQ, then they can head towards the forums to ask questions.

But here is the catch - some people here (especially people with authority) may say things that will directly contradict the web-site's own definitions or answers which can only end up confusing these visitors even more.

 

22 hours ago, Janus DarkFox said:

Over the years, definitions change, whole threads are rebuilt from scratch to cover the best what’s known, for internal links I give for members wanting that, reflect what should be internally known, props to the staff past and present reading back on the history :cake:

 

I see that what could people do is take a look at the definitions and make changes to them until everyone’s comfortable, this includes and front page FAQ question that is or vaguely or not already covered.  Someone not just staff take the Initiative to get things going on these matters.  Over long stretches these debate schisms happen every few years, some become its own forum to develop some new area.

 

Once everyone is happy, come back to Site Comments, suggest these changes, defend without debating and maybe staff can do something more, maybe even the BOD.  This has been the process for what I’ve seen for years reading back.   

The General FAQs always defined "Sexual Attraction" as  "Desire to have sexual contact with someone else, to share our sexuality with them", since 2014 when the page included the definitions. It's just that it was only edited recently to clarify that sexual attraction doesn't need to be based on people's appearances.  I already checked that myself with the Wayback Machine. You can go see that for yourself.

 

If it's regular members and  people with power, who share the idea that Asexuality and Sexual Attraction is anything you want it to be, are the ones who dictate what's Asexuality and Sexual Attraction is on this web-site (despite all the definitions debates, the whole "Invalidation" controversy and the Sex-favourite Asexuals debates going around) and everyone is asexual if they claim so (no questions asked), then why did you kept those definitions on the front page for so long????

 

Outside of AVEN, I still have people telling me to "check out the resources of AVEN'' (despite that I already was using them, which kind of shows lack of awareness from them on what's really going on here), it still proves that a lot of people are relying on this web-site to spread awareness and education in regards to Asexuality, there is still some chance that this web-site still could make some change. But after seeing that post on Reddit, that I shared here, I'm starting to get more sceptical on what this web-site and it's leadership are really trying to achieve.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mezzo Forte
13 hours ago, LeChat said:

@elisabeth_II Oh, before you go, have you met @Mezzo Forte, yet, on the forums? He's also a musician, and AVEN has a musician thread.

 

https://www.asexuality.org/en/topic/165518-asexual-musicians/?tab=comments#comment-1062621982

I have no idea what’s going on in this thread, but I love that I have this status as the resident musician, even during times when I’m not as active on AVEN. :P Always nice to meet fellow musicians too, @elisabeth_II :) 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LeChat

@Mezzo Forte Heh. I think your "musical" username, avatar, and the fact that you liked posting about music a lot helped make you memorable. :) I'm glad you're still around AVEN.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
HikaruBG
Quote

we'd just explain all that to the person and let them decide for themselves. Issues only arise when they're like "um no, you're totally wrong about how sexuals feel. They're aroused by attractive people, that's why they're sexual and I'm not". Or someone else jumps in and says that, because that happens too. That's when the conflict starts because sexual people are generally instantly offended and annoyed, and aces also get upset as many can feel strong aesthetic attraction so it seems like the person is implying they're not ace, and suddenly everyone is arguing!

What's more baffling that when you start question these people that if they don't find anyone sexually attractive, why do they go through the process of choosing someone to have sex with  (I tend to do that outside of AVEN because I'm well-aware that the forums will not allow me to do that here), they will reply with something like "just because I desire sex [with others], this doesn't mean that I find people sexually attractive specifically" (whatever that supposed to mean) or they will reply with the argument that "Action≠Attraction" or "Behaviour≠Orientation".

... Which is extremely hypocritical of them because they judge people on those exact principles - that all "allosexuals" will automatically want to bang anyone who they find slightly attractive or made them sexually aroused by their mere appearance.

 

So this apparently means these people have the full right to judge others on the basis of what they say and do, make a generalizing comment about them and pretend that they know better... but the moment someone starts questioning them, they are suddenly being personally attacked or invalidated.

 

This is my biggest issue with the Ace Community in general, not just the AVEN forums.

Edited by HikaruBG
replacing spoiler with quote, since I'm on PC now; same content
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Skullery Maid

Here's what I learned from watching LGBT go from very specific categories to being virtually anything... People gonna do what makes them feel good, definitions be damned. Just doesn't matter. If Kimothy gets the validation, attention, internal sense of self, personal pride, etc, from identifying as asexual, she's going to identify as asexual. You can argue til you're blue in the face that she's not asexual, but to her, she is. And that's all that's going to matter. 

 

If there are no social or emotional benefits to identifying that way, no one would unless absolutely necessary. People didn't call themselves queer in the 70's unless they were really fucking queer, because it caused more problems than it solved. Now it's cool to be queer, so everyone is queer. 

 

And holy hell did I fight it. I was livid for years. I still get pretty salty about hetero romantic aces calling themselves queer, to be honest. Doesn't sit well with me. But, I don't really talk about that much anymore because you know what? Doesn't matter what I think. It just doesn't. You guys aren't going to stop calling yourself queer, so I can either accept reality or fight for fun. What I can't do is realistically expect my personal opinions to influence someone else's sense of self. 

 

AVEN was once the only real asexual show in town. AVEN was able to control messaging and opinions. But like the LGBT community, asexuality is growing. Sources abound from a variety of places, routed in a variety of theories. They aren't all uniform, some are contradictory. I see the same thing in the LGBT community. I can pull up gay memes that say completely opposite things. Cuz you know what? Gay people are all different, so they have differing opinions and perspectives. Same thing is happening with asexuality. 

 

Apparently it's becoming cool to say you're asexual. Maybe it's because the youths feel disenfranchised from stereotypical gender and sexual roles. Maybe it's because more people simply feel comfortable coming out as such. Maybe younger generations like to take things and tweak them to make them their own. Who knows. But I will tell you this... popularity of an orientation is NEVER a bad thing. The more people who know about it, even if they're misinformed, the more normalized the concept will be. If society stops presuming sexuality from birth, all the better. Popularity can be annoying, but popularity also means acceptance. So, don't look a gift horse in the mouth. 

 

Education is hella important. But also, maybe you'll have to have conversations with the people you meet. Maybe if you date an asexual, you'll still have to talk about sexual compatibility. Oh well? We all do. Lord knows that if I go on a date with a random girl who identifies as queer, I know virtually nothing and will need to have some talks. It's fine. It's totally doable. Despite the fact that 99.9% of people are now queer, we still manage to make friends and find partners. It really, really didn't ruin being gay. It's just different

 

  • Like 12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Philip027
Quote

But I will tell you this... popularity of an orientation is NEVER a bad thing. The more people who know about it, even if they're misinformed, the more normalized the concept will be. If society stops presuming sexuality from birth, all the better. Popularity can be annoying, but popularity also means acceptance. So, don't look a gift horse in the mouth. 

Thing is, if you're being "accepted" because they think you're just essentially the same as "normal" sexual people, is that truly acceptance?  I don't feel like it is.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Skullery Maid
31 minutes ago, Philip027 said:

Thing is, if you're being "accepted" because they think you're just essentially the same as "normal" sexual people, is that truly acceptance?  I don't feel like it is.

Ah yes, this boogeyman. I've been hearing this cautionary tale for what feels like a thousand years, but to my knowledge that has never actually happened. People may have misinformation, but I've yet to hear of a situation where someone said "no, I'm asexual as in I don't want sex at all" and been told they aren't actually asexual.

 

Has this literally ever happened? 

 

Kimothy: I'm asexual

Jarothon: That's awesome, I'm cool with you being asexual. I've heard asexuals still want sex, just don't experience attraction.

Kimothy: Actually, I don't want sex at all.

Jarothon: Nevermind I'm no longer cool with you being asexual 

 

I know this is the big scary slippery slope fable that's tossed about, but unless, in reality, asexuals are being harassed by otherwise asexual-accepting folk because they REALLY don't want any sex, then that's a made up problem. I'm not interested in trying to fix problems that exist only in your head. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Philip027
Quote

but to my knowledge that has never actually happened.

It's sure easy to dismiss and write off experiences when you've never seen them firsthand, isn't it?

 

Quote

Has this literally ever happened? 

 

Kimothy: I'm asexual

Jarothon: That's awesome, I'm cool with you being asexual. I've heard asexuals still want sex, just don't experience attraction.

Kimothy: Actually, I don't want sex at all.

Jarothon: Nevermind I'm no longer cool with you being asexual

Yes, it has.  I don't have to look very far to find stories and accounts of essentially this happening.  In fact, one of my spouse's online ace friends more or less had this happen to them too.

 

You can keep on pretending like all this misinformation on asexuality isn't really a big deal and isn't really damaging the public perception of asexuality all you want, but there is unquestionably some degree of damage being done.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Chihiro

It is a real problem when society expects you to get into relationship, have sex, get married etc. Personally, I am being pressured into relationship by my family/friends etc since a long time. I don't use the word asexual, but I have told them I am not interested. And they don't believe its possible because medically there is nothing wrong with me. If I tell them the word 'asexual', I know they will stumble upon AVEN and will go 'oh, asexuals can have sex after all'. And there are many who are in similar situation like I am.

 

Its also a problem when an asexual ends up in a mixed relationship (accidentally).... their partner will assume rejection/manipulation instead of understanding that they have an genuine mismatch.

  • Like 4

Share this post


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

×
×
  • Create New...