Jump to content

"Are Aces LGBTQIA+?" Masterpost


LeChat
Message added by LeChat,

Hi, everyone.

 

Let's all, please, remember to be welcoming to new members of all ages and nationalities (e.g. English isn't some members' first language) and treat them with kindness and respect.

 

They're new and might be unfamiliar with asexuality, demisexuality, etc., still trying to learn about these things, and/or about how to use the site, its features, etc.

 

Please, remember the TOS and refrain from personal insults/accusations, like troll calling, sock accounts, etc.

 

Thank you.

 

LeChat,

Welcome Lounge, Announcements, and Alternate Language moderator

Recommended Posts

SilenceRadio
2 hours ago, RileyA said:
11 hours ago, SilenceRadio said:

Yes, that means you're assumed to be something you aren't, and that if you were honest about what you were, you'd get backlash.

 

We can talk about how people in different-gender relationships are much less vulnerable to overt anti-gay prejudice without necessarily arguing that they're privileged.

No, we never get backlash from queer people.

I was talking about (cis) straight people.

 

2 hours ago, RileyA said:

hetero and straight have its own differences

  • straight is a cis man loving a cis woman and vice versa [which also includes trans men loving trans women and vice versa] anyone who is in the gender binary
  • hetero is gender loving a different gender than its own which would be homosexuality

if im a hetero agender person then i develop attraction to anyone other than fellow agenders. if im a hetero enby then i develop attraction to anyone other than fellow enbys. heteros can still be queer

A closeted single gay/bi person can "appear" straight, but that doesn't mean they get straight privilege. Privilege is not simply appearance. Sure, that single gay/bi person is less vulnerable, but I wouldn't say that they're as privileged as a straight person. And I'm not necessarily refuting that you should navigate queer spaces any other way.

 

2 hours ago, RileyA said:

someone who uses the prefix het isn't LGBTQ. They are het. Het and straight. How much sex they want is irrelevant.

Straight trans people aren't part of the community, then?

 

1 hour ago, sevan said:

but aint some already proved my point? that consensus doesnt even exist in the lgbtq community itself because of this

It's not even one whole "LGBTQ" community. It's multiple, separate ones. You can't reach consensus on all of them.

 

1 hour ago, sevan said:

hetero and straight have its own differences

  • straight is a cis man loving a cis woman and vice versa [which also includes trans men loving trans women and vice versa] anyone who is in the gender binary
  • hetero is gender loving a different gender than its own which would be homosexuality

if im a hetero agender person then i develop attraction to anyone other than fellow agenders. if im a hetero enby then i develop attraction to anyone other than fellow enbys. heteros can still be queer

Arguably, since "queer" can apply to trans people, straight trans people can be queer in spite of being straight... Of course, "queer" tends to simply mean "same-gender-attracted" most of the time, which is why you often see people say "queer and trans", "queer and ace"... in practice, I don't see the term used in a very inclusive manner. Which I understand, but... that makes the common idea that it's all inclusive a bit of a failed promise in my eyes... but that's a whole other tangent.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, SilenceRadio said:

Arguably, since "queer" can apply to trans people, straight trans people can be queer in spite of being straight... Of course, "queer" tends to simply mean "same-gender-attracted" most of the time, which is why you often see people say "queer and trans", "queer and ace"... in practice, I don't see the term used in a very inclusive manner. Which I understand, but... that makes the common idea that it's all inclusive a bit of a failed promise in my eyes... but that's a whole other tangent.

i do see queer as a general term that anyone in the lgbtq community can identify as instead of it just being same gender attraction or gender nonconforming so thats why i will regard it so generally 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, RileyA said:

But general acknowledgement of your demographic's place in the former has to be some sort of price of admission. If a large number of your demographic are very apprehensive about being associated with "dirty gays" or "transpeople", then your groups' wider acceptance is always going to be tentative. 

How awkward would it be if there was a significant subculture of misogyny among gay men, or TERFs that were lesbians, or, as @sevan mentioned, an issue of bi erasure in gay and lesbian communities. I guess then only pan trans people would be truly LGBTQ.

 

I dunno, on a personal level, I don’t really have a horse in this race, in the sense that my crippling anxiety and self-disgust pretty much rule out any kind of participation in wider LGBTQ circles. But at the same time, from my perspective, I see the LGBTQ community as a coalition of different smaller communities united by their flouting of cisheteronormative convention. From that perspective, I think asexuals have a place. 
 

Frankly, just by not being interested in women or wanting to discuss their bodies, I grew up excluded from a lot of cishet culture anyway. And while I may not have ever wanted to date a man, I was still targeted by slurs and physical abuse as I grew up, and I continue to struggle to reconcile my identity with daily life in the world. I’m not here to play oppression Olympics, but I feel like a lot of ace people have similar experiences. 
 

I think, ideally, we wouldn’t have all these little subgroupings and divisions. People would be people and we’d all understand that each person can love who they love (or not) for whatever reasons and to whatever degree, and that no specific configuration of those desires is any more valid than any other. Unfortunately, we don’t live in that world, we live under cisheteronormativity. That being the case, I think it behooves those of us who buck those conventions to stick together, with the ultimate goal of normalizing non-cishet existence.

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
Sarah-Sylvia

@RileyAWhat you're advocating for just doesn't make sense. What you're essentially saying is that if a couple is straight or looks straight then they shouldn't be showing affection to each other in lgbtq spaces, while others who look it can, it's ridiculous. Would you say it's then totally fine for someone 'queerer' to make out on the dance floor like you mentioned instead? Come on.

 

One big issue I think there is here is that you're comparing people's queerness and saying someone is or isn't queer enough to be themselves and share affection at these events. Going by you and the article you shared, a straight trans couple (or one of them being trans) would be judged for doing that.

Also, you do know that alot of trans people don't pass and their relationship can be judged in society right? (Are you then going to judge based on how they look?)

 

But even going there is BS, because you're still going around comparing 'privilege' and judging people for how queer they look or not, and saying hey you have to be or look queer enough to be yourself in those spaces. I hope you realize this isn't ok. Even if you wouldn't word it like I put it, it stiill amounts to that. People need to be able to be themselves, and if people go around judging how queer people are, .. it's not something that should be encouraged as ok. Cuz there's not just trans people, there's also different ways to be queer. I personally think lgbtq spaces need to be inclusive enough if the goal is to help people in all sorts of situation feel like they belong.

 

 

And to go back on topic, I think Asexual people should ideally feel included and like they belong too. If someone ace doesn't like how much focus there is on sexuality though, I think there's good enough reason for asexuality-centered groups.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Queerdo

We've had to ask disruptive people to leave multiple times. What we don't do is say, "since this person is bi it's a bi problem, and a problem of bi people unless they prove otherwise." But aside from parents, family, and members of allied groups, straight people rarely show up.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Sarah-Sylvia

I wonder how many hetero-romantic aces have had not-fun experiences in some lgbtq groups.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
SilenceRadio
5 minutes ago, Sarah-Sylvia said:

I wonder how many hetero-romantic aces have had not-fun experiences in some lgbtq groups.

Apparently, aces tend to be more accepted in offline groups in general, so it depends. Not that many of them seek those in the first place.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm ace and I am not LGBTQIA, it's ok to say this. But hang on there, even though I am not LGBTQIA, I do have LGBTQIA friends and that's where it ends, boundaries, very platonic.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The French Unicorn
33 minutes ago, Sarah-Sylvia said:

I wonder how many hetero-romantic aces have had not-fun experiences in some lgbtq groups.

From what I heard most of them seem to not be very interested in joining anyway. But I guess those who try must have not been welcomed.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Sarah-Sylvia
14 minutes ago, Frenchace said:

From what I heard most of them seem to not be very interested in joining anyway. But I guess those who try must have not been welcomed.

From the little I did see around including in this thread, seems that might have happened at times, but I don't see why a group would do things that are unwelcoming to someone ace. Just like if someone trans is hetero. The groups I've seen were nice and also welcoming, to allies too, so I'd like to think there's a lot that can be great for anyone including aces, but I also don't know how things are or have been outside of those groups.

Am curious.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/25/2022 at 5:48 AM, SilenceRadio said:

Straight trans people aren't part of the community, then?

You're right. I meant a cis person. Sorry.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/25/2022 at 9:04 AM, Epic Tetus said:

How awkward would it be if there was a significant subculture of misogyny among gay men, or TERFs that were lesbians,

How does this relate to the fact that many ace people don't want anything to do with a queer/LGBTQ label?

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
SilenceRadio
Just now, RileyA said:

How does this relate to the fact that many ace people don't want anything to do with a queer/LGBTQ label?

It has to do with the fact that yes, some aces can be antigay and/or hold transmisic beliefs, but that it is the same in other demographics and therefore not a reason to exclude them.

 

A couple of bi/trans/gay people don't want to consider themselves part of "the community". That doesn't change the fact that other bi/trans/gay people who are interested can consider themselves a part of it.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Sarah-Sylvia said:

@RileyAWhat you're advocating for just doesn't make sense. What you're essentially saying is that if a couple is straight or looks straight then they shouldn't be showing affection to each other in lgbtq spaces, while others who look it can, it's ridiculous. Would you say it's then totally fine for someone 'queerer' to make out on the dance floor like you mentioned instead? Come on.

 

One big issue I think there is here is that you're comparing people's queerness and saying someone is or isn't queer enough to be themselves and share affection at these events. Going by you and the article you shared, a straight trans couple (or one of them being trans) would be judged for doing that.

Also, you do know that alot of trans people don't pass and their relationship can be judged in society right? (Are you then going to judge based on how they look?)

 

But even going there is BS, because you're still going around comparing 'privilege' and judging people for how queer they look or not, and saying hey you have to be or look queer enough to be yourself in those spaces. I hope you realize this isn't ok. Even if you wouldn't word it like I put it, it stiill amounts to that. People need to be able to be themselves, and if people go around judging how queer people are, .. it's not something that should be encouraged as ok. Cuz there's not just trans people, there's also different ways to be queer. I personally think lgbtq spaces need to be inclusive enough if the goal is to help people in all sorts of situation feel like they belong.

 

 

And to go back on topic, I think Asexual people should ideally feel included and like they belong too. If someone ace doesn't like how much focus there is on sexuality though, I think there's good enough reason for asexuality-centered groups.

The reality is that trans people don't have this issue like cis bi people do because they're either visibly queer or aware enough of passing privilege to take certain steps to sustain a safe space for everyone. 

 

It can be as simple as waiting a but until people know you and what you're about before you take those actions. 

 

I'm aware and accountable enough for my privilege to not have an issue doing that for an evening. Asking me to do that for life would be different. But for an evening, I can center my queer identity and relationships. It shouldn't be a big deal. Really.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, SilenceRadio said:

It has to do with the fact that yes, some aces can be antigay and/or hold transmisic beliefs, but that it is the same in other demographics and therefore not a reason to exclude them.

 

A couple of bi/trans/gay people don't want to consider themselves part of "the community". That doesn't change the fact that other bi/trans/gay people who are interested can consider themselves a part of it.

But why would you have people who are cis, any attraction they have is not same gendered (and usually only cis people too) and homo- and/or transphobic in a place with these marginalized demographics. Why would you make it open to them? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Sarah-Sylvia
4 minutes ago, RileyA said:

The reality is that trans people don't have this issue like cis bi people do because they're either visibly queer or aware enough of passing privilege to take certain steps to sustain a safe space for everyone. 

 

It can be as simple as waiting a but until people know you and what you're about before you take those actions. 

 

I'm aware and accountable enough for my privilege to not have an issue doing that for an evening. Asking me to do that for life would be different. But for an evening, I can center my queer identity and relationships. It shouldn't be a big deal. Really.

Ok, but it's not just you. others might feel very differently from you.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Sarah-Sylvia said:

Ok, but it's not just you. others might feel very differently from you.

 

 

I think there's something amiss if it causes you great hardship not to perform heterosexuality in a queer space for a few hours.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/24/2022 at 10:26 AM, RileyA said:

If a large number of your demographic are very apprehensive about being associated with "dirty gays" or "transpeople", then your groups' wider acceptance is always going to be tentative. 

 

On 7/25/2022 at 9:04 AM, Epic Tetus said:

How awkward would it be if there was a significant subculture of misogyny among gay men, or TERFs that were lesbians,

 

7 minutes ago, RileyA said:

How does this relate to the fact that many ace people don't want anything to do with a queer/LGBTQ label?

Well, it was a response to the part of your post that you quoted. See above.

 

19 minutes ago, RileyA said:

But why would you have people who are cis, any attraction they have is not same gendered (and usually only cis people too) and homo- and/or transphobic in a place with these marginalized demographics. Why would you make it open to them? 

Well, I doubt that anyone, regardless of gender or orientation, who is homo/transphobic would be particularly welcome in LGBTQ spaces. Just because you include aces doesn’t mean you have to accept any and all abuse from them, just like if a gay or trans member of the community was being abusive towards others, they would likely stop being welcomed.

 

As for your other stipulation, same-gender attraction, I think that is a less relevant point than the underlying reason why same gender attraction is a problem: it violates cisheteronormativity.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Sarah-Sylvia
Just now, RileyA said:

 

 

I think there's something amiss if it causes you great hardship not to perform heterosexuality in a queer space for a few hours.

I can say the same the other way for if you feel you wanna impose on others like that, including just because they're hetero or seemingly in a hetero relationship to your eyes.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Epic Tetus said:

Just because you include aces doesn’t mean you have to accept any and all abuse from them,

 

 

Before I stopped working, I worked in a college. They had a LGBTQ student union of sorts. 2 ace people who only dated other het cis people were on that board. When I left, they were trying to make ALL queer events open to allies so they could bring their boyfriends and other cishet friends to the "parties". So no exclusive queer events at all. They were in the process of reminding everyone that being ace gives you a say in this. 

 

Thankfully covid happened....

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Sarah-Sylvia said:

I can say the same the other way for if you feel you wanna impose on others like that, including just because they're hetero or seemingly in a hetero relationship to your eyes.

 

A cis man and woman in a relationship is always a heterosexual relationship. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Sarah-Sylvia
10 minutes ago, RileyA said:

 

A cis man and woman in a relationship is always a heterosexual relationship. 

Thanks for the lesson xD

Whether or not that relationship is het, it can still be queer people.

 

The topic's gone long enough for me. I feel it's time to stop talking on it. You know where I stand, that I don't think it's ok to discriminate like you were saying.

 

 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 months later...
On 8/3/2018 at 12:24 AM, Guest said:

ace ppl should totally be accepted in LGBT tho, the extended acronym is LGBTTQQIAAP, the first A standing for Ace. #solidarity

Yes, but asexuality it is not about sex at all

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

Yes, but asexuality it is not about sex at all

This is a silly statement.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Eliigh said:

will you argue with title "non-sexual" at the word "asexual"?

I don't understand what this question is asking.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Snao Zedong said:

I don't understand what this question is asking.

First of all, word asexual have the same meaning as non-sexual. Why are you thinking that this is silly statement?

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

First of all, word asexual have the same meaning as non-sexual. Why are you thinking that this is silly statement?

They are generally going to be used in different contexts. Some asexual people might also feel that non-sexual describes them (and I know some people even prefer it due to what they perceive as skewed usages of "asexual" but that is a very different can of worms) but some may not - perhaps because they have a libido that leads them to masturbate and feel sexual pleasure, perhaps because they are sex-favourable and willing to compromise with a partner who desires them, or perhaps because they're curious themselves and wish to engage in sexual activity to see what the big deal about it is.

 

But your initial statement of "asexuality is not about sex at all is" a) unrelated to the post you quoted, which is many years old and from an account that since has been deleted (but I suppose that's a separate issue) and b) implying that sexual orientation has nothing to do with sex - having sex, wanting sex, etc. Most people would strongly disagree with that. I have heard this argument either come from people who want to continue to pathologize asexuals who don't have sex (due to a very narrow interpretation of "sexual attraction" that attempts to completely divorce it from the motivation to pursue sexual activity) or from people of other sexual orientations who are morally opposed to everyone having sex outside of procreative situations, to argue that people who are of a minority orientation must still practice the very restrictive sexual activities that are prescribed by moral authorities (usually churches) as acceptable. I know nothing about you and so I can't presume if either of these categories of reasoning apply to you, but I decided on a whim that it would be simple enough to divert the off-topic direction in which your post may have steered this thread. Sexual orientation, including asexuality, is absolutely relevant to the sexual activity one would be inclined to pursue; not everyone interprets the same or takes the same actions, but to intrusively "correct" someone (who didn't even mention sex at all in the post) on a misguided matter of petty pedantry does not seem to be a good-faith attempt at preventing overly strict categorizations. Your follow-up response focusing on asexual vs. non-sexual is a nonsequitur; thus I am responding with some excessively decorative prose to ensure this dialogue continues as a lark for my own enjoyment. 

 

Hope this helps!

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Asexuality has 'sexuality' in its name, so sure seems like it's about sexuality :P

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Sarah-Sylvia said:

Asexuality has 'sexuality' in its name, so sure seems like it's about sexuality :P

There could be deeper discussions about the incompleteness of different concepts we have of "sexuality" as a very rich topic, especially since "orientation" is a recent concept that was designed to encapsulate it in a very restrictive way. But I don't think that this is the place for that, nor was the comment really framed that way.

 

I mean, Foucault's History of Sexuality series of texts covers the topic largely outside the notion of "orientation" and is certainly a different approach to the matter than what we generally take on AVEN or in LGBTQIA+ discourse as a whole. If such a discussion were to unfold (in a different thread than this) I would have to brush up on those texts, which means reading sentences that sometimes last longer than a single page. My life is too busy right now to be up to that challenge, unfortunately. :P

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...