In being a-spec am I considered queer?

[emNem]

I’ve asked questions on here before, but this one is a little different. 
 

I’ve come out to one friend of mine since discovering I’m aro (aromantic is my main label but I have a few subset labels). When I came out to him, it wasn’t very formal so I was expecting some jokes because that’s just the way him and I communicate. But the joke I got, the first thing that came out of his mouth was, “No!! I lost my token straight friend 🥺”.

I know no judgment or any negative connotation was meant by that, but I stated that I didn’t consider myself LGBT. I know the more recent acronym includes asexuals/aromantics (LGBTQIA+), and I find all genders attractive, but since I’m only sexually interested in men, and I don’t want any romantic relationship, I still consider myself a straight ally, and not part of the lgbt community. I wouldn’t date my same sex, and I wouldn’t have sex with my same sex. So by definition I’m not homosexual in any way. 
 

Am I putting down the rest of the

a-spec community that has already had trouble in being accepted in the queer community? 

(Like literally my friend is making me feel so bad about this💀)

[BigBassFox]

You decide what labels you are comfortable with, what matters is that you are happy with the way you identify.

 

If your friend has made you feel bad about this, I think explaining how this has made you feel will help the situation if they are a good friend.

[Sarah-Sylvia]

"Queer is an umbrella term for people who are not heterosexual or cisgender."

So technically yes. But I've seen aces that don't like to be considered queer, and was contention for people who are heteroromantic, depending on the environment.

[hewhomainsness]

29 minutes ago, emNem said:

Am I putting down the rest of the

a-spec community that has already had trouble in being accepted in the queer community? 

oh no, not at all. what you want to identify with is your choice, and it's not like someone saying they don't personally identify with something really harms anyone

plus some other a-spec people don't identify with the LGBT+ community either

[RileyA]

I think if attraction to other gender people, is a primary trait in your attraction, and you're cis, then indeed I don't see why you'd feel queer too. 

3 hours ago, emNem said:

Am I putting down the rest of the

a-spec community that has already had trouble in being accepted in the queer community? 

IMO, you're not putting them down, but the fact so many ace people identify more strongly as being het than they do queer is why not everyone agrees ace people are queer. So I do believe that more unity among ace people either accepting you're all queer/LGBTQA for being ace, or, you're just ace and being ace doesn't make you queer, would make ace acceptance more uniform. 

 

But at the moment, while there are ace people who clearly do not feel queer/LGBTQA and and make definitive statements that they are not queer, it's going to cause some discord. Because indeed,  if being a heteroromantic ace means that David isn't queer/LGBTQA, then nor is the other heteroromantic, Steve. They either both are, or both aren't. And there has to be consensus that they are, but perhaps one person has some internalized queerphobia that causes them to reject that fact.

 

Or just being ace means you're ace and that's a different thing from LGBTQA.

 

This is just my opinion. I believe it's the reason het ace/aro people struggle to be accepted in queer spaces. It's the lack of internal consensus. And yes, I do believe universal understanding could improve the sense of belonging.

 

 

[Monke Jimmy]

I'm heteroromantic and consider myself queer, and I haven't gotten any backlash about it yet. You do you. 

[Iam9man]

4 hours ago, emNem said:

Am I putting down the rest of the

a-spec community that has already had trouble in being accepted in the queer community?

Simply, no, you’re not. So don’t worry 😊

 

Some aces consider themselves LGBTQ+ and some don’t.

 

I personally consider myself LGBTQ+/queer due to being ace, but I know many others don’t. I also appreciate some queer people of other orientations don’t consider aces (or at least heteroromantic aces) to be queer, but I am personally yet to encounter any such thinking in the wild; I’ve been made welcome in every queer space I’ve attended (maybe playfully as the “token ace guy” mind you 🤣).

 

I’m sorry the conversation with your friend was upsetting.

Edited October 26, 2022 by Iam9man

[WhiteCatandcherries]

3 hours ago, RileyA said:

So I do believe that more unity among ace people either accepting you're all queer/LGBTQA for being ace, or, you're just ace and being ace doesn't make you queer, would make ace acceptance more uniform. 

I agree you might have a point, but I think it isn't so simple to do in practice. I personally feel that my aceness makes me queer (regardless of my also queer romantic orientation), because it is a sexual orientation and way of experiencing sexuality that is outside the norm of society/ not heterosexual, but some ace people do not identify with the label and community and that's their right to do so. I don't feel I can just assign them a label they do not identify with. The same way they can't tell me that my aceness doesn't make me queer.

[RileyA]

43 minutes ago, WhiteCatandcherries said:

I agree you might have a point, but I think it isn't so simple to do in practice. I personally feel that my aceness makes me queer (regardless of my also queer romantic orientation), because it is a sexual orientation and way of experiencing sexuality that is outside the norm of society/ not heterosexual, but some ace people do not identify with the label and community and that's their right to do so. I don't feel I can just assign them a label they do not identify with. The same way they can't tell me that my aceness doesn't make me queer.

 

You see, this is the thing, this "community" thing. Let's use whiteness as an example. The only "white communities" that I know of DO NOT share my values. But I'm still white. I can't identify as anything else as white. There are several ways I am white. I can't distance myself from whiteness, even if I distance myself from those "white communities". 

 

But we know who those guys are, and what they stand for, and it's pretty abhorrent. I don't know of many "things" that categorize their membership by "whiteness" that has "good stuff" at the core of its goals.

 

So I guess I don't see how the LGBTQ+ community is quite the same as those "white communities" and why someone would want to distance themselves so much despite fitting the bill.

 

I don't think being LGBTQ is that different from whiteness in the sense that your demographic either is, or isn't. "Queer" has a different history as a label, but generally being part of the group of people who aren't cis and/or het, I think is pretty clear cut. You either are or you're not. Some people might want to use GSM or one of those labels, and I don't mind that, but part of the umbrella of people who include trans women, gay men, non binary folks, an acknowledgement of that.

 

ETA: I use words like queer and LGBTQ+ interchangeably to refer to this umbrella group. 

[WhiteCatandcherries]

4 hours ago, RileyA said:

 

You see, this is the thing, this "community" thing. Let's use whiteness as an example. The only "white communities" that I know of DO NOT share my values. But I'm still white. I can't identify as anything else as white. There are several ways I am white. I can't distance myself from whiteness, even if I distance myself from those "white communities". 

 

But we know who those guys are, and what they stand for, and it's pretty abhorrent. I don't know of many "things" that categorize their membership by "whiteness" that has "good stuff" at the core of its goals.

 

So I guess I don't see how the LGBTQ+ community is quite the same as those "white communities" and why someone would want to distance themselves so much despite fitting the bill.

 

I don't think being LGBTQ is that different from whiteness in the sense that your demographic either is, or isn't. "Queer" has a different history as a label, but generally being part of the group of people who aren't cis and/or het, I think is pretty clear cut. You either are or you're not. Some people might want to use GSM or one of those labels, and I don't mind that, but part of the umbrella of people who include trans women, gay men, non binary folks, an acknowledgement of that.

 

ETA: I use words like queer and LGBTQ+ interchangeably to refer to this umbrella group. 

I guess I can see your point. It's just that white is a biological fact, where sexuality and gender is something you identify with. Like if a heteroromantic ace feels straight - if they feel that that fits their identify and experience best - who am I to come and tell them that they are not? For me ace is undoubtedly a queer thing. But if others feel described by a label in oppositition to that, I don't feel like I can just tell them they are wrong, since romantic and sexual identity is something that comes from you identifying with it / feeling it describes your experience.

[RileyA]

26 minutes ago, WhiteCatandcherries said:

Like if a heteroromantic ace feels straight -

Well the thing that has to have some sort of consensus is exactly this: does an atypical romantic and or asexual label mean you're under that umbrella? 

 

Like just the fact that you don't experience sexual and/or romantic attraction, or you experience it in ways one might describe as "grey" or "demi", does that mean you're under the umbrella?

 

For me that is a yes or no question, but one best answered by the people in the groups concerned. Whatever the answer is, it would require some ingroup self moderating to achieve that consensus. Gatekeeping basically. Eg if the answer is yes, then someone ace denying that they are under the umbrella would be treated as an oxymoron. Or at least a failure to understand terms.

[Iam9man]

21 minutes ago, RileyA said:

it would require some ingroup self moderating to achieve that consensus. Gatekeeping basically

Tend to disagree philosophically that gatekeeping identities is a good thing, but even from a purely practical perspective this is very unlikely to occur. Even the gay & lesbian communities, which have arguably been part of the LGBT+ community (in its modern, Pride/Visibility, sense) the longest don’t have some universal agreed precise criteria for who is in and out.

[RileyA]

23 minutes ago, Iam9man said:

Tend to disagree philosophically that gatekeeping identities is a good thing, but even from a purely practical perspective this is very unlikely to occur. Even the gay & lesbian communities, which have arguably been part of the LGBT+ community (in its modern, Pride/Visibility, sense) the longest don’t have some universal agreed precise criteria for who is in and out.

There is agreement that homosexual attraction makes you under the umbrella, even if some other thing means you're not "gay" or "lesbian".

 

Ace people don't have a consensus on whether they're under the umbrella.

[The French Unicorn]

As long as you are not saying that because you don't feel queer or LGBT+, other aros and aces shouldn't, you are not hurting anyone.

No once can force you to identify with a label if you don't want to.

[nanogretchen4]

"Queer" is a reclaimed slur, and if you look at dictionary entries from the period when it was used as a slur it was a synonym for "homosexual". So who has a clear right to reclaim the slur? Homosexuals. That could reasonably be extended to bisexuals and pansexuals since the homophobes who used it as a slur only cared about the homo aspect of their sexuality. Also homoromantic aces and homo oriented aroaces, because they homophobes did not know who was actually having sex with their partners. These days the queer label is useful for people whose orientation cannot be adequately labeled as homosexual or heterosexual since either they are nonbinary or they are attracted to nonbinary people. Also, when queer was a slur homophobes did not know the difference between orientation and gender and half the time they were calling people queer because they were gender nonconforming in some way. So trans and genderqueer people can also reclaim the label.

 

If someone is not attracted to their own sex or gender and they are not trans or nonbinary, I am not convinced that they are entitled to reclaim a slur that would never have been used against them back when people did not want to be called queer. 

[Kroete]

I am a queer person who is aro-ace. Let me share some thoughts about the word "queer".

 

The thing about the word "queer" is that it means everything and nothing. Ok, that's not really true, but my point is there is no real unified definition, and there probably never will be, and that's kind of the whole point.

However, I can say that queer is generally used in the context of sexuality, romance, gender, sex, and the like, with regard to being different than the norm somehow. How exactly, that is kept intentionally open.

This vagueness of the word "queer" is perhaps also its biggest strength. Because it is open to new uses. Queerness never has a "final" or "official" definition, because if it did, sooner or later it will all fall apart and it'll be missing the point. It is thanks to this open definition that aces and aros and aspec people are perfectly capable of identifying as queer.

 

Also, the word "queer" can always be used on top of other identities, you don't have to give up other words for choosing queer.

 

It is because of this I personally consider myself queer because I consider me being aro-ace as queer, because I consider being aro-ace in general as going against "the norm", or at least the common expectation. It is therefore inherently queer in my eyes. I am queer because I am aro-ace. If I were "only" aro, I would be queer. If I were "only" ace, I would be queer. On the day I realzied I was ace, I instantly realized that means I had to be queer. Accepting myself as queer was the easiest thing to me (once I finally accepted myself as ace). A big reason is that I understood I am not in the slightest heterosexual, I never even had sex, not even romance, I don't want it, and the thought of it kind of freaks me out. So this is a very clear and obvious "violation" of heteronormativity. Thus, queer.

 

At least this is true under MY definition of queerness, but other people's definition of course differs and I think it's important to respect that, as long you're not dealing with some obvious bad-faith trolling.

 

A HUGE false assumption about queer people is that you can not be both straight and queer at the same time. Although queerness is vague, I can say with absolute certainty that persons can be straight and queer. And many such people do happily exist! Think about this:

First of all, what does straight mean? Does it mean heterosexual? Or heteroromantic? Or both at the same time? Are you still straight if you are only heterosexual, but not heteroromantic, or vice-versa? That's where the problems begin, it depends a lot on the definition of "straight". What if you are heterosexual and panromantic? To argue that a panromantic person can never be queer is … just wrong. It goes against everything what this concept is about.

And what if you're both heterosexual and heteroromantic, but also trans? I highly doubt the trans community would be happy if you tell them straight trans people can never be queer. Same goes for intersex, obviously.

This is probably the biggest myth, that "queer" and "straight" are opposites of each other, while the truth is more complicated.

 

Another thing that often pains me to see is that people struggle with the question of whether their identity makes them "queer enough". People might still "fit in" at least in *some* of the "boxes" that society has set up for us. In my case, I am cisgender and endo (not intersex). So I am "conforming" to at least *some* degree. But it absolutely does not make sense to me to not consider myself as not queer because I am cis. I'm still aro-ace.

There are some people who believe if you are non-conforming in only one aspect (like romantic orientation), that disqualifies you from queerness. That to be queer, you either have to be VERY queer, or you're not queer at all. I fully disagree. It's not as if like you first have to collect enough queer points to become a recognized card-carrying queer person. It doesn't work like that!

 

And to be clear, you are putting down nobody no matter if you choose for or against calling yourself queer. That's your own thing. Anyone who tells you you're not allowed to call yourself queer because you're aspec or aro is completely wrong and has a bigoted view. This kind of exclusionism is unhealthy and I completely reject it. Aspec and aro people need to be 100% able to identify as queer and/or as part of the LGBTQ+ community, if they want to. There are similar experiences, like the need to explain yourself, most people being completely clueless about what your identity even is, the whole heteronormativity thing, not being represented in media, and so on.

 

If you still think you're not queer, that's also perfectly OK. My goal is not to "convince" you're queer. My goal is to explain. There are people who might be aspec but still feel more strongly connected to heterosexuality/-romanticism than anything else. The gray zone is a thing, after all. So I totally get it when people don't *really* feel comfortable with the label of queerness. Being "kinda straight" is a real thing, and is often forgotten. Sexuality, romance, those things don't have strict boundaries after all.

 

Long story short, the word "queer" boils down to an identity that you may or may not embrace and what exactly it means differs on the individual. There is no strict definition, and that exactly is the whole point. Since the definition is so open, nobody but you can tell you whether you are queer or not.

 

I hope this clears up some things up about queerness.

[Sister Mercurial]

Depends on the definition of queer used by the person you're talking to.  Many in the community who self-describe as queer would consider what you describe as falling under that epithet.  However, in the general public at large, queer has historically meant homosexual, so if you call yourself such when speaking to them, you are likely to be met with confusion.  

[AstrophelDragon]

On 10/26/2022 at 6:19 AM, RileyA said:

You see, this is the thing, this "community" thing. Let's use whiteness as an example. The only "white communities" that I know of DO NOT share my values. But I'm still white. I can't identify as anything else as white. There are several ways I am white. I can't distance myself from whiteness, even if I distance myself from those "white communities". 

 

But we know who those guys are, and what they stand for, and it's pretty abhorrent. I don't know of many "things" that categorize their membership by "whiteness" that has "good stuff" at the core of its goals.

 

On 10/26/2022 at 6:36 AM, WhiteCatandcherries said:

It's just that white is a biological fact, where sexuality and gender is something you identify with.

I think based off of this, whether or not ace is technically defined as queer, or aro is technically defined as queer, it doesn't really matter. You being white doesn't mean you go join "white communities," and in a similar way, someone being aro or ace (or anything for that matter) doesn't mean they have to go join queer communities. It just matters on how that individual feels about it. If an aro or ace individual feels solidarity with the larger queer community, then by all means, let them identify as such. But if they don't feel like it fits them, and they'd rather live life as a cis, mostly-straight person, then they can. Kind of just depends on circumstances I think, and how they feel their life has been affected by it

[Kroete]

Well, if I had to explain my identity to a complete stranger, I would not just say the word "queer" because I am aware of the possible confusion.

 

However, I also know there are many queers who only use that word, probably because they just don't want to go into the nitty-gritty details and time is valuable, which is understandable.

 

As you said, depends on person.

[Cronis]

On 10/25/2022 at 10:04 PM, emNem said:

I’ve asked questions on here before, but this one is a little different. 
 

I’ve come out to one friend of mine since discovering I’m aro (aromantic is my main label but I have a few subset labels). When I came out to him, it wasn’t very formal so I was expecting some jokes because that’s just the way him and I communicate. But the joke I got, the first thing that came out of his mouth was, “No!! I lost my token straight friend 🥺”.

I know no judgment or any negative connotation was meant by that, but I stated that I didn’t consider myself LGBT. I know the more recent acronym includes asexuals/aromantics (LGBTQIA+), and I find all genders attractive, but since I’m only sexually interested in men, and I don’t want any romantic relationship, I still consider myself a straight ally, and not part of the lgbt community. I wouldn’t date my same sex, and I would have sex with my same sex. So by definition I’m not homosexual in any way. 
 

Am I putting down the rest of the

a-spec community that has already had trouble in being accepted in the queer community? 

(Like literally my friend is making me feel so bad about this💀)

To be queer means you're not cisgender and heterosexual, by being aromantic, that's part of the LGBTQIA community, the A umbrellas aromantic, asexual, and maybe some others but the point is. Aromantic IS part of the lgbt community :))

and if you feel bad, i'd explain it to your friend, and from what you said he sounds like a good one so i'm sure he'll understand :]

i hope this helps you in some way