Just came across this article. It's quite hurtful, but also expected I suppose?

[confusedbutsure]

you can read it here: http://www.pridesource.com/article.html?article=61431

The language of the article is quite derogatory towards asexuals, almost making it sound like we don't know what we're talking about and there's probably something wrong with us. The first two paras bring out the prejudice of the author, something asexuals have been quietly facing or fighting for ages and have only of late started making themselves more visible.

What's even more bizarre to me, is that the article is published on a website which advocates rights for LGBTs, who have themselves faced and fought prejudice, suppression, discrimination both social and legal for a long time.

Of course, I agree that there's freedom of expression, but I wonder if it extends to and protects, i don't know, bigotry?

The full text of the article is below:

A As In Zilch By Charles Alexander

There's been a bland addition to the soup. (Or is it stew?) The label on the can now reads LGBTA. The LGBT stands for the usual spicy noodles and meatballs; the A stands for asexual, as in "An asexual is someone who leaves the room and nobody gives a damn one way or the other."

Frankly, I've never encountered anyone who wouldn't dare or care for a diddle, but I once met a guy who said that until age 30 he hadn't wanked alone, with a partner, or in the happy-go-lucky company of a circle jerk. (He traveled exclusively in square, knee-jerk circles.)

I have no idea who tumbled him down the slippery slope of fun and games, and it wasn't me who escorted him hand-in-hand (or whatever) picking cherries along life's sunny rimrose path. But I do recall hearing about another 25-year-old bloke who had no libido, period. Zilch.

Turns out his problem was organic. He had a tumor pressing on that part of the brain responsible for getting it on and off. Once an operation was performed, a whole new world of libidinous adventure opened: courtship, marriage, children, divorce, alimony, child support, burnout, and overcompensatory total exhaustion . . . .

Poor guy. He shudda stayed in bed with his socks on.

According to a Brock University (St. Catherines, Ont.) study this newly outed asexual breed of homo-sapiens (emphasis on syllable three) makes up one percent of the population. Findings are detailed in The Journal of Sex Research (I have a lifetime subscription with coupon-clipping privileges) and New Scientist.

According to New Scientist, "The response level is close to the percentage of gay people . . . which is around three percent." (I don't mean to quibble but a two percent difference when it involves millions of people is quite a difference. But don't get me wrong. I'm not putting asexuals down. I just don't want one to hit on me.)

New Scientist admits the results are controversial and offers a caveat: "The closest we have come to understanding human asexuals comes from studies -- mostly surveys -- of people who report not having sex." (And do they cheat on their income taxes?)

Having not had sex myself lately, I suppose I qualify by default. It's reassuring to feel not wanted, er, wanted, er, whatever.

New Scientist coyly adds: "If asexuality is indeed a form of sexual orientation [Aside: Is starvation a form of eating?], perhaps it will not be long before the issue of 'A' Pride starts attracting more attention. Activists have already started campaigning to promote awareness and acceptance of asexuality." (P'town nursing homes.)

Lest anyone think yours truly made any of this up, let me hasten to assure you that the flat champagne has indeed already been uncorked. An Asexual Visibility Education Network exists, with online store. AVEN sells T-shirts: "Asexuality: it's not just for amoebas." (Earthworms or Michael J)

As expected, the fundies and Focus on the Family are having fits of righteous dysentery. Ex-Asexual Ministries (Amoebas for Jesus) are being activated in "strongholds" like Boston, Hell MI, and the Greater Zug Island Bar & Grill.

A4J Founder Rev. Pat Freeloader says, "We want to save these anemics who won't procreate or have the decency as good Americans to even try to have an abortion. The next thing you know they'll want to marry each other, form Straight-Asexual Alliances, and serve in the military and seduce our troops."

Asexuals of America, UNITE! (Divide and conquer.)

[alpacaterpillar]

This sounds like bigotry to me, mainly because of the endless little bracketed comments, which noticably express points of rhetoric and nothing rationally worth listening to. And I tried looking up 'Amoebas for Jesus' and it appears to be something completely irrelevant to asexuals. I think he made up the last three paragraphs.

They emptied the shitbucket into this guy's head, that's for sure.

On a side note, I'm not a big newsreader, but is it the case that the majority of "opinion" articles are just screaming rants about how x is so much better than y because of all the offensive puns I can stuff in here? Because the ones I've read indicate the authors' opinions are really not worth listening to...

[Sarcastic Bob]

If you think this is bad, you should read the comments on asexuality articles. Compared to them, this guy's a paragon of virtue.

To be honest I think articles like this are just a side effect of visibility. If there's any upside, at least it's something that's obviously bullshit rather than some wannabe psychologist calling it a mental disorder.

[SorryNotSorry]

When it becomes a hate crime to publish offensive stuff about asexuals, these nyah-nyah types will sing a different tune.

[Tea.EarlGrey.Hot]

"[Aside: Is starvation a form of eating?]"

Sigh. No, you turdball. But on that same terrible analogy, starvation is a DIET. Eating a LOT is a diet. Eating only veggies is a DIET.

THERE ARE A LOT OF DIFFERENT DIETS OK GOSH OURS JUST MAY INVOLVE DIFFERENT THINGS

This guy is a little too flippant for my tastes, blabbering on about what he doesn't understand. Maybe he's an objective writer on things he cares more about, I don't know -- but he's assuming the population of ace is so low (which is kind of is) that absolutely nobody will be offended by this and everyone will agree. He's forgetting not EVERYONE is on the same level knowledge-wise as him. He thinks everyone discovered this idea yesterday, like he has.

[Lydian]

"[Aside: Is starvation a form of eating?]"

Sigh. No, you turdball. But on that same terrible analogy, starvation is a DIET. Eating a LOT is a diet. Eating only veggies is a DIET.

THERE ARE A LOT OF DIFFERENT DIETS OK GOSH OURS JUST MAY INVOLVE DIFFERENT THINGS

This guy is a little too flippant for my tastes, blabbering on about what he doesn't understand. Maybe he's an objective writer on things he cares more about, I don't know -- but he's assuming the population of ace is so low (which is kind of is) that absolutely nobody will be offended by this and everyone will agree. He's forgetting not EVERYONE is on the same level knowledge-wise as him. He thinks everyone discovered this idea yesterday, like he has.

1% is a lot of people. Considering he realizes 2% difference is a lot, 1% is obviously not going to be just a few people nobody will ever hear from. What an ass. I'm less disappointed in him though and more in the site for putting this up to begin with. I guess experiencing bigotry first-hand isn't enough to stop some people from having a bigoted state of mind towards others. Lovely, isn't it?

[JDP]

What's even more bizarre to me, is that the article is published on a website which advocates rights for LGBTs, who have themselves faced and fought prejudice, suppression, discrimination both social and legal for a long time.

It is bizarre because there ought to be no inherent affinity among asexuals for lesbians, gays, bisexuals and transgendered folks, since the majority of them are sexual.

[Kellam]

The authour seems so enamoured of his own sexual adventures that anyone who deviates from his narrow life view is as good as non existant. I'm realy let down, I wanted to leave a comment but I thought the one there was so well worded. Quite frankly, I'm pissed. But I suppose increased visibility dose mean were gonna unearth the bigots out there too.

[mayve]

After reading the first sentence of that article I was all "NOPE."

I wouldn't waste my time with narrow-minded people like him.

[JDP]

The word bigotry doesn't seem apt.

From Wikipedia: Bigotry is the state of mind of a bigot: someone who, as a result of their prejudices, treats other people with hatred, contempt, or intolerance on the basis of a person's ethnicity, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, disability, socioeconomic status, or other characteristics

We're held in contempt, like atheists, but I'm not sure we're hated or not tolerated. They just don't understand us.

[confusedbutsure]

To be honest I think articles like this are just a side effect of visibility. If there's any upside, at least it's something that's obviously bullshit rather than some wannabe psychologist calling it a mental disorder.

Yes I suppose it's a side effect of visibility, which we have to deal with but not get bothered by. But I am pretty sure that once we become more visible some psychologist or sociologist will start ranting about it and how it's a mental disorder.

[LaMaestra]

Charles Alexander? More like Warren Idiot!

[Kellam]

I couldn't help myself and went back and left a comment. We need never be silent and sometimes I just can't hold my tounge! Perhaps a flurry of pro ace comments is our best response.

[5_♦♣]

After Googling his name and reading other articles he wrote for pride source, I'm convinced it's just satire.

[Arcovia]

After Googling his name and reading other articles he wrote pride source, I'm convinced it's just satire.

it's pretty badly written satire, if that's true.

[Guest]

Unfortunately there is also a high percentage of ignorant people in the world!

[R_1]

"[Aside: Is starvation a form of eating?]"

Hmm, some asexuals here argues that asexuality is not a sexual orientation just like atheism is not a religion (Technically, theism isn't a religion, but that's for another thread.). I suppose it depends on how you categorize it and why.

[alpacaterpillar]

The word bigotry doesn't seem apt.

From Wikipedia: Bigotry is the state of mind of a bigot: someone who, as a result of their prejudices, treats other people with hatred, contempt, or intolerance on the basis of a person's ethnicity, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, disability, socioeconomic status, or other characteristics

We're held in contempt, like atheists, but I'm not sure we're hated or not tolerated. They just don't understand us.

Wikipedia says "or", not "and", so assuming we are indeed held in contempt (he certainly doesn't take us very seriously) that is bigotry.

[Diceman]

It sounds to me he just has a snarky writing style. I would guess most of what he writes is done in a similar way. When he talks about sexual relationships he wrote "Once an operation was performed, a whole new world of libidinous adventure opened: courtship, marriage, children, divorce, alimony, child support." If you read this from a sexual perspective you could say that he's accusing sexuals of having relationships that aways end badly. I wouldn't take it to be an attack on anything.

[Guest Jigger77]

I read through that article a couple of times and the more I read it, the more confused I get. Some of it is so over the top that I'm almost convinced that it is satire. Granted, satire that seems to stab everyone in the jugular...

[Kellam]

It sounds to me he just has a snarky writing style. I would guess most of what he writes is done in a similar way. When he talks about sexual relationships he wrote "Once an operation was performed, a whole new world of libidinous adventure opened: courtship, marriage, children, divorce, alimony, child support." If you read this from a sexual perspective you could say that he's accusing sexuals of having relationships that aways end badly. I wouldn't take it to be an attack on anything.

There is a grain of truth in every joke.

[OtherWise]

It sounds to me he just has a snarky writing style. I would guess most of what he writes is done in a similar way. When he talks about sexual relationships he wrote "Once an operation was performed, a whole new world of libidinous adventure opened: courtship, marriage, children, divorce, alimony, child support." If you read this from a sexual perspective you could say that he's accusing sexuals of having relationships that aways end badly. I wouldn't take it to be an attack on anything.

There is a grain of truth in every joke.

Not necessarily. Sometimes there's just a bleak fart in the dark trying to pass itself off as a witty commentary.

[alpacaterpillar]

Even if he was poking a bit of fun at typical heterosexual relationships, I think it was more along the lines if "sure, we have problems, but these guys are f***ing losers for not even trying". If he portrayed normal relationships as great and awesome, it most likely would not have appealed to the average reader (considering the typical Western 'slightly-cynical' view of just about everything in everyday life).

[Guest]

Hmm, some asexuals here argues that asexuality is not a sexual orientation just like atheism is not a religion (Technically, theism isn't a religion, but that's for another thread.). I suppose it depends on how you categorize it and why.

Atheism is a religious orientation, not a religion. There's a difference between the two.

Anyway, I have seen two lovely comments on the really bad article that totally make up for it. Whatever this person wanted to do with the poorly written short text, they did cite AVEN, so it's still visibility they're doing. I have stopped caring about asexual bigotry looong ago :P

[Anhamirak]

The word bigotry doesn't seem apt.

From Wikipedia: Bigotry is the state of mind of a bigot: someone who, as a result of their prejudices, treats other people with hatred, contempt, or intolerance on the basis of a person's ethnicity, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, disability, socioeconomic status, or other characteristics

We're held in contempt, like atheists, but I'm not sure we're hated or not tolerated. They just don't understand us.

Two things. One, the word contempt is right there in the definition, so the word bigotry is, in fact, apt. Two, people of every religious orientation are held in contempt by some other people of other religious orientations; it's hardly an issue unique to atheists.

[swim2thesun]

I commented on the article...

... and to think, here I thought ride is supposed to encompass equity. Well this here is most definitely a sickening article. As and asexual spectrum identified person this article completely silences the many variable experiences that asexual people encounter. As many other people within the LG (I'd say LGBT but it often seems to want to leave the BT out, hell it often wants to leave the lesbian out too.) community all the hardships that they've gone through are proclaimed all over the media and yet every other story is ignored. I don't understand how someone who's seemingly done research into the topic of asexuality can still come up with such an unfunny and Asephobic (yes there is such a thing as asephobia) article. You and those that agree with you on this are extremely closed minded and shouldn't be the message bearers of the world. Try getting out of your little snow globe and expanding your world view.

[sinisterporpoise]

I think too many of you are looking for an excuse to be offended here. I think the article would have to make some sort of sense before I could take any sort of umbrage.

[SpadeofAces]

Meh.

I left a comment, but whether it even leaves a dink in this dude's brain...well, we may never know. And who cares? The sexual world can have whatever views of the asexual world it wants. Tis free speech after all. I am confident and content enough in my Acedentity that I just don't give a rip what sexuals think, bigots or no.

As I said earlier, meh.

[confusedbutsure]

Meh.

I left a comment, but whether it even leaves a dink in this dude's brain...well, we may never know. And who cares? The sexual world can have whatever views of the asexual world it wants. Tis free speech after all. I am confident and content enough in my Acedentity that I just don't give a rip what sexuals think, bigots or no.

As I said earlier, meh.

It is free speech isn't it. sigh. we should make use of our own free speech rights :)

[Froggie]

Being in a good mood this morning, I found the article quite entertaining. However, had I have been in a worse one, it probably would have left me crying or going fowl shooting, depending on what sort of worse mood I was in.

I can see that it could be humour, seeing as I laughed at it, but even so it is... Not good humour. And, it's only funny because he sounds so much like a moron - and you wouldn't be able to tell that that was the case if you didn't know what you were talking about in the first place.