I just really like that as a complete sentence.
I just really like that as a complete sentence.
consider: it’s ok for asexuals and aromantics to create terms that help them describe their experiences and how they experience their attraction. it also costs zero (0) dollars to respect that instead of making fun of them just because you don’t understand.
you can be ace-spec and still want sex?
NOw You KNOOOOW…..
saying you’re asexual isn’t cringy
saying you’re aromantic isn’t cringy
saying you’re demi/gray isn’t cringy
saying you’re sex repulsed isn’t cringy
saying you’re sex positive/neutral isn’t cringy
A-spec identities aren’t cringy
but having a blog dedicated to bullying people for their sexual/romantic orientation?
now That’s cringy
💜🖤 aces who do want to have sex are still 100% ace 💜🖤
<< previous page ♠
the platform for asexual awareness for so long has been to promote that not wanting to have sex doesn’t make you broken, or less human. that is absolutely true and a vital message for all society! unfortunately, while important, this message resulted in asexuality being reduced to never wanting or enjoying sex; which is othering to the many aces who do
I’ve received plenty of ignorant messages telling me I’m somehow not ace because I’m dating and have sex, but surprise- I still don’t find anyone sexually attractive so I’m still ace! I’ve also had messages from people asking me if they’re ace if they “don’t hate sex”. you are, and that’s why these pages are so very very necessary!
all asexuality is completely valid, whether you don’t ever want to have sex or if you actively seek it out!
thank you for all your support this week pals, it’s meant a lot to me so far! let’s keep it going and spread that asexual awareness and ace positivity this asexual awareness week. two days left, I hope to see you tomorrow!
pls give me 1(one) reason aces have ever been oppressed, and 1(one) example of aces being a part of lgbt history(before 2004 at least) and then maybe i’ll consider the idea that aces belong in the lgbt community lol
Proof of the existence of asexuals in LGBT+ communities before 2000:
The Golden Orchid association (1644-1949) - a group of women in China that included lesbians, bisexuals, and “women who wanted to avoid both marriage options, and any romantic or sexual partnership” that today we would call asexual or aromantic.
A book published in 1999 supports the previous link of someone’s personal experience, and notes that asexuals could be considered part of Kinsey’s “Group 3″ (the bisexuals) because they were “about equally homosexual and heterosexual” and “have no strong preferences for one or the other” just like bisexuals.
A source from 1999 noting that, while some female-female relationships in the early to mid-twentieth century were obviously lesbian relationships, not all of them were, but that it would be a mistake to label them all “friendships”. It specifically notes that asexual partnered relationships also existed.This book describes a series of interviews done in 1990 by Catherine Whitney who interviewed heterosexual women married to gay men, and found that they were often asexual. It also describes how, in 1990, Ann Landers (a very popular advice columnist) asked her readers if married couples could enjoy a full life without sex and was flooded with 35,000 responses from people of all ages who had little or no sex and didn’t miss it. It also describes how “Boston marriage” was originally coined with a not-necessarily-always-accurate implication that such a relationship between women was nonsexual, but that later on the assumption was reversed to imply women in a sexual lesbian relationship, and how that caused some women involved in such relationships to hide the asexual nature of their relationships for fear of being called frauds by the larger lesbian community.
This 1997 book that states “To be a Kinsey 3 (bisexual) is to be equally attracted to men and women, i.e. completely bisexual…it is also to be equally unattracted to men and women, i.e. completely asexual. Bisexuality is never about two, only about one – asexual, or self-fulfilling – or three – continuously and equally attracted to both men and women”.
Proof of asexuality being considered as a concrete, distinct orientation before 2000:
A 1983 issue of the Journal of Sex Research studied the Mental Health Implications of Sexual Orientation among heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual, and asexual people.
The article “Asexuality as Orientation: Some Historical Perspectives” describes different historical studies on asexuality, including a study from Johnson in 1977 where the word asexual was used to describe women “regardless of physical or emotional condition, actual sexual history, and marital status or ideological orientation, [who] seem to prefer not to engage in sexual activity”. It also describes a 1980 study by Storms who included asexual as one of four orientation categories when mapping out sexual orientation. It also describes a 1983 study by Nurius that found out of 685 participants, 5% of males and 10% of females were asexual. It also describes a 1990 study by Berkley et al. that included questions “related to homosexuality, heterosexuality, and asexuality” and included four items (out of 45) that were specific to asexuality.
This book published in 1922 contains a lot of what I personally would describe as narcissism and pseudo-science, but acknowledges asexuality nonetheless: “In addition to the ordinary distinctive males and females, we have asexuals, homosexuals, bisexuals, and old women of both sexes.”This book from 1996 that notes “A transsexual may have a heterosexual orientation, a homosexual orientation, a bisexual orientation – or an asexual orientation” and clarifies that “a very small number – are asexual or bisexual.”
This book mentions a study by Malyon in 1981 that noted the options available to gay and lesbian teenagers choosing whether, or how, to come out by “[describing] three possible modes of adaptation in adolescence: repression of sexual desire, suppression of homosexual impulses in favor of heterosexual or asexual orientation, or a homosexual disclosure.”
Kinds of oppression that asexuals face:
Eunjung Kim wrote a chapter titled “How Much Sex Is Healthy? The Pleasures of Asexuality” that describes how “the absence of sexual desires, feelings, and activities is seen as abnormal and reflective of poor health” in Western contemporary culture “because of the explicit connection between sexual activeness and healthiness” and argues that “medical explanations of asexuality as an abnormality that has to be corrected constitute a large part of the stigmatization and marginalization experienced by asexual people.” It also discusses the ways in which some groups, specifically Asian American males, that are desexualized can erase the space for asexual Asian American men to simply exist.
Asexuals also face sexual harassment, rape threats, corrective sexual assault, and corrective rape (which, no, is not a lesbian-only term according to actual South Africans) specifically because they are asexual.
There was a recent study by the AAU to identify sexual assault on college campuses, and broke down the responders to their survey by sexual orientation, including asexual. The results clearly show that asexuals are not immune to unwanted sexual contact, stalking, intimate partner violence, or sexual harassment.
A chapter of “Asexualities: Feminist and Queer Perspectives” that notes the specific way that asexual people are talked to/about: “Because asexual difference cannot be iterated in the linguistic field where sex and a sexed position dominate the discourse of sexuality and desire, the asexual subject is linguistically and visually dismantled and reconstructed in the position of a fetish object. This fetishistic conversion happens because the asexual person is made into an image, or spectacle, for consumption.” and “The difference between the unassailable asexual (someone who lacks all of the traits commonly blamed for asexuality such as past history of abuse, disability, etc.) and the spectacular asexual is that while the unassailable asexual allegedly makes asexuality digestible for a skeptical public and presents an accessible image, the spectacular asexual is always consumed as a fetish object, regardless of mental health, ability, and gender.”
The study “Intergroup bias toward “Group X”: Evidence of prejudice, dehumanization, avoidance, and discrimination of asexuals” is exactly what it sounds like. The article’s abstract states: “In two studies (university student and community samples) we examined the extent to which those not desiring sexual activity are viewed negatively by heterosexuals. We provide the first empirical evidence of intergroup bias against asexuals (the so-called “Group X”), a social target evaluated more negatively, viewed as less human, and less valued as contact partners, relative to heterosexuals and other sexual minorities. Heterosexuals were also willing to discriminate against asexuals (matching discrimination against homosexuals). Potential confounds (e.g., bias against singles or unfamiliar groups) were ruled out as explanations.”
The Invisible Orientation: An Introduction to Asexuality describes many issues that asexuals face, including: how asexuality is seen as “invisible” and lends to people thinking it does not exist, how asexuality is actively erased as “unimportant” or not its own identity, the explicitly and implicitly negative messages associated with a lack of sexual attraction, the fear asexuals face when they believe there is something physically or psychologically wrong with them for being asexual, the belief asexuals face about how they must be deeply flawed since they do not conform to other sexual identities, how asexuals face cultural ideologies that sexuality is biologically based and ubiquitous (that all humans possess sexual desire) and that don’t acknowledge asexuality, that to describe oneself as asexual is a statement of moral superiority or purity or failure to find a suitable partner, that asexuality is an immature state they will “grow out of”, that asexuality is a description of action or a preference, that asexuality is unnatural or unhealthy or has to be a symptom of something else, etc.
Asexuality has been shown in the media in a negative light for decades, reflecting the idea that (for various reasons steeped in classism and racism) any woman who wasn’t willing to marry and procreate was a threat to the status quo, as seen in this 1955 book that notes: “Women who did not marry incurred political and social scorn for another reason. The influx of eastern and southern European immigrants in the United States pushed the question into eugenic terms–the wrong people were reproducing. Educated women came primarily from white middle- and upper-class stock, the most desired element by dominant social norms. When these women refused to marry and reproduce, they forced a new concern into the public discourse. it is not a coincidence that the stereotypical asexual unmarried older woman emerged at this time as a source of popular humor.”
Some people in some religions are very explicit about hating asexuals specifically because they are asexual, seeing asexuality as “a perversion akin to homosexuality and bestiality”.
Other religions see asexuals as actually sinful if they choose not to have sex with their spouse.
While not every member of every religion looks down on asexuals, many people in portions of various religions choose to view asexuals negatively.
Some people even recommend asexuals avoid being in a relationship with non-asexuals and assert that “promoting and trying to spread” asexuality, or behaving in an asexual manner, is wrong or unhealthy.
Because of these religious beliefs about asexuality, that also opens up asexuals to discrimination in various legal ways, including (but not limited to) things like the new adoption bill in Texas.
Asexuality was implicitly pathologized until very recently, and even now, the DSM-V states that a diagnosis of HSDD may not be given only if the patient has a preexisting knowledge of asexuality and chooses to ID that way.
Asexuals have long been considered part of the bisexual community. When people used to talk about bisexuals, it included asexuals because asexuals were the bisexuals too. Bisexual history is asexual history.
Asexuals have also long been considered as a stand-alone orientation that was part of larger non-straight communities and could be studied in comparison to other sexual orientations.
Asexuals face many of the same issues that other marginalized orientations face as well as issues specific to their orientation. These include erasure, medicalization, misidentification, harassment, rape specifically targeted at them for being asexual, and religious intolerance, to name just a few.
None of this is exhaustive. There are more sources to be found and studied.
what the fuck are you talking about? are you hearing yourself rn?
It does say who they’re attracted to tho. They’re attracted to people they have an emotional bond to. There’s more sexualities than just straight, bi, and gay.
Person: What’s demisexuality?
Demisexual: It means you don’t get attracted to people unless there’s an emotional bond.
Person: Oh, so like, a normal person?
Demisexual: Actually, no, although I can see how you’d think that. Most people don’t have sex with people unless they have an emotional bond with them but that’s not really to do with sexuality, that’s just staying safe and having common sense.
’Normal’ people, although not intending to sleep with someone right away, still know, usually, whether they would be interested in doing that within a short amount of time, sometimes immediately. People come up to me and say “You’re attractive, can I have your number?” after just seeing me from across a bar. They’ve never spoken to me, don’t know who I am but still found me attractive and are thus interested in getting to know me more to see if they’d like to start a relationship.
Demisexuals don’t experience that. We don’t see underwear adverts and find the actors desirable. We don’t look at someone from across a room and think “they’re hot, I wonder if they’re single”. ‘Sex sells’ goes over our heads. Dating apps where you swipe pictures across the screen are useless. We literally don’t get attracted to people that quickly.
Person: Oh, I see. So it’s not just being picky or abstaining from sex, it’s literal lack of attraction?
Demisexual: Yes, you’ve got it.
Person: That must make dating difficult.
Demisexual: It does. Many of us are interested in dating but are limited to people we know emotionally. If someone asks for my number I then have to say to them ‘can we be friends for roughly two to three years, by then I should know whether I find you physically attractive and if I do we can start dating’. It’s sad because I don’t want to get people’s hopes up or seem like I’m leading them on. But I literally do have to know them for a while before I can get attracted to them if I do at all. It also meant growing up was a strange experience because everyone would be pointing out attractive people on TV, in magazines and when walking down the street and I just didn’t understand.
Person: Well thank you for taking the time to explain that to me. I understand now that there is a difference between abstaining from sex and actually lacking attraction.
Demisexual: No problem. It’s nice to be accepted and understood.
Demisexuals, you are real and valid. Just because people don’t understand what you go through that doesn’t mean what you go through is fake. Pride is about respecting and celebrating all sexualities and their nuances.
You should also note that demisexuality is common among those on the autism spectrum. To deny demisexuality is not only illogical but it’s also ableism. You’re erasing people’s symptoms because its convenient for you and because you don’t understand them.
Demisexuals just want to chill and exist. They don’t want fame and to be mollycoddled. They just want awareness and acceptance.
Let’s not hate on people just because we don’t understand.
MY OFFICIAL CULTURAL ANTHROPOLOGY COURSE TEXTBOOK’S GENDER/SEXUALITY CHAPTER INCLUDES DEMISEXUALITY.
I AM SO HAPPY.
THIS IS UNHEARD OF. MY CROPS ARE FLOURISHING AND MY SKIN IS CLEAR
IDENTITY POLICERS CAN SUCK MY ASS
The Ace Agenda
- Rid the world of the belief that “sex” is what makes us human.
- Educate the masses about the fact that being asexual is not a shortcoming or a problem that needs fixing.
- Raise the middle finger to the world and show off that ace ring.
- Find a cuddle buddy.
Experiencing romantic feelings without sexual feelings is perfectly normal and cool and you deserve to have comfortable and happy relationships.
Experiencing sexual feelings without romantic feelings is perfectly normal and cool and you deserve to have comfortable and happy relationships.
Experiencing neither romantic feelings or sexual feelings is perfectly normal and cool and you deserve to have comfortable and happy relationships!
I’m really happy people are seeing this post.
Your needs in a relationship are important and valid no matter what your reasoning. You don’t ever have to do something that you don’t want to do in a healthy relationship and you shouldn’t be pressured to feel certain ways about sex and relationships.
Yes you! I love you! Even if you don’t love yourself! You’re so strong, amazing and a wonderful person. If you ever feel down, just know that there’s someone to talk too. You can even talk to me about your problems, I’m all ears! It’s going to get better, you will feel better one day. Maybe not now, or in a week but one day. Just be patient, you have the future to look forward too. ♥️♥️
some of y’all still can’t recognize the differences between platonic, romantic, sexual, mentor-student, and familial relationships, both in fiction and reality, and it really shows
some of y’all still think there’s only one type of love and it really shows
Thank you to all the people who posted this so I ended up seeing it. I really needed this right now. Thank you!
I needed this.
Yeah… Not gonna lie… I cried…
We need more people like this
Goddamn it stop making me feel human
The therapist I wanna be.
Text in the image:
“I’m a therapist and keep this poster in my waiting room, apparently it’s saved a few lives.”
I don’t like the phrase “a cry for help.” I just don’t like how it sounds. When somebody says to me, “I’m thinking about suicide. I have a plan: I just need a reason not to do it,” the last thing I see is helplessness.
I think your depression has been beating you up for years. It’s called you ugly, and stupid, and pathetic, and a failure, for so long that you’ve forgotten that it’s wrong. You don’t see any good in yourself, and you don’t have any hope.
But still here you are: you’ve come over to me, banged on my door and said, “HEY! Staying alive is REALLY HARD right now! Just give me something to fight with! I don’t care if it’s a stick! Give me a stick and I can stay alive!”
How is that helpless? I think that’s incredible. You’re like a marine: trapped for years behind enemy lines. Your gun has been taken away, you’re out of ammo, you’re malnourished, and you’ve probably caught some kind of jungle virus that’s making you hallucinate giant spiders.
And you’re still just going, “GIVE ME A STICK. I’M NOT DYING OUT HERE.”
“A cry for help” makes it sound like I’m supposed to take pity on you, but you don’t need my pity. This isn’t pathetic. This is the will to survive. This is how humans lived long enough to become the dominant species.
With NO hope, running on NOTHING, you’re ready to cut through a hundred miles of hostile jungle with nothing but a stick, if that’s what it takes to get to safety.
All I’m doing is handing out sticks.
You’re the one saying alive.
I legit cried at this. I’ve needed to hear it put this way. Bless this post.
Boggle the Owl is a great comfort.