"Ace week" in girl guiding.

There is another consequence if girls are encouraged to label themselves asexual.

They'll become the next fetish target for entitlement to their bodies, that they're being selfish in not giving somebody access to it on the basis of a mere absence of attraction. Like nuns and vestal virgins, both heavily fetishised (and yes, of course some would have chosen to not have sex when they did have desire, but some would be drawn to it because they had no interest in sex) in certain genres.

Why give it a label so it can become an object of desire?

OMG, asexuality as a “handy label to justify why a girl don’t want to have sex before she is ready”.

This is why I don’t want any random adults to talk to my children about sex. Has the world gone completely mad??? “No” is sufficient. If you are not ready, the answer is “No”. If you don’t like the other person enough, the answer is “No”.

Please, for any lurkers. Just look at how this is portrayed. This is absolutely crazy.

The same people who think that you need some label to justify why you don’t want to have sex, these people want me to trust them and other random adults to talk to my children about sex.

Not only does this erode essential boundaries, it also causes harm.

@thevassal

Thank you for seeing my point of view. I don’t want a random adult to talk to my children about sex and sexuality. If my children would trust an adult and ask a question, then fine. But I would expect to be told about it (very casually).

I don’t differentiate between straight, homosexual, bi, or asexual. For me, it is the discussion about sex which shouldn’t be initiated by an adult. At all. It definitely should not be taught outside school.

In school, it should follow a PSHE curriculum, be taught be experienced teachers and shared with me in advance.

Maybe some children cannot talk to their parents. My children talk to me. After the sex Ed in school, the first thing they did was to talk to me. After the pride etc talk, the first thing they did was to ask me. They had got some things wrong. We cleared it up. That is ok.

Just because some random children whom I don’t know are sexualised early and cannot talk to their parents, that does not give random adults the right to cross boundaries and try to “educate” my children about sex.

Some topics should never be initiated by adults unless in a very controlled setting. It crosses a boundary. The next time, this boundary will be easier to cross. That is wrong on so many levels.

In what way have asexual people suffered anything like that?

They haven't

We probably all know asexual people in real life and just haven't given it that much thought?

I'm sure we have all met and know asexual people and I'm also sure that whilst they won't have suffered the same sort of prejudices gay people have suffered that they will have had to put up with being say the office weirdo; the cold fish; the sad spinster.

"for a teenage girl to have a handy and socially acceptable label to append to explain disinterest in sexual involvement before she's ready"

I don't understand this. Girls shouldn't need an alternative label to the word no. I understand peer pressure but it's like saying to a bloke I'm not interested in you because I'm a lesbian. Girls and women should be respected when using the word no.

I think the problem with the asexual identity is that it is a spectrum and I've heard some ridiculous things. Like "I'm asexual but sometimes I do feel sexual attraction if it is the right person." Also the greys and the romantics who say "I can only feel sexual attraction with someone I have romantic feelings for." Duh isn't that many of us? I see it as an adult identity label but not a sexual orientation. I don't see this as something that should be discussed with children. As a mum my young children knew you could love a man or a woman, but they didn't need to know about sex or that some people didn't have sex.
Great if you are an adult and you believe this about yourself.

It is not just about consent though, the way she explains it, or not wanting to be coerced or pressured into having sex. And it doesn’t seem to change daily, she says she has known it as long as she was able to understand about relationships and sex, and when she learned about asexuality, it made sense to her.

You would not say to someone who says they are gay at 20 that well, it changes daily, why label yourself? So why say that about someone who says they are asexual? It’s bizarre.

When she told me, she said she knew I would say she didn’t need a label to feel comfortable in herself but it was important to her.

But anyway, it is a separate issue from what is appropriate to discuss at Guides. I just find some of the attitudes towards asexuality quite eye-opening, really.

As such, at school, we teach children that some people have two mummies or two daddies, because not everyone is heterosexual.

As part of that, we can also teach them that some people never have any sexual feelings at all, and that's ok.

These two things are not the same. The two mummies or two daddies is not about sex. For those two things to be the same the first paragraph would need to be

"Some people have sexual feelings for the same sex, and some for the opposite sex, and some for both"

I have only got half way down the second page and I had to stop reading. Of course everyone is entitled to their opinion, and I do not think that any discussion of personal sexuality belongs in primary school, or indeed any sexuality outside of it in activities children do. So I don’t support asexuality coming into Girl Guides, it is not appropriate.

But my DD would very much have appreciated asexuality being recognised as a thing during her secondary years, in sex and relationships education where they assume everyone wants to have sex, to English where they assume everyone will fall in love when teaching Shakespeare, to the general cultural trope in almost all culture that people have sex, it is not hard to change the narrative to most people and to recognise asexuality in SRE when hetero/homo/bi sexuality are all recognised. Being asexual caused her a lot of anxiety because she thought there was something wrong with her (and it is disappointing on this thread to see people rehearsing such ideas). The threads I have read on MN about asexuality are all pretty prejudiced, to be honest, in a way that has surprised me, whereas in fact, for my DD, realising asexuality was a thing made her more confident in herself and not think there was something wrong with her.

Just because trans rights advocates are apparently using asexuality to make arguments about young people transitioning does not mean that there are not genuinely asexual people out there who need support and indeed, acceptance. I agree about discussion being age appropriate; my DD would not for example discuss being asexual in front of her younger siblings not would I, but aside from me, I am fairly sure her friends know. Not least because she wants to head off romantic overtures and be accepted for who she is.

I think it's a fair point if you don't want anyone to talk about sex other than a parent or teacher. I don't necessarily agree, because I think young people might have questions they might not feel comfortable asking their parents or their teacher, and asking another trusted adult (and guiders should be crb checked) or discussing in a small group where they won't be mocked or have the awkwardness of raising it in front of their classmates or main friendship group) is quite beneficial. But if that's your viewpoint then OK.

But looking at the guiding website it seems like they've got lots of information about being gay, lesbian and bisexual, and have been 'celebrating' and teaching about them for some time, so I struggle to see how mentioning asexuality is any different. If it's a case of "some people are attracted to the opposite sex, some people are attracted to the same sex, some are attracted to both, and some aren't attracted to anyone at all, and all of those are okay," then I really struggle to see what the problem is? It might even help girls whose parents feel the way of some of the bigoted posters on this thread to have another adult say they are not sexually traumatised, physically or mentally ill, a possible pedophile, or appropriating the trauma of gay people. 🤔

If you dont want guiders to talk about any sexuality at all then fair enough. But if your daughter asks a guider if she has a boyfriend for example, then if it's OK for her to say "No, I'm gay," then it should be equally fine for her to say "No, I'm asexual." None of this has to be a particularly big deal and I imagine to the girls it's being discussed with its not!

[quote vinsurvin]@MrsOvertonsWindow I'm sorry to break it to you, but children do have sexual relationships. Children are increasingly being sexualised from a very young age. Children have 'boyfriends' and 'girlfriends' at primary school. It's an unfortunate truth that children are having sex or experimenting with sexual touching while still at primary school. You might not like it, but it is the reality and will continue to be so - the average age of puberty is getting younger and younger in Western society which means sexual feelings are kicking in younger and younger.

Pretending this isn't happening isn't going to help matters. It is what it is and we have to provide safe frameworks to educate and keep children safe as they learn to navigate their sexual feelings. As such, we have to prepare children and explain to them -in age appropriate terms - what sex is, who has sex and with whom, and what it's ok for them to do and what it's not ok to do, from a fairly young age. Introducing them to the idea that not everyone has sex with someone of the opposite sex is not harmful or damaging in any way. The pearl clutching on here is ridiculous. Girlguiding are not suggesting that they are going to be holding sessions where girls are going to be forced to declare themselves as any particular sexuality. They're simply raising awareness that asexuality exists. I don't see why that would be a problem. Why do you find asexuality as an orientation so threatening? I'm confused.[/quote]
I know a lot about children in primary schools and their sexual experiences. Every one of them was either being sexually abused by adult (teacher, learning mentor, scout / cub master, priest, sports coach, private tutor) or involved with age inappropriate behaviour with another child. None of these children consented. Some of these children were let down by adults who failed to listen to their disclosures.
Dismissing those of us who know about safeguarding, who work with even the youngest of children as "pearl clutchers" displays a personal arrogance and level of ignorance about safeguarding .
I hope that your comments are made from ignorance and that you are in no way involved with children. If you do work with children, please research professional dangerousness as a concept. Countless serious case reviews (or Child Safeguarding Practice Reviews as they are now known) identify professional dangerousness significant factor. Adults who consider that they know better and ignore the established safeguarding principles end up being identified as contributing to the serious harm and often death of a child.
My (lesbian) sexual identity is irrelevant to my professional work with children. As it should be for every adult.

You're not allowed to say a child has been groomed????? Wow.

@vinsurvin

May I ask, do you have children?

I am sorry if you felt targeted. I have not read the whole thread. I wish you the very best in whatever you do and do not do.

The issue for me is the fact that I don’t want a strange adult to talk to my primary school aged children about sex. I don’t want them to talk about their sexual orientation. I don’t want them to talk about what they do or do not do in bed.

I am the parent and I will talk to them about that. We also have the PSHE curriculum in our schools. That is enough.

For me, a boundary is crossed when an adult discusses sex or sexual orientation with a child.

It's often hard to have a conversation about safe guarding children without needing to use the word. I've really no idea what MN mods are thinking.

My post was deleted and I read through the guidance and saw nothing remotely relevant, but my post did have the word gr**med in it, so perhaps that's seen as hate speech now?

Perhaps we need a list of banned words.

That's an autocorrect - it was about Asexuality . Although actually it was all about all kinds of sexuality so that's entirely appropriate.

Every fucking chapter - 'Oh god I'm at a party and some people are giving each other handjobs, how can I possibly admit I am Ace and I don't want to give anyone any hand jobs? Oh god now I am off to uni and people are shagging, how can I possibly admit I don't want to shag anyone? Oh god now my friend is talking about masturbating, how can I possibly admit I don't want to have a wank...' and on and on and on and on.

Give it a fucking rest love. Go and have a walk or something. Read a fucking book it might help you write one that's not shit

Surely there is a difference between a child's lack of sexuality because they have not reached sexual maturity, and an adult's asexuality once they reach sexual maturity.

Trying to imply to children that not having sexual feelings, that is totally standard at that age, means that they are asexual rather than pre-sexual is incorrect. Plus, let's not forget the massive safeguarding red flags of expecting untrained volunteers to discuss sexuality with children.

No-one was making fun of the idea of asexuality, it just seems no big deal to most of us in a "you do you" kind of way.

The jokes about the underwear was that it was classic "sexy" underwear that I have zero interest in, as I imagine is similar for other feminists who aren't interested in wearing uncomfortable expensive straps to turn men on.

vinsurvin
You have totally missed the point I was making. I think I am done with this thread as it's just become an exercise in sealioning.