"Ace week" in girl guiding.

@vinsurvin.

You should just be honest. Calling the underwear asexual was ridiculous and you know it.

Vinsurvin. It would be if that's what I said.
Bur I didn't say asexuals are paedophiles.
I said asexuality is a useful cover to hide behind. But I'm sure you know that.

[quote doublemonkey]@vinsurvin - How was that underwear in any way asexual??[/quote]
It's not the underwear - it's the joking I object to.

@vinsurvin - How was that underwear in any way asexual??

I have a great sense of humour and I'm always happy to laugh at myself. But a bunch of grown women finding it funny to take the piss out of a group of people who they think are weirdos who don't really exist isn't really very funny to me.

People have made jokes about asexual underwear. 😂😂

Jesus, can you not hear yourself? Please explain how that underwear was asexual??

Look, I'd love to have sexual feelings. I'd love to be able to enjoy sex. I'd love to be able to know why everyone else seems to find it so fantastic. I can't relate to what for a lot of people is a huge part of their lives. Can you really not imagine how hard that might be?

Im.sorry life is so hard fir you. But to object the idea that lack of feelings on children could be a result if trauma whilst talking about sexual activities on.primary school is extremely worrying. These kids kids not exist to make u feel.better. we shouldn't ignore what they are going through because adults feel it invalidates their sexuality

Being asexual does not make you a paedophile. What an awful thing to say.

I have nowhere said that children's sexual feelings are the same as adult's. However, children developing sexual feelings as they go through puberty is a perfectly normal stage of development. I don't understand why that would be a troublesome thing to say. This very Victorian attitude that children should be pure and innocent until the age of 16 is ridiculous. Children go through puberty from the age of around 9 and with that will come - perfectly naturally - sexual feelings.

The bigotry on this thread is so sad to read.

People have made jokes about asexual underwear.

People have claimed that asexual people don't exist.

People have claimed that asexual people are mentally ill.

People have claimed that asexual people have all experienced sexual trauma.

People have claimed that asexual people are repressed homosexuals.

People have said that asexuality is just an attempt for people to put a label on themselves.

In short, this entire thread seeks to undermine, trivialise, mock and erase a sexual orientation.

We live in a world where sex is a major cultural currency. It's expected that people will want to have sex and you're considered to be weird/sad/abnormal/lacking/traumatised etc in some way if you don't. To be asexual is to have something 'wrong' with you.

Try living in a world where everyone is doing something you don't enjoy and don't understand. And where you are constantly judged and belittled for not enjoying it and not understanding it. Feeling like you're constantly on the outside, looking in.

Look, I'd love to have sexual feelings. I'd love to be able to enjoy sex. I'd love to be able to know why everyone else seems to find it so fantastic. I can't relate to what for a lot of people is a huge part of their lives. Can you really not imagine how hard that might be?

Totally agree with this, @Thefartingsofaofdenmarkstreet.

I dislike the tendency to analyse and label every single point on the bell curve and put everyone in a box as though that trait makes up their whole identity. We don't all need to know what anyone else wants to do or not do to get their rocks off, as long as those people are of age.

Not everywhere needs to be a safe space to explore one's identity.

Surely asexuality is actually a lack of orientation?

And how can it be catagorised as a definitive thing in itself when not feeling sexual desire can be caused by a great many things (stress, illness, meds etc.)

People don't turn lesbian when they get stressed or take anti-depressants so it's not the same thing really, is it.

I suppose the point is you've told her some men go out with and marry men, some women go out with and marry women, she will be surrounded with evidence that the majority of adult people "go out with and marry" people of the opposite sex, so telling her some people aren't interested at all is hardly difficult.

I understand your point, but then there are lots of people who never get married, never date etc and there could be lots of reasons for that, not just that they are asexual. What is it that you would be telling a prepubscent child that asexual people 'are not interested in'?

I guess I'm just wondering why it's necessary to tell kids about an absence of sexual feelings, while they are still too young to really know what sexual feelings are anyway?

If I am being absolutely honest here, I do also feel like there is some appropriation going on as well. Gay people in the past were massively discriminated against for their sexuality, they were (and still are in some countries) murdered, they were discriminated against at work, they went to prison for being gay. In what way have asexual people suffered anything like that?

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

But they won't know that until they talk to someone will they?

If they talk to someone , process the abuse, and gain agents the maturity maturity comes with it and still feel that way then they can safely say its them ajd how they feel.

But if you give the kids a label for something that explains perfectly normal.and valid feelings fir what they have been through they might never find out.

If they are asexual then talking to someone about what's happened to them won't hurt will it .

I agree and have already said several times that I know that any sexualised behaviour at this age should be reported. However I don't agree it is always down to trauma.

I think we need to be careful not to let kids label themselves.

The teenage years are mostly when kids discover their sexuality, and sexual orientation, after some experimenting.

This drive for labelling can be harmful - humans like belonging to a tribe, but changing tribes can be difficult, sometimes dangerous.

But going back to the Facebook post on GG - there are some enthusiastic responses there from young GG leaders who seem to be enjoying the "validation" of being recognised as Ace/Aro, and I'm not sure that's a good idea.

Girl guiding leader here, didn't even know anything about it and wouldn't bring it into my meetings as not my place to start those discussions and personally believe they are too young (5-10 for my units) BUT it is surprising some of the subjects that the girls instigate conversations in.

We teach children about different sexual orientations as part of helping them to understand the world around us and how different people live their lives.

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.

It's simply part of educating them about how the world works and how different people fit into the world.

It also means as they grow up and start to experience (or not experience, in my case) sexual feelings, they can understand and interpret their feelings within the frameworks of sexuality they have learned about.

Again, if you replace asexuality with homosexuality in what you've written, hopefully you can understand why what you've said is troublesome. If we didn't teach kids about homosexuality, people who are homosexual would just have to 'figure it out' when they got to adulthood. By then they might already have experienced a lot of pain and trauma in trying to fit themselves into a society where they didn't feel they belonged. Same for asexual people. Knowing it exists means that, as you grow up, if you don't start to experience sexual feelings, you'll know that's normal and ok too. Rather than thinking you're a freak of nature.

I hope that explains things for you.

Are you in the UK? We do educate children at primary school about sex. At a basic, age appropriate level.

Any sexualised behaviour at that age should definitely be reported asa safe-guarding issue.

Regardless of stages of puberty a child is still a child.

No ones afraid to talk to and educte their children about sex. With a heavy focus on consent boundaries and what's appropriate amd legal behaviour.

These children don't exist to validate the.lives of adults. And by applying that label to what indeed could be a response to trauma and any child engaging in sexual activities under the age if 16 is being abused! ,.you risk them assuming that their perfectly rational feelings to said trauma is indeed a sexuakity and therfore does not need any form.of investigation. All to.avoid upsetting asexual adults.

I'm not saying that it's ok for children to be having sex at primary school. I'm saying it's not ok to pretend to children that sex doesn't exist and not to educate them about it until an arbitrary age when adults decide they are old enough to handle it. This is because if a child is having sexual feelings when they are in primary school, if they've not received any education about it, what are they going to do with those feelings? How might those feelings be expressed? Who might they end up hurting when they try and express those feelings? Sex education is important for this reason.

Buy asexuality is an absence of sexual feelings, so why would kids need to know about it anyway? Surely you don't really need to even know about asexuality until, well, adulthood really when you might start wondering why you have never fancied anyone? Certainly not at primary school where is completely normal not to have any sexual feelings?