Young adults who identify as asexual feel excluded from the wider LGBTQ community

Please explain to me , a Lesbian, how we have 'straight sex.' I am very confused.

Well it's not clear to me what the definition is.

I think it is quite clear what the definition is, and some gays have straight sex, doesnt make them less gay

Difference is fine.

We’re all different to each other.

In your example a gay person (depending on sex) will have, in the fairly recent past, been discriminated against (no right to marry their chosen partner) and even criminally prosecuted for their choice of sexual/romantic partner/s (if male).
In many countries, this still happens.

Within a gay (or straight!) relationship, asexuality is only a problem if the lack of sex is not a mutual choice.
At no point in UK history have asexuals been criminally prosecuted or forbidden from marrying on the basis of their asexuality.

Some asexuals do have sex, btw, so there is no agreed definition of what human asexuality is. Not sure how media is supposed to better represent an identity that has no fixed definition.

Whereas homosexual relationships are easy to represent in media because there is a very clear visual difference between a homosexual relationship and a straight relationship - two partners of the same sex!

Please do educate us on what asexual representation and acceptance would look like and how it differs from anyone else who doesn’t want to engage in sexual activity/doesn’t like sex/doesn’t want a sexual relationship. We’d genuinely love to hear a reasonable explanation

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asexuality

Too many people don't seem to accept that others can be different and they prefer that people keep quiet about their difference.

Very, very sad.

if you read the thread, most of us accept “difference” and diversity of sexuality etc just fine. It’s a ridiculous straw man and worn old cliche to imply that people “don't seem to accept that others can be different” when lots of people on this thread clearly accept, understand and are fine with homosexuality (or are even gay themselves). Many mums of MN also have loads of experience of having kids with ND conditions and special needs, and so on. This is not about rejecting any kind of “difference” and you know it.

The much more complex discussion on this thread is about the recent tendency for a lot of people to try to make an “identity” out of any completely normal or unpersecuted personality trait, like or dislike in an attempt to leap onto the now almost meaningless LBGTQ+ bandwagon and claim special status. Whether that applies to asexuality is being debated, but you could join the debate and make a clear case for why you think it should be given such a status, or why it needs awareness raising about it, or how it affects people negatively, for example. Then others might change their minds, that’s how debate works.

Just attacking people for supposedly not tolerating difference is daft. Basically crying “bigot” because people have valid points you don’t like, instead of making a clear counter argument. I can’t think of anything I have more tolerance and understanding of, than people not being interested in sex. I am totally fine with it and, as a CSA survivor and separated older woman, very sympathetic. That is a separate issue from the discussion about whether it is a sexuality, or makes you “queer” or disadvantaged in any way.

This seems like a self fulfilling prophecy. Not many people care if you’re asexual and it’s difficult to describe any discrimination faced by asexual people (that isn’t imposed on anyone, especially women, who choose to remain single for whatever reason.)

so if you go around saying you’re discriminated against because you’re asexual you’ll get pushback…

Which you can then interpret as evidence of anti-asexual prejudice.

(And describing asexual as “difference” is really pushing it. It’s one end of a continuum of normal experience, and most people experience low libido at some point in their lives. If you choose to label yourself that way, it’s… fine.)

''@ReadersD1gest

Gay is something you are, as opposed to something you're not. Why can't you see the difference, and stop trying to conflate two things that are completely unrelated?''

This thread really makes grim reading.

The lack of knowledge and understanding is astonishing.

Being asexual is also something you are.

It is not a choice/fad/a defect.

Someone could also be gay (seek romantic relationships with someone of the same gender) and be asexual (not want that relationship to include sex).

It just seems to me to boil down to same issue:

Too many people don't seem to accept that others can be different and they prefer that people keep quiet about their difference.

Very, very sad.

One of the elements that makes these discussions a little confusing at times is that even the traditional sexualities are really self-defined and don't have a clear scientific explanation, and it's also clear that there are cultural influences at play in terms of people's behaviour and also self-perception.

The current common wisdom is that sexuality is inborn and unchangable, but that's more of an assumption than something that can be shown to be objectively true, particularly if you are looking to measure it in some way apart from what people do. It works fine in general as an assumption for most people, but in terms of trying to create some kind of scientific or even anthropological basis to support it, it's just not at all clear that its the case.

What that means here is that it's difficult to say definitively that all these other sexual identities are really clearly a different kind of thing.

The other thing that strikes me is that left wing models of sexuality often seem to treat it as an identity, not just an alliance of people with certain political interests in common, or who might potentially be interested in romantic/sexual relationships with each other. - and maybe that opens the door to people who see other types of sexual interests as an identity. A fairly mainstream view on the right tends to not see sexuality as an identity at all, and you see people who take that view tend not to really engage in many of the more identity based elements - they don't usually join in with Pride celebrations, or join a gay men's choir, or that kind of thing. You don't hear such people use identity type language to describe themselves in quite the same way either.

I can't quite see that approach as being that likely to fall prey to the thinking that everyone has to have a sexual label for their exact feelings at this moment in time.

The whole thing really disgusts me; fake niche identities.
I remember around 2010 being out and No One Cared! I was just another normal person like everybody else. it was so great. I loved it.

If you are asexual fine, do form a social group to find a partner ( the asexual lesbian I know never did in our L social group) and then live your life like everyone else.
We need to embrace our shared humanity.

From a survey of 3,695 young adults aged 18-25 27% said they “rarely or never” feel a part of the LGBTQ community.
I'm sorry if I'm missing the point of this thread, but it seems like there's something important missing from this description of the survey.

If the sample were representative of all 18-25-year-olds, I'd expect a lot more than 27% to not feel part of the LGBTQ community, so what population is the sample supposed to represent? Is it readers of Attitude magazine? Is it people who identify as LGBTQ (but not necessarily as part of the LGBTQ community)? Does it include those who identify as L, G, B, T or Q but not as LGBTQ (perhaps like the "get the L out" lesbians)? Does it explicitly include identities not covered by those five letters? If so, which ones?

There are so many possibilities, and the survey results are really meaningless if we don't know what the inclusion criteria were and what population the sample aims to represent.

Is this explained somewhere else? Have I just not read it properly?

Also, it's not obvious that people who say they don't feel part of the LGBTQ community are feeling excluded: they may just not be interested in being part of it. That seems like a significant distinction.

Yes it's way past the point now that being trans, queer or LGBTQ+ can easily apply to absolutely anyone. Anyone who doesn't subscibe to gender ideology is, for example, because they're "agender". Anyone who has had romantic or sexual feelings that change over time or are different in different circumstances, which is everyone pretty much, can proclaim they're one of those aroace/blah/wibble categories.

And I think that's part of the point of the whole "queer" movement - alongside its boundary-dismantling/"queering" agendas - that anyone can identify into it. That gives white, middle class people in rich western countries a way to join the "oppressed" and be in a "marginalised" group, which means they can shrug off their guilt at being the oppressor. It also means that organisations and companies can tick their EDI boxes by making a big fuss about these categories, that include mainly already privileged and advantaged people, instead of doing the work to be genuinely inclusive of real disadvantaged groups.

In my field of work I have seen organisations immediately become more "inclusive" by someone who's already inside the organisation announcing they're non-binary or queer. Hey presto, "marginalised" (not) person being centred and celebrated even more than they were before, and company gets brownie points

Abroromantic / aro flux: someone who fluctuates between experiencing romantic attraction and not experiencing it, and/or experiencing romantic attraction to different strengths.
Abrosexual / ace flux: someone who’s experiences of sexual attraction fluctuate; they may go through periods of asexuality and periods of experiencing sexual attraction. The strength of their attraction could also fluctuate, going through phases of weakness and intensity.
Ace: an abbreviated term for ‘asexual’.
Akoiromantic/lithromantic: a person who experiences romantic attraction but has no desire or need to have their feelings reciprocated. Sometimes an akoiromantic person’s attraction may fade if a romantic relationship is established.
Akoisexual/lith(o)sexual: someone who experiences sexual attraction to people but has no desire to have those feelings reciprocated. For some, if the attraction is reciprocated, their feelings may fade and they will no longer be attracted to that person. ‘Lithsexual’ is also sometimes used to describe someone who does not like to receive sexual contact but may be happy to give it.
Alloromantic/zedromantic: someone who does experience romantic attraction. An alloromantic person may be allosexual as well, but not necessarily.
Allosexual/zedsexual: someone who does experience sexual attraction, and therefore not on the ace spectrum.
Apothisexual: someone who is asexual and sex-repulsed.
Aro: an abbreviated term for ‘aromantic’.
Aromantic: someone who does not experience romantic attraction.
Asexual: someone who does not experience sexual attraction.
Autochorissexual/aegosexual: someone who is aroused by sex that does not involve themself; it is a disconnection between oneself and the sexual object/activity. Someone who is autochorissexal might have sexual fantasies, or enjoy reading erotica or watching porn, but will have no desire to be involved in the activities themselves. This identity did not arise within the ace community and isn’t necessarily an ‘ace’ identity.
Cupioromantic: someone who does not experience romantic attraction but has a desire to be in a romantic relationship.
Cupiosexual: someone who desires a sexual relationship, but does not experience sexual attraction.
Demi: an abbreviation for demisexuality and demiromanticism.
Demi(a)romantic: someone who only experiences romantic attraction after establishing a strong emotional connection to someone.
Demi-(a)sexual: someone who only experiences sexual attraction after establishing a close emotional and/or romantic connection with another person/persons.
Frayromantic: someone who experiences romantic attraction, but this attraction fades after getting to know the object of attraction.
Fraysexual: someone who initially experiences sexual attraction upon meeting someone, but this attraction fades after getting to know them.
Grey-(a)romantic: someone who sometimes, occasionally, or rarely experiences romantic attraction. The attraction they experience may be weak, or it might be infrequent. Also used as an umbrella term for all romantic orientations that fall between alloromantic and aromantic.
Grey-(a)sexual: someone who sometimes, occasionally, or rarely experiences sexual attraction. The attraction they experience may be weak, or it might be infrequent. Greysexuality describes any sexual orientation that falls somewhere between asexual and allosexual. It is often used as an umbrella term to encompass other identities on the grey area of the spectrum, including demisexuals, lithsexuals, ace flux, etc.
Perioriented: describes a person whose romantic and sexual orientations align, for example, a homoromantic homosexual person, or an asexual aromantic person.
Varioriented: describes a person whose romantic and sexual orientations don't align, for example, a homoromantic pansexual person, or a homosexual demiromantic person.
Quoiromantic/WTF-romantic: someone who finds romantic attraction confusing, or cannot differentiate between platonic and romantic attraction, or is unsure of whether they experience romantic attraction.
Quoisexual: someone who is unsure whether they experience sexual attraction, or is unsure about what sexual attraction is.

Looking at this whole list, like others, I’ve probably been all of them, sometimes in the same day. Am I just super special? Is there a special name for me?

Similar with the full form of the LGBT+.

Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, Questioning, Intersex, Pansexual, Two-Spirited, and Asexual.

According to Stonewall’s trans umbrella most of us could identify as trans if we wanted. Intersex is a medical condition that shouldn’t be there. Questioning is ambiguous and meaningless, and again, a high percentage of us probably fit that at some point or other. Pan is just bi but believes in however many genders we are now up to. Two spirit is cultural appropriation, ironic from a group that are usually hot on the tail of any cultural appropriation that they personally disapprove of. And asexual, which is neither a gender nor a sexuality. The whole this is pointless codswallop.

Just live your lives, and teach your children not to immerse themselves into this brain sucking bullshit.

When would you have time to get anything done? All the swooning and mooning around would play havoc with the ironing pile.

Repeating what you’ve said before doesn’t clarify things.

If 1-2% of people have no sex drive, presumably 1-2% of people have very high sex drives - where is their label? Are those with very high sex drives portrayed positively in books? On TV? Do they have adequate recognition? Maybe not, because like asexuality it’s not something that requires any special care or attention for fair and equal treatment in life.

As for the word salad of fake sexualities - it honestly reads like a Freudian psychoanalysist has put a label to all the ways people’s pasts and personalities affect how they develop relationships, it doesn’t mean they are actual sexualities. There is no need for all these labels that young people proudly display to as many people who will pay attention, and if people don’t pay attention, don’t acknowledge and congratulate them, or we dare roll our eyes and wait for these inevitable teen phases to pass (as we did goths and emos)(and the teen phase refers to the high need for validation and attention), then we’re hostile.

I don’t give two hoots if someone is asexual or demisexual, or any other made up word to pigeon hole a personality trait, but the recent trend for shoving these details at people is very disturbing. It’s got nothing to do with me who others have sex with, or not, and as a middle aged adult I can honestly say that the topic of conversation, on meeting someone new, has never come up. I would give short thrift to anyone wanting to share intimate details of their sexual preferences unless I was very close to them.
It’s nothing like the recognition that the LGB fought for - they were losing jobs, being imprisoned, weren’t allowed to have civil partnerships or get married. Everything else in the TQ+ is attention seeking bollocks that literally anyone could identify into if they navel gaze hard enough, they all have the same rights that we all have.

Abroromantic / aro flux: someone who fluctuates between experiencing romantic attraction and not experiencing it, and/or experiencing romantic attraction to different strengths

Like, is there anybody for whom this wouldn’t apply? If you experience the same intensity of romantic attraction at all times for all people, I think that would be more remarkable than “I fancy some people more than others”.

This. Who knew “the shine wearing off your new boyfriend after a few months” and “not really being in the mood for sex when you are stressed/tired” were two different sexualities, and not just entirely normal parts of most people’s relationships.

Which is not to say being asexual doesn’t exist in general, as clearly it does, but I do think that trying to claim the above minor fluctuations in your sex drive are a) abnormal and b) part of your sexual identity, is pretty absurd.

Ffs I've been all them. If you go back to me at 14 or thereabouts to now in my 50s I've experienced pretty much the entire list.

No one gave a shit at any point.

At various times in my life I have been all sorts of things from that list. Frayromantic and fraysexual, for instance, are pretty common things happening to people who are partnered with someone for a long time, but actually depend on the personalities of the two people involved and not necessarily true with other partners.

And that’s horrifying.

If Poirot and Miss Marple have to shoehorn all that Tumblr crap into every episode it’s going to be very boring series.

And we thought Dr Who had gone to shit!

I dont even know what a genderist/identitarian lense is, and am not making any demands from anyone else other than recognition and acceptance

You're on the FWR board on MN but you don't know what genderism and identity politics are...

Another way in which the concept is useful to bad actors is by normalising the concept of having sex without attraction and sometimes without even the expectation of pleasure. Convenient for those who wish to exploit young people who haven't grown into their sexuality yet.

It seems to be a lack of any orientation. It differs from gay and Lesbian and bisexual orientations in that it has never been illegal to be asexual.

What it might actually mean appears to be extremely complex, given that there are all sorts of subcategories to sexual and romantic attraction (which just might end up including almost everyone):

Abroromantic / aro flux: someone who fluctuates between experiencing romantic attraction and not experiencing it, and/or experiencing romantic attraction to different strengths.
Abrosexual / ace flux: someone who’s experiences of sexual attraction fluctuate; they may go through periods of asexuality and periods of experiencing sexual attraction. The strength of their attraction could also fluctuate, going through phases of weakness and intensity.
Ace: an abbreviated term for ‘asexual’.
Akoiromantic/lithromantic: a person who experiences romantic attraction but has no desire or need to have their feelings reciprocated. Sometimes an akoiromantic person’s attraction may fade if a romantic relationship is established.
Akoisexual/lith(o)sexual: someone who experiences sexual attraction to people but has no desire to have those feelings reciprocated. For some, if the attraction is reciprocated, their feelings may fade and they will no longer be attracted to that person. ‘Lithsexual’ is also sometimes used to describe someone who does not like to receive sexual contact but may be happy to give it.
Alloromantic/zedromantic: someone who does experience romantic attraction. An alloromantic person may be allosexual as well, but not necessarily.
Allosexual/zedsexual: someone who does experience sexual attraction, and therefore not on the ace spectrum.
Apothisexual: someone who is asexual and sex-repulsed.
Aro: an abbreviated term for ‘aromantic’.
Aromantic: someone who does not experience romantic attraction.
Asexual: someone who does not experience sexual attraction.
Autochorissexual/aegosexual: someone who is aroused by sex that does not involve themself; it is a disconnection between oneself and the sexual object/activity. Someone who is autochorissexal might have sexual fantasies, or enjoy reading erotica or watching porn, but will have no desire to be involved in the activities themselves. This identity did not arise within the ace community and isn’t necessarily an ‘ace’ identity.
Cupioromantic: someone who does not experience romantic attraction but has a desire to be in a romantic relationship.
Cupiosexual: someone who desires a sexual relationship, but does not experience sexual attraction.
Demi: an abbreviation for demisexuality and demiromanticism.
Demi(a)romantic: someone who only experiences romantic attraction after establishing a strong emotional connection to someone.
Demi-(a)sexual: someone who only experiences sexual attraction after establishing a close emotional and/or romantic connection with another person/persons.
Frayromantic: someone who experiences romantic attraction, but this attraction fades after getting to know the object of attraction.
Fraysexual: someone who initially experiences sexual attraction upon meeting someone, but this attraction fades after getting to know them.
Grey-(a)romantic: someone who sometimes, occasionally, or rarely experiences romantic attraction. The attraction they experience may be weak, or it might be infrequent. Also used as an umbrella term for all romantic orientations that fall between alloromantic and aromantic.
Grey-(a)sexual: someone who sometimes, occasionally, or rarely experiences sexual attraction. The attraction they experience may be weak, or it might be infrequent. Greysexuality describes any sexual orientation that falls somewhere between asexual and allosexual. It is often used as an umbrella term to encompass other identities on the grey area of the spectrum, including demisexuals, lithsexuals, ace flux, etc.
Perioriented: describes a person whose romantic and sexual orientations align, for example, a homoromantic homosexual person, or an asexual aromantic person.
Varioriented: describes a person whose romantic and sexual orientations don't align, for example, a homoromantic pansexual person, or a homosexual demiromantic person.
Quoiromantic/WTF-romantic: someone who finds romantic attraction confusing, or cannot differentiate between platonic and romantic attraction, or is unsure of whether they experience romantic attraction.
Quoisexual: someone who is unsure whether they experience sexual attraction, or is unsure about what sexual attraction is.