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

Don’t forget the ‘Past Caring’ Asexuals (especially as they’ll probably be the biggest group)!

Anyway , Sherlock Does have ‘relationships’. He lives with Doctor Watson, they have many meals, discussions and adventures together. He has a relationship with his brother, and a rather hostile one with Lestrange.

Miss Marple has friends, she has a nephew of whom she is fond, she has several god children ( knits for them). poorer has two employees whom he knows well, he has a colleague….

I don’t understand what other sort of relationship can be portrayed. Friendship, responsibility, supervision, affection…what’s missing?

Regarding discrimination: I think it would help here if we talked in terms of the protected characteristic 'sexual orientation' rather than the fluid 'sexuality' which covers a lot of things that are specific to the individual. I'm sure we could find that 1-2% of the population are aroused or not aroused by all sorts of things - that doesn't make them a 'community' or an 'identity' or in need of special protection or elevation.

Asexuality is not a sexual orientation and not covered within Equality Law. It's a personal preference, that's all. If in the vanishingly unlikely event you had grounds to sue for discrimination for being asexual the case would probably come under belief / religion.

Regarding representation: we are a species who reproduces sexually - some/many/most are sexually active for much of our adult lives. Of course we are going to create art and stories about that. Relationships, emotion, passion are the stuff of drama and conflict. Asexuality would be anathema to good drama. There are lots of stories with no sex whatsoever but that is different. What would be the central conflict / dilemma in an asexuality narrative?

That's a line out of context, ID what time I left the post and I'll re-read it. Accept that the lol was insensitive.

If the Asexual group is gonna be more prominent, then it needs to split into post-medicalisation/surgery Asexuals, and those Asexuals not having had procedures.

Because imho, there's a hell of a difference between the two.

You dislike the sneering.

I dislike the tone policing

We even each other out.

Asexual isn’t really an orientation. I assume asexual people who want romantic relationships know if they want them with men women or either one. Straight gay bi, those are your options. Tbh I don’t know what medical conditions or identity disorders or lack of interest in sex have to do with sexual orientation. At this rate they will add an “S” for straight.

What is being described as hostility?

My reaction to anyones sexuality is v much "ok grand".

It's none of my business.

There seems to be a lot of hostility towards asexual people.

Thinking something is not that remarkable and doesn't need to have loads of awareness raised about it is not "hostility". If someone told me they were asexual I'd genuinely respect that, and not discriminate against them, or dislike them, for it at all.

It's in the quote history & clickable
"...you must be very unhappy indeed, lol."
It didn't sound like you had a lot of natural empathy. It's hard to read threads on this board for all the sneering.

Here is a list of some of the new sexual attraction identities:

https://www.oulgbtq.org/acearo-spectrum-definitions.html

I count around 24 different ones. The interesting question is what is left as the background against which these are defined, i.e., what's supposed to be mainstream?

Count not could sorry

I have a friend who is a Roman Catholic Priest, so sworn to celibacy from the age of 32. ( I am a Christian, but not RC)

We seem to find plenty to talk about, and I would say we have a meaningful friendship. I am fond of him, he is fond of me. Isn’t this an achievable model for people who are not having sexual relationships because they aren’t interested, as well as those who have offered them to God?

Obviously the fact that some people are not interested in sex is not made up. But having it as a special identity or "sexuality" is odd. Even if it can be seen as a "sexuality" that doesn't mean it makes you "queer".

I have a sexuality, I'm straight. I'm not part of the LGBTQ+++ "community" though am I?

Furthermore, you can be straight (or whatever else) and lose interest in sex - this is very common as people get older, especially for women. Many times I've seen women on MN, who are mothers and wives, or sometimes divorced, say they wouldn't give a shit if they never had sex again, or actively never want it again. Are they suddenly LGBTQ+? Or does it not could for them?

"... most women in her position were not asexual."
Genuine question - how would we know? Granted, some women have left diaries, letters etc that show they enjoyed sex, but do we know that's "most"?

Exactly.

If everyone was meant to be included it would be all 26 letters.

I’m well up for fewer depictions of sex in TV shows & Films, but if the only way to achieve fewer sex scenes is to substitute them with dialogue about why a character isn’t having sex and how not wanting sex gives them a special identity label that means they are so very much Not Like The Other Characters?

No Thank You.

it is not a made up label, it is a sexuality that is innate in 1-2% of the population. it exists, therefore it needs a name, like everything else that exists

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

a significant portion of young adults identifying as asexual don’t always feel like they’re a part of the LGBTQ community.

Because they're isn't any need for them to be, and maybe they get that?

Isn't there a prominent academic type who has publically revealed being Bi?

However no-one she meets asks her any follow up Qs, indeed she feels this makes people Bi-phobic.

Whereas in reality, people have just had enough, they don't give a flying fig she likes her own sex.

No, she's angry and we're all phobes.

Get...a...life! Or a room, lol.

Oh God, same. I'm often bewildered by what others think is mainstream. But no one cares about my problems. We dont all wear a weirdo lanyard for me to recognise other weirdos. We all need to learn to not give any shits what other people think (because, kindly, they are not thinking about you at all) . Whether about our sexual exploits or not, whether the clothes we wear are comfortable but ugly or power suits. It is no ones business and if people do comment, so what. If you are confident and comfortable in yourself, other peoples opinions do not matter to you.
If you are not yet confident and comfortable in yourself, try working on that.

Granted young people mostly dont have that attitude, but they too can work on that.

Generally in current year absolutely no one cares about your sexuality or lack of, and as it has been rammed down our throats for the last decade, most of us have lost patience with it.

It's not overly difficult to find like minded people if you have some other thing to talk about, some hobby maybe. Yes they may not be asexual too, but you always have the other thing to talk about. Possibly if you have more than one hobby, you'll get to meet lots more people and have two things to talk about. With confidence. Being asexual is not the only part of anyone's life. If it is they need a hobby. If it's the only thing you talk about, you will be boring. No one likes boring people.

Lots of good points on the thread. I'm another who just doesn't get why not wanting sex is a big deal or should afford you a special identity. It comes across as people just desperately shoehorning anything they can into the LGBTQ+++ so they can claim special status - especially as I've seen various people claiming to be "ace" on Twitter, also patronisingly explaining that being asexual doesn't actually mean not ever having sex! (That Kat Bristow person was one IIRC) So how are they different from anyone else and even if they are, how does it cause them any problems?

Not wanting sex is like not wanting to eat olives or play rugby or go on holiday - fine, don't then. It's illegal to make someone have sex, so you're protected there. Loads of people are single and don't have any sex whether they want to or not, so you're not going to stand out a mile are you. There are few jobs where you're going to be discriminated against for it, surely. Maybe porn star but that's about it. And lots of us can't do specific jobs because of our likes and dislikes (eg fear of flying means you can't be a pilot) so that's not unique either.

As for awareness - so what? Does everyone have to be aware that some people don't want sex - why? I mean it's a) obvious and b) doesn't really affect anyone in any negative way does it?

Why does there need to be awareness though?
I don’t understand.
Surely there’s only a necessity of awareness if you then need to take into account those along other points along the “how much does this person want sex” spectrum?

It sounds like making up a label and making sure everyone knows about it when, simply, there’s no need.

If we need to make sure everyone feels represented in every facet of their lives will there be time for actual education to take place? (Wonders if this is part of the problem)

If the lol was inappropriate, apologies. Tbh, I'm unsure where I used it.

I have zero issue with people being unhappy. My natural empathy goes out to anyone sad with their lot.

I have zero time for this being a gender. Imho, gender has become one of the most destructive concepts ever to take hold in society, and even by its broadest definition, not fancying people and not fancying getting on with it, is not even close to being a gender.

Nymphomania, sex addiction, not a gender either.