Asexual Pride

[madcatladyforever]

I'm an asexual myself and there have been a lot of asexuals parading at Pride.
I'd be interested to know what everyone else thinks but I don't personally think asexuals have any place in Pride unless they are actually gay asexuals.
I'm a straight asexual and I would not feel comfortable joining in the parade although as always I'll be there cheering everyone on.
Any thoughts?

Yes, maybe post this in the LGBT section?

Were they part of AVEN? I don't mind them being there, I feel that Pride is for anyone who is not heterosexual and heteroromantic. So if you are asexual you can't also be heterosexual, because they are both sexual attraction related identities. Asexual people in relationships with people of a different sex to their own have as much right to be at Pride as bisexual people in different sex relationships.

But I am sure there are people who disagree, and also people who would disagree with other parade groups (the military, faith groups etc...) so for me it's just about how we can ensure Pride is fair to as many groups as possible

Perhaps when you can have asexual abuse hurled at you in the streets. Perhaps when asexual people are sacked for being asexual. Perhaps when asexual people have a history of being oppressed, killed and jailed for being asexual. The list goes on - you get where I’m coming from.
Seriously - what is the point of a gay and lesbian protest/celebration if it’s not about gay men and lesbians.
Go and march with war veterans as you have as much in common with them as you do with the gay and lesbian community.
By all means come and support us - but you are not one of us.

Feline then take it up with the organisers of Pride. It was them that invited AVEN.

There are ace people in same-gender/sex relationships, who are not homosexual (they may be homoromantic) but face the same oppression as gay and lesbian people because of their relationship.

Quite rightly many lesbians feel that asexual women who are homoromantic should not describe themselves as simply 'lesbian' because it's not accurate. "Asexual lesbian" does the job, or "asexual homoromantic" if you want to be technical. Therefore it's important for asexual people to be represented for their identity, not be forced to piggy back in the lesbian or gay man community, people here are regularly complaining about the definition of lesbian being widened unfairly.

You can't know by looking how someone identifies, so you can't assume that a 'straight presenting' couple at Pride isn't made up of 2 bisexuals, or 1 bisexual, or any other not straight identity.

A bisexual in a different gender relationship also isn't going to be sacked or killed or jailed. But they are still bisexual, and still valid and welcome at Pride.

Pride is not just for gay and lesbian people, and if you want something that exclusionary you should consider making your own event.

It’s hardly exclusionary suggesting that a gay and lesbian event have a gay and lesbian focus!
Your brand of identity politics will be the ruination of everything that the gay and lesbian community fought for. It does not bring us together - it’s dogmatic orthodoxy drives us apart. Soon it will be queer identified straight people marching ... for what?
This is an important conversation we need to have.
I was out in the 80s. There were no legal protections. And people were dying from AIDS. We were fighting for our lives. That is our history. That is why we marched. That is why we protested. People hated us and felt free to say so. It’s nice you want to join us in solidarity - but maybe remember where we are coming from. For some of us it is much more than a frolic. Don’t ever forget the gay and lesbian pioneers that paved the way for you.
So perhaps go and forge your own path and make an event for yourselves instead. Or join ours as a supporter.

Doesn't one of the As in the LGBT alphabet soup stand for Asexual.

I'm asexual and it's an odd twilight situation where everybody I've told think it's because I haven't met 'the one'.

Nope. I'm not doing something so intimate out of curiosity.

I'm not sexually interested in men or women and people simply can't get their heads round it.

Think someone saying in a pub 'I don't drink' and seeing the wanker-ish' reactions.

www.spectator.co.uk/2016/11/why-be-lgbt-when-you-can-be-lgbtiqcapgngfnba/

I don’t use the alphabet soup. It is ridiculous. And I hate queer as when I grew up - you heard that word yelled and you knew it was time to start running and looking for a hiding spot.
I use gay and lesbian.

Feline Nobody should be forcing anyone to use Queer if they do not want to. I will often use Queer to describe myself but only within groups/people who I know are not hurt by the word.

Asexuals have been around forever, it's not a 'new' identity, and as I said already prejudice and discrimination comes from people coding a relationship as same-sex, people aren't that fussed about whether the people in that relationship are actually having sex with each other.

Are you intentionally excluding bisexuals? Do you really feel that LGBTA should just be LG?

I'm asexual. I'm not 'straight' or 'lesbian' asexual because I'm not interested in relationships with men or women. I don't think that I'm discriminated against in any way and think it would be bizarre to attend Pride. I'm not proud of not wanting to have sex. I'm not ashamed of it either. It isn't something that really affects my daily life to be honest. Apart from the occasional 'do you have a boyfriend? Girlfriend?' nobody cares.

Nothing new about being a maiden aunt.

I've been described as asexual in the past, but i'm not up on all this stuff.

How can you be a gay asexual or straight asexual?

Surely the idea is that you are not sexually interested in either sex?

CaptainKirkssparetupee
Asexual means that you are not sexually attracted to anyone- you can still very much feel a romantic attraction

Feeling no romantic attraction at all is a different thing- aromantic. People who have no romantic attraction at all can and do still feel sexual attraction

My sister finds this whole area a subject of fascination, it's not something i've looked into .
I find both reproductive organs to be sickening if I'm honest I'm not sure i could bring myself to have sex at all.
I can find people pretty, but people of both sexes, as far as i understand this nowhere near a romantic feeling, it's more an apreciation of features.
I've not really cared enough to search out where i fit.

Material good for you :) Absolutely nothing wrong with being ace, or aromatic/aro if that's also how you ID, and you don't have to go to Pride either. However if you wanted to attend Pride you'd be just as welcome as a gay person who chooses to remain celibate. It is your identity that 'qualifies' you, not your behaviours.

Asexuality isn't about not having relationships, or not having sex, although there are asexual people who don't do either, it's purely about not experiencing sexual attraction.

Many asexual people are in loving and commited relationships with other people (some are in same-sex relationships and some are not) this doesn't make them any less asexual.

How strange

Captain it's also possible to be sex repulsed or not (and that exists to varying degrees) some people would not have sex for any reason and the whole idea is just revolting, some people would have sex for a 'purpose' such as procreation, to please a partner, to satisfy libido, and some people think the act of sex is 'fun enough' but could just as happily live without it. All of those things are possible without 'sexual attraction' being present.

An ace person may or may not experience romantic feelings and want a romatic relationship. This can be for their own sex, or a different sex, or both (just like sexual attraction).

For most non-asexual people their romantic and sexual attractions correlate, and some asexual people are also aromantic and just don't seek any relationships deeper than a friendship situation.

I guess it's a little strange if you've not come across it before, from my perspective I'd probably find it pretty odd to suddenly experience sexual attraction for the first time. It'd be a totally alien thing to me.

I guess I could describe myself as asexual, seeing as I haven't had sex for 18 years, and have no intentions of ever having it again.
I have no place on any march or any movement as a result, as being asexual doesn't make me opressed in any way.It really is just a load of snowflakery bollocks.

It's all far too complicated for me to get my head around.

I find it a bit difficult to understand too, actually. I've never experienced sexual attraction, therefore I haven't had those relationships. I assume that someone asking me on a date will be doing so because they're sexually attracted to me - that seems to be generally how these things work!

I'm not quite sure what distinguishes 'romantic attraction' from platonic affection - I've had some very intense friendships! Also not sure how someone can be asexual and yet have sex, although I take your point about 'relationship' maybe being defined more broadly and not necessarily always a sexual thing.

I suppose for me it isn't an 'identity' - I was in my late twenties before I ever heard the term 'asexual' and it was just - huh, I guess that's what I am then. Not that important. Nothing wrong with other asexual people thinking differently, of course, but I don't think our situation is remotely comparable to the discrimination and oppression that gay and lesbian people have faced historically, and still do in many parts of the world.

I suppose for me it isn't an 'identity' - I was in my late twenties before I ever heard the term 'asexual' and it was just - huh, I guess that's what I am then. Not that important. Nothing wrong with other asexual people thinking differently, of course, but I don't think our situation is remotely comparable to the discrimination and oppression that gay and lesbian people have faced historically, and still do in many parts of the world.

This is my feelings too.
It wasn't sometimes i activly sort out to be part of, if that makes sense i was explaining how i felt one day and i was sort of told, that sounds like you're asexual, and that's basicly it.
I guess it's just not important enough to me, as it's the absense of a feeling, i don't feel strongly about it.

I've never been sexually aroused either, I'm guessing most asexual people can as you've noted about a lot do have sex?

There's a lot of misconceptions about asexuality, so it's not uncommon for someone to say "oh you're probably just asexual" when someone says they don't like sex, or don't want a relationship.

The only requisite for being asexual is not experiencing sexual attraction. That is it. If you don't experience sexual attraction to anyone then you're probably asexual, or at least on the ace spectrum.

noeffing if you experience sexual attraction and choose not to have sex for whatever reason, you are not asexual. Asexuality is an orientation, not a choice. Also it's incredibly rude to refer to things as "snowflakery bollocks" just because your personal experience is different from other people's. It is perfectly possible to debate without calling people names or shitting all over their experience.

Captain It varies? I haven't been, but asexual people have varying levels of libido and levels of arousal, that is to do with biological processes (hormone levels and other stuff) rather than just sexuality. There are straight and gay people who have a lot of sex, or not a lot of sex. Or who struggle with arousal or don't.

I would imagine it's easier for a female to have sex without arousal than for a male, although there are obviously pharmaceutical methods to make things easier (that's probably the wrong word) if you need to have sex (for procreation for example). Ideally I'd like to never have sex, I plan on procreating using artifical methods of insemination, but that's also cause I plan on being in a relationship with a woman, if I ended up with a man sex would be the easiest way to have children so I'd just deal with that. There are some asexual people who would never be comfortable with that.

Material Romantic attraction is wanting the stuff in a long-term romantic relationship (without the sex) with someone. Strong loving feelings, maybe wanting cohabitation, maybe raising children together, maybe just viewing that person as 'more important' than a very good friend. But that's just my own experience, I'm sure there are other asexual people who experience romantic attraction who can add to that. It's more than just platonic feelings, and can also have a level of intimacy (cuddling, sometimes kissing, caring for the other person etc...) that would be unusual in a friendship by current societal definitions of 'friendship'.

Thank you for answering these questions.

It's ok :) I feel like a lot of the time people don't undersrand asexuality, because they haven't come across it, or because they think that asexual people just want to be single forever and therefore would never experience any form of discrimination.

Aside from single people, especially women, being judged for being single and childless, many asexual people are in same-sex romantic relationships and face all the discrimination that comes along with that. I don't think they should be forced to piggy-back on the lesbian/gay man community just to find safety from that discrimination. I don't think that's fair on lesbians/gay men, who should be free to have a community of people who experience the world in a similar way.

If I just described myself as lesbian, without clarifying that I am asexual and only romantically interested in women I would be tricking lesbians into thinking they would have a sexual relationship were we to date. That would be a horrible thing to do and could only lead to hurt for me or her.

Just like bisexual people deserve their own community at Pride, so do asexuals, because there are experiences that asexual people share that other people may not understand and it's nice to have that community.

Whether or not asexuality should be represented in the parade is up to the organisers of the parade.