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

[IwantToRetire]

From a survey of 3,695 young adults aged 18-25 27% said they “rarely or never” feel a part of the LGBTQ community. Aside from those who said they were questioning their sexual or gender identity, asexual people were most likely to say this.

18% said they “rarely” felt included and 9% said they “never” felt included.

30% of asexual young adults said they “always” feel included and 30% said they “sometimes” feel included.

39% of asexual people of colour said they rarely or never felt part of the LGBT+ community, compared to 24% of white asexual young people.

It’s also estimated that between 0.44-1 percent (295,768 to 672,200) of the UK population identifies as asexual.

The data paints a disappointing picture that suggests a significant portion of young adults identifying as asexual don’t always feel like they’re a part of the LGBTQ community.

“I hope that this research makes clear the need for greater awareness of the lived experiences and realities of asexual people, especially as we can see a wider pattern here of LGBT+ people of colour feeling excluded from our community.”

https://www.attitude.co.uk/news/a-quarter-of-asexual-young-adults-feel-excluded-from-lgbtq-community-430087/

the point of starting this thread wasn't about whether or not anyone was asexual, but why an anti woman, gender conforming cult should think they can appropriate it.

Because appropriation is how queer theory has got any traction in the first place.
They rode on the coat tails of the LGB, now reject those who don’t comply.

They’ve appropriated medical conditions - intersex conditions - and I’ve yet to see the NHS or any other health body make the distinction that a medical condition isn’t an identity. I’ve also seen on Twitter and Reddit young trans people (mainly female ones) claim they are intersex because they never developed properly as women (meaning they never became very curvy, as many women don’t), so now instead of just being normal women with a normal body shape, they hang on to a diagnosis that hasn’t been investigated, and that there’s no evidence for. Meanwhile those who actually have DSDs try to educate the idiots and end up banned on SM for being transphobic - just for talking about a medical condition!

There’s an attempt to introduce autigender to the list - hijacking another medical issue, and already making things more difficult for those genuinely in need of support, as the whole idea of autism is becoming diluted.

Let’s hope that the push to include paedophiles in the alphabet soup never comes to fruition.

Why wouldn’t the gender cult appropriate asexuality? This is what they do.

My question would be why have so many adults - teachers, drs, mental health workers - gone along with any of this? What has influenced them? What has made them drop everything known about typical child to adult development and decide that this cult-like behaviour is suddenly real and needs to be validated, when every other phase up to this point has been treated as the temporary beast that it is?
Why have so many lost their minds? Who does it serve?

Ok all, let's keep this as simple as possible eh?Opposites are relevant, like theists and atheists, different but related by the acceptance or rejection of the same subject.
So this thread has been tough to read. And the bullying btw is not clever when it gets plain nasty.
Asexual is something that needs to be recognised, but should be separated from a very different sexually defined/persecuted group.

Excellent post, @DogFleece . The 'who does it serve' question at the end, though, shouldn't lead us to too 'conspiratorial' an answer, I think. It seems to be a perfect storm of many different factors contibuting to this insanity-

• the horrible effects of social media, which god knows have the capacity to make us all a bit crazy but are especially insidious for youg people
• hypersexualistion of society and the internet, which allows men to habitually rehearse sexual fantasies to the point where they become additions - and to demand mainstream validation and facilitation of their additions
• girls' confused and frightened responses to this hypersexualisation of their bodies
• the terrible failures of our education system, which has become worse and worse at teaching critical thinking, and which is more and more required to take on larger pastoral responsibilities that it just can't handle well (the tasks of socialising children into a crazy society by providingn relationships lessons, etc )
• The micro-industry of proviing resources for this impossible task, which seems to be populated with snake oil salespeople offering unevidenced claims and solurions
• The related marketing micro-industry that has grown up around corporations desire to score easy, cheap 'progressive' branding boosts by latching on to the validation of identities (rather than, say, mending their gender pay gap, not employing children in sweat shops overseas, not filling the seas with plastic, etc.

My question would be why have so many adults - teachers, drs, mental health workers - gone along with any of this? What has influenced them? What has made them drop everything known about typical child to adult development and decide that this cult-like behaviour is suddenly real and needs to be validated, when every other phase up to this point has been treated as the temporary beast that it is?
Why have so many lost their minds? Who does it serve?

I agree with Random, it serves, and/or appeals to, a wide range of people for a range of reasons, that aren’t necessarily to do with whatever deliberate agenda it might have. With the professionals, teachers, psychologists etc, I think those who have swallowed it have done so because of the forced teaming with LGB being very effective. A lot of people genuinely believe (or have been believing, I think things are changing) that some one saying they’re trans is exactly like saying they’re gay - and it’s persecution to not accept/go along with that, and all right-thinking, modern, educated people don’t want to be homophobic, and being trans is exactly the same.

Of course there are massive differences on many levels, and one of the most important is that you don’t do anything about a young person saying they’re gay, except accept and reassure (and perhaps educate about certain risks, esp if male). If they change their mind at some point (e.g. if it was a social contagion effect or a phase) it doesn’t matter.

accepting and “validating” a cross-sex gender identity if a very different thing when there’s a medical pathway and body-harming treatments involved.

But to be fair a lot of them have had doubts and questions and been unhappy about this. One effect of that is that people have just left their profession because the prevailing culture meant they would be bullied or punished for saying anything. Reading between the lines, I think that’s what happened to the brilliant educational psychologist we had at my kids’ primary school and who helped with my DD’s issues (non gender related but it came up). When I hinted very subtly that I wasn’t fully on board with the gender movement she subtly agreed. She left within a year or two and changed jobs to something totally different. If you had qualms about potentially destroying kids lives by encouraging transitioning, what else could you do?

@DemiColon:
"I wonder now if the fact that these kids are being taught that these identities are real and important is part of why so many seem to mature quite late?"
I remember as a teenager we read books like 'Catcher in the Rye' and Bildungsroman all about the pains of growing into adulthood.
Perhaps teenagers today are given ready-made identities instead of the experience and expectation they should struggle, mature and grow into adults.

The LGBTQ+ community is about much more than sex.

It's really not you know, the LGB community is ALL about sex 🤷 it's kind of the point!

If we include asexuals in the LGBT community, we might as well include everyone. There’s nothing wrong with being asexual at all, and I do think the number of asexual people has been underestimated - but it’s got nothing to do with LGB people. Asexual people might as well complain the straight community is excluding them. It’s sex and attraction. If you’re somebody who doesn’t have that then you’re not going to be part of that community. That’s ok.

All these added letters devalue the community IMO. If you’re not part of a defined group, why not form your own group, representing people like you? Is that not as ‘cool’ as LGBT people? It’s just silly. Being asexual is definitely not silly at all, but wanting to be part of a group representing people who have sex with people of the same sex is.

The LGBTQ+ community is about much more than sex.
How could this possibly be true?

''@Baabaa75 · Yesterday 18:29
The LGBTQ+ community is about much more than sex.

It's really not you know, the LGB community is ALL about sex 🤷 it's kind of the point!''

''@ReadersD1gest · Yesterday 20:29

The LGBTQ+ community is about much more than sex.
How could this possibly be true?''

Because people who are part of this community are human beings, not just genitals?

The LGBTQ+ community is associated with cultural and social movements too. It has a long history of campaigning/activism on equality.

Also, how many times do we have to repeat on this thread that the fact that someone does not see sex as a priority/might not want sex does not mean they do not have relationships/feel attraction to people?

Some asexual people have relationships. That relationship could be a same-sex one or an heterosexual one.

It really is not that complicated.

But of course you have to be willing to listen rather than just sneer or feel threatened.

Some asexual people have relationships. That relationship could be a same-sex one or an heterosexual one.

So in that sentence you’ve defined that they might be LGB by whether their relationship is same-SEX or not. The LGB rights movement is defined by sex - namely by same-sex relationships and/or same-sex sexual interactions.

Of course the LGB movement has cultural significance and political importance etc. but it is defined by sex. By the definition you’ve just written, an asexual person can be LGB if they are same-sex attracted (presumably romantically only). If they’re heterosexual then they’re not.

And I am fed up of being told that the sex of a person is about “genitals’ and we shouldn’t reduce people down to “genitals’, that is untrue and a false argument to try to deny that for gay and straight people, attraction is based on sex - not genitals, sex. I am not attracted to penises, but to a man as a whole and many other aspects of the male body. It’s the gender ideology movement that reduces people to body parts e.g. cervix Havers.

I do agree that some, perhaps lots, of people are asexual - though I think that might be better served by being included just as part of the normal range of human interest in sex (or nto) rather than a separate category all by itself.

The thing that really struck me about the original quotes from the study in OP's first post was that the state of not being included in the "LGBTQIA+ community" is presented by the researchers as a bad thing, but that's not necessarily what the young asexual people surveyed might think. The young asexual-identified person I know best is scornful at the thought of being included under the "queer umbrella", not because he gives a shit about being thought of as gay or not, but because he's fairly clear-minded and considers asexuality is a totally different thing from sexual orientation. He also doesn't want to appropriate a history of oppression. So it's perfectly possible that some of the asexuals surveyed consider their non-inclusion a reasonable and sensible thing.

So it's perfectly possible that some of the asexuals surveyed consider their non-inclusion a reasonable and sensible thing.

Exactly - and so to repeat myself. My starting this thread wasn't about whether anyone was or could be asexual but the arrogant presumptive assumption that they should be part of the rainbow umbrella.

On one level, the rainbow umbrella is irrelevant to most people, and only really appeals to young adults who want to "belong".

The problem is that parts of the establishment has given them a political priority totally out of proportion to their numbers let alone political nous.

Why not give Goths the same priority? Many young people were attracted to that view of the world, or even hippies. Both groups have / had more to offer as a social and political perspective a group of queer converts whose life is about they themselves and their introspection.

The LGBTQ+ community is associated with cultural and social movements too. It has a long history of campaigning/activism on equality.

This isn't true. The LGB community has had a long history of campaigning based on achieving their equal rights and representation because of their sexuality.

The TQ+ community is the only "campaign" group that advances ideas that are about restricting other peoples rights.

It is reprehensible to make out they are the same.

Not forgetting many of the earlier gay and lesbian campaigners are so disgusted by the Queer followers and their intolerance, that they have formed the LGB Alliance.

Much to the relief of those who are same sex attracted.

As I have asked before, how is it possible that anyone could post on a FWR thread promoting the queer faction as being in any way suitable to have influence or control over young people.

incomprehensible!

I do not understan 99% of these comments!

”why would anyone care / have to know / sex is personal”

Are you really telling me that none of you haven’t talked about / no one has talked to you about these things?
Should I shut down people when they meantion dating/partners - cause I don’t care, how rude would that be.
A friend of mine told me their trying for baby, why is she telling me she’s been ejaculated into, gross, I don’t want to know.
People dontalk about sex, why aren’t aces aloud to tell they don’t have it / feel sexual attraction?
My closest people in my life do talk about personal things, why shouldn’t i do the same, am I supposed to censor myself - what kind of friendship would that be?

Oh, and so many commenting about rolling eyes, maybe I’ll do that the next time someone tells me their going on a date/ hook-up / getting married / having a baby.
Yeah, I’ll just roll my eyes, because how silly!

And I don’t know why so many are talking about late bloomers - that’s not asexuality. And again what are the people who never ’bloom’ supposed to do?

There are so many things to worry about, small group of people who don’t have sex / feel sexual attraction and who just want a word and way to find each other, is not worth all of this angst you are having.

Why do you imagine someone discussing their date / partner, an actual live person who exists and occupies spaces in the world, is in any way related to your decision not to have a partner?
Do you really feel your position is in any shape or form as interesting to anyone else?
As for the equating someone announcing a pregnancy with them declaring they have "been ejaculated into" 🤦‍♀️ You have serious issues.
I'd actually wonder how much interaction with other people you have, because you sound socially backward.

That was @YouAreNotBatman

People are not oppressed on the grounds that they are asexual. They just aren't. It's a personality type. People might roll their eyes at the self indulgence and narcissism . That's not oppression.

Some of this thread truly is truly batshit.

I have absolutely no idea as to why anyone would be so triggered by the idea that:

• some people might be asexual
• they might still enjoy romantic relationships
• they might want to talk about it with others, because humans tend to want to talk about things like love/relationships/what goes on in their lives
• that being part of a community might mean that someone who doesn't quite understand how they fit it in a world where most people are expected to have sex might be reassured to hear that there are other people like them after all, that they should worry about being ''weird'' or that they should not force themselves to have sex if it is simply not for them.

To me that anyone would have an issue with the above is beyond odd.

Somehow it has been bizarrely twisted into something that involves views on trans rights and being lectured by people who are very likely to be straight on what my identity is (as someone who is not hetero) is and how I should describe/view/experience my own community.

Mind-blowing.

Nobody is "triggered" at all, stop that 😂
We're just baffled at being expected to find it interesting,

"triggered" oh FGS.

Is that what you call it when people disagree or have questions? To avoid being told we're being "triggered", we have to just accept any old illogical nonsense and "be kind" and shut up, is that it?

People are allowed to point out things that don't make sense or are coming across as attention-seeking. Others are free to argue back/explain/point out why they think it does make sense. Why don't you do that instead of going on the attack? It makes it seem like you don't really know why you think what you think, you just know you're supposed to think it to be a good person. If that's not the case, and you have thought it through, then you can make a clear case for it - right? No attacks needed.

some people might be asexual
they might still enjoy romantic relationships
they might want to talk about it with others, because humans tend to want to talk about things like love/relationships/what goes on in their lives
that being part of a community might mean that someone who doesn't quite understand how they fit it in a world where most people are expected to have sex might be reassured to hear that there are other people like them after all, that they should worry about being ''weird'' or that they should not force themselves to have sex if it is simply not for them.

And no one has been remotely upset or unaccepting of any of the above. No one has been being nasty about asexual people or saying they don't exist, or anything like that at all. Have they? If you think they have, could you quote?

I still don’t understand how you can want to have sex sometimes when you are asexual?

Why would you want that then? It renders you sexual, any orientation, but certainly not «a-«

1. Try to resist heteronormativity.
2. Group every feeling or behaviour that could conceivably be seen as outside traditional heterosexuality into a single list and call it a community.

I'd imagine you're just an ordinary Joe with a low libido. Definitely not a member of the "most oppressed" gang. Some people can't just bear the word ordinary.

3- start accusing ordinary non-sparkly lesbians and gay men ‘homonormative’ and force them out of the expanded community.