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/

"... 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"?

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?

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?

Count not could sorry

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?

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.

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.

What is being described as hostility?

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

It's none of my business.

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.

You dislike the sneering.

I dislike the tone policing

We even each other out.

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.

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?

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?

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

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.

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.

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...

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!

And that’s horrifying.

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.

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.

Not ignored. I believe they have objected to being included in the word soup. They do not identify as LGBTQ+++and they were not asked for their permission to be included.

Yes we all know that, but most rainbow organisation continue to include the "I" so (in case you didn't guess) it was part of me making fun of the whole ludicrous arguement.

ie trans isn't about sexuality, LGB is. And who knows what Queer means. A catchall phrase to cover what ever an individual feels they are particularly special for.

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.

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”.