Stonewall releases report on "dehumanising" discrimination against asexuals

[GinAllAround]

I'm not doubting that you can be judged socially for saying you're asexual but is it really the same as being gay or lesbian?

Although I agree that it shouldn't be classed as a MH condition, I've never heard of anyone being denied a job or housing for being asexual or being beaten up or taunted in the streets.

And what extra legal protection/rights do asexual people need? Surely they have the same rights as anyone else?

www.stonewall.org.uk/about-us/news/new-research-shining-light-‘dehumanising’-discrimination-faced-ace-people

No one enjoys smear tests. They are undignified, uncomfortable (can be painful) and involve lots of questions you might not fancy answering. It’s shit. But it’s NHS health screening.

I don't believe any woman should be pressured to have a smear test, it needs to be consensual. I don't see that it needs to be different for "asexuals".

I don't know what the rules are around IVF but would the same not apply to a non-ace straight couple who'd been trying with insemination only?

Yes.

Seriously. Sex is how babies are made. At some point people need to accept that not wanting to have sex does not constitute a fertility problem.

No one is trying to ‘cure asexuality’ by pointing out that you and your partner could just try having sex to make a baby or accept that you aren’t having one because you aren’t interested in having sex.

This isn’t being mean or discriminatory. It’s the biology of how babies are made.

We need to go back to people fighting for the rights to do things (get married, be next of kin, adoption etc) and to change society to not abuse people or discriminate for doing things (holding hands in public, talking about the people they loved, dressing a certain way).

Obviously when it was LGB rights, the right to be gay and treated equally was synonymous with people be able to legally do things.

LGB rights was not about the right not to sleep with the opposite sex, for example, people have always been able to not do things without anyone caring.

The only complicating factor is that men do try to force women into sex, in all shapes and forms. I can't see that saying no for being asexual is any different than saying no for being a lesbian, for finding the bloke gross and disgusting, for having a boyfriend... men not taking no for an answer is not an asexual problem, its a man problem.

@RunningAndSinging I was responding to @IncomingTraffic's comment about the woman who wanted fertility treatment and wasn't having sex. In the article she says her husband has fertility issues. So they would need to use donor sperm for insemination to be able to say they had attempted it in any reasonable way. Like a lesbian couple would. And it is not stated in the article that she has tried this very logical, cheap and sensible course of action which any ethical doctor should expect before referring someone for the invasive and mentally torturous treatment of IVF.

It's rude to intentionally take people out of context to try and make a political point.

I do get that it must be awful if all the health care professionals keep trying to cure the asexuality before treating the problem the person came in with. That is what they are saying is happening. Who are we not to believe the people experiencing it?

How can you ‘cure’ a lack of desire?
Doctor, I don't fancy anyone. Here dear, take this pill for a week and you’ll soon feel better.
Well guess what, there’s viagra, there’s all sorts of meds for women whose sex drive has waned. the GP doesn’t diagnose those patients as ‘asexual’.
It’s complete nonsense, navel-gazing tosh and so narcissistic.

Quite. Smear tests are awful and undignified whether you are straight, bi, lesbian or asexual.

Campaign for better screening for all women, hell yes I'm on board. Making this out to be a special issue for asexuals is just a nonsense

Honestly, people who claim victimhood and want special treatment because they can't get IVF when they're not trying to get pregnant or willing to accept biological reality aren't going to be decent parents.

Do they think Stonewall will be there to help them with the dirty nappies when they feel persecuted for not being the centre of attention in the middle of the night when the baby's done a poonami?

You’re not wrong, but the other side of that coin is that if someone’s potential cervical cancer isn't picked up early through screening, they may well have no choice but to have many many different procedures far more invasive than a quick 2 minute smear.

Well obviously no one should be pressured into it.

But asexual people complaining about being offered one or told the benefits of cervical screening are making a huge fuss. The NHS Cervical screening harasses every woman with letters and pre-made appointments and phone calls, whatever their reason for not wanting a smear test.

Asexual people are no more unique in that regard than they are in finding it a horrible experience.

The thing about all this ‘lived experience’
stuff is that the people who are so keen on it don’t really appreciate that their own lived experience is just not as unique or special as they imagine it to be.

And it is not stated in the article that she has tried this very logical, cheap and sensible course of action

It's stated in the report, they have been doing it. That's what she's objecting to, but as pp pointed out it would be the same for any other couple or single woman exclusively using artificial insemination to get pregnant.

Could you just confirm that asexuality does not mean that the person in question isn't actually having any sex?

We had another person here who identified as asexual, who had lots of sex.

We also had a report of something like a 14-year-old who claimed to be asexual, because they didn't get aroused. Obviously rather concerning. Likewise the idea that 'trans' teenagers are asexual, rather than have had their sexual function removed.

And yes, many postmenopausal women could be considered asexual, and the sort of asexual who absolutely do not have sex.

And as NotBadConsidering points out, every single day people are saying things that other people regard as odd, or off, and might even ask them about it. Being offended is completely normal. And just part of life. It's some entitlement to ask for legislation to eliminate being offended.

I mean, I find that offensive. Can we counter legislate the legislation?

Asexual people are no more unique in that regard than they are in finding it a horrible experience.

Yes, that was my point.

When mission creep reaches absolute desperation. Gravy train drying up a bit perhaps.

The irony of your comment about me is that I'm a lesbian, used to be a supporter of Stonewall, attending groups & meetings back in the day. So when you say :But if you don't actually have any skin in the game and your only argument is 'this doesn't affect me personally so I think it's irrelevant to everyone else and thus a waste of time,' then that's not a great rationale, in fact I have considerable skin in the game. It's a source of great sadness to me and countless other lesbians and gay men to see what used to be a great campaigning organisation turn into an organisation that has done so much harm - especially to women and children.
They're cynically looking for a new source of income and &, just as they exploit confused children in schools, they're also openly exploiting people desperately looking for an identity in our complex world. Thus fostering an inward looking pointless alphabet soup of gender ideology that offers nothing constructive to anyone.

No, it's stated that they are using insemination. It is not stated that they are using donor sperm for that insemination. Those are two different things.

We had another person here who identified as asexual, who had lots of sex.

This. It's the meat eating vegan, and the lesbian having lots of sex with men. Words mean nothing more than 'I like the feels and identity of this avatar (today)' in the ongoing computer game of my life.

It would be nod and smile territory if it wasn't for trying to bend the law and force compliance on others.

If they’re asexual how do they know they both have fertility problems? Especially since they haven’t been able to meet the threshold to be referred to a fertility clinic.

None of that sob story is convincing. And it will be the best stonewall had to put in there.

Oh lord, as if anybody gives a shit if others around them have sex or not. They all need to get over themselves and realise they're as boring and pedestrian as the rest of us.

Well, quite.

I can say that not one person I work with has ever shown the slightest interest in my sex life. Sometimes people who are new might say something like “ do you have a partner/ kids “ but that’s just conversation.

The same as if they are talking about their dog they might say “ do you have a pet? “.

After I say “ I’m a single parent “ or “ I’m happily single “ no one ever asks after that. I’m incredulous about the people who say it was forced out of them.

or the people who got an email from HR telling then to have sex

or the woman who says she found sexual harassment uncomfortable and that’s because she’s asexual ( yeah all other women love it ). How can people be to stupid as to think it’s about sex?? It’s about control, putting you in your place because you are a woman.

really no one at work or socially cares. Unless they are a pervert / creep and that’s another problem.

and if a HCP asks, I just say “ I’m not sexually active “ and that’s the end of the conversation.

Grifters gotta grift. Stonewall needs to think about their income stream you know! Let’s come up with a whole load of new problems the world needs our expensive advice on and monitoring via our expensive approval scheme.

Sorry I misread. But male fertility problems don't necessarily mean you have to use donor sperm, and I don't blame them for wanting to use their own gametes. IUI might help.

<raises hand> Another lesbian with HUGE amounts of skin in the game, supporting Stonewall back in the day of real, actual issues and inequality. Who is now no longer welcome in LGBT+ because of being - actually homosexual.

So yes. All patience lost, totally fucked off, the people originally supported by this are the ones with the real problems being trampled by a whole lot of exciting identity stuff.