Hahahaha!!!!

[DialSquare]

I love JKR!

You do love a bit of hyperbole don’t you. No one is hating on anyone. We’re saying that being asexual doesn’t warrant a special day. And as for it being a pointless thread where everyone agrees with me, well you’ve disproved that load of bollocks with your own posts. In the same way I couldn’t give a shit what someone who disagrees with me thinks, I also don’t need pats on the back from strangers on the internet.
I’ll continue to post threads about whatever I like. I hope you continue to join in.

To me asexuality is about much more than just not being keen on sex, it’s more about the fact that I have never fancied anybody, never had crushes on people as a teen, never felt desire towards anyone. I guess if you are straight how I feel towards everybody is how you would feel towards the same sex. It’s not just being uninterested in sex, it’s all of the feelings of desire towards another person that come before sex as well. You don’t have to be having sex to know whether you are straight or gay, you can have a low sex drive but not be asexual and still feel sexual desire or fancy people. For me it’s the absence of those feelings towards anybody, male or female, which has led me to believe I am asexual more so than the fact I have no interest in sex.

Of course sexuality and sexual interest can change, I know many women who hit their forties and left long term straight relationships to be with women, but the fact it might change isn’t a good reason to just deny the fact asexuality can be a genuine sexuality for some people. Most people wouldn’t think it acceptable to say to somebody straight or gay that they might change their minds and nobody is arguing that straight, gay or bisexual aren’t valid sexual identities because it might change in the future and it’s no longer okay to tell teens that their sexuality is just a phase despite the fact that some teens who think they are straight or bi or whatever may not still identify that way once they hit their 40s.

Essentially if somebody is attracted to the opposite sex we have the label straight, attracted to the same sex we have the label gay and attracted to both sexes we have the label bisexual. Nobody says not to use these labels because it’s just about you and your feelings and a ‘valid identity’ isn’t necessary, indeed there are plenty of forms and situations where you can be asked to state sexual orientation. Why then is asexual not a valid label for people who are not attracted to people of either sex? When asked my sexual orientation what would you suggest I say consider I am not, and never have been, attracted to males or females? I’m not straight or gay or bi and that’s something that runs much deeper than being ‘not keen’ on sex, is it not valid to have a label for that absence of attraction? Surely if actually I have to go through life stating that I am straight (or gay or bi if preferred) but just ‘not keen’ on sex, despite never having been attracted to a man (or woman) once, and if people refuse to recognise asexuality because they feel it’s only existed ‘5 minutes,’ maybe that is a kind of oppression?

"I honestly can’t believe the irony in people making claims about asexuality, trying to make it something strange, perverted, dangerous or insidious."

Nobody has said any such thing, if anything most comments are about it being total irrelevant, people who have little or no libido don't need to 'identify' as asexual. It's a complete waste of time to make such a thing the centre of your existence.

We don't need yet another virtue signalling day for imaginary folks, it's just another example of the batshit ideology forcing there stupidity down everyone's throat.

When asked my sexual orientation what would you suggest I say consider I am not, and never have been, attracted to males or females

You pick the 'prefer not to say' option, of course. Or leave it blank. You don't have to tell anyone what your sexual preferences are, or your religion, or your sex, or your gender, or your ethnicity, etc.

If you are ever forced to do so then you refuse and step away.

Damn, I'd not made that connection before.

Bloody hell. They are really fucking diabolical, aren't they?

Is it a love in, or is it a little endorphinfest of hate?

Surely we should be educating teenagers that it's absolutely fine to say confidently, clearly and firmly "thanks but no thanks". No further explanation is needed, nor should be requested. The asexual identity badge is a diversion from the point that nobody should be demanding job interview style feedback for any such encounter.

Yep, that sums it up nicely.

The concern for me is how this translates to what goes on in schools and youth organisations. I can definitely see an argument for asexual being added to gay, straight and bi in age-appropriate education. However, once you start with the celebrations and flags and board games and assemblies and lunchtime clubs you put pressure on children to pick an identity and you give openings to bad actors from within or without the organisation.
Here's an extract of what Safe Schools Alliance said in an article about Girl Guiding and Asexuality in 2021:

Asexuality does not mean that a person does not have sex, it means that they have no sexual desires. It is our opinion that conversations about asexuality may groom children to see enthusiastic consent as an optional extra; this is clearly a risk. The idea that sex is some sort of obligation is not one that we believe children should be exposed to. Indeed, it may well be used to convince children that there is nothing wrong with rejecting the requirement of consent....

....As an example, if a youth group leader says or lets it be known that he is asexual and then a child asks a question about it, the predator has now got an easy way in to discuss sexual desire or lack of with a child. He can pretend to be increasing their knowledge. He can work out how to exploit the specific vulnerabilities of individual children. He can use the cover of “I am an asexual so I have no sexual desire” to give the child a false sense of reassurance while he continues to groom her (or him). He can touch her without her worrying that it is a sexual touch. He can get quite far until she feels that it is too late and that she cannot get help. He can also make her feel as though no-one would believe her as ‘everyone knows that he is asexual’.

T can be prised from the LGB because it is not an orientation. Is it possible that Ace is being promoted because it is an orientation and so slots in nicely next to LGB ? The last 10 years teaches us to be very cautious.

This is just paranoid nonsense and has already been disproved.

Splendid idea! Where do we sign up? I’ll make a banner emblazoned with “This is pointless. Look at me dammit!”

I came here to say similar.

Teenagers need to be supported to thoroughly understand consent and girls in particular need to be empowered to say no. Boys in particular need to be taught that 'no' is a complete sentence.

They don't need 'asexuality' muddying the waters - ideas that you can only say no if you're Ace, or if you say no you must be Ace etc etc.

Consent needs to be discussed and understood separately from special identities, not seen as only valid for some special identities - that is dangerous.

(And if JKR wants to take the piss out if a man who has repeatedly insulted and bullied her online, crack on I say. I don't understand this po faced expectation that women be perfect in all we say and do, all the time. This is why people are now 'triggered' at the mention of a golden snitch, but are quite happy to watch Neil Gaiman the sexual predator's new series on TV. It's just age old sexism /rant).

I missed that one yesterday! They all know its bollocks but still keep on repeating it. As shown on this thread!

I actually don't particularly like "identities" for any sexuality. I think they are reductive and damaging.

As a descriptor on occasion they are not that bad I suppose including asexual - though it's worth noting that the idea of a gay or straight type of person is historically unusual - it's not an idea that needs to exist for people to know who they want to have sex with. You don't need to have a label to avoid "denying who you are". Just like we don't usually need a label for many other things we are, or are not, compelled by.

I don't really think the fact that you have no interest in romance either is that relevant to anyone but you, (and it is, apparently, not implied in the word asexual, as apparently plenty of asexual people like romance, and some even like sex. Go figure.) It's part of your experience and relevant to you, but adding a label doesn't change that in any way.

We seem to be in a phase of culture where self-understanding is mainly a matter of accepting certain branding.

Absolutely this.

'Branding"

Yes that's exactly it. Everything's got a flag etc.

For a movement that's supposedly all about being yourself, there certainly is a lot of categorisation and stereotyping. What group you're in and how to signify that.

It's all so reductive (and teenage).

I think that it's notable that a lot of the people who are falling into this way of thinking are autistic. Particularly the ones identifying as asexual as there is a relatively high number of people with autism who don't have any interest in sex.

Many seem to latch on to these reductive categories to help them understand people and themselves - much as many teenagers do - this is why teen magazines are so full of silly personality tests. But as all of us who were teens long ago know, the sooner you realize those labels are in themselves reductive, the sooner you begin to understand yourself, and by extension, are able to understand others.

Thank you for this, it is very clear and factual, and that's welcome in a discussion like this.

It still doesn't explain what is different now, and requiring of an identity, a name, a label, a flag, a day, when there have always been people [including in my own family, and I'm sure other posters know similar people] who experienced and spoke of
' the absence of those feelings towards anybody, male or female'
which you describe.

So I think the point that you're missing is that it's not new, and it's not unusual,

it's completely accepted, nobody 'hates on' people who are not sexually attracted to other people, that's just who they are and how they want to live their lives.

And of all the non-straight sexual identities, it was historically, and in parts of the world where you may be killed for being gay or lesbian still is, the least dangerous one - has it ever been a criminal and possibly capital offence not to be sexually attracted to anybody?

It's because of the ordinariness and familiarity of people who are not sexually attracted to other people, and the relative safety of that identity, that the whole day/flag/label/oppression discourse is rejected as being a '5 minute' thing.
The objection is to the discourse, not the people.
.

Its a lie

this was pointed out to that poster on another thread and they are still perpetuating the ‘myth’ lie

@MolkosTeenageAngst

Surely if actually I have to go through life stating that I am straight (or gay or bi if preferred) but just ‘not keen’ on sex, despite never having been attracted to a man (or woman) once, and if people refuse to recognise asexuality because they feel it’s only existed ‘5 minutes,’ maybe that is a kind of oppression?

No, it isn't. It might be annoying, it may be uncomfortable, but it isn't 'a kind of oppression'. It's this appropriation of the language of oppression, actual real oppression, that leads to the ridicule of things like Asexuality Visibility Day.

There's absolutely no reason why you or anyone else has to 'go through life' stating either that you are not keen on sex or that you have never been attracted to anyone. Sure, some people may ask you about your family status, or your dating history or whatever, but those people do that to everyone, and many of us have areas of those that we may be sensitive about. Some of us may even have had traumatic experiences in some of those areas, but again discomfort is not oppression. It's being human. Navigate it.

Yes. I would be taking very much notice of what Safe Schools say. When it comes to discussing sex, sex education, sexual orientation, etc, with regards to children, they are alive to every possibility of exploitation.

And the fact that it is absolutely sounding just like the other days of visibility, or remembrance, which are actually mostly about lobbying and adult male sex drive would be ringing bells for me.

In my opinion, there's no way stonewall and pink news would give a flying fuck about children unless it served the interests of adult men.

we've had this discussion on here before. Loads of children and teens thinking they might be asexual, when they're just sexually not matured.

Plus, it's completely normal to not break out in a sweat seeing members of the opposite sex.

There are loads of women for whom the arousal part doesn't take place until all the right buttons are being pressed. And for many, not even then.

Franky I don't think it's surprising that a lot of people feel pressured into feeling sexually attracted, willie nilly (as it were).

A far better use of sex education would be to address that. Instead of labelling it, giving it a fanfare and a special day.

Have you ever had any difficulties understanding your own sexuality/ sexual desire? Have you had sexual desires or encounters which fall outside of society’s the ‘norm’ ie: heterosexual? It’s easy to say you don’t like ‘identities’ for sexuality if your own sexuality has always been clear to you and if it’s something you haven’t struggled with. It’s probably easy to say there’s no need for people to have a sexual identity if you are straight and have had typical sexual relationships.

My sexuality is something I have struggled with since my teens. I have always felt different, it didn’t occur to me that I wasn’t attracted to men or that I didn’t have a sex drive so I put myself in multiple uncomfortable sexual encounters. I stayed in a toxic abusive relationship because I believed my low sex drive was the issue and that I deserved my boyfriend’s abuse because of it. I have wondered if I was gay and felt defective when female sexual encounters didn’t feel right either. I have struggled with self-harm and multiple suicide attempts because I felt so broken and defective. I’m not saying not understanding my sexuality was the only issue, but I would say it has had a significant negative impact on me and if I could change one thing about myself it would be to experience sexual attraction and desire and to be straight, gay, bi, anything but asexual really. It’s easy to say that my interest in sex/ romance is nobody’s business but my own but the reality is that society, friends, family, colleagues, even acquaintances all have certain expectations regarding relationships, I can almost guarantee when I meet somebody new they will ask if I am in a relationship/ married within 5 minutes. You might think it’s not necessary to add a label but the reality is that it can feel very uncomfortable and very isolating to not fit into society’s norms and to feel different to everybody else, there is something validating to know that you are not the only person experiencing what you feel and to know that it is common enough that there is a term for it. It would feel different if I were in a world where I could answer the question ‘Do you have a boyfriend?’ with ‘No, I’m asexual and happily single’ in the same way somebody could reply ‘No, I’m a lesbian and I have a girlfriend.’ Do you feel that lesbians shouldn’t be able to identify as such?

Labelling (surely it's a label rather than an actual identity) yourself as "asexual" explains to others why you don't want to have sex or chase around for relationships which would seem destined to progress to sex. But I don't see why anyone should have to give an explanation of why they don't want to have sex. Surely, in a sane world, the lack of consent should be assumed unless consent is actively given. If you haven't consented, then there is no consent. You just don't want to, and that's an end to it. Surely what needs to happen is a more general understanding of what consent means. I see no reason why the burden of explanation should fall on the "asexual".

Sorry, I should have been more clear that I was being tongue in cheek when I suggested it was a type of oppression! But it does feel like a type of silencing; few people turn around during Pride and says why do people who are gay/ bisexual feel the need to label themselves and who cares and why should they have to state it to anybody anyway but it does feel like people don’t think those whose sexual orientation is no attraction to anybody shouldn’t be able to have a word to explain that. Obviously I don’t think I am oppressed as somebody who is asexual, but I do feel very much invisible, ‘other,’ different, unaccounted, odd and pitied. I don’t feel like it is something I can tell people and have respected. I don’t understand why people who do experience sexual attraction to others and have a label to describe it, whether they be gay, straight or bisexual, feel so strongly that those who don’t feel it can’t also have a recognised and validated label? A day for asexuals isn’t harming anybody and might be positive for some people, young or otherwise, who are confused about their sexuality. Just because asexuals are not oppressed doesn’t mean they should be denied any recognition at all?

I think for me it’s because it’s bigger than just not wanting sex, it’s not experiencing any sexual attraction at all to anybody. That’s probably what makes me feel more different than just not wanting sex, it’s when people have conversations about which celebrity they fancy or point out somebody attractive etc and I have no point of reference for what it feels like to fancy somebody or find somebody attractive. It’s hard when people ask which celebrity you fancy to say ‘oh, I don’t fancy anybody, ever, and never have.’ I don’t find being celibate the most isolating or difficult thing about being asexual and for me asexuality is not really about the fact I don’t want or have sex. Maybe it’s something though that other people can’t understand, I don’t know, certainly it seems there are a lot of people on here who are not asexual who seem very determined to tell me exactly how I should think and feel about my sexuality rather than to listen to my actual experiences and maybe consider them before deciding for me asexuality is bullshit and irrelevant.