mermaid taylor swift christian tumbr dot com
Posts tagged asexuality
Actual thing I just came across on the AVEN message board.
“I want to take you home and hang you on my wall”
They’re also quoting “Creep” by Radiohead so lol they may actually be trolling, but I bet either way there were people who wholeheartedly agreed with them
I caught the Radiohead reference right away, but the rest of the post seemed like standard ace weirdness and their post count was too high. The responses are exactly what you’d imagine, though.
Some more quotes from the same thread:
This discrepancy I was at least aware of… Ok. First off, when I’m watching porn, I don’t fantasize, I don’t think of myself as one of the actors, I’m just watching. I guess you could call it voyeuristic, but watching two people go at it in real life world would probably not be amusing/a turn on.
It’s not sexual attraction because I don’t want to have sex with them, and it’s not really aesthetic attraction as I usually experience it… but there must be some aesthetic component because I refuse to watch porn without a hot guy in it. Actually, not just the guy. Both of them need to be reasonably attractive. Or maybe that’s just personal preference? I’m not even sure if it’s actual “attraction” between me and a porn actor- if he/she magically poofed into my bedroom I doubt I’d feel sexual attraction or aesthetic attraction - they’d just be a rando person in my bedroom.Sounds like sexual arousal caused by aesthetic attraction. I for one don’t think anything you’ve written so far prevents you to identify as asexual, but only you can know for sure of course.
A good example would be all of those pedophiles out there that don’t have any interest in touching real kids, you know?
For example, I used to think I had a breast fetish. I’d get turned on by photos of topless women, but I started to noticed that if I saw photos of the same woman over and over again, I’d lose interest.
Internet asexual communities are like beautiful trainwrecks.
I believe this is my favorite:
“The feelings of Person C does not involve wanting Sex with them, although does cause them to manually stimulate themselves, which is not exactly sexual attraction in its traditional sense, although masturbation can be either sexual for some people (Substituting sex with stimulation), or to satisfy the libido of some Asexuals”
24 notes (via gazelystare-deactivated20120714 & gazelystare-deactivated20120714)
Actual thing I just came across on the AVEN message board.
“I want to take you home and hang you on my wall”
The are no Oppression Olympics, just the difference between prejudice and oppression.
It occurs to me why asexuals on tumblr annoy the fuck out of me. It’s because they remind me so much of the atheist community I used to be involved in. It was mostly middle class white guys and I was convinced atheism was the worst oppression to face, but then reality smacked me in the face, well mostly their own misogyny towards me and other women.
I know the atheist arguments so well because I used to make them. They argue from a place without experience so as they shout out against sexism in the bible, they actually fail to realize that biggest reason why sexism exists is men. Of course the typical atheist, especially the internet one, is ignorant of what sexism, homophobia, racism, and other oppressions are really about.
So while yes, people can be prejudiced against atheists, they’re not oppressed, there is no institutionalized oppression against atheists, no murders happening today on the streets because they’re atheist. Yet, they won’t hesitate to appropriate struggles of other people, and if you dare say they’re not oppressed they whip up the worst, yet rare and far between incidents of against atheists as if it happens to them on a daily basis. They even appropriate the “coming out” of gay people, bc telling your parents you’re an atheist is the same thing as gay, riiiight.
And that’s not to say people aren’t ignorant about atheists, and it’s really fucking sad when parents won’t allow their children to believe as they want, but they’re not oppressed.
Ring a bell asexuals? because this is exactly what you do too.
And invariably I’ll get the but I’m “insert actual oppressed identity” then i’m not talking about you, but if you’re going to defend straight asexuals appropriating my identity and pulling this shit, then you’re not helping the LGBTQ cause. Demisexuality and Asexuality is not an oppression. I’ve never claimed they don’t get shit, but it’s not the same. Learn the difference.
I think an important unifying factor is that both groups are heavily made up of nerds. And I really hate nerds. Scratch the surface of any nerdy dude and you will find oozing piles of resentment against women and queer people and especially against queer women.
156 notes (via morningchorus)
Celibate Gay Men Are Significantly More at Risk of Suicide
Unlike, I gather, a lot of queer resource tumblrs, I follow a bunch of religious tumblrs too, and a bunch of blogs that focus on the intersection of the two topics. Which means…
OMG. Shut up. Shut up. Shut up with your bullshit.
The points made in the OP are relevant and important. Quibbling over the amount of data used is apparently way more important to you than acknowledging that suicide is a major, major, major fucking issue for queer people, and here specifically gay men. It only takes a little emotional intelligence to recognise that an irresponsibly, decontextually applied asexual narrative could have a major impact on vulnerable young men. This is not about actual asexuality, but about asexual dialogue being used to justify (or promote) celibacy - the potentials for abuse of that are massive, particularly within a context where there is a ‘love the sinner, hate the sin’ ethos (or where one, like a queer youth, may have that background and still be processing shit around that when they access projects that use asexuality materials). And denying/repressing genuine desire is a form of self-imposed isolation and it has been demonstrated over and over isolation is a major factor in queer youth suicide.
I dont’ think the unbrokencircle is sending out bullshit. I think she’s pointing out legitimate limitations in a study with a very small sample size, and legitimate caution on should take in drawing conclusions.
To the extent that I think she’s wrong, it’s because I think it’s because she doesn’t agree that ~good data~ is incredibly challenging to get on a topic (does homosexual repression cause emotional distress/suicide) that is so vague, and where you can’t rely on self-reporting, so that people are forced to rely on interpreting the data, and making cautious, hesitant, conclusions from correlations. And that’s normal and to be expected in the social sciences.
Saturdays with the anthroposophists
Sometimes when I tell people about Waldorf training, and tell funny/weird stories about the things that the hardcore athroposophists say, I am struck by the knowledge that I, a grown-ass adult, have voluntarily started associating with the silliest cult in the history of cults.
Example: When my handwork teacher was laying on some serious medieval medical knowledge about how little children who suffer from an excess of yellow bile should be supervised while sanding their knitting needles so that they don’t sandsandsandsand them into a razor sharp point and then absentmindedly stab themselves.
Other times, when I realize that I’m in a K-8 school that doesn’t contain a single computer and where parents sign an agreement saying that they won’t let kids under 10 use computers at all, even at home,….and I think of what kinds these days get up on on the internet, it seems so terribly sensible.
Internalized Rape Culture and the New/Old Misogyny
When I first saw this and this, my first reactions were of amused bafflement. Surely no one could seriously think the utterly unremarkable responses described were indications of a unique orientation, one so very different from that of the dirty rutting slabs of flesh who are naturally driven into frenzies by naked flesh and lip friction? I mocked it and moved on. As I thought about it more, however, I realized what’s actually going on here. Here are two people, presumably teens and/or young adults, who really do believe that most humans do not experience attraction that moves beyond mere stimulation of nerve endings, and who really do believe that every display of the human body is incredibly compelling and erotic for the “sexual” viewer. How the hell did these ideas get into their head?
The answer’s rape culture, of course, and the lack of discussion in mainstream society about what mutually enjoyable sexual contact actually looks and feels like. Rape culture presents an image of sexuality, particularly female sexuality, in which intellectual involvement is rarely discussed. Emotions are, but they generally tend to be negative, revolving around obsession, jealousy, and indifference. Bodies, particularly female bodies, exist for the sexual gratification of others, and bodies that that are judged unappealing are stigmatized. A Martian who made observations of our media might be excused for concluding that human sexuality was an all-consuming, compulsive exercise in which all emotional connection to one’s sexual partners was shallow and highly dependent on sensory appeal.
Tumblr kids, aren’t Martians, of course. They are simply individuals who have internalized the messages of rape culture to the extent that being mentally aroused by a kiss is a revelation. Rape culture has taught them that bodies exist to be stared at and fantasized about, so therefore it’s noteworthy when they are bored by a shirtless stranger. They have been taught that sex is a dehumanizing act of rubbing together. Their feelings are not rare, though the choice to attribute what they perceive as unusual reactions to asexual identity may be. What it reminds me most of was the pre-teen and teenage girls I met while investigating child abuse. These girls were all sexually active with boys and men who were in their late teens and early twenties. What struck me was the way these girls described how the felt about sex. There was no joy, little arousal. They had sex mostly because they had learned that sex is what you do when you have a boyfriend, especially if you are lucky enough to be young girl with a super cool older guy who has “needs”. More significantly, there was no indication that that understood this was abnormal. They knew all the ways one is supposed to indicate sexual satisfaction, but it was pure pantomime. It goes without saying that their boyfriends did not care that they did not enjoy it, so long as they did it. Rape culture reinforced all of this.
Non-asexuals are perfectly aware that learning to take control of one’s sexuality is not something you learn overnight, especially if you are a woman. You will be met with constant resistance. I never had a truly coercive partner, but I spent a long time settling for subpar sex because I didn’t know what I was looking for, and my partners were not motivated to do anything other than what they had always done. While it was relatively easy for me to come to terms with the idea that I was bisexual, I spent way too much time stuck on the idea that I was only attracted to a certain kind of woman, coincidentally the kind who is also appealing to men. Very few people are lucky enough to sort out what they want sex and physical affection and their relationships to be like without at least several years of fumbling. This is especially true if you are queer and closeted. We are encouraged to settle, if settling means being sexually available. Actual pleasure is only for straight men. When you finally realize what you’ve been missing, it’s mindblowing. Why did no one tell me earlier?
The point is that it is a damn shame that people can grow up not realizing a kiss can be both emotionally gratifying and sexual. That kiss described in that post? Sexual. Say it with me. It’s not a bad word. It’s not a word that will doom you to an eternity of mindless meatpuppethood. If we don’t start confronting this shit with discussions of how damn joyous sex can actually be, of what good sexual contact actually feels like, we are only assisting in rape culture’s endurance. We cannot fight sexism by creating a neverending series of meaningless little categories like “demisexual” and “heteroromantic”. Such divisions reinforce the idea that rape culture provides truthful depictions of the human sexual experience, and there is nothing more dangerous than that.
<3 for “dirty rutting slabs of flesh”.
But really, I do feel silly all the time for feeling like this tumblr trend of fake sexual identities is a hill worth dying on. But I think you did a great job of articulating why the mass spread of this nonsense on (and off!) the internet is dangerous for young women and young queer people who are beginning to understand their sexuality and navigate their sexual identity within a culture of misogyny and homophobia.
It does genuinely disturb me to see these ideas moving into the real world and I think it is genuinely important for adults who exist in these internet spaces to not led these ideas go unchallenged.
Seriously, guys. No one’s experiences are more valid than anyone else’s. None of the letters in the LGBTTTQQIAKLKDFGNAL spectrum is printed in bigger font than any of the others. (And let’s face it, I’ve probably missed out half the letters anyway.)
So let’s work together.
(emphasis mine)
Excuse me while I vomit a little.
“Sexual” is not a bad word. For the last time, it’s the use of it as a noun that is bad.
Your example of calling someone “gay” is wrong; it’s more like calling someone “a gay”. Or “a transgender”. People are not sexuals, or gays, or transgenders. They are people. I love how bad people on this site are at reading comprehension. Someone says, “Don’t call people sexuals as a noun!” and you reply “But it’s a perfectly valid word!” Someone says “Cis hetero people aren’t queer” and the reply is “Why do you say trans and gay and bi asexuals aren’t queer?” Fuck Tumblr. Fuck it, seriously.
And the point about people calling us “asexuals” doesn’t work, because it’s a label we chose for ourselves.
I actually don’t think the problems of non-consensually labeling people “sexual” go away when you use it as an adjective instead of a noun, and I’m not sure why the noun argument and comparison to “a gay” and “a transgender” even took off here as the dominant problem. I don’t think that’s even the issue. It’s just as fucking creepy to call me a “sexual person” as it is to call me “a sexual.”
The bottom line is that: you have no idea about a person’s attractions, a person’s relationship to dominant sexual culture, a person’s relationship to their own body, or a person’s experiences of sexual violence, just because they don’t identify with the AVEN/Tumblr ace subculture.
Reblogged for the bolded.
I am the asshole who doesn’t believe that asexuality is a valid identity and the person that think asexuality as an identity construction is inherently homophobic and misogynist (not saltmarshhag or the people that created the homophobic ace meme, so don’t blame them for my words)
The reason (among many) is this: The way that asexuals talk about their identity is so self-contradictory a meaningless label that doesn’t describe any coherent sexual identity. I don’t want to get tl;dr but let’s stick with the assertion that asexuals can have a high libido, masturbate, enjoy porn, have sexual crushes on celebrities, have sexual partners, enjoy sex with those partners and still fit, somehow in with the ever-changing definition of “asexual”. That’s why you have “grey-A” and “demi-sexual” and various permuations of asexual identity (and the homophobic myth that “romantic orientation” is a concept separate from sexual orientation) that eventually, get to the point where they describe 99% of the people in the world.
The corollary of this incoherence is that people with whom asexuals don’t feel a subcultural kinship with aren’t considered asexual, no matter how much they fit idea of asexuality (doesn’t have or want to have sex). A nun is celibate, not asexual. A bisexual woman who criticizes “ace” subculture is “a homosexual lesbian” even if she talks about her own sexual desires and behaviors as being almost identical to what would be called “demisexual” if only she said she liked Doctor Who. The ridiculous twisting and redefining of what fits in the category of asexuality is not just so that any awkward teenager who loves the BBC can be fitted in to it, but so that anyone who isn’t invested in talking about how their mom and gay people oppress them because they don’t understand their love for Sherlock is exluded.
53 notes (via saltmarshhag-deactivated2013011 & homophobic-ace)
I’m SO HOMOPHOBIC that I volunteered 8-10 hours a week for over 3 months of my life fighting to make it illegal for someone to be fired from their job or evicted from their houses for their sexual orientation or gender identity.
I’m SO HOMOPHOBIC that I’m a member of Students for Sexual Health…
I bet you even have gay friends.
wow someone really wants a cookie
so, uh, just sayin’, these actions and the defensive insistence about how awesome they are fits perfectly in with someone who fetishizes gay people as cool and different and tragically victimized. Someone, for example, like a teenager in a small town who feels like she’s different and smarter than the people around her.
(Source: unlubricated-anal-sex)
Okay, entirely putting aside my own personal opinion on asexuality and whether it’s a queer identity and how big the queer umbrella is/should be and whether passing privilege has as much effect as certain people are arguing it does…
I’m seeing logic circles in this argument, going like such:
-Asexuals are not queer
-Therefore the ostracism and marginalisation they face is not queer
-This ostracism and marginalisation they face isn’t queer because they’re not queer
-They are not queer because the issues they face aren’t queer issues
-The issues they face aren’t queer issues because they’re not queer
-They’re not queer because…(ad nauseum)
At least, I haven’t seen an argument as to why asexuals aren’t queer that doesn’t either start playing oppression olympics or say it’s because the issues they face aren’t queer (and starting the loop). Maybe passing privilege is brought up, but that argument discredits the fact that a lot of the time, the passing privilege is due to invisibility and erasure, and does a lot of damage internally for the damage it supposedly spares externally.
And as long as the one side is stuck in a logic loop, nothing the other side says is going to get through. And as long as both sides are speaking from a place of pain, neither side will be able to step back and say “oh, this is a better way to get the point across.”
And I don’t know how to fix these problems outside of a miraculous epiphany.
(This is why I’ve kind of been staying out of the argument these past few rounds, because I don’t have anything to say that I haven’t already said and from what I’ve seen what I have to say won’t be accepted anyway)
listen, you deliberately obtuse, disingenuous brat. I’m going to explain this once more for you in the simplest terms I can imagine.
queer as a pejorative term has historically been used against people who experience romantic or sexual attraction to the same gender. it still is today. it is the verbal essence of the hate, disgust, and derision that straight people and homophobic society feels about us.
in recent history, those it has been used against have begun the hard work of reclaiming that word. reclamation of “queer” is the empowering process through which we take control of a word that has been used to hurt us and to turn us into queers rather than human beings. this process is not complete. people still use these words against us. in the mildest cases, angry men scream QUEERS out their car doors as we walk from parking to the gay club that is celebrating pride that very night, all because two women were holding hands. in the most severe cases, the psychological violence of that word is backed up by physical violence. there are still many people who wince when they hear “queer” and would rather not make it part of their identity. and even those of us who do use that word to describe ourselves do it gingerly, conscious of the ways in which that single syllable can suddenly turn poisonous in the mouths of even the most “progressive” straights.
and then suddenly, a group of people who does not share this history and this present with us come clamoring in, demanding that they count as queer because a few academics who were horribly disconnected from the “real world” decided to change the definition to “not normal.” these people - hetero- or aromantic asexuals, in this case - have never and will never experience the oppression that is inextricably linked to this word. in fact, they carry with them the privilege of being able to choose ”queer” - to want ”queer,” even - while those of us who actually are queer had it shoved on us by a society that refuses to see us as anything more than queers and hates us for it.
the logic isn’t circular. it’s simple. “queer” has always been a slur aimed at us, people who are somehow attracted to the same gender. and so it is our word and no one else’s, just as it is our pain and no one else’s.
thank you for this response
38 notes (via qweerdo & ace-azaelia)
