Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

1

GaldraChevaliere wrote (edited )

Because entryism is a time-honored tactic of oppressors, and straighties when they're not trying to kill us act like the LGBT is a fun social club and not the collective resources of oppressed folk trying to survive. Inclusionist rhetoric allows oppressors into queer spaces, meaning even our few refuges now have cishets using our limited resources and making the environment unsafe. Aces and aros experience no direct material oppression from being ace/aro, and only incidentally intersect with the LGBT when they experience some form of same gender attraction or are not cis. As such, the inclusionist rhetoric that 'ace =/= cishet' while simultaneously maintaining that the split-attraction model allows for the existence of cishetero-romantics that are somehow distinct from cisheterosexuals, is destructive and allows for cishets to take over our spaces even more than they already have. I mean, fuck. Pride's already a corporatized, cop-loving parody of its roots. It's essentially telling the people with their boots on our neck that they don't need to move their foot, and we actually like it there.

e: If I have to spell it out for you why letting a cishetero man in a queer space is dangerous, ask literally any queer woman. The last thing we need is some 'aro' dudebro insisting lesbians just haven't met the right man, bi women are sexual unicorns or indecisive, and trans women and nonbinary femmes are 'confused men' or 'the best of both worlds'. Given the proclivity of cishet men for violence against literally anything that makes them feel insecure in their masculinity, would you really want someone like that in the places we're supposed to be safe from our bosses, parents and straight society at large?

1

thekraken wrote

I am sure some asexuals that have people insist that they are 'broken' or 'have not yet met the right man/woman' might disagree with you about the lack of direct material oppression due to being ace. As for your point in regards to aro people, it could be valid. Though to be frank, an aro cishetero is still hetero, and so, imo, should not classify themselves as queer in any way.

1

GaldraChevaliere wrote

Find me one ace/aro who's been murdered explicitly for being ace. The rare cases that could qualify all have other traits that put them in a vulnerable population. Aces are not 'broken', they are valid, but they are not systemically oppressed or victimized. They don't get murdered if someone clocks them. They don't have laws pushed to make it impossible for them to survive.