You must log in or register to comment.

Tequila_Wolf wrote (edited )

Presumably this meme comes from some ace people being shitty to other queers wherever you are. Maybe you've had personal experience of somebody being snooty or whatever. But that doesn't make ace people globally, (who are clearly a sexual minority excluded by the present world in multiple significant ways), someone to be gross about.

This is not a good-faith meme. Please stop.

14

GaldraChevaliere wrote

Name one oppression aces face that's not linked directly to homophobia or misogyny. This is absolutely good faith and frankly it needs to be said because inclusionists have brain worms and can't comprehend the concept of "you have to be LGBT to be LGBT".

−5

blog wrote

Ace people receive threats of corrective rape and do get correctively raped. This includes male aces. It's not that they are being mistaken for gay people, they are being raped to "cure" them of specifically asexuality.

5

GaldraChevaliere wrote

Got sources on that, or some way in which that's not directly a consequence of misogyny? Ace people get assaulted because of how misogyny functions. Nobody's targeting you for being ace.

−5

blog wrote (edited )

You're right, because I'm not ace. You, however, are an asshole.

3

GaldraChevaliere wrote

Nah, you're just a tankie that thinks you have a right to let them into our spaces. Eat a bullet.

−8

blog wrote (edited )

Criticizing anarchists isn't the same as being a tankie. Bringing up the assumption that I'm a tankie because I criticized anarchists in another thread is intellectually dishonest as fuck because 1 -- it's literally wrong 2 -- it still wouldn't prove me wrong on this point even if I was a tankie (failing to be impressed with the RIAU is absolutely not the definition of what being a tankie is) 3 -- assuming I'm ace because I spoke up for ace people is guilt by association and you'd recognize it for what it was if a straight person accused someone of being gay for speaking up for gay people. It literally bespeaks your own fear and hatred because you're unable to comprehend why anybody other than aces would speak up for them.

People telling me to die because I criticized anarchists and pointed out aces get correctively raped.

This place is disgusting.

6

GaldraChevaliere wrote

Still waiting on that source or how that isn't a direct consequence of misogyny. The door's right there, feel free to take the rest of the inclusionists on your way out.

−6

blog wrote (edited )

If a male ace gets raped by a woman because she doesn't believe he could be disinterested in sex how is that misogynist?

And is it your position this has literally never happened?

My sources are: actual ace people who've been correctively raped. If you won't believe it happens without numbers.... would it have been reasonable to deny corrective rape existed at all before numbers on it existed?

EDIT: Here's a link to an ace person talking about it pointing out that corrective rape clearly is not solely misogynist nor homophobic as well as the way that aces experience harrassment specifically because people interpret their identity as a sexual challenge: http://theasexualityblog.tumblr.com/post/143094779590/corrective-rape-in-relation-to-asexuals

Today on the wonderland that is raddle: Some aphobe telling me to eat a bullet for pointing out that aphobia is a thing.

EDIT where did you go? Did you realize you were full of shit?

7

GaldraChevaliere wrote

It's literally a function of misogyny, you twit. If you read even an ounce of feminist theory rape of men still upholds patriarchy and misogyny by stripping manhood and the strength associated with it from him, likewise women are held to be unable to rape because we're perceived as weak. Start with the fucking basics before you step to me. My position is that it fulfills that function and that cishet ace people face no material oppressions specific to aceness.

Lesbians and bi women deal with the exact same shit because men feel entitled to all bodies, which again, is a function of you guessed it, misogyny. Aceness only matters to men insofar as it presents a barrier to their exertion of power over not-men. They face no other structural barriers at the fuck all.

Nah fam, I went to go handle shit IRL because I'm not online all the time. Have you gotten that bullet yet? It looks pretty delicious.

−7

blog wrote (edited )

No doubt it is connected to misogyny, and I never denied this, but misogyny is specifically the hatred of women. Men being harmed by patriarchy isn't misogyny itself and it's incoherent to claim this.

Bigots telling me to eat bullets: the height of radicalism

1

GaldraChevaliere wrote

Actual queer people telling straights to fuck out of our spaces, you mean. You're completely unable to source any real material oppression that ace folk specifically face, because what challenges they do encounter are in fact wholly fucking rooted in misogyny. Which like, hey, cishet women are oppressed too, but they're not gays and that's a fucking okay. Words actually mean things, shocker of the century.

−6

this_one wrote

It seems like any oppression a-spec people do face, apparently "doesn't count" to you. If you ignore all the ways a-spec people are oppressed, sure! They're not oppressed! But changing the definition of "oppression" doesn't make anyone safer, so it's a pointless, shitty, derailing thing to do.

5

GaldraChevaliere wrote

You literally face no systemic oppressions. There are no laws that target you. You will not be murdered for being ace. You will not be denied the right to marry if you are heteroromantic. In no meaningful way does your aceness impact your rights. Grow the fuck up and stop thinking being in the LGBT is some cool secret club you're denied access to.

−6

blog wrote (edited )

Nobody ever claimed cishet aces are specifically gay, but okay, keep on with your nasty bullshit

edit: literally everything queer people face comes back to patriarchy/misogyny in some way so find a real argument. Using your "logic" there's no way to stop this argument from also invalidating everything all queer people go through as just "misogyny"

EDIT: Are you calling me straight? Because I'm not.

0

GaldraChevaliere wrote (edited )

The thread is literally about cishet aces infiltrating and attacking queer people in our own spaces, you fucking moron. I used straight women as an example because they, like cishet aces, face misogynistic oppression, but it's not the same thing as being LGBT and they don't have any right to LGBT spaces or resources because they're specifically produced by and set aside for ourselves to support eachother.

Yeah, except we actually have to deal with that shit in specific ways and have built coalitions for the express purpose of supporting eachother through it. There are laws built to oppress LGBT people specifically, on the axis of our bi/homosexuality or our transness. There are entire structures of society that exist to exploit and kill us, and none of those things exist that target ace folk. At most they suffer a relatively minor stigma of being prudish or uptight which given how they fucking act when they do get invited into queer spaces, is not undeserved. When you can't get married and as such are denied visitation rights in hospitals or child custody or the tax and insurance benefits marriage brings, come back and talk to me about oppression. When you're actively targeted specifically for your aceness for rape, murder and ostracism, come talk to me about oppression. When it is illegal for you to exist to the point pogroms are started to hunt you down, come talk to me about oppression.

EDIT: Reading comprehension, pick it the fuck up. I'm talking about cishet aces, because that's the subject of this entire idiotic exchange. Please eat your bullet, it's getting cold.

−7

blog wrote (edited )

When you're actively targeted specifically for your aceness for rape

Yes indeed I already pointed out that this happens. Not sure why you feel the need to deny this. You can only do so by ignoring ace people. I mean literally a moment's worth of Googling will make it clear that this happens to ace people.

Also, you've done this several times but you've used derogatory terms to insult my intelligence which is always ableist and allegedly against this site's TOS. Moron specifically mocks people with intellectual disabilities, actually comes straight from medical ableism. Funny how you're railing and screaming about bigotry while you spew so much yourself, deny and trivialize rape, etc.

I'm out of this thread.

0

GaldraChevaliere wrote

Kill yourself on the way out, quisling. Moron hasn't had that definition since the fucking thirties. I keep telling you that it happens because of misogyny, you waste of flesh. You refuse to acknowledge that because it'd mean your MOGAI shit is unproductive.

−9

blog wrote

Yeah, telling anyone to kill themselves is super ableist because there exist mentally ill folks who just might do it; and moron is clearly an ableist slur, like any term that insults people based on intelligence and which comes from medical ableism. The oppression of all LGBT people happens "because of misogyny" and I'm not a waste of flesh just because you're really bigoted.

6

LanguageBot wrote

I've noticed you used the ableist word "moron" in your comment, please refrain from doing so.
Consider instead: uninformed, reckless, impulsive, ignorant, risk-taking, risky and dangerous, dipshit

Discussion about the words here, stop this message from being posted by quoting the word: "moron"
3

GaldraChevaliere wrote

Bigoted against literal straights, lmfao. Actually kill yourself. I'm waiting.

−8

blog wrote

Disabled folks and mentally ill/suicidal people literally don't matter to you, in your own words. Alrighty then.

4

GaldraChevaliere wrote

You don't matter to me, and I doubt that they much matter to you either given your willingness to use them as a pawn.

−9

blog wrote (edited )

I'm disabled you piece of shit. Why do you think I have so much time to sit and argue with jerks online?

You're being ableist and all you've done in this thread is deflect from your own bullshit and bigotry. Go fuck yourself

5

GaldraChevaliere wrote

So am I, you weakling. I don't use it as a shield. Kill yourself already, you're taking way too long.

−9

blog wrote

In addition to being disabled, you're also horrifically ableist. Really? Weakling?

I'm not using it as a shield, you're being fucking horribly ableist

4

GaldraChevaliere wrote

You literally only brought it up because I called you stupid for acting stupid. Last one for tonight, eat that bullet and save everyone the trouble.

−10

blog wrote (edited )

You violated this "radical" site's TOS and triggered the language bot by using multiple slurs but okay, addressing bigotry is stupid.

btw stupid is also definitely also ableist, and telling people to kill themselves is also ableist

You made arguments and called me stupid for not accepting them. That's just you being ableist

7

LanguageBot wrote

I've noticed you used the ableist word "stupid" in your comment, please refrain from doing so.
Consider instead: uninformed, reckless, impulsive, ignorant, risk-taking, risky and dangerous, dipshit

Discussion about the words here, stop this message from being posted by quoting the word: "stupid"
1

LanguageBot wrote

I've noticed you used the ableist word "moron" in your comment, please refrain from doing so.
Consider instead: uninformed, reckless, impulsive, ignorant, risk-taking, risky and dangerous, dipshit

Discussion about the words here, stop this message from being posted by quoting the word: "moron"
2

Dumai wrote (edited )

honestly i am not the identity police, people can identify however they like, they can define what "sexuality" means for them in their own personal lives, even if they are defining it as something alienating to them personally

but nobody's ever really been able tell me what this "sexual attraction" (which asexual people apparently lack) even is without dehumanising "sexuals", or assigning predatory instincts to "sexuality", or treating "allosexuals" as inherently sexual creatures, all of which i would call rape culture

nobody has been able tell me how a cis man who exclusively pursues relationships with women, confesses exclusive romantic interest in women, but identifies as asexual is materially oppressed on the back of this alone, without essentialising "sexual attraction", assuming systemic rape/compulsory heterosexuality primarily or even exclusively harm asexual people, or erasing gay people's experiences of their own marginalisation. and nobody can give me a good reason why "heteromantic asexual" people can, uh, reclaim "queer".

i have been told that asexual people can still have sex, obviously, because sex feels good and can strengthen a romantic bond with a partner! which like, isn't sexuality? apparently???? it's not so much that i'm trying to deny that asexual people can identify with that label but i really object to "sexuality" being publicly restricted to like, this instinctive carnal urge to fuck anyone who meets your standards regardless of circumstance, because that is absolutely not how sexuality works for anybody who isn't a predator.

so i'm really, really not saying people can't identify as asexual. all i really ask is that this super weird construction of sexuality isn't universalised, normalised, or forced onto anyone because is it exactly the kind of thing has been used to demonise gay people since "homosexuality" had any meaning as a category

and for god's sake don't tell people they have "sexual privilege", this is super homophobic and pretty racist as well

8

Tequila_Wolf wrote

but nobody's ever really been able tell me what this "sexual attraction" (which asexual people apparently lack) even is without dehumanising "sexuals", or assigning predatory instincts to "sexuality", or treating "allosexuals" as inherently sexual creatures, all of which i would call rape culture

If you have time, I would love to hear some examples of this dehumanising of sexuals so I can better understand what you mean. I understand that there's an argument here but presently it's still too abstract for me to fully follow.

nobody has been able tell me how a cis man who exclusively pursues relationships with women, confesses exclusive romantic interest in women, but identifies as asexual is materially oppressed on the back of this alone, without essentialising "sexual attraction", assuming systemic rape/compulsory heterosexuality primarily or even exclusively harm asexual people, or erasing gay people's experiences of their own marginalisation.

Same thing here; I'd really appreciate understanding the ways that these things are the case more concretely. Why does it essentialise that and assume that?

Do you come across many people like this? I'm trying to understand generally what is going on in this thread.

Thanks for your contribution, it helped me think through a few things!

5

theheart wrote (edited )

nobody has been able tell me how a cis man who exclusively pursues relationships with women, confesses exclusive romantic interest in women, but identifies as asexual is materially oppressed on the back of this alone, without essentialising "sexual attraction", assuming systemic rape/compulsory heterosexuality primarily or even exclusively harm asexual people, or erasing gay people's experiences of their own marginalisation. and nobody can give me a good reason why "heteromantic asexual" people can, uh, reclaim "queer".

Ultimately, I agree with this. I think that cishet ace people clearly are marginalized in a few ways, but they aren't oppressed like queer people are and have historically been; there were no cishet aces wearing the pink triangle, nor fighting at Stonewall. I think that there should be solidarity with ace people, and that queer people and aces are allies that align closely and should thus fight together (maybe consider MOGAI be overarching with 'queer'/LGBT being a group within such?), but I'm uncomfortable with the prospect of a cishet person being 'queer'.

(By 'ace people' in that sentence I mean people who are ace without other queer identities, e.g. a cis heteroromantic man. Obviously ace trans or gay or others count as queer.)

4

[deleted] wrote (edited )

2

ziq wrote

A lot of asexual ppl have sex because it's not socially acceptable to be in a relationship and not have sex with your partner. It's to please the partner.

5

[deleted] wrote

3

ziq wrote

I think the "feels good" part is probably bullshit. If it felt good they wouldn't be asexual.

1

[deleted] 0 wrote

1

bea wrote

Yeah, pretty much. Aces still feel urges* and masturbate* and they may use sex toys and such for that.
*not all do

The other side of this is when an ace has sex with a person like their romantic partner for example.

I'd describe it as a similar thing to a straight guy having sex with another dude for whatever reason. He may do it, and he may even enjoy the feeling of it, but he still wouldn't be sexually attracted to him, would he? It'd the same for non-sex-repulsed aces having sex with anyone.

2

Dumai wrote

you may have missed all the tumblr posts in like 2016 calling people acephobic for assuming asexuals could never enjoy sex

or all the people celebrating "non-sexual kink" with regard to asexuality

and again, if people wanna do that stuff and still consider themselves asexual like, i'm not here to tell them they can't, i'd feel like an invasive weirdo for doing that

but i really don't think this construction of sexuality should be universalised! ace discourse seems very adament it should though!

3

[deleted] wrote (edited )

4

[deleted] wrote (edited )

2

GaldraChevaliere wrote

That's a galaxy brain level take, fam. And also kind of hypocritical given how much ace discourse revolves around the filthy allosexuals and our insatiable appetites for sex. Fucking just to masturbate seems real bass-ackwards to me.

2

[deleted] wrote

1

[deleted] wrote (edited )

2

GaldraChevaliere wrote

What is this absolute mess of a post? You're thinking bisexual, by the way, but since we're in MOGAI hell already let's roll with calling it pan. If your label doesn't preclude literally doing the opposite of its meaning, why do you even have it? What meaning or value does it communicate to others? What is possibly laudable about viewing sex with another person purely as a masturbatory act of release without consideration for them?

2

sdou wrote

and for god's sake don't tell people they have "sexual privilege", this is super homophobic and pretty racist as well

I'm curious about the racist part, do you mean because it dilutes the word "privilege" and makes it meaningless?

2

Dumai wrote (edited )

the sexuality of people of colour is especially policed and demonised in the west

obviously straight poc still have have straight privilege but white aces suggesting it is possible to be privileged for being "sexual" is just... blatantly racist to me

5

transtifa wrote

Damn looks like it's discourse time

7

shanoxilt wrote

Fuck off to Tumblr with this bullshit. We already have FARTs on this site; there's no need to bring out the rest of the bigots.

5

GaldraChevaliere wrote

You're starting with FARTS (please fucking Christ realize this isn't helpful, it's childish and plays down the actual threat they pose, also where? I've seen maybe two in the year I've been here.) and going to bat for literal cishets who are indistinguishable from the average breeder in every conceivable way, but your mogai shit is radical and recognizing that cishets aren't oppressed is tumblr? Please go outside, your people need you.

0

Tequila_Wolf wrote (edited )

I've forgotten how our conversation went about this last time, but I have a few thoughts.

I think loads of LGBT people are assimilationist breeders and you give disproportionate disdain to ace people for their participation in that.

Calling ace people "het" in 'cishet' isn't right, same as calling a cisbi person a cishet if they're not hooking up with people of the same gender, for whatever reason.

Sounds like you have a bunch of shitty liberal ace people where you live, but that's not reason to generalise to ace people globally. I know some solid ace people doing radical and queer things.

Given how little queer representation ace people get (much less than the rest of us), it shouldn't be a surprise that more of them lead normative lives, if they do.

Seems to me that queer people would generally want to openly embrace other sexual and gender minorities' weird and find ways to weaponise it against the current order.

10

GaldraChevaliere wrote

There are no material oppressions that hetero-attracted cis aces or aros face. It's a simple fact and it's low of you to try to defend them as "kweer" when the person I'm responding to is actively comparing exclusion of our oppressors from a space to TERFism. Name one fucking ace person who's been killed for it. Name one ace person who's lost a job because they don't fuck that wasn't directly a result of misogyny. There are actual LGBT ace people who experience same gender attraction of some form or another and I respect and embrace them, but don't tell me that we should give a shit about literal cishets because they appropriated a queer identity and aesthetic but only ever enter our spaces to attack us.

2

Tequila_Wolf wrote

Ok, I'll try my best to respond here, to both of your responses to me in this post.

hetero-attracted cis aces

I don't understand how this (attraction + aceness) is possible, and I suspect that we both have quite different frames of reference for ace people. Between everything said around here, I've become quite confused.

All the ace people I know are also aromantic so it seems very different to most of the circumstances described here. Those people have pretty straighforward oppressions. I haven't had much chance to think through whether the oppressions are somehow unique to aceness and separate from misogyny or homophobia but also I don't see these oppressive frameworks as wholly distinct, or (importantly) why they need to be. I'd be super interested to hear more about how you and others understand this.

I meant to address you directly in relation to past things you said and not in relation to the thing you were responding to, because this is a conversation I would like to understand better and I know you have solid queer politics and meaningful things to say generally. But obviously I can see why you would interpret me as engaging you in relation to your response to shanoxilt.

literal cishets because they appropriated a queer identity and aesthetic but only ever enter our spaces to attack us.

One thing that is stunning me a bit is just how much of a problem this seems to be for you, like the situation in the meme is a very regular occurrence. This is unheard of where I am, for example.
How regular must it be for it to be a real concern we have rather than a reason to be troublesome toward ace people? I don't know if it's comparable, but I think about people talking about false rape accusations to discredit rape accusations generally, when false rape accusations only make up a small fraction of accusations. But it did give me this kind of sense.

As a result I read the meme as being a subtle way of digging at ace people generally.

I didn't mean to upset you if I did and am happy to do the work of learning what I did wrong if I have done wrong.

7

theheart wrote

In regards to the oppression, I have a simple argument that I use personally; gay people have gotten beat in the streets, and trans women shot to death in my community. Ace people do not face oppression that stands as similar; they are marginalized themselves, but they do not face the same struggle queer people have and do face. I keep bringing up the pink triangle, Stonewall, AIDS, the modern day nations where it's illegal, and the nations where it's legal but you run the risk of getting killed if you go out in public. As far as I'm aware, there are no systematic oppression of comparable scale for being ace alone.

There's no need to strain queer spaces and resources by opening them up to any group that's marginalized; like I said, I'd prefer the idea of having an overarching label including aces, but I don't think cishet aces should be considered queer by any means.

1

deathsembrace OP wrote

Calling ace people "het" in 'cishet' isn't right, same as calling a cisbi person a cishet if they're not hooking up with people of the same gender, for whatever reason.

Calling ace people 'het' in 'cishet' is a line I've heard cishet aces use; heteroromantic, asexual. This was what was in mind here; cishet ace people, who face no (so far as I'm aware) material oppression hijacking queer spaces and repressing queer voices.

0

sudo wrote

What's a FART? (I'd look it up, but you already know what the results would be.)

2

deathsembrace OP wrote

We already have FARTs on this site

Sounds like an issue with the site.

there's no need to bring out the rest of the bigots.

Is it really bigoted to not want cishet people in queer spaces over queer people? That doesn't seem to click with me.

−9

ziq wrote

Why are you using an alt? What are you scared of?

6

ziq wrote

I guess that's hypocritical since I always had to use alts just to talk about anticiv before the discourse was shifted.

7

deathsembrace OP wrote

Ace discourse has gotten me thrown out of places in the past, so I decided I'd test the waters with a meme this time.

−4

ziq wrote

You're "testing the waters" on a politics meme space?

4

deathsembrace OP wrote

I wanted to see if it would get me tossed out of Raddle; given the response, its been useful for gauging things.

−1

this_one wrote

Instead of waiting for other people to 'cancel' you, you (and in fact all aphobes) are actually allowed to fuck off and never return if you want :)

3

GaldraChevaliere wrote

You're not valid, dear. Must suck oh so hard not to be meaningfully oppressed.

−5

deathsembrace OP wrote

That seems harsh, given they seem to be NB (sorry if that's wrong, I'm assuming based on pronouns.)

You don't have to be a cishet ace person to have... opinions about it.

3