This blog is done

It’s a complete work.  I won’t be updating here anymore. I do plan on leaving this blog up though, with all its posts up as well, since I know many people were kind enough to link to these posts or even cite them in works.

I just feel more at easy blogging elsewhere, under a different name and url. For one thing, I have a different focus (less on asexuality re: social justice) toward lighter topics, and also because everything about this blog reminds me of a time in my life I’d rather put behind me.

I would really prefer though, that if anyone chooses to follow me elsewhere, that they don’t refer to me with the url, title, or usernames I used here, to better make a clean break/fresh start. I feel like an entirely different person.\

An Update

I have not updated this blog in almost a year now, and for that I apologize. I both work and go to school full-time, and my duties have been increased in the last year. In addition I have had a variety of health problems to deal with.

All of that, however, does not explain the lack of updates on this blog. After all, I managed to squeeze in several posts during the school year in previous times, and during times when I had even more hours at work.

There are a variety of contributing factors. I’ve changed so much as a person from when I started this blog, that the goals and focuses set out in it seem nearly alien to me. I’ve grown alienated from the asexual community and asexuality in general (more on that, I swear).

This blog was written somewhat with a social justice perspective in mind, and in general, I found social justice to be a laudable movement when I began the blog. Didn’t agree with everything, mind you, but I thought people could work within it. I have since changed my mind. The bizarre and outright harmful actions and rhetoric of so many in the social justice sphere have made me long to be disassociated with it. There are so many reasons and examples I could go into, but to what end?

I do not think all social justice activists are bad people, some are wonderful people who are very insightful and open-minded. The movement though, as a whole seems to be coming to rely on close-mindedness, on an insistence of righteousness, on painting those who disagree or think otherwise as “evil oppressors”.

I still consider myself a LGBT activist, an anti-racism activist, etc etc. I just do not want to be considered part of the amalgamated movement that calls itself “social justice” with an emphasis on “intersectionality” (which has, as far as I’ve seen, lead to many people who are not from X group speaking over and for those of X group, which is ironically something the social justice idea is supposed to be against…but which, when you expect everyone in the movement to be an expert and caller-outer on every subject, is an inevitable result).

It’s also the reason I’ve become more alienated from the asexual community. I was never much into AVEN, for various reasons, but I greatly enjoyed communicating with other asexuals on Tumblr. In the past year I have lost the desire or interest to use the asexual tags or talk about asexual things there. A great deal of the discussion on tumblr is by asexuals who are also members of the social justice community.

The other day (on something entirely unrelated to asexuality) I was called out as a misogynist for using the word trans* (which I have used to describe myself for a very long time). It just really hit home on why I cannot feel comfortable communicating about asexuality or other subjects there that fall under the social justice sphere. People speak often of the circular firing squad in social justice, and to some extent, leftist circles. I have no desire to submit myself to infighting and bullying, or to be associated with it. For every social justice activist who is unbelievably thoughtful and insightful, genuinely interested in progress, there seems to be 100 who are in it for the bullying potential and inner drama. For every person concerned with real progress, there are even more who just want to attack people for not knowing the “right” words to describe themselves.

Having lost my primary means of contact with other aces, I am now perpetually out of the loop. I have ace friends of course, but my friends are all the type to recognize they are asexual, and then move on. They would not consider themselves activists and do not talk about asexuality a lot. It is not a main interest to them. There’s nothing wrong or unusual about that.

The lack of contact and activism has revealed some interesting things to me however. I have noticed that, as my communication with other aces have declined, so have my doubts about my own asexuality increased. All of the internalized issues and worries that I have have set in on me with a renewed force. I have found myself slipping into my old pastime of desperately searching within myself for any signs of attraction to members of the opposite or same sex. I have found myself trying to find some evidence that I could be gay or straight or bi/pansexual. But it is not there; I have never been sexually attracted to or interested in anyone, ever.

What this reveals to me is how important the asexual community’s existence is to asexuals. Nowhere can we casually see other asexuals. I do not run into another person who is asexual in the coffeeshop, or the bookstore, or class. Without seeking it, there is nothing to affirm the existence of my sexual orientation, and so many things that erase it.

Without the ace community and the affirmation and positivity is provides, I have once again begun to feel like I am not a whole or complete person, like I am a subhuman because I lack the supposedly universal and necessary human traits of sexuality and desire.

Asexual communities are important. Asexual visibility is important. These things have been reaffirmed for me, and yet I still feel alienated from writing here.

I have to wonder if this blog, and the kind of content it holds, is the best way for me to go about increasing asexual visibility. I have pondered if it would be better for me to switch from blogging about what has been largely political or social justice asexual concerns, and instead just switching my focus to creating more original fictional content for asexuals. That would, after all, provide us with more visibility and with affirming reading materials. It would be a way to reach out to those who lack a physical community and are not a part of the online community. It would be something that could be affirming for asexual people regardless of their political beliefs or interest in activism.

It’s not that there aren’t things I want to write about here. There are so many things I’ve planned on writing about, and never did. Part of that is the social justice thing. So many of my posts here are so much longer than they should be, because so many words are wasted writing disclaimers and the like, when if I could rely on people reading my writing in good faith then I wouldn’t have to waste so much time and effort repeating myself and accounting for every little possible misreading or intent a person could assign to what I say. That is exhausting, and also means that I cannot casually write for this blog. It has to be a big undertaking, with lots of empty time and mental energy, so that I do not forget to word everything ever so carefully.

I apologize for this meandering and disjointed post, but I thought I had some obligation to my readers and subscribers to let them know what was going on with this blog, and with my own mind. It is not a dead blog, but I have not yet decided if it is worthwhile to write for it any longer. I still consider myself an asexual, and an asexual activist, and an asexual writer, and I don’t see that ever changing. But what I write about, and how I spread visibility and do my part for asexuality, may have to change.

I am incredibly grateful to you who have read my writing and thoughts and who have supported it, or challenged it.

Asexual Ugliness

Let’s talk a little about being ugly. We’ll throw fat in too, since what I am particularly wanting to address is the “You’re just asexual because you’re ugly” idea, and with it the “you just can’t get anyone because you’re ugly.” idea as well. We’re including fat because, hey, come on, with the way people are? I’m sure some of us have heard the “You’re just asexual because you’re fat and can’t get anyone.” version.

The idea, I think, is that a person will take refuge in asexuality “I’m not interested in anyone because I’m asexual!” rather than admitting the truth, that they ARE interested, but are simply too ugly/fat to get anyone.

This isn’t going to be a long article, because I can debunk this very short and simple. Simply go over to your TV set, turn it on, tune into the Maury Povich show, and watch how many fat and ugly people are getting it on with multiple partners, with multiple possible fathers, and probably getting significantly more laid than a lot of great-looking people (such as myself).

Not that you have to submit yourself to Maury if you don’t want to. You can just look around you in life. How many ugly, fat, or fat AND ugly people do you see in romantic-sexual relationships, and marriages? TONS. There was some chick who was like 700lbs on TV and she got a boyfriend.

I mean this is just stupid, this idea that ugly or fat people can’t get laid or find partners. It’s a joke. At the very least, if the world operated the way people pretend it does, and people of similar looks-levels match up, the fat and/or ugly people can always match up with each other.

The mind. It cannot take the stupidity of so many people in the world. Come on. We’ve all seen:

A. Fat guys and fat girls together
B. Ugly guys and ugly girls together
C. good-looking people with ugly people together
D. fat people with skinny people. Together.
E. All kinds of combinations of the above.

Sexyness is not all in looks. Some good-looking people like to believe that, that their looks can make up for having a shit personality, being an asshole, having a horrible laugh, being unwilling to do anal, and wearing floral print high heels. The truth is, it really doesn’t.

The truth is, when someone is funny and kind and sexy to someone, their flaws often start looking cute, rather than as flaws. For instance, I was head over heels for this girl once, who had a dead tooth. I doubt many people sit there and think “ahh dead teeth, how beautiful and attractive.” But, since I loved her, I loved her dead tooth. It was adorable to me, a perfect thing that was a part of her.

The thing is, there are all sorts of things that determine attraction and love. For some people, it’s their voice or laugh (my girl above had a laugh that could make most guys cream their jeans). For others, what they want out of a partner is someone who can cheer them up no matter how down they are. Others want someone who’s sexually compatible and great in bed (which has nothing to do with looks in itself). Common interests. A certain physical trait, like green eyes, brown eyes, a bit butt, freckles, dainty hands, big hands, it goes on and on.

Looks are probably the sole defining attraction-trait for a very small part of the population. Those are not usually the kind of people you honestly want to date. I

Now, I know what you’re thinking (actually I don’t, but I’m going to assume for the point of the story): “Well, I’m frequently interested in people based on their looks, and I’m not an asshole.”

And you’d be right. But I seriously doubt you are interested in looks to the exclusion of all other traits. Maybe a girl or guy’s cuteness is what makes you want to talk to them, but you would probably cease wanting to date them if they were a major creep, or super annoying.

And if you met someone who was just perfect for you, had every personality trait and kink you wanted them to, and they had an ugly trait or were fat, would you just let them go because their looks weren’t that great?

Sure, there are some people who probably really couldn’t get over a person’s ugliness or fatness. But honestly, those people either have serious hang-ups or the sort of personality I couldn’t imagine anyone ever wanting to get saddled with in a partner.

Anyway, I’m getting off on tangents about looks and attraction when really, I’m just trying to prove here that it’s ridiculous to assume that fat or ugly people can’t find anyone to date/fuck/marry.

If you’re being told by someone that you’re only identifying as an asexual because of your looks:

1. Point to society.

You can point anyone saying “You’re too ugly/fat to get anyone, that’s why you’re asexual” to a motherfucking window, or a TV set, and prove them wrong, because chances are there are plenty of people as ugly/fat as you getting plenty of sex, dates, etc out there.

2. Hand them a mirror.

Ask them, “How did you manage to get a partner then?”. Now, obviously that’s rude as fuck, but it’s not even on the same level as telling someone “You’re too ugly/fat to fuck” because of their sexual orientation.

3. Point out all the people that have tried to date you.

Chances are, someone has tried to date you in your past. Even if they have shitty, cruel motives like “I’m a complete loser/psycho/asshole, but I bet this ugly person will settle for me”, the chances are good that if you were really out to get laid or married, someone expressed interest at some time. If not, well, you lucky asshole. You can always tell them I hit you up:

“There’s some girl on the internet that wants to date me.”

“She’s probably a 40-year old dude.”

“Well, then a 40-year old dude wants to nail me, so you’re still wrong about me not being able to get anyone.”

4. Honestly, I have no more suggestions on how to deal with this level of bullshit, that’s so illogical and stupid that it makes ME feel stupid just trying to refute it. I would suggest being as rude or hostile as you wish to anyone who uses the stupid line. Kick them out of your life if you can, if it’s a more casual attachment. If it’s a boss or co-worker, teacher or professor, probation officer, someone you have to be around, well, get away from them as soon as legally possible, because they are a major fucking asshole.

And stupid. Which is not just me heaping insults on assholes, but the legitimate truth. How do you go your whole life without noticing all the ugly or fat people out there with partners? Only stupidity can explain it.

Anyway, this has been my thoughts and suggestions on dealing with asexuality as an ugly or fat person, or as a person of any look status who is dealing with the “you’re asexual because you’re fat and/or ugly” line.

I wrote this because the search term “scared of being judged for being fat and asexual” popped up in my list of referral terms for this blog a while back, and it broke my heart. The idea that there are people out there that have to be afraid of being open about their sexual orientation, all because people are so damned judgemental about looks, just kills me. I know the “you just can’t get a man!” is given to lesbians all the time, and that it’s given to asexuals as well… let me just say the whole phenomenon inspires a lot of extremely not-nice feelings in me, if the tone of this post hasn’t given that away.

Society. Humankind. Get your shit together.

The Bleak Future of Asexuality

Of all the prompts for this month’s Carnival of Aces theme (The Next Generation), this was the one to catch my eye:
“– How might things be different for the next generation of people on the ace-spectrum? How *should* they be different?”

Mostly because as of late I have been having some rather glum ruminations on what the future holds for asexuals.

Let me start this out by noting that I know I have a tendency to see the negatives in life. You could call me a pessimist or cynist, but, based on how often my negative observations are true, I sadly call myself a realist.

That warning out of the way, let us continue to my expectations for the next generation of ace-spectrum people.

My expectations? Not good. Not good at all. I honestly think the next generation of aces (and the ensuing time period for us all) may be a worse one for aces than this one.

In our current time, that this generation of aces started out in, asexuality is a very obscure thing. Visibility is an issue, and so is legitimacy. One of our primary struggles is simply getting people to know that asexuality exists. Many of our antagonists attack the very legitimacy of our sexual orientation itself, they question the very right of asexuality to exist, and for asexuals to have a unique term(s) to identify themselves by.

Meanwhile, we are told by our loved ones, our doctors, our professors, that asexuality is not a thing. That asexuality is simply a phase. That asexuality can be “cured”. That asexuality is the result of sexual repression, or trauma from sexual abuse and rape.

That all sounds like some heavy crap to deal with, but… I question whether it has not made things sometimes, in a way, easier for some of us to deal with.

If, after all, a parent thinks asexuality is just a phase, and does not take it seriously, then are they not likely to dismiss the arguments from asexuals in the first place? …that is, if they do not consider asexuality to be a real thing, and instead think a young person will inevitably change their mind, then it is quite easy to just let the whole thing go, like this:

Barnacle: “Mother dear, I am an asexual you see.”

Mother: “Bullcrap. It’s just a phase. You’ll meet the right person.”

Barnacle: “It’s not a phase, it’s my sexual orientation.”

Mother: “Okay, fine, you’re an asexual.” thinking: ‘Yeah she’ll get over this weird crap eventually… especially when I introduce her to that stud Jimmy next week lol‘

That is, some of us may have escaped experiencing direct hostility and anger because we weren’t taken seriously.

Because asexuality isn’t taken seriously as an orientation, it is quite easy for people to simply ignore the whole thing when one of their family members, friends, or acquaintances is asexual. By agreeing with us or seeming accepting of our asexuality, they do not have to make any real acknowledgement that asexuality is a real thing, or a valid orientation, because there is no presence of it, no knowledge of it, than the rare person (likely the only one in their life) claiming to be asexual.

In other words, one asexual person can be dismissed mentally as a weirdo who will soon enough see the light and give up their weird ideas. There is no real impetus to change us or challenge us, in our claims, when asexuality is not a thing with any presence or growing legitimacy in the eyes of the world.
However, all that will (hopefully, if we activists are doing our job right) change for the next generation.

Asexuality will have more of a presence in the world, appearing in more media and being mentioned more in person and in various media. Even the simple presence of “asexual” on a poll as a possible orientation in non-asexual-related media will serve as markers of our legitimacy, of our realness, of our existence as something more than an ill-thought-out phase.

As such, when we say we are asexual, it will begin to mean something to your average person off the street. It will not be something to be explained, or dismissed.

And it will begin to carry concrete meanings with it, that instantly present themselves in the mind of the hearer.

They can mean such things as:

“This person will not date you or have sex with you. They are not interested in you the way you are in them.”

“This person is going against God’s wishes (and needs to be told all about that, to get it into their poor led-astray-by-Satan head!)”

“Oh, so she’s one of those slut-shamers. What a bitch. ”

“One of those prudes”

“One of those homophobes that try to convert us to straightness or celibacy”

etc.

Whereas now the only meaning we impart on many by saying we are asexual is:

“WTF does he mean by that?”

In addition, while we in this generation suffer from largely no asexual characters or mentions in the media, I predict the next generation of asexuals WILL have some asexual characters and mentions in the media.

And the characters and plotlines will largely be along the lines of the House. M.D episode on asexuality, and the media commentary will be much along the lines of the Fox News take on asexuality, with plenty of mockery and misunderstanding. (“ Like if it’s that small a portion of the population, do I have to recognize you? Like, woo recognize me because I wear sock monkey hats!” “ I don’t trustem, I don’t trust em a bit” “they have a lack of a sexual – a sort – a sexuality, so they’ll be kinda like, treated as lepers, asexual lepers, if you will”)

A lot of people, creators, will see asexuality and think “ooh, that’s neat. Gives me an idea for a storyline” and go off and make asexuality what they want, to fit into their funny or interesting (as they see it) storyline, without bothering to do research, or with cherry-picking certain things to fit their needs. Accuracy will not trump sensationalism or the needs of the story.

So asexuals will have to deal with that, as they grow up and form their identity. Asexuality as a joke, as something to be mocked, as something weird and strange and misrepresented. They will have to sort through more bullshit information, and face more hostility, more mockery, all the while having to deal with probably having internalized both the sexualnormative ideas put out by society, as well as actual anti-asexual ideas and stereotypes of what an asexual is.

The children that are being born today will also miss out on something we have all had to some extent today: the ability to set the tone, to define what asexuality is and isn’t, and to create the language.

No group or movement is ever completely a closed book, so it’s not like any innovation or influx of new ideas from someone in the future is just completely going to be rejected. But even so, we, the asexuals of today, are the ones who, for instance, decided that “an asexual is someone who does not experience sexual attraction”. That is the definition that was presented, and that the majority of us think is the best description.

By that little thing, by all of us either accepting or rejecting, by promoting that idea, have set in motion what someone, 15 years from now, will look at to determine whether they are asexual or not.

The asexuals of the future will have to deal with our legacy, while we were free of any legacy.

“Was I Fired Because of My Asexuality?” Revisited

“Was I Fired Because of my Asexuality? Revisited” AKA in which I am automatically a cold, rude, liar because of my asexual orientation and mental illness.

Two years ago, I wrote a post here Was I Fired Because of My Asexuality? about an incident that happened at an ex-workplace.

It should be noted that at no point did I ever receive any negative feedback on this post—to my face. I received no negative or hostile comments on this blog. I did however, turn up some rather nasty things people had to say about it elsewhere on the internet—anonymously, big surprise.

Here are some of the things anons on the internet had to say:

“this is why you were fired. you didn’t talk to your coworkers you probably acted cold and distant to them never interested. this sent off vibes you had a bad attitude. AND THEN YOU WERE RUDE TO YOUR BOSS THAT sealed the deal over him thinking you had a bad attitude.”

This anon asserts that I was fire for being cold, distant, and uninterested in my co-workers. They also assert that I was rude to my boss.

Since I made it pretty clear in my post that I wasn’t cold or uninterested, merely shy, I can only presume that the above anon thinks I am a liar as well.

As for why I was fired, well, I think my boss made it pretty clear why SHE thought she was firing me. According to her, I was a mentally ill pathological liar. That’s not firing someone because they’re rude; that’s firing someone because you think they’re mentally ill. You don’t get much a much clearer case of ableist firing in the workplace than a boss outright telling you that they’re firing you because you’re a crazy liar, and that you need a psychiatrist.

As for why I am dredging up these old comments now, when they certainly have very little worth… Well, I think they’re a quite nice example of the sorts of conclusions people jump to about asexuals. It’s interesting how anti-asexual champions of queer issues are so quick to ignore a clear case of discriminatory firing against the mentally ill (“You’re mentally ill, a liar, need therapy, YOU’RE FIRED”.) But hey, what is intersectionality, when there’s a chance to bash on those inherently homophobic slut-shaming asexuals, amirite?

Anyway, onto another comment:

“i do not believe for one second the coworker went into long detailed descrips of her bf’s dick

tho considering this is all written from the asexy’s pov, it was probably more like “i saw my boyfriend last night” and she just turned that into “my boyfriend pounded me into the mattress with his glorious pulsating six inches” bc the only thing non-asexuals do is fuck, right?”

Well, right there. I’m a liar and delusional because I’m asexual. I stock condoms, vibrators, and lube, assist customers with some deeply personal health and sexual issues at my current job, but wait… I’m so terrified and hysterical over even something so innocuous as a girl talking about her boyfriend, that I hallucinate sex stories to get upset over.

Yeah right. THAT seems like a healthy and non-stereotyped view of an asexual, right? No. None of those anons know me… but they know right off the bat that I am a liar and delusional. How? Why, I’m asexual, of course.

Oh but asexuals don’t have to deal with negative stereotypes, do they? Everything is peachy keen for us. /sarcasm

This person presents the asexual POV as inherently dishonest and warped.

You know, if a customer walked up to me today and started talking to me about his penis, I wouldn’t be at all put out. It’s practically in my job description. But you know what? I still don’t want to hear about my co-worker’s partner’s junk. Nope. Not ever. Not getting paid for that shit.

I did, however, learn that it’s something I should put up with. Now I say nothing when male co-workers make such timeless sexual abuse jokes as “old enough to read, old enough to breed”. Now I just smile and take it when a male coworker I barely know decides it’s cool to talk about how large my breasts are, and compare them to his girlfriend’s.

I don’t like being unemployed. I’ve already seen what employers think of my word as an asexual, mentally ill female bodied person. Thanks to the internet, I’ve also even gotten a glimpse at what many non-asexual people think of my word.

We’ve seen what they think of Adria Richard’s word. We’ve seen what they think of god knows how many female-bodied people’s word, or mentally ill people’s words, or GSRM people’s words.

Anyway, let’s pick through some more comments that are indicative of the type of reaction asexual people being fired for being asexual will be likely to receive (aka, even if they have a ton of proof, they’re all most likely going to be considered bullshit liars according to non-asexuals):

“with how asexuals on the internet treat queer people on the internet i wonder how many of their “i was fired for being asexy!!!1!” stories should actually be “i was fired for being an asshole to someone who was queer and i did it in the name of being asexy”

Here, not only are asexuals who say they were fired for being asexual disbelieved, but their firing is automatically chalked up to homophobia. This, despite the fact that a very large portion of asexuals are trans* or homo/bi/pan-romantic. Doesn’t matter. We’re still all homophobes, in the eyes of many anti-asexuals.

“tbh i think they’re full of shit about being fired and just co-opting queer people’s stories and the lack of deets for their claims doesn’t help”

“probably
or they were just fired for being an annoying ass about their asexiness”

This last one actually has me quite curious. What IS “being an annoying ass about their asexiness”? What does that constitute? Talking about asexuality? Talking about asexual issues? Talking about their asexual partners or relationships? Do they mean complaining about sexuality in the workplace? (That’s hardly an asexual action; see: Adria Richards, who as far as I know, is not asexual).

The last string of comments I’d like to address is one that was prompted by my mentioning that incompatibility with coworkers is considered a valid reason to fire an employee.

Anon 1:

“wait can you really get fired for not talking to your coworkers

like is that actually a thing”

Anon 2:

“if you actively oppose the atmosphere of the workplace, yeah

i mean if you’re just quiet but kinda nice and still friendly then it’s probably no big deal

but if you storm off whenever coworkers start talking and act like that dumb asexy, well…”

This is a quite interesting and telling line. If you’ve read my original post, you know that my reaction to my coworker was described by me like this:

“when Christie chose to go into long, detailed descriptions of her boyfriends’ genitalia and her sex life with him, I chose to go over and clean the ice cream machines, or sweep the floors.”

Going over and doing the (mandatory) menial cleaning chores while someone was chatting, in a work environment where we were technically not allowed to talk or to stand idle, is a pretty far ways off from “storming off”, I think.

But of course, we can’t forget that I am an asexual and mentally ill, and thus, a deluded liar who cannot be trusted to accurately describe my own experiences.

I (in my lying liar deluded point of view) would have thought that I was a quiet and shy, but still nice and friendly person. I guess I probably WAS wrong. A nice and friendly person is apparently a person who doesn’t make a peep about the sexism, racism, sexual harassment,homophobia, cissexism, ableism, and body-shaming in the workplace that make it a hostile environment.

Good thing I learned my lesson about that.

This Blog is No Longer About Asexuality

Once upon a time I wrote a manifesto on why I think the character, Clarissa Oakes, from the popular Aubrey-Maturin series, is an an example of an asexual female character . Since then, I have noticed in my blog stats people coming here looking for non-asexuality related information about Clarissa, Jack Aubrey/Stephen Maturin slash, and all sorts of Aubrey-Maturin facts.

Upon studying my blog data, it has come to be that the Aubrey-Maturin series actually generates as many hits as such popular terms as “asexuality” and “demisexuality”. This is significant because, I have written 20+ articles here about asexuality, and I have written only one article on the Aubrey-Maturin series. What kind of increased audience would I find, were I to write 20 Aubrey-Maturin posts?

As such, I can only conclude that there is a larger audience out there for my Aubrey-Maturin thoughts and analysis, than for my asexuality thoughts and analysis. Therefore, it is more cost-time-effective for me to begin blogging solely about my Aubrey-Maturin viewpoints.

Hopefully, dear followers, you are also fans of this excellent series and will remain following my blog for all my insightful insights into the curious relationships aboard H.M.S Surprise.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Yes, this is an April Fool’s Post. I’m sure that was  obvious, but given how often it hasn’t been obvious to me before (I don’t usually keep up on dates) I thought I’d spare a few people like myself 😛 What isn’t an April Fool’s, however, is what I said about the Aubrey-Maturin readership of this blog rivalling the asexuality-readership on this blog. That’s kind of disheartening.

 

 

Ace Mini Meta Going on at DW’s Asexual_fandom comm

There’s an Ace Mini Meta Fest going on at Dreamwidth’s asexual_fandom comm (which is just generally a great ace comm if you haven’t heard of it) here.  It’s stressed that it’s very informal and low-key, so if anyone would like to try their hand at writing a short piece of meta in any way tied to asexuality, that would be great..

At the very least, it should turn up some great things to read.

Obligatory Ace Valentine’s Day Post

Ah yes, another Valentine’s Day alone. Not that it bothers me, though it might bother some romantic asexuals. I love Valentine’s Day. To me, Valentine’s Day is the day when you have just one box of chocolate, while waiting for the rest to go on sale. It means that pretty soon, there are going to be boxes and boxes of cool little cards with Pokemon, The Simpsons, Transformers, Little Mermaid, etc on sale for like 25 cents. Because unlike candy, valentine’s day cards are pretty much worthless after Valentine’s.

And I like to tack the cards up on my walls.

Not to mention themed T-shirts, giant plushies, greeters, etc.

In other words, Valentine’s Day is to me what it is actually meant to be: an orgy of consumerist delight.

That said, for all those interested in my rather sad excuse for a love life, here’s a report on that.

It’s not good. Not good at all. I decided to abandon my usual approach to love/romance, I.e complete passivity, that is, waiting for my knight or knightess in shiny armor to find me, and actually go out looking.

Since I’m not particularly interested in having a million non-asexuals asking me ignorant questions about my asexuality, insist they can convert me with their peens (if you think I’m exaggerating or stereotyping, just check out Swankivy’s reports of her experiences on Okcupid), and I would much rather date someone who I know will understand my asexuality, I decided to pursue asexuals only.

If you know anything about asexuality at all, then you probably know that most of us are physically very distant; that is, a lot of us are probaby the only out asexuals in their town or area. So hoping to physically run into another asexual and date them, or meet them through work, or any of the other ways most people meet the people they will date, is pretty much a great way to die alone.

And so we turned to the internet, to the ace-dating sites that are so often advised as the means by which an ace should find a date, in all of the “I’m sick of being alone” posts out there. I went with Ace-book. People say it is dead, people say all the asexual dating sites are pretty dead.

So far, no luck. No one has messaged me first, and so I decided to take the initiative and message other people. Most people simply ceased communicating. Some ceased communicating after I explained what ‘neutrois’ meant. I am rather hoping that’s just a coincidence, rather than the timing meaning anything. To be honest, that was surprising; most asexuals on AVEN and tumblr seem fairly hip to all things queer. The crowd on Ace-book does seem to consist a lot less of typical internet nerds. There are a lot less people on there that have things like “feminism, video games, manga” etc in their profile interests, than on other ace spaces.

As for the cease in communication; that is probably typical of all dating sites; someone realizes you’re not the type that knocks their socks off, and gives up on you. It’s worth noting, however, that I originally made an ace-book account to meet more asexual friends (my potential partner interest being listed as “just pals”) but I haven’t even found one anyone for that.

It doesn’t really have me down; I am only 22 years old after all, and it wouldn’t matter if I was 32, 42, etc. There’s a lot of life left to live and find someone in. Not that I mind being Valentines-less forever, if that’s the way it turns out. I’m in good company with myself after all. I suppose the next step will by trying other ace dating sites, and perhaps the ace-dating tumblrs.

to avoid confusion: a username update (I changed mine)

Changed my display username here to Barnacle Strumpet. Because:

1. It deeply amuses me

2. I was getting tired of my old username

3. I made a new blog,  Nihilism is Grand, for posting about non-asexual matters, and figured if I was ever going to change it, it would be before I spread my old username all over both blogs.

4. I’ll probably be writing a lot more, since I’ve gone from having two jobs, one full-time and one part-time, to just having one part-time job. And I also have my own computer now :3

You ever just want to be done with it all?

I don’t update here very often. Some of that is  because of people’s attitudes on asexuality. You can see the sort of ignorant ideas people have it about it any time there is a new article on asexuality anywhere. It just makes me pretty sad that articles on asexuality in feminist spaces actually seem to garner as bad or worse comments than those on more general sites like slate.com, or articles in mainstream news outlets like The Guardian, The Atlantic, etc.

Let’s examine some comments:

When your chief complaint about your identity is that it keeps you from really identifying with mainstream romcoms you can probably safely remove yourself from the oppressed peoples list.

I can only suppose from this comment that the writer thinks things like corrective rape, non-consensual medical treatment for one’s sexuality, and being unable to seek out medical services for fear of being judged or otherwise having one’s treatment impaired by one’s orientation, are all things that are less important worries than lacking characters on TV to identify with.

These are only two complaints, but they are real ones asexuals face. When you seek treatment for depression or anxiety or other medical problems, and instead of getting treatment for those things, you have to constantly be on the defensive against psychiatrists who are more interested in treating your other “problem” (asexuality), then yes, that is a problem and something is wrong. People’s bigoted opinions about correct human sexuality are directly affecting one’s ability to be treated for actual problems.

This is not just a problem with psychiatry, it extends to doctors of the body as well as doctors of the mind, although I have most heard about asexuals having problems with psychiatrists. It was a psychiatrist, after all, that managed to convince me that I was wrong, and that asexuality did not exist. That caused me a lot of personal suffering.

But it is somewhat irrelevant, because most asexuals could not give a hoot about being put on some list of “oppressed peoples”.  We are concerned with tackling our problems, not gaining oppression brownie points.

I asked a question in that article, which no one was apparently able to answer:

So which is it? Are we supposed to talk about our experiences in terms of oppression/inequality, in which case we are “co-opting the language of systematic oppression”. Or should we not do that, and instead focus on recognition for those identities, in which case we are making our issue”overtake a real analysis of inequality.”

The author of the article essentially said that by talking about asexuality in terms of oppression or marginalization, we were “co-opting the language of systematic oppression.” They then turned around and stated in the article that by focusing on gaining recognition for our identities, rather than possible oppression issues, we are overtaking and preventing a real analysis of inequality.

In other words, we should neither talk about possibly oppressive things nor about gaining recognition for our identities’ existence.

So I ask again here: What are we supposed to talk about? I can only surmise that we are meant to stay silent, to stay in the background, leaving the world ignorant of asexuality’s existence. I still want an answer. It’s hard to believe that of all the people that read that article, asexuals and non-asexuals alike, no one saw the disturbing implication that by talking about asexuality in any manner we are somehow harming the cause of other minority groups (which is funny, since most feminist sites make a point to say somewhere in their FAQs that tackling things like racism or sexism does not limit ones ability to care about other issues, like queer rights or world hunger. That is, that there is not a finite amount of issues that can be held as important to progress)

Sadly, I know I did not express what I meant particularly well in the comments section. I had just come off a 16-hour work shift, and do rather want to facepalm at my attempts to explain what I meant. Hopefully I have done so better here.

However, when one is dealing with comments like this:

Autosexuals. Pah. Seriously, we need a speshul identification term for “I masturbate” now? I have two very autosexual cockatiels in my house, yo.

It is pretty unlikely that one is going to gain any worthwhile conversation anyway. For the record, autosexual does not mean “I masturbate”. It is a term for someone who is primarily attracted to themself. It does not mean “I am a homosexual/heterosexual/asexual that masturbates”. It in fact does not mean that one masturbates at all. It means that one is primarily attracted to oneself as opposed to being attracted to other people. I have never seen an autosexual claiming to be oppressed, and in fact, have seen very few autosexuals at all. Unlike asexuals, they do not have an obvious internet presence or groups or blogs devoted to their identity. That is why autosexuals sometimes do turn up on AVEN or other asexual sites, seeking information. They don’t seem to have a significant group identity or presence in social justice circles. Indeed, google autosexuality, and most of what will come up is people mocking their very existence.

Mocking people for their varied sexual identities or practices. Very feminist, yes? Acting like you get to be the judge of demisexuals and demiromantics, when you don’t even know the difference between them, is also apparently a feminist thing to do.

The article is here: http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2013/01/11/generation-fight-identity-fight/ and it is response to a NYT article on the newer GSM identities (think genderfluid, agender, asexual, etc). The feminist article, as opposed to the NYT article, choices to include otherkin, transfat, and transethnic identitities in with the gender and sexual orientation identities in the NYT article. The NYT article is about the differences between the older gender and sexual orientation identities and the new ones. Why Jill (the author of the feminist response article) chose to bring up otherkin and other things that have nothing to do with gender identity or sexual orientation I know not.