♠️ AceInvaders! ♠️

Or they had other words!

Like, there is a huge difference in acknowledging that across time and culture things might be categorized differently and saying “you can’t call [Historical Figure] bisexual because that’s ahistorical!”

Acknowledging that across time and cultures there are different ways of categorizing the human experience which won’t always align with our modern categories and definitions is important, but if you are trying to use the ahistorical argument to dissuade queer and LGBTQIA+ folks from identifying with historical figures or using them as examples to show that folks LIKE us have always existed? That’s just bigotry.

2) Where is this evidence that the ace/aro community is More Problematic than any other subgroup? Ofc there r lots of issues but it’s still relative to everyone else

A major gripe I have with aphobes on this site is they act like being a-spec is an opt-in type of identity, like a political alignment or hobby discriptor, and not a set of names that describe an intrinsic part of a person.  It ties into the whole “asexuality is not having sex”/”aromanticism is not liking to date”/”a-spec orientations are actually just actions” bs that they seem unwilling to let go of.

I can’t opt out of being asexual.  Me choosing to reject the label is called “putting myself in the closet” and “denying my sexuality”, not “unaligning myself with other evil a-specs”.

And “[Y]ou better be bending over backward to be fighting the shit I see in the ace/aro community if you want me to take you seriously” is just the most audacious shit I’ve ever read.  The fuck do you want me to do OP?  I can’t kick people out of being a-spec, and shitty people aren’t gonna change just cause some rando told them they’re not being very nice.

(But most importantly: how dare you say the only way my struggles as a minority group will only be taken seriously by you if I “bend over backwards” to follow your orders??  My struggles aren’t only valid when I perform to your specifications, who the fuck do you think you are?  Callouts are important but hinging your allyship on how much I do them is just so utterly fucked up.)

The comparison with straight people is pretty apt though: I’ve noticed that a lot of people tend to treat a-spec orientations as they would heterosexuality, and aphobia as they would “heterophobia”.  Hence the complete lack of shame when putting “OP is an aphobe” as their title like they aren’t literally announcing they’re prejudiced against a minority group.

Asexuality does answer the question of which genders the person is attracted to. That answer is none.

And you know what? It still fucking does and I will participate in fighting the gatekeepers and LGB police because if there is ANYONE who doesnt belong in the LGBTA community, its people who turn their backs on those that need help.

Listen to me, kids. If you’re trans-you’re LGBTA. If you’re ace/aro/aspec- you’re LGBTA. If you’re homosexual(gay/lesbian)-you’re LGBTA. If you’re pan/poly/bisexual- you’re LGBTA.

https://assemble-the-fangirls.tumblr.com/post/150505554371/autismserenity-fornaxed-good-lord-im-not

One among many examples of queer history erasure: this

was changed into

and here’s an excellent post about it. 

Here’s a very good post about “is queer a slur or not”. tl;dr: nobody is pushing the label on you. If someone says “queer community” they simply are not talking about you. And if you hear someone calling themselves “queer”, that’s their decision, that’s a word that’s been reclaimed and it’s well within their right to use it to describe themselves. 

2016: Asexuals are not LGBTA+! The A always stood for ally and asexuals are straight.

In regards the umbrella term usage:

66.9% of respondents held that Queer is a suitable umbrella term.

40.2% of respondents held that MOGAI is a suitable umbrella term.

34.3% held that LGBT[…]+ variations are suitable umbrella terms.

32.4% of respondents held that QUILTBAG is a suitable umbrella term.

25.6% held that IMOGA is a suitable umbrella term. 

25.3% held that GSRM is a suitable umbrella term.

12.2% of respondents stated that they exclusively use non-LGBT[…]+ umbrella terms such as queer, MOGAI, QUILTBAG, etc.

Only 28% of respondents felt that LGBT[…]+ variations can be considered complete and sufficient as an umbrella.

When writing LGBT[…]+ variations:

71% of respondents include the letter Q

48.6% include the letter A

41.4% include the letter I (i)

24.4% include the letter P

14.2% include the letter N

When writing LGBT[…]+ variations, the following punctuation are used:

76% of respondents use a plus sign (+)

2.4% use an asterisk (*)

0.4% use a question mark (?)

0.2% use a slash (/)

Regarding the length of LGBT[…]+ variations:

2.9% of respondents use 3 or fewer letters

39.3% use 4 letters

33.3% use 5 letters

15.4% use 6 letters

19.5% use 7 letters

14.1% use 8 or more letters

Survey

Most recent data release

Results tag

It has begun *intense music and thunderclapping*

I understand the issue with having queer in the name, hence why most call it a qpp or quasiplatonic relationship.

that’s. literally what it is. you can just say “this is my best friend”. you might want to add that you’re extremely close or that your friendship is very important to you but it’s so unnecessary to call yourself queerplatonic or whatever. outside of a small community literally no one cares nor does it mean anything.

The reason the distinction of “platonic attraction” is made at all is purely to provide aid in aromantics figuring out their identity. No one ids as “queerplatonic” either, it’s a relationship type.

Qpp isn’t a pointless or harmful term, and a quasiplatonic partner is not the same as a best friend. It’s a relationship that toes the line between romantic and platonic, “alterous” is the most popular term. It’s not quite romance — there’s often little to no romantic attraction and rarely exclusivity. But it isn’t friendship — it often involves romantic components or a level of intimacy beyond what’s considered of friendship, such as dating, living together, marriage, raising kids etc. Perhaps in a society that doesn’t rank romance, sex, friendship and family in levels of importance, “best friends” wouldn’t come with a million wrong assumptions, but that is not a society we live in, therefore the distinction is needed.

If you think a term is pointless it’s bc it wasn’t made for you, simple as that. I don’t understand some lesbian terms, some don’t understand the necessity of non binary genders, but that doesn’t mean they have no significance.

-Writes a two page paper on why asexuality is not a real identity, completely ignores asexual voices, tells asexual people that they don’t need representation, claims that asexuality breeds internalized homophobia and therefore hates asexual people talking about the sexuality, username is a combination of the words ‘cishet’ ‘hate’ ‘not lgbt’, goes out of their way to harass asexual people minding their own business, tells asexual people that they can’t use the resources of lgbtq+ organizations offered to them despite many organizations acknowledging asexual people as lgbtq+

‘“ihatecishets” as a url truly is the ultimate form of ace oppression‘

Also:

cishet hate must truly be frightening for ace people to see

Yeah, because all aces who are bothered by this must obviously be “cishet”, right? That’s how this works, right?

you heard it here folks “cishet” is coded aphobic language. When are you gonna admit you hate the trans people who made that word long before the ace discourse was popular to describe actual tangible oppression and systemic issues that go beyond “boo hoo Everyone wants to feel Included”

I’m trans, and I can’t trust the term “cishet” anymore because it’s so often used by CIS PEOPLE as a way to distance themselves from their own cis privilege while telling me what I have and haven’t experienced as a direct result of my asexuality.

So many people are called “cishet” when they aren’t by any definition, simply for believing that aces are LGBTQ+.

There is nothing inherently wrong or disrespectful about being an aromantic heterosexual man. We should not hold aromantic heterosexual men to some lower standard of human decency because we assume they are inherently or automatically disrespectful toward women, or we assume they hold no regard for women. 

It is entirely possible, and should be the expectation in daily life, that all types of men have respect for women. Being romantically attracted to women, desiring a romantic relationship with a woman, or being willing to have a romantic relationship with a woman is NOT any kind of sign of respect for women. There are plenty of people who are romantically attracted to women and do NOT respect them, just as there are plenty of people who are not at all romantically attracted to women and respect the heck out of them! 

It should be the expectation that any type of man you meet will have a basic respect for women and women’s feelings. If he doesn’t have that respect, he’s an asshole, but his romantic/sexual orientation should not be an indicator of whether or not he’s a misogynistic asshole. 

Imagine a young man traumatized by his past abusive relationships with women, and not wanting to be in romantic relationships with women anymore. Or maybe a young man who simply doesn’t like the idea of being trapped and tied down in a long-term, monogamous relationship with one woman. He still communicates respectfully with his female sexual partners and female friends, listens to them when they speak, respects their opinions and requests, makes sure they are also satisfied during sexual encounters, etc. 

Romantic attraction ≠ respect

Do you love your mother, your father, your siblings, your pets?