28. Survivor. Aroace as in oriented towards relationships that are neither romantic nor sexual. I don't use tertiary attraction labels to describe my feelings for others and you can't make me. Everyone should be allowed to do what they want, but also, no one should feel like they have to do anything they don't want, and that's more important to me. If any of my posts don't apply to you, that's your problem, not mine. I delete replies that are mean-spirited or willfully ignorant.
Asexuality and aromanticism being defined as "little to no sexual/romantic attraction" is crazy to me. Imagine if they redefined being a gay man as "little to no attraction to women" and you had to, like, figure out for yourself that liking men was a part of it.
Personally, I define my aroaceness not as a lack of romantic or sexual attraction, but as an orientation towards relationships that are neither romantic nor sexual. Redefining my orientation this way has helped me find a lot of peace I didn't have before.
Edit 6 Apr 2026: Wow, it only took ten days before someone decided to be weird on this post and was promptly followed up by two comments addressing the weirdness that completely ignored my original point. And that isn't even counting all the people who originally ignored my point. But as annoyed as I was by the "it's a spectrum!" posters, I would take a thousand more of them before dealing with the repercussions of having one singular uneducated teenager on my post who insists that it's not.
The funny thing is that I didn't even really mind having an uneducated teenager gatekeeping on my post. I don't like it, but I can handle it. I gently but firmly told the kid to knock it off and haven't heard anything since.
So imagine what it feels like to be me, coming back to tumblr after a day long break and seeing two people with a much bigger audience than me dunking on this teenager, on my post, while completely ignoring what I actually said. Like, are you lumping me in with the kid? Are you assuming I hold the same ridiculous opinions? Or do you just not care what I have to say as long as you can dunk on someone?
Anyway, I'm turning reblogs off on this post. Congratulations on finding a quick and easy opportunity to be mean to a child. I hope you're pleased with yourselves.
And to the child who made those gatekeeping comments on my post, if you're reading this, assuming you haven't had a panic response to someone disagreeing with you and blocked me (I understand, I've been there and don't hold it against you even if it is a phase we all need to move past eventually), I truly hope you can internalize some kind of lesson about the community you belong to from all of this, and I hope the lesson isn't that we don't tolerate mistakes.
I'm reblogging this once more so people see the update, pinning it, and then no one's ever going to reblog it again. Congratulations to the two of you who ruined it for everyone.
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
✓ Live Streaming✓ Interactive Chat✓ Private Shows✓ HD Quality
Anya is LIVE right now
FREE
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
re: the whole cultural exchange/context conversation, though, I think all of the recent discourse has shone a light (a few, really) on symptoms of broader issues. and I think it's clicked a few pieces into place for my understanding of why people online are Like That.
because I've noticed for years that people online tend to get into skirmishes where they seem to be effectively saying the same thing, but either one party or both parties believe the other is in disagreement. they'll be on the same side, with mostly the same position, just with maybe a tiiiiiny tweak or two. but they'll think that they're way way way opposed. and I've been trying to figure out what the fuck that is for forever now
I think it's multifaceted, but the pieces I had 'figured out' prior were:
1. person A reads a phrase by person B. the phrase can be interpreted in multiple ways, and different political groups might say the same thing but mean it in subtly different ways.
in order to gauge which of the meanings person B belongs to, person A tries to use context clues about person B's other beliefs. person A then finds out that person B disagrees on some very small aspect (or even something else entirely unrelated to the current phrase person A is trying to decode). person A uses this information to categorize the original phrase into whichever group person A dislikes and disagrees with, and extrapolates a bunch of negative political opinions that person A is now convinced person B must believe in. person A's conviction is often so strong that, if person B tries to correct misconceptions about their beliefs, person A would rather believe that person B is being deceptive, than accept that person B was miscategorized.
2. throughout the process of language acquisition in life, we come to learn the definitional and connotative meanings of words via repeated exposure and association.
we learn that "hello" means "hello" because we watch others using it, and we also experimentally use it in different situations and with different people and then watch their reactions. therefore, we learn the associations attached to those words, in addition to their literal meaning.
this is also how we develop an intuition for dogwhistles and other forms of 'dangerous' group vocabulary. different groups will adopt eachothers' language, mannerisms, speech patterns, etc.. those who oppose that group (especially if they feel threatened by that group) will, therefore, hold negative associations between the use of behaviors resembling the bad group, and membership in that group. this is not isolated to tight-knight groups, though. everyone has a slightly different internal map of associations and connections between words and their meanings, all based on personal experience.
in one person's household growing up, "what are you doing?" may have been said with true curiosity and neutral intent. each time they heard that sentence, it was someone actually wanting to know what they were doing, maybe even with warmth and as a bid for connection. in another person's household, "what are you doing?" may have only been said as a rhetorical question, in a hostile tone, conveying something like "I am announcing my presence and you are in big big trouble".
when those people interact outside of their household, and a friend or a stranger asks that same question for the first time, how they are likely to interpret such a phrase is probably going to differ. someone in the second environment might become immediately defensive, even if the vocal tone of their friend does not suggest hostility.
a lot of the misunderstandings I've witnessed online seem to stem from a mixture of these two, with some added flair caused by things like ignorance, personality clashes, bigotry, etc.
however, on a larger, culture-to-culture, society-to-society scale, a lot of the recent discourse has brought something else to mind.
cultural difference, as a whole, really does not seem to be considered in a lot of these arguments online. the idea that people are misinterpreting words or attributing bad faith to people unnecessarily seems to come up, and people are quite frustrated with that, but I'm wondering now if it's just a clash of cultural norms around communication that are being amplified by algorithms and the internet.
because the point that I personally find the most frustrating is when you get reactions that were extremely unexpected. you said one thing, thinking it would be interpreted one way, to communicate something specific, only for the person you're interacting with to come away with something completely different. it's like talking to a wall. you speak the same language, but it feels like you don't. everything you do to try to help the situation, everything you think would be reassuring or lend to conflict resolution, seem to do the polar opposite.
and certainly, this is not solely cultural (on a societal level). even within a country or a culture, no two people are the exact same. there are people within high context cultures who feel that it's all performative and despise it and wish everyone was low context. there are people within low context cultures who feel stifled and on edge and prefer softening the blow. how anyone feels about it all is incredibly subjective and relative to one another. there is no objective "truth" about communication, just relative and comparisons. the high context culture is no more "correct" or morally superior than the low context culture, and vice versa. there are mean Canadians and nice Germans who exist out there. nothing is a monolith.
additionally, the internet has its own sort of culture and norms that adapt to the medium it occupies. when you can't rely on visible social cues, you have to find other ways of communicating that nuance. even from site to site, the culture is different. even within the same website, different subcultures are created, maintained, fall out of popularity or usage, etc.
so, onto the thing I've been watching happen with all of this FIFA world cup discourse...
when a certain misunderstanding happens once, it's probably more individual to the situation and the people involved (vs something beyond itself).
..........but then you see it happen over. and over. and over again. the same misunderstanding. the same argument. with almost the same language and sentiments thrown around, and an identical sequence of events every time between the same exact groups involved.
(I'm simplifying with N=non-American(s) and A=American(s) for this; the main people involved seemed to be people from the UK, but it was definitely not limited to them. but again. simplification. listing out every little group is tedious and not the point of what I'm trying to say here anyways)
N: *sees that uber is price gouging the fuck out of rides going to metlife stadium*
N: oh fuck that, this is outrageously overpriced. I'll just walk to the stadium. both in protest of this bullshit, and because I assume that I can do that since it's not that far away from the stadium
A: *out of a genuine concern for other people's wellbeing, because they don't want to see anybody get hurt or die, and under the guise that "if I was about to do something that a local knew was a bad idea, I'd want to be told why I shouldn't do that, because they definitely know their country better than I, a traveler, probably do"* oh hey it's really shitty that they're upcharging you ridiculously, but please don't try to do that. you can't do that, you will die
what N seemed to hear: I think the price gouging is great. fantastic, even. justified. when I am telling you that you will die if you try to make this walk, I am directly insulting both your intelligence and your athletic ability. I am trying to assert how superior Americans are. I love our shitty infrastructure and think it needs zero improvements. I think it's great that you can't walk from your hotel to the stadium, and think taking an uber there is the optimal setup. I'm only pretending to think that it's bad and pretending to agree with you, as some sort of bizarre power move to pretend I'm a better person (and manipulate you into thinking I'm on your side, because I think you're stupid enough to fall for that). I am also too fat and lazy to walk a couple of miles, so I am assuming that nobody else could do that as well. that is the only reason why I am assuming somebody couldn't walk a couple of miles. also, fuck you and your mother.
N: yeah yeah, listen, we'll be fine. we're built different than you. we can walk a mile, no problems.
A: no, seriously, we're not joking and we're not just trying to say you're not athletic. you can't walk to the stadium because there's a massive swamp and multi lane highway that you'd have to pass to get there, and both of those things are not safe for pedestrians. please do not do this, for your safety's sake
what N seemed to hear: I am stupid and love capitalism. I personally deeply care about whether or not you participate in our ridiculous infrastructure and pay our transportation costs, for some reason, as a point of national pride (or something). I think you haven't figured out any of this yourself because I think you're dumb and stupid and will never live up to your dreams, and not because you're looking out for strangers and just trying to help out. I think you're a fragile widdle baby who needs to be protected, and I think this for egotistical self-serving reasons that affirm my own superiority complex and sense of nationalism (and not out of any genuine concern for your fellow human to not get turned into a pancake by a semi). I am informing you of how impossible it is for pedestrians to cross our highways, which means that I adore our national highway system, I adore the way roads are built here, and I think that having completely uncrossable massive high speed roads is the best way to do things evarrrrr. by letting you know about these things, I am simultaneously expressing affection and approval of those same things. I am also simultaneously saying that I think I'm better than you.
N: why are you so proud of your shitty roads? why would you make such a thing? don't you see how bad this is? this is a point of PRIDE for you? what the fuck? why do you approve of any of this? why do you think it's okay to charge nearly $100 for a ride that's normally $12?
A: we... don't? we're not a fan of our infrastructure, either. it's really really shitty that they're upcharging you so badly, and a lot of us prefaced our statements by validating that you were being mistreated here. we're just telling you factual information so that you don't fucking die, dude. because we'd like it if you didn't die. because that would really suck!
[continue ad nauseum]
and like. I know for sure that I'm misinterpreting things myself, not seeing certain perspectives and biases, just kinda inevitably. that's part of why it's so confusing. because you think you can just say the right thing, and stop this situation, but nothing is received in the way that you intend it.
I'm sure it's also just the loudest most annoying bunch out of a group of otherwise decent people, and only a fraction are doing this whole discourse, but the fact that it's happened multiple times with basically the exact same sequence of events on both sides... idk it's just really intriguing to me. like I really do wonder wtf the miscommunication is there, and whether it's even resolvable or if the context of knowing the person you're talking to belongs to this or that group means that it'll play out this way in perpetuity.
I've met plenty of people from overseas who act nothing like this, so I kinda wonder if these people are like the MAGA types of the population over there? so they're just hypercritical and think everybody's out to get them automatically? I've got mutuals who think nothing like this and the vast majority of people don't seem to think or act like this, but there's just...a very particular subgroup who thinks this way. it's lowkey fascinating lol. and honestly kinda sad because it seems like the fundamental pain point here is a chronic distrust of strangers giving a damn about their wellbeing. that just seems like a really torturous, stressful way to go about the world and human interactions. I've certainly met people here who would fall into that behavior type, but nothing like this discourse has been lol.
but it's very clearly some sort of misalignment and misunderstanding due to cultural differences, because most of the people involved are in aggreeance for the most part (re: our failing infrastructure and uber surge pricing sucking major ass). what exactly causes that, though, idfk
and so I think about the whole "piss on the poor" "bean soup theory" "so you hate waffles" phenomenon, and the number of times I've gotten into arguments that felt like you were talking to a genie who kept misinterpreting you, and I'm like. is this part of that puzzle? is it some sort of bizarre cultural clash that's causing these seemingly irreconcilable miscommunications and arguments? is it totally unrelated? would there even be any coherent solution or suggestion to resolve it, in the case where this was the situation going? is it certain specific (sub)cultures, or just an inevitable side effect of any two cultures that are different enough to clash? can we actually figure out a way to bridge that gap or is it hopeless to even try?
Anyway the real questions I'd like to ask allo people in fandom in an attempt to get them to understand maybe a little bit why aro and/or ace fans feel so upset and lonely all the time are:
Do you have any aro/ace headcanons? Are they of main characters? Your favorite characters? Characters you even like?
When was the last time you read a fic that featured an aro/ace character? Did you bookmark it? Did you leave a comment? Have you ever put one on a reclist?
Have you ever participated in a genfic exchange? Have you ever considered that things like exchanges rely in part on having a certain number of participants, otherwise assignments won't work?
Have you ever had your art tagged with the name of a ship you didn't personally like? How did that make you feel? Have you ever thought about the fact that other people might feel the same way? Maybe even about the ships you do like?
Bonus hard round:
Have you ever considered what kind of a message it sends to say "Just let me write stories/make art/reblog posts about the things I like!" and to then exclude an entire group of marginalized people from "The things you like"
sex-repulsed people are fully within our rights to be cranky and blunt about not liking sex and how it's fucking everywhere btw. we shouldn't have to tiptoe around and make sure our phrasing is perfectly squeaky clean because people interpret any criticism of sex and sexualization as puritanism. venting about compulsory sexuality is not purity culture. maybe you could stand to learn a thing or two from us.
It really says something that a lot of monogamous people consider polyamorous and aromantic to be "opposites" but every polyam person I know took one look at aromantics and said "they're just like me for real"
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
✓ Live Streaming✓ Interactive Chat✓ Private Shows✓ HD Quality
Anya is LIVE right now
FREE
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
Titled "Asexual Resonances in History", this queer history zine contains quotes from historical figures who may have been asexual or on the asexual spectrum.
Inspired by Ela Przybylo and Danielle Cooper's paper Asexual Resonances: Tracing a Queerly Asexual Archive, the zine contains quotes that resonate with the modern understanding of asexual identities. Featuring real, historical people like King Kristina of Sweden, Emma Trosse, and Zinaida Gippius, this zine is an attempt to show how asexuality has always existed and will continue to do so.
I think a lot of radical feminists don't realize that gender is not the same in every culture. Gender is not based upon sex, because gender is not consistent across culture and religion.
sometimes I go on Reddit (my first mistake) and come to the car-crash-like realization that a lot of people genuinely think "friend" is the word for "a kind of relationship that is fundamentally and definitionally not deep, close, or meaningful" and any kind of depth or closeness automatically means you are "more than friends" and then I just. get really sad for the state of everything. no wonder the Loneliness Epidemic exists damn
any other aromantic people ever thinking about how scary it is being an adult in a world where romantic relationships, in which people generally prioritize their commitment over their friends, leads you into situations where you know if it came to it everyone around you could, like, move far away due to work/life/general circumstance, and you're just kinda the fodder left behind, not because they don't love you or value you, but because you're not the priority. and you can't really get upset at them for it because they're making the choices they need to make in their life to be happier and you're happy about that but you also can't act like you're happy with the cards currently at your disposal and you're always a little antsy about it because, well, yeah sure maybe your friends would be okay with you moving in or living with you if you needed to. and for the sake of sustainability, convenience, or necessity, that may very well be what happens. but would you be satisfied with that? would you be happy? you know that's not really what you want, not like that. maybe you want to be the definite priority. maybe that's selfish to ask for. but your closest friends have life goals that aren't your own, which is fine and you'd never blame them for that or get in their way of getting it, but where does that lead you in the end? when will it be you? when will it be You
people love to intentionally read anything said by an aspec person in bad faith
a sex repulsed ace person can raise an issue with a statement that, on its face, reads like someone saying you, the person reading this, have a moral obligation to be horny on main (a statement i have unironically seen!) and here come 500 aphobes and aspecs with internalized aphobia to tell them they're a horrible person who wants "real" queer people thrown in jail and probably also kicks puppies
some people are more open about their aphobia ("omg why do aces have to make everything about them, look at this cringe loser") and others are much more subtle about it. but it happens nonetheless, over and over again.
oh, but they can't possibly be aphobic. after all, as they're so quick to point out, they have an ace friend who passes out water bottles at the orgy.
gotta love it (/s) when people talk about this being the autism website and then berate someone for reading a post literally because it means they can throw another marginalized group under the bus lmfao
“let’s pull out the dictionary and list every definition of the word people on this very site use colloquially in the sexual manner more frequently than any other definition to further dunk on the sex repulsed ace person. how dare you assume op meant it in the way most people immediately think about. i am very smart.”
(it’s not even the same word, just one that looks similar enough. but who cares about the facts as long as we can point and make fun of the #cringe ace person, right?)
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
✓ Live Streaming✓ Interactive Chat✓ Private Shows✓ HD Quality
Anya is LIVE right now
FREE
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
Typed and cleaned up a mini-zine I made a while ago for an ace week zine making event. Made in reaction to my continued frustration what is often seen as "acceptance" and the DSM.
For folks not familiar with mini-zines here are instructions on how to fold them: https://docpop.org/2018/01/how-to-make-mini-comics-my-guide-to-cutting-and-folding-an-8-page-zine/
[Zine text:
Cover: Asterisk Acceptance. What does asexual acceptance actually mean?
Page 2: Asterisk acceptance: accepting something by adding exceptions to existing assumptions rather than challenging the assumptions.
This shows up all the time when people try to include asexuality. While often well meaning, it falls short of actual acceptance.
Page 3: Examples include:
We are all sexual beings*
*except for some asexuals
A strong romantic relationship needs sex to thrive*
*except for some asexual relationships
Sexual attraction is a core part of being human*
*except for asexual people
Page 4: This even shows up in medical spaces.
The DSM, the text used for defining and diagnosing mental disorders in Canada and the USA, has two diagnosis that can often apply to asexual people.
In the most recent version of the DSM, DSM-V, these are Female Sexual Interest/Arousal Disorder (FSIAD) and Male Hypoactive Sexual Desire Disorder (MHSDD).
Page 5: Both of these diagnoses have exceptions for people who identify as asexual.
But is that enough? What about the person who’s never heard “asexual” before? What about the doctor that doesn’t believe them? What about those whose asexuality isn’t lifelong? Does this exception help them?
Page 6:
Asterisk acceptance fails because it doesn’t question the underlying assumptions. It only adds exceptions to the rule. It continues to alienate, obscure and other those that it places in the list of exceptions.
Page 7:
Not only does asterisk acceptance hurt asexual people, it closes the possibilities asexuality brings to non-asexual people.
How much stronger could consent be if “no” was always an option?
What types of connection and pleasure exist beyond sex?
What do we want sex to mean for us and our relationships? Are there more ways of accessing that meaning?
Last Page: Real acceptance must happen at the root. ]
It does lowkey bother me HOW MUCH I see people saying “asexuals can have sex! They can have sex too!! Don’t worry guys asexual doesn’t mean sexless they CAN have sex some do have sex-“ like yeah they can. Some do. But does it bother you to think about aces not having sex?
Happy Pride all the queers in my phone. But an extra happy pride to all the bisexuals in straight passing relationships. To the trans people still living in the closet for their safety. To the nonbinary people getting misgendered. To the ace and aro people who sometimes feel like Pride isn’t for them. To the BIPOC people who face discrimination in the queer community. To everyone who feels like they aren’t queer enough.
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
✓ Live Streaming✓ Interactive Chat✓ Private Shows✓ HD Quality
Anya is LIVE right now
FREE
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
*taps mic* the queer community needs to make more effort to make pride events accessible despite corporate influence on pride and structural inaccessibility.
the queer community needs to hype up disability pride month (july btw) while queer pride month is happening. the queer community needs to amplify disabled queer experiences.
the queer community needs to recognize intersex people and how many of us have disabilities related to our intersex variation - and this Still Does Not Prove Eugenicists Right.
the queer community needs to fight ableism and love disabled people. queer or not. also quick question. why do you think the right paints us as insane predators.
