#askmint

Honestly, agreed

I still stand behind my reasoning that you can be nonbinary and a lesbian, but you do have to be comfortable enough with being associated with women to be a wlw.

I dislike the definition “non-men attracted to non-men.” First of all, who is a man is just as difficult a question as who is a woman. Second of all, it seems weird to phrase lesbianism around men. Like, people do that to bi women all the time (“available to men”) but lesbians? Why?

I haven’t been answering asks bc I want to give them thought and grad school sucks the energy out of me but this one just

2/2 We have so much more in common with gay men than straight men. We’re both GAY. So what if we’re gay for different genders? Gay men can make a recolor of our flag if they want to because they’re gay too and we’re in this together. I think those people just hate gay men and that’s why they say we don’t share a sexuality. They’re the ones saying mlm can’t make posts for mlm only too.

You’re right. This is why I say that unless you never ever experience sexual attraction (as in never wanting to have sex with people) then you’re allosexual. But I do believe that gray-aces can exist as a label, they are allosexual but also under the a-umbrella (since the umbrella is not limited to just aces/aros)

Personally, I don’t see the need for the word “allo.” It doesn’t denote any group of people that is important to separate from others. Like I said, allo people are very often under the a-umbrella.

The reason that I think gray-asexuality can exist is that labels can give people a sense of security. If someone struggles with physical intimacy for example, it can be difficult to tell whether it’s due to attraction or trauma or just how someone is with no reason. Unless that struggle is causing distress (in that case they should see a therapist about it) identifying as gray-ace can help them come to terms with it.

I don’t really see a-umbrella labels as “sexual orientations.” It’s more like just a label someone can use if they want to, but don’t have to. Ideally, the a-umbrella will make it so that there doesn’t need to be any labels; if you need these resources, then use them and be part of this community. There are no special labels required.

This is an interesting point that I’ve talked about before. Are nonbinary people trans?

hypothetical scenario: a person is, say, a heterosexual nonbinary man who does not identify as trans. Is he LGBT?

Is it possible for there to be cishet nonbinary people? Not-LGBT nonbinary people?

This is I think another instance where nonbinary people mess up the system since as a whole we can’t be described in simple terms.

An a-spectrum would indeed exclude people who choose not to engage in sex or romance. This is why I prefer the “umbrella” language because it’s less about where you fall on a “spectrum” of attraction (which is just so muddy and difficult to define) and more about do you need to be under the umbrella or not? Are these discussions relevant to you? If so, welcome.

For your second question, as far as an ace/aro umbrella goes, I don’t think there is or should be a clear boundary between who is in and who is out. If you find yourself in need of the resources then partake in them. And even if you don’t? Why don’t you still go to a meeting or discussion and listen in, maybe you’ll learn something about your own relationship to sex/romance.

Exactly. People are so obsessed with aces/aros being LGBT that it actively hurts the efforts to create an actually beneficial ace/aro community. Ace/aro is not about identity or about validation or anything like that, it doesn’t matter if you identify as ace or aro, all that matters is whether you struggle with society’s demands of being in romantic/sexual relationships.