Asexual Awareness Week

[ysabetwordsmith]

This is Asexual Awareness Week.  Appreciate aces and entertainment that is about something other than sex/romance.

I have written about many asexual, aromantic, and other ace-spectrum characters over the years.  You can find some of them via my QUILTBAG Characters post.

Comments

[capri0mni]

Yeah. Thanks for that. I think the piece where Stalwart Stan got kidnapped was one of the pennies that dropped in my brain that finally got me to:

oh... ... ... Oh! Now I get it!

(Man! I can not tell you how confusing Match.com, etc., was, back when I was working under the mistaken assumption I was straight)

Thoughts

[ysabetwordsmith]

>> Yeah. Thanks for that. I think the piece where Stalwart Stan got kidnapped was one of the pennies that dropped in my brain that finally got me to:

oh... ... ... Oh! Now I get it! <<

The bit where he wasn't attracted because he's demi and committed to Lawrence? Yeah, that was a total nonstarter. Poor Velvet, trying the femme fatale routine on a gay guy and his demi bi boyfriend.

>> (Man! I can not tell you how confusing Match.com, etc., was, back when I was working under the mistaken assumption I was straight) <<

That must have been maddening.

Have you seen Stan's horrified response when they're doing homework and he realizes that for allosexual folks, "It just turns on at random?!"

So far, people don't seem very aware of any orientations beyond sexual ones. But they exist. I've always noticed how people often have a "type" when it comes to friends as well as mates. Often it's kind of vague because there's so little attention paid to this. Then I found Pips, and damn, he just crushes so hard when he sees a new boss that he wants to work for. It is adorable. So I have started writing more about that, and I'm keeping an eye out for other examples of platonic orientations. Not that I want to narrow anyone's options, but surely it would be easier to meet one's needs if one has a clearer idea what they are.

Re: Thoughts

[capri0mni]

That must have been maddening

Indeed.

As I wrote on my own Tumblr, for this week:

[If asexuality were a recognized orientation, when I first tried online dating] I would not have spent years trying to find a heterosexual partner, only to have each of those potential partners tell me: “Sorry, but there’s just no spark,” and break it off, just when I was beginning to really like them. I would not have spent those years thinking:

• Either there was some big, secret, flaw in me that I needed to find and fix before I deserved to be in a stable, supportive relationship (’cause if the same thing happens in every relationship, and you’re the only constant, then you must be the problem… right?)
  
• Or that all the guys I happened to connect with through these dating sites were both oversexed and terribly ableist, and the only reason they didn’t want to be with me was because they were grossed out by the idea of my wheelchair

And even though learning that I'm Ace, has not led, yet, to finding my Queer Platonic Partner, it has led to me forgiving myself, and letting my memories of all those (perfectly decent) guys out of the "sleazy creep" purgatory I'd put them in.

Also: if you want to complicate things for your characters even more, here's another term I came across this week:

Autochorissexualism:

A disconnection between oneself and a sexual target/object of arousal; may involve sexual fantasies, or arousal in response to erotica or pornography, but lacking any desire to be a participant in the sexual activities therein. Commonly found in asexual people: an analogous feeling may occur in aromantic people for romantic fantasies. Coined by Anthony Bogaert.

...And I can't help but wonder if the moral panic that blooms in popular media every now and then (like the fruiting bodies of fungi after a rain) about "Men addicted to porn, but 'unable to connect' to real women" are actually just talking about guys who are Ace. ...And if that were recognized as such, would "ace" still be (in terms of numbers) a 'minor" orientation?

Re: Thoughts

[ysabetwordsmith]

>> [If asexuality were a recognized orientation, when I first tried online dating] I would not have spent years trying to find a heterosexual partner, only to have each of those potential partners tell me: “Sorry, but there’s just no spark,” and break it off, just when I was beginning to really like them. <<

Likely so.

>>And even though learning that I'm Ace, has not led, yet, to finding my Queer Platonic Partner<<

Yeah, people haven't really thought about platonic orientations or how to find a permanent queerplatonic partner. But those orientations do exist, and I am becoming more intrigued by them.

>> ...And I can't help but wonder if the moral panic that blooms in popular media every now and then (like the fruiting bodies of fungi after a rain) about "Men addicted to porn, but 'unable to connect' to real women" are actually just talking about guys who are Ace. <<

Well, that depends. Does the guy really want a romantic, sexual relationship with someone else? If he does, then it's an obstacle. If he doesn't, then it's not. Perhaps he is ace. However, perhaps he is aromantic and enjoys sex but not all the expectations of women who chase after him demanding attention when all he wants is a nice uncomplicated fuck. Many aromantic men turn to pr0n because it is satisfying without the clinginess.

>> ...And if that were recognized as such, would "ace" still be (in terms of numbers) a 'minor" orientation? <<

Probably there is more of it than people realize. It also varies by locale. It is quite common in Japan, to the point that society is starting to complain about isolated young people who have zero interest in relationships.

Re: Thoughts

[capri0mni]

Well, that depends. Does the guy really want a romantic, sexual relationship with someone else? If he does, then it's an obstacle. If he doesn't, then it's not.

The problem with that line of thinking, though, is that if people don't know that asexuality exists/is something that's possible as an identity, they very likely could attribute their unhappiness to failing a sexual/romantic relationships (as I did for years), instead of being unhappy because the relationships you do have are not honored in our culture the way sexual relationships are.

I mean: it's great the DSM5 now has a caveat that low sex drive is to no longer be considered a medical disorder, if a person self-identifies as "asexual."

But people who've never heard of the word "asexual" aren't going to call themselves that... And they'll still be subject to having their orientation medicalized.

Oh, and just tonight, someone posted a link to this article from Teen Vogue, which talks about this precise issue: What being asexual means to me (I swear, last year and this year especially, Teen Vogue has become a portal for Terramange leakage).

Re: Thoughts

[ysabetwordsmith]

>> The problem with that line of thinking, though, is that if people don't know that asexuality exists/is something that's possible as an identity, they very likely could attribute their unhappiness to failing a sexual/romantic relationships (as I did for years), instead of being unhappy because the relationships you do have are not honored in our culture the way sexual relationships are.<<

The flow chart goes like this:

Person uses pr0n instead of having sex. Is person unhappy?

No -> No problem. It is okay to be happy having no sex. Person may be asexual or some other identity.

Yes -> Problem. Does person identify as asexual?

No -> Problem could be due to mis-identifying as sexual when person is actually asexual. Explore identity to see if this is the case. Problem could be due to sexual and/or relationship malfunctions. Explore those to see if anything is not working correctly.

Yes -> Problem is likely due to self and/or society having less-healthy views of asexuality. Consider working on one or both of those.

>>I mean: it's great the DSM5 now has a caveat that low sex drive is to no longer be considered a medical disorder, if a person self-identifies as "asexual."

But people who've never heard of the word "asexual" aren't going to call themselves that... And they'll still be subject to having their orientation medicalized.<<

Hell, everything is subject to being medicalized, it's why that book exists. It's not based on science, it's based on what drugs and services can be sold to insurance companies. The logical thing to do would be check for asexuality -- and check to make sure the person has a reasonable idea what that even is -- but I doubt they'll do that because it would lose them money. Just look at how badly homosexuality has been handled and expect they'll fumble everything else similarly. Sure, it's nice to have the exception but using it requires knowing oneself and being able to fight for that identity when someone else has the power to write down whatever they please. I don't expect that to go very well. I'd say, if you're having sexual identity issues, look for a therapist who advertises support of a wide diversity of identities. Because otherwise you're likely to get the standard, which tends to suck.

*ponder* Actually, I've seen so many people realize their identity from reading stories about said identity, that's my recommendation. You're sexually confused or unhappy about your identity? Stack up a whole bunch of literature and start reading. It has a pretty good chance of clarifying some things for you.

Hmm. Now I really want to get a list or two and see how hard I can bingo them just from what I've written. Because then I could just say, "Here, read your way down the links in this post."

Re: Thoughts

[capri0mni]

Indeed. Representation matters.

(and, along with Capitalist forces trying to skew everything to their favor, we also have to deal with exclutionists within the rights movements themselves: feminists who want to exclude trans women, gays and lesbians who want to exclude aces, genderfluid, and bi folk for not being oppressed like they are, etc.)

All of which is why awareness weeks and things matter.

(I just wish I liked the aesthetics of the Ace pride flag better than I do) :-/

Re: Thoughts

[ysabetwordsmith]

>> Indeed. Representation matters. <<

Yeah, that's why I want everyone to have stories about them.

>> (and, along with Capitalist forces trying to skew everything to their favor, we also have to deal with exclutionists within the rights movements themselves: feminists who want to exclude trans women, gays and lesbians who want to exclude aces, genderfluid, and bi folk for not being oppressed like they are, etc.) <<

That sucks. But it's why I wrote "TERF Wars" -- that shit is not okay.

>> All of which is why awareness weeks and things matter. <<

Agreed.

>> (I just wish I liked the aesthetics of the Ace pride flag better than I do) :-/ <<

So make your own. Genderqueer and Pansexual look even worse.

Re: Thoughts

[capri0mni]

Hm.

I have my own flag to wave and promote, first.

(Though the intersex flag is classic -- top notch vexillology).

[seishun]

*\o/* it was a major relief to understand i'm ace.

Congratulations!

[ysabetwordsmith]

It is good to know yourself, and understand that there is nothing wrong with you, that you are just right for you. :D

[chanter1944]

As an ace spectrum lady with both demi and grey as orientation variables, thank you for this. :D

You're Welcome

[ysabetwordsmith]

I'm glad that resonates for you. I want everyone to have literature about them. Good literature, with a nice mix up upbeats and downbeats, not judgmental crap.

[mdlbear]

Thank you.

Gray-ace, demiromantic, as far as I can tell. I enjoy sex but don't seem to feel sexual attraction, and I have no idea whether what I feel in a relationship is romantic by anyone's definition.

[mdlbear]

Another link: Asexual Awareness Week

Thoughts

[ysabetwordsmith]

>> Gray-ace, demiromantic, as far as I can tell. I enjoy sex but don't seem to feel sexual attraction, and I have no idea whether what I feel in a relationship is romantic by anyone's definition.<<

Fascinating. Yeah, there are some subtleties the ace vocabulary hasn't really caught up with. Like I can tell what's hot, and enjoy talking about it, without feeling a compulsion to do anything about it very often.

Autosexual is for people who enjoy solo activities but not with another person. Some aromantic sexual folks are just interested in the physical sensations, rather than attraction or relationship regarding another person.

[mama_kestrel]

The other thing people don't realize is that orientation can change. I was always demi-sexual; my heart had to be well and truly committed before my body wanted anything to do with sex. But after attempts to reproduce screwed up my hormones completely, and surgery finished the job? I'm totally ace now, but still romantic/monogamous. I feel badly for my partner, who is also demi, still interested in sex but not with anyone else, but I can't seem to convey to the few I've talked to that no, I don't miss it myself. Why would I miss something I have no interest in whatsoever? Cuddles, yes, lots of cuddles and affection and love. But while I wasn't asexual when we married, I have been these last 15 years. That's half my marriage. No one talks about that possibility, but I'm sure I'm not unique.

Well ...

[ysabetwordsmith]

Almost everyone's orientation DOES change. It just tends to change in a pattern so widespread that they don't think about it as such. Most people are born with their sex/romance circuit OFF. That is, ace-aro. Some, however, know from a very early age that they are straight, gay, or whatever. At puberty, the majority of people find that their sex/romance circuit turns ON so now they are romantic and/or sexual of some flavor. Quite often, later in life, the sexual circuit turns down (graysexual) or off (asexual). It doesn't always, but that's very common. Frequently the romantic side stays on, but sometimes that kicks off too (aromantic).

Another interesting feature is that some people seem to lock onto one partner. If that partner dies or otherwise departs, the remaining person doesn't become interested in anyone else; in essence, becoming ace-aro. While not common, neither is it rare; plenty of folks have known a widow or divorcee who just isn't in the game anymore.

People simply don't think that these things "count" as changing orientation, despite the dramatic effects on someone's life and choices.

I have also seen someone's sexuality flip over quite unexpectedly from gay to bi. That's how I learned never to carve it in stone. I think of people as currently whatever.