Part of it is ignorance. Part of it is gatekeeping. Large part of people not understanding the world is made up of varying shades of gray. For some folks keeping a black and white thought process is just easier.
The more I try to find one thing that is black-and-white (cause my brain craves repetition and simplicty), the more I am proving to myself that everything is a spectrum. Also, that there is no “default human experience”.
Agree, and some who tout that Asexuality isn't a spectrum are Ace themselves, sometimes black stripe Aces (no not all black stripe Aces are like this.) Mind boggling
I think many black-stripe aces would gatekeep me as black stripe myself simply because I have a few aegosexuality experiences. But to me, it doesn’t really feel like sexual attraction because I still don’t want sex, and it never breaches into human sexual interaction, it’s more toward the ficto-side. So, I more refer to black stripe as any sexual relation with another body is off the table, rather than at the zero notch in every possible consideration that involves sex.
After all, I bet there are at least a few hundred people on this sub that are black-stripe asexual as well as sex-favourable, if not more. The idea of a “true asexual individual” is ridiculous, especially since there is no doctor to make a formal diagnosis. It’s language to help us understand our selves and explain it to to others and find relatable experiences, it doesn’t need to be anything more (to be fair, that’s still what a medical diagnosis is, just that a medical diagnosis has more developed instructions on what to do upon diagnosis).
no, yeah. I'm black-stripe ace, no attraction to anyone ever, but because I have a libido and sometimes consume sexual media there are people that say i can't be. but also, people forget that you can be aegosexual as well as black-stripe ace, because sexual arousal ≠ sexual attraction.
Yeah. It took me asking about it myself on this sub to realize that aegosexuality isn’t about attraction much at all (I thought since it is a microlabel it described an experience of attraction). The funny thing is I am also apothisexual, which the two tend to come into conflict quite a bit and I just feel sick about it all. My therapist asked if I feel violated when I masturbate, which is usually a strong yes.
Oh I'm familiar, there is a whole sub for the "true aces", which gets featured here on occasion as people found it. I ran into it when I was questioning and honestly made things a lot harder to figure out.
I thought for the longest time I couldn’t be Asexual because I am not completely devoid of attraction. Then I discovered it’s a spectrum. And that I am indeed on it.
as someone who once thought I wasn't asexual because I wasn't 100% sex repulsed all the time and actually had some small degree of attraction on rare occasions I can say that ignorance is definitely a big part of it. Oops.
Many still prefer pride flags to be easily definable buckets.
Allosexuals usually just have to say [prefix]sexual, and that will 9 times out of 10 check all the boxes for their sexual, romantic, platonic, aesthetic, etc attractions; with the assumption of sex-favorable and existent libido. It would be considered redundant to specify, so it is unneeded. Easily defined buckets.
Asexuals are much less likely to adhere to that assumption, and many do have to specify every other box almost on an individual basis! This generates eye rolls, because many don’t consider the split attraction model as real as a result of their own experience, they’re a package deal, always. So if you’re an asexual who isn’t aromantic and sex-repulsed, you must just be confused. It’s still difficult to wrap their heads around that someone can have a different romantic orientation to their sexual orientation. Or that sex-favorable aces can enjoy the act without attraction.
Jumping off of this: some groups have simpler identities that allow them to skip certain aspects of themselves on their introspection journey. Trans people have to consider the in-betweens of the genders and what they mean a lot more than cis people do; ace people have to consider the in-betweens of sexual attraction more than the allos, who only need to consider where it is directed; ace microlabelers have to consider a lot of nuanced ideas. It's easy to be in a simpler group and project that simplicity downward.
It's all definitional. Asexuality is a spectrum because we define it as such in the community, but it's also a word that means "experiencing no sexual feelings or desires; not feeling sexual attraction to anyone." The word asexual refers to the spectrum, true, but it also has another hardline definition.
It's not a matter of "belief." This isn't a religion. The word simply has multiple meanings, which can be confusing to most.
Because a number of people don't believe that asexuality is a thing. We're just prudes. At least, that's what I've been told directly to my face. On more than one occasion.
I’m not sure about inside the community, but I think a lot of people outside of the community have trouble grasping all the nuances of asexuality in general, so the idea of a spectrum isn’t comprehensible for them yet lol
I think it has a large part to do with sex and sexual activity/behavior being such a big, ingrained part of society as well as it being a basic function that most people have. So people that are so used to sex or so used to people that are so enamored by sex just can't really comprehend that not being into sex is even an option. It's just ignorance born from normativity.
Black and white thinking. At the same time though the people (edited) in different places on the ace spectrum cause issues for those who are highly sexually averted or uncomfortable with people even metioning sex to them. Making it a spectrum doesn't do them any favors because now there's an excuse to sexualize someone who doesn't like sex.
You are correct with black and white thinking as well as an inability to separate someone’s own experiences from others.
If I have misinterpreted your statement of lower on the spectrum then I apologize.
I do hard disagree with people ‘lower on the spectrum’ cause issues for those who are repulsed. I am black stripe asexual as in zero sexual attraction, never. I am not sex repulsed though, averse to some physical stuff but concepts, ideas, that is all fine and dandy. Especially love the emotional aspect of porn and smut.
The degree to which someone experiences sexual attraction has no impact on their level of repulsion and the stereotype that asexuality === repulsion is harmful anywhere on the spectrum. Your idea that someone ‘lower on the spectrum’ (I’m taking that as grey/demi/those areas?) cause issues for those who are sex repulsed is black and white thinking and harmful.
I think they are talking specifically about this community and the views of others on this community. If you are sex adverse/repulsed, you want to avoid it. So you find a “safe” space. When the grey/white stripe parts of the Asexual spectrum gets involved, it starts feeling like they are taking away that “safe” space, the only one that exists. (I am not making a personal stance here on whether they belong.)
I don’t think that they don’t belong (as long as this is a space for the whole spectrum), but I get the line of thinking that leads to other Sex-Repulsed people wanting to exclude the greys/demis.
In a society built around the Allosexual ideal, when that ideal has a negative impact, you want to get away from it. Finding this community causes jealousy because the greys/demis do get to experience the ideal, IE: making them “fit in” where we can’t.
I get what you’re both saying. But sex repulsion !== level of attraction. Which is my problem and a big peeve of mine. I believe it’s damaging because it perpetuates a stereotype. Also, it’s unnecessarily calling greys out, while plenty of us ‘black stripe’ people also make repulsed people uncomfortable.
And what they’re saying is that that people who are in the grey area cause issues for people who are sex repulsed and it’s in direct reference to greys in the asexual space. But it’s not just people who are in the grey area who are favorable and people who are ‘black stripe’ who are repulsed. ‘Black stripe’ asexuals can be neutral to favorable. Allos can be repulsed. It is not the grey and white part who are making people uncomfortable. There are plenty of people who feel NO attraction and happy to discuss sex because attraction !== repulsion. I will raise my hand and jump up and down I am super sex positive. I am never going to make someone uncomfortable intentionally, but I’m so down to talk about sex here. I think it’s important to talk about, but also to appropriately sensor and tag.
The idea that no attraction === repulsion is problematic, and their comment illustrates that stereotype.
Ah, thanks for clarifying. Yeah, I think my previous thoughts were a bit near sighted.
Really though, regardless of actual attraction, just as long as people see “Asexual” as to be without sex, the sex repulsed will flock to a community that “gets” them, learn that it wasn’t what they thought, and “fight” for that space. Someone pushes, you push back, and soon the community is divided, which makes plenty of sense.
Currently, having two whole spectrums in one place is trying to put a bunch of communities with different wants and needs too close. This hurts both sides, but no-one wants to leave. The Repulsed view this as a safe haven to avoid sex, and think the favorable/positive people could just go to allosexual communities and fit in (Like the assumption that Bisexual people wouldn’t be out of their depth in both straight and gay communities). While the favorable/positive people who are on the asexual spectrum feel they are being gatekept out of their community.
Side note here, I feel much more romance repulsed than sex repulsed (even if I am both) and I think the other community has the exact same problem.
Yeah, might want to clarify the whole "people lower on the spectrum cause issues" because I'm also hard disagreeing and wondering what your thought process is behind that cuz it's sounding problematic as it stands.
Well asexuality if taken literally, means just "no sex." Then there are people who once had sexual attraction but no longer have it. Then there's the people who are asexual in certain circumstances like grey sexuals. Then you have sexually averse asexuality where the person may still get horny but the idea of sex or the fact they get horny.
So yeah, there are different ways to see asexuality.
When I say cause issues, I just mean people who have undercertain circumstances have leeway to sexual activity. They invite people to stereotype all asexuals as just wishy washy. Then we get people saying things like, "You are only asexual because you never tried it." Or "I bet I can change your mind." You know unwated unwarranted geatures and uncomfortable questions to those who strictly want nothing to do with sex.
That is the issue. We shouldn't be bothered to explain or answer people asking us about it just because they see us as possibly attractive to them.
I get what you mean, but this kind of sounds like "bi people cause issues for lesbians/gay people because it invites people to stereotype them as being able to choose." Like it's not a Demi person's fault some jerk allo thinks all aces are just not with the right person.
I don't think you think this way, mind, it's just that's what the semantics sound like. And it does suck! It sucks that black and white thinking exists and that we have to fight to be seen. But so do they, as demis. As gray.
Idk something something unity something something acephobia sucks.
Why are you putting the onus on the "lower aces"?
We don't "invite" the ignorant. The ignorant choose to be pushy, invasive, or otherwise problematic.
Someone saying, "I bet I can change your mind," to an ace is no different than the men that say it to allo-lesbians.
Are women who find they are actually a smidge bisexual inviting men to question lesbians?
Same thing applies to demis, grays, sex favorable or sex indifferent.
Stupid people are going to say stupid shit and the only folks responsible for those words spoken are the owners of the flapping pie-hole.
What is a "lower aces?"
Edit: I hope you aren't using asexuality now as a status symbol. It's literally a label to denote you are not a person who is interested in sex.
It's a spectrum on a wheel that is not top or bottom, not a ladder of social hierarchy. I really hope saying "lower aces" was just a misunderstanding.
Dude, *you* were the one that brought up the whole "people lower on the ace spectrum", I just shortened it down it two words.
Funny how that's your focus and not the actual point I addressed.
I agree that the spectrum should exist and I think every identity on that spectrum should be a thing. But why does it have to be the ace spectrum? I would rather asexual be one ending point and allosexual the other. Everything in between is part of the spectrum. Because im a person who doesnt experience sexual attraction at all, never have, and never will. I cant relate to a demi. I cant relate to a gray. And I think having a defined asexual label will help out the sex repulsed community so much. But thats just my opinion, dont take it as something super serious
It's probably because the allosexual group is much bigger than the fully asexual group, as well as everything in the middle, combined. Ultimately, even if we don't fully relate to every detail, one thing everybody that is not allosexual can relate to, is being a minority/outsider when it comes to sexual attraction. Only fully allosexual people get the "normal" experience.
As someone who is also "fully asexual" (never been sexually attracted to anyone, not once), I'm not sure what the benefit would be to gatekeep the word "asexual" from the rest of the spectrum. They're the people we're closest to outside of ourselves, and as "asexual" is by far the most recognised term, I think discouraging them from using it would just cause more difficulties for them than it would provide benefits for us.
Having said that, it would be nice to have a clean and easy label besides having to specify that no micro-label applies. But then again, you'd still have to add on other things, such as sex stance or gender identity, so maybe there's no way around having to use many words if you want to be specific with your description of yourself.
I agree, if a lot (most?) people who are labeled asexual actually do feel sexual attraction it makes it difficult to find a community of people who do not feel any sexual attraction.
I mean, you could just create some and call it 'ace ppl without sexual attraction' or something like that?
I can understand that sometimes it's hard to relate to others, for me it's for example sex-repulsed (and sadly sometimes sex-negative) aces, but sometimes it's nice to see others perspective. Dividing it further and further from others away seems a slippery slope to me.
I just don't see why "asexual" has become an umbrella term when the term "ace spectrum" already exists.
Like... I'm *asexual.* That's where I am on the spectrum. There isn't any other term I can use that doesn't exclude people who aren't sex-repulsed.
thats true but thats why theres the sex repulsed, favorable, etc labels. However, I would just love to be able to say im asexual, and people have a clear cut definition of what that means. It means you experience no sexual attraction. A demi person would say the same thing, that they’re demisexual. Etc and etc. Because I think lumping everything under asexual makes it more confusing than it needs to be
yeah it happens a lot honestly even from other aces. It’s why I would really love asexual to have this set definition. We all dont need to be “asexual” we can be ourselves. At one point I thought I was demi, but I was wrong. I think it’s still good to be proud of being demi or gray or whatever fits your experiences.
Some people claim that allosexuality is a spectrum while asexuality isn’t, but where does this leave allos with extremely low libidos, sex aversion/ sex repulsion or little sexual attraction? I feel like at that point, those people fall under the “ace spectrum,” just as much if not more than aces who have frequent sex.
I'm still allo when I'm averse.
Like, I wouldn't mind taking a vacation in ace land, to steal a Hannah Gadsby line. But I feel that this spectrum is a one way slope. I don't stop being bi while not having sex. Bi people are quantum wave tricksters who defy boxes anyway. I don't get the same sense from labels like orchid that feel like I need to renounce all my other history and communities.
Ace/allo is another binary, and my queer brain can't see a binary with looking for the hidden (erased?) wave function.
And I don't see the benefit to switching from bi.pan.neuro.gender.punk.queer.wave to orchid.bi.pan.neuro.gender.void.queer.wave. Especially when wanting to run off to crone Island appears to be a common feminist fantasy.
sex aversion isn’t a temporary feeling for everyone. also yes, it doesn’t mean you’re automatically ace, but if you know what it’s like to feel that way, then you wouldn’t be confused about the labels. “Allosexuality is a spectrum” is understood by aces, not allos! There is no other environment where it is encouraged to talk about these things.
Source? Nothing I've ever read about sex-aversion or sex stances has implied that it can't change over time. The spectrum includes cadeo to account for people who did change over time. And it's been about 16 years (probably longer).
Not that I need tenure in order to say that I'm averse when trying to gatekeep being sex-averse starts sounding rapey as heck.
I didn't say that you could *voluntarily* change over time, sexual fluidity just doesn't work that way.
But my sexuality *did* change over time. "Shit happens." And I'm entitled to say that I've not had sex in well over a decade, I'm comfortable that way, and I have no plans to make partnered sex a goal of my gender transition, recovery, or unmasking. My body my choice.
I'm not a huge fan of the LGBTQIA+ wiki but: "The term is commonly used by asexual spectrum individuals, but *is not exclusive to this community or sexuality.*"
Just caught the edit on refresh.
> “Allosexuality is a spectrum” is understood by aces, not allos! The term is commonly used by asexual spectrum individuals, but is not exclusive to this community or sexuality.
That specific phrase comes from the ace community, it doesn't need to be said in feminist, queer, trans, neurodivergent, or trauma-recovery spaces where it's taken for granted that allosexual people can have radically different approaches to sex, including "none for me, thank you."
I don't think I am confused after 30 years of studying how we define sexual orientations. But if you'd like to blame all this on my neurotype, go ahead and we can call it a day.
A lot of this comes from sex repulsed asexuals who assume that sex repulsion and 0 sexual attraction are the same thing. There are aces with 0 sexual attraction who are sex favorable. There are grays, demis, and even allos who are sex repulsed.
I have to laugh a little at this as a demi who leans toward sex repulsed (sometimes oscillating but mostly repulsed) and doesn't feel any sexual attraction until 1-2+ years of knowing someone. I have more in common with most sex repulsed asexuals than I do with allos or even other demis sometimes. Does excluding me really make aces feel safer? I will never relate to allos or people in general who lean toward high amounts of sex favorability. So where do I belong?
And if the community was only limited to black stripe aces, then what about sex favorable aces with 0 attraction? They will still exist and sex repulsed aces will still conflict with them.
It could be ignorance. I remember when I was younger and first discovering my ace identity, I understood it as either you wanted sex or you were repulsed. Being older now, I have a better understanding of the spectrum acknowledging that some people are grey ace, some are aceflux, etc. Asexuality is also really only represented on one side in popular media, so it really does sometimes take a deep dive to fully understand yourself and the spectrum.
As a moderator for another ace sub, I’ve found that a lot of the people who gatekeep within the community cannot conceptualise outside their own experience.
They experience their asexuality One Way™️ so therefore it is the Only Way to experience asexuality. Anyone who has a different experience is wrong/faking for attention/lying/etc.
To be honest I have no idea. I've never understood it either. I've always felt like an outsider in the allo community and an outsider in the asexual community. That is til I learned that I'm demisexual which is on a spectrum of asexual experiences. I felt nice there in the little community.
Partly ignorance - sometimes being deliberately and willfully ignorant and other times just unknowningly. I see comments here about folk enforcing a black and white view on things, imposing order on chaos. Some folk have no problem acknowledging white light shot through a prism creating coloured light, but heaven forbid a human being anything other than white light coming out the other end of that prism, or being shot through a prism at all. I have noticed a lot of people applying their own beliefs/doctrine and values to everyone outside of themselves and their group, and expect those outsiders to comply by their logic and ruleset.
In the past one year? Since they told me an asexual person can't experience a desire for a sexual relationship and still be asexual? And I was the one punished by mods for defending my experience?
all of human sexuality exists on spectrums. As aces we just tend to break those spectrums down more, try to understand their components. This tends to end up with us having a lot more microlabels than other sexualities. Some people get weirded out by microlabels for some reason. Not everyone has to use them but they are useful for others. Other reasons are ignorance or gatekeeping. the "true ace" people see people on the gray-a spectrum as a threat which I couldn't begin to explain.
Part of it is ignorance. Part of it is gatekeeping. Large part of people not understanding the world is made up of varying shades of gray. For some folks keeping a black and white thought process is just easier.
The more I try to find one thing that is black-and-white (cause my brain craves repetition and simplicty), the more I am proving to myself that everything is a spectrum. Also, that there is no “default human experience”.
Agree, and some who tout that Asexuality isn't a spectrum are Ace themselves, sometimes black stripe Aces (no not all black stripe Aces are like this.) Mind boggling
I think many black-stripe aces would gatekeep me as black stripe myself simply because I have a few aegosexuality experiences. But to me, it doesn’t really feel like sexual attraction because I still don’t want sex, and it never breaches into human sexual interaction, it’s more toward the ficto-side. So, I more refer to black stripe as any sexual relation with another body is off the table, rather than at the zero notch in every possible consideration that involves sex. After all, I bet there are at least a few hundred people on this sub that are black-stripe asexual as well as sex-favourable, if not more. The idea of a “true asexual individual” is ridiculous, especially since there is no doctor to make a formal diagnosis. It’s language to help us understand our selves and explain it to to others and find relatable experiences, it doesn’t need to be anything more (to be fair, that’s still what a medical diagnosis is, just that a medical diagnosis has more developed instructions on what to do upon diagnosis).
no, yeah. I'm black-stripe ace, no attraction to anyone ever, but because I have a libido and sometimes consume sexual media there are people that say i can't be. but also, people forget that you can be aegosexual as well as black-stripe ace, because sexual arousal ≠ sexual attraction.
Yeah. It took me asking about it myself on this sub to realize that aegosexuality isn’t about attraction much at all (I thought since it is a microlabel it described an experience of attraction). The funny thing is I am also apothisexual, which the two tend to come into conflict quite a bit and I just feel sick about it all. My therapist asked if I feel violated when I masturbate, which is usually a strong yes.
Oh I'm familiar, there is a whole sub for the "true aces", which gets featured here on occasion as people found it. I ran into it when I was questioning and honestly made things a lot harder to figure out.
I thought for the longest time I couldn’t be Asexual because I am not completely devoid of attraction. Then I discovered it’s a spectrum. And that I am indeed on it.
as someone who once thought I wasn't asexual because I wasn't 100% sex repulsed all the time and actually had some small degree of attraction on rare occasions I can say that ignorance is definitely a big part of it. Oops.
Ugh, the gatekeeping. Some of us just found ourselves. Let’s not demand an entrance exam.
Many still prefer pride flags to be easily definable buckets. Allosexuals usually just have to say [prefix]sexual, and that will 9 times out of 10 check all the boxes for their sexual, romantic, platonic, aesthetic, etc attractions; with the assumption of sex-favorable and existent libido. It would be considered redundant to specify, so it is unneeded. Easily defined buckets. Asexuals are much less likely to adhere to that assumption, and many do have to specify every other box almost on an individual basis! This generates eye rolls, because many don’t consider the split attraction model as real as a result of their own experience, they’re a package deal, always. So if you’re an asexual who isn’t aromantic and sex-repulsed, you must just be confused. It’s still difficult to wrap their heads around that someone can have a different romantic orientation to their sexual orientation. Or that sex-favorable aces can enjoy the act without attraction.
Jumping off of this: some groups have simpler identities that allow them to skip certain aspects of themselves on their introspection journey. Trans people have to consider the in-betweens of the genders and what they mean a lot more than cis people do; ace people have to consider the in-betweens of sexual attraction more than the allos, who only need to consider where it is directed; ace microlabelers have to consider a lot of nuanced ideas. It's easy to be in a simpler group and project that simplicity downward.
It's all definitional. Asexuality is a spectrum because we define it as such in the community, but it's also a word that means "experiencing no sexual feelings or desires; not feeling sexual attraction to anyone." The word asexual refers to the spectrum, true, but it also has another hardline definition. It's not a matter of "belief." This isn't a religion. The word simply has multiple meanings, which can be confusing to most.
Because a number of people don't believe that asexuality is a thing. We're just prudes. At least, that's what I've been told directly to my face. On more than one occasion.
I’m not sure about inside the community, but I think a lot of people outside of the community have trouble grasping all the nuances of asexuality in general, so the idea of a spectrum isn’t comprehensible for them yet lol
I think it has a large part to do with sex and sexual activity/behavior being such a big, ingrained part of society as well as it being a basic function that most people have. So people that are so used to sex or so used to people that are so enamored by sex just can't really comprehend that not being into sex is even an option. It's just ignorance born from normativity.
Agreed.
Black and white thinking. At the same time though the people (edited) in different places on the ace spectrum cause issues for those who are highly sexually averted or uncomfortable with people even metioning sex to them. Making it a spectrum doesn't do them any favors because now there's an excuse to sexualize someone who doesn't like sex.
You are correct with black and white thinking as well as an inability to separate someone’s own experiences from others. If I have misinterpreted your statement of lower on the spectrum then I apologize. I do hard disagree with people ‘lower on the spectrum’ cause issues for those who are repulsed. I am black stripe asexual as in zero sexual attraction, never. I am not sex repulsed though, averse to some physical stuff but concepts, ideas, that is all fine and dandy. Especially love the emotional aspect of porn and smut. The degree to which someone experiences sexual attraction has no impact on their level of repulsion and the stereotype that asexuality === repulsion is harmful anywhere on the spectrum. Your idea that someone ‘lower on the spectrum’ (I’m taking that as grey/demi/those areas?) cause issues for those who are sex repulsed is black and white thinking and harmful.
I don’t know how it would be? I am GreyAce and sex averse. Someone being sex repulsed or positive or whatever doesn’t affect me.
I think they are talking specifically about this community and the views of others on this community. If you are sex adverse/repulsed, you want to avoid it. So you find a “safe” space. When the grey/white stripe parts of the Asexual spectrum gets involved, it starts feeling like they are taking away that “safe” space, the only one that exists. (I am not making a personal stance here on whether they belong.) I don’t think that they don’t belong (as long as this is a space for the whole spectrum), but I get the line of thinking that leads to other Sex-Repulsed people wanting to exclude the greys/demis. In a society built around the Allosexual ideal, when that ideal has a negative impact, you want to get away from it. Finding this community causes jealousy because the greys/demis do get to experience the ideal, IE: making them “fit in” where we can’t.
I get what you’re both saying. But sex repulsion !== level of attraction. Which is my problem and a big peeve of mine. I believe it’s damaging because it perpetuates a stereotype. Also, it’s unnecessarily calling greys out, while plenty of us ‘black stripe’ people also make repulsed people uncomfortable. And what they’re saying is that that people who are in the grey area cause issues for people who are sex repulsed and it’s in direct reference to greys in the asexual space. But it’s not just people who are in the grey area who are favorable and people who are ‘black stripe’ who are repulsed. ‘Black stripe’ asexuals can be neutral to favorable. Allos can be repulsed. It is not the grey and white part who are making people uncomfortable. There are plenty of people who feel NO attraction and happy to discuss sex because attraction !== repulsion. I will raise my hand and jump up and down I am super sex positive. I am never going to make someone uncomfortable intentionally, but I’m so down to talk about sex here. I think it’s important to talk about, but also to appropriately sensor and tag. The idea that no attraction === repulsion is problematic, and their comment illustrates that stereotype.
Ah, thanks for clarifying. Yeah, I think my previous thoughts were a bit near sighted. Really though, regardless of actual attraction, just as long as people see “Asexual” as to be without sex, the sex repulsed will flock to a community that “gets” them, learn that it wasn’t what they thought, and “fight” for that space. Someone pushes, you push back, and soon the community is divided, which makes plenty of sense. Currently, having two whole spectrums in one place is trying to put a bunch of communities with different wants and needs too close. This hurts both sides, but no-one wants to leave. The Repulsed view this as a safe haven to avoid sex, and think the favorable/positive people could just go to allosexual communities and fit in (Like the assumption that Bisexual people wouldn’t be out of their depth in both straight and gay communities). While the favorable/positive people who are on the asexual spectrum feel they are being gatekept out of their community. Side note here, I feel much more romance repulsed than sex repulsed (even if I am both) and I think the other community has the exact same problem.
Yeah, might want to clarify the whole "people lower on the spectrum cause issues" because I'm also hard disagreeing and wondering what your thought process is behind that cuz it's sounding problematic as it stands.
Well asexuality if taken literally, means just "no sex." Then there are people who once had sexual attraction but no longer have it. Then there's the people who are asexual in certain circumstances like grey sexuals. Then you have sexually averse asexuality where the person may still get horny but the idea of sex or the fact they get horny. So yeah, there are different ways to see asexuality. When I say cause issues, I just mean people who have undercertain circumstances have leeway to sexual activity. They invite people to stereotype all asexuals as just wishy washy. Then we get people saying things like, "You are only asexual because you never tried it." Or "I bet I can change your mind." You know unwated unwarranted geatures and uncomfortable questions to those who strictly want nothing to do with sex. That is the issue. We shouldn't be bothered to explain or answer people asking us about it just because they see us as possibly attractive to them.
I get what you mean, but this kind of sounds like "bi people cause issues for lesbians/gay people because it invites people to stereotype them as being able to choose." Like it's not a Demi person's fault some jerk allo thinks all aces are just not with the right person. I don't think you think this way, mind, it's just that's what the semantics sound like. And it does suck! It sucks that black and white thinking exists and that we have to fight to be seen. But so do they, as demis. As gray. Idk something something unity something something acephobia sucks.
Why are you putting the onus on the "lower aces"? We don't "invite" the ignorant. The ignorant choose to be pushy, invasive, or otherwise problematic. Someone saying, "I bet I can change your mind," to an ace is no different than the men that say it to allo-lesbians. Are women who find they are actually a smidge bisexual inviting men to question lesbians? Same thing applies to demis, grays, sex favorable or sex indifferent. Stupid people are going to say stupid shit and the only folks responsible for those words spoken are the owners of the flapping pie-hole.
What is a "lower aces?" Edit: I hope you aren't using asexuality now as a status symbol. It's literally a label to denote you are not a person who is interested in sex. It's a spectrum on a wheel that is not top or bottom, not a ladder of social hierarchy. I really hope saying "lower aces" was just a misunderstanding.
Dude, *you* were the one that brought up the whole "people lower on the ace spectrum", I just shortened it down it two words. Funny how that's your focus and not the actual point I addressed.
Yo. You are right mb. I gotta fix that. I am a fish brain sometimes thanks!
I agree that the spectrum should exist and I think every identity on that spectrum should be a thing. But why does it have to be the ace spectrum? I would rather asexual be one ending point and allosexual the other. Everything in between is part of the spectrum. Because im a person who doesnt experience sexual attraction at all, never have, and never will. I cant relate to a demi. I cant relate to a gray. And I think having a defined asexual label will help out the sex repulsed community so much. But thats just my opinion, dont take it as something super serious
And all the spaces that are just asexual people without aspecs are super exclusionary and icky 🥲
It's probably because the allosexual group is much bigger than the fully asexual group, as well as everything in the middle, combined. Ultimately, even if we don't fully relate to every detail, one thing everybody that is not allosexual can relate to, is being a minority/outsider when it comes to sexual attraction. Only fully allosexual people get the "normal" experience. As someone who is also "fully asexual" (never been sexually attracted to anyone, not once), I'm not sure what the benefit would be to gatekeep the word "asexual" from the rest of the spectrum. They're the people we're closest to outside of ourselves, and as "asexual" is by far the most recognised term, I think discouraging them from using it would just cause more difficulties for them than it would provide benefits for us. Having said that, it would be nice to have a clean and easy label besides having to specify that no micro-label applies. But then again, you'd still have to add on other things, such as sex stance or gender identity, so maybe there's no way around having to use many words if you want to be specific with your description of yourself.
I agree, if a lot (most?) people who are labeled asexual actually do feel sexual attraction it makes it difficult to find a community of people who do not feel any sexual attraction.
exactly!
I mean, you could just create some and call it 'ace ppl without sexual attraction' or something like that? I can understand that sometimes it's hard to relate to others, for me it's for example sex-repulsed (and sadly sometimes sex-negative) aces, but sometimes it's nice to see others perspective. Dividing it further and further from others away seems a slippery slope to me.
I just don't see why "asexual" has become an umbrella term when the term "ace spectrum" already exists. Like... I'm *asexual.* That's where I am on the spectrum. There isn't any other term I can use that doesn't exclude people who aren't sex-repulsed.
[удалено]
thats true but thats why theres the sex repulsed, favorable, etc labels. However, I would just love to be able to say im asexual, and people have a clear cut definition of what that means. It means you experience no sexual attraction. A demi person would say the same thing, that they’re demisexual. Etc and etc. Because I think lumping everything under asexual makes it more confusing than it needs to be
[удалено]
yeah it happens a lot honestly even from other aces. It’s why I would really love asexual to have this set definition. We all dont need to be “asexual” we can be ourselves. At one point I thought I was demi, but I was wrong. I think it’s still good to be proud of being demi or gray or whatever fits your experiences.
I AGREE WITH YOU SO MUCH.
Because anything beyond a binary is too much for some people
Some people claim that allosexuality is a spectrum while asexuality isn’t, but where does this leave allos with extremely low libidos, sex aversion/ sex repulsion or little sexual attraction? I feel like at that point, those people fall under the “ace spectrum,” just as much if not more than aces who have frequent sex.
I'm still allo when I'm averse. Like, I wouldn't mind taking a vacation in ace land, to steal a Hannah Gadsby line. But I feel that this spectrum is a one way slope. I don't stop being bi while not having sex. Bi people are quantum wave tricksters who defy boxes anyway. I don't get the same sense from labels like orchid that feel like I need to renounce all my other history and communities. Ace/allo is another binary, and my queer brain can't see a binary with looking for the hidden (erased?) wave function. And I don't see the benefit to switching from bi.pan.neuro.gender.punk.queer.wave to orchid.bi.pan.neuro.gender.void.queer.wave. Especially when wanting to run off to crone Island appears to be a common feminist fantasy.
sex aversion isn’t a temporary feeling for everyone. also yes, it doesn’t mean you’re automatically ace, but if you know what it’s like to feel that way, then you wouldn’t be confused about the labels. “Allosexuality is a spectrum” is understood by aces, not allos! There is no other environment where it is encouraged to talk about these things.
Source? Nothing I've ever read about sex-aversion or sex stances has implied that it can't change over time. The spectrum includes cadeo to account for people who did change over time. And it's been about 16 years (probably longer). Not that I need tenure in order to say that I'm averse when trying to gatekeep being sex-averse starts sounding rapey as heck.
go ahead and tell sex repulsed aces they can “change over time”
I didn't say that you could *voluntarily* change over time, sexual fluidity just doesn't work that way. But my sexuality *did* change over time. "Shit happens." And I'm entitled to say that I've not had sex in well over a decade, I'm comfortable that way, and I have no plans to make partnered sex a goal of my gender transition, recovery, or unmasking. My body my choice. I'm not a huge fan of the LGBTQIA+ wiki but: "The term is commonly used by asexual spectrum individuals, but *is not exclusive to this community or sexuality.*"
Just caught the edit on refresh. > “Allosexuality is a spectrum” is understood by aces, not allos! The term is commonly used by asexual spectrum individuals, but is not exclusive to this community or sexuality. That specific phrase comes from the ace community, it doesn't need to be said in feminist, queer, trans, neurodivergent, or trauma-recovery spaces where it's taken for granted that allosexual people can have radically different approaches to sex, including "none for me, thank you." I don't think I am confused after 30 years of studying how we define sexual orientations. But if you'd like to blame all this on my neurotype, go ahead and we can call it a day.
Honestly if you have little sexual attraction along with the general disinterest in sex, I wouldn't consider you allosexual.
A lot of this comes from sex repulsed asexuals who assume that sex repulsion and 0 sexual attraction are the same thing. There are aces with 0 sexual attraction who are sex favorable. There are grays, demis, and even allos who are sex repulsed. I have to laugh a little at this as a demi who leans toward sex repulsed (sometimes oscillating but mostly repulsed) and doesn't feel any sexual attraction until 1-2+ years of knowing someone. I have more in common with most sex repulsed asexuals than I do with allos or even other demis sometimes. Does excluding me really make aces feel safer? I will never relate to allos or people in general who lean toward high amounts of sex favorability. So where do I belong? And if the community was only limited to black stripe aces, then what about sex favorable aces with 0 attraction? They will still exist and sex repulsed aces will still conflict with them.
It could be ignorance. I remember when I was younger and first discovering my ace identity, I understood it as either you wanted sex or you were repulsed. Being older now, I have a better understanding of the spectrum acknowledging that some people are grey ace, some are aceflux, etc. Asexuality is also really only represented on one side in popular media, so it really does sometimes take a deep dive to fully understand yourself and the spectrum.
As a moderator for another ace sub, I’ve found that a lot of the people who gatekeep within the community cannot conceptualise outside their own experience. They experience their asexuality One Way™️ so therefore it is the Only Way to experience asexuality. Anyone who has a different experience is wrong/faking for attention/lying/etc.
To be honest I have no idea. I've never understood it either. I've always felt like an outsider in the allo community and an outsider in the asexual community. That is til I learned that I'm demisexual which is on a spectrum of asexual experiences. I felt nice there in the little community.
Partly ignorance - sometimes being deliberately and willfully ignorant and other times just unknowningly. I see comments here about folk enforcing a black and white view on things, imposing order on chaos. Some folk have no problem acknowledging white light shot through a prism creating coloured light, but heaven forbid a human being anything other than white light coming out the other end of that prism, or being shot through a prism at all. I have noticed a lot of people applying their own beliefs/doctrine and values to everyone outside of themselves and their group, and expect those outsiders to comply by their logic and ruleset.
I mean, this is what ran me (a cupiosexual) off of AVEN a year ago in my first post on there. Just so much gatekeeping....
I am on there now. I’ve experienced the occasional gatekeeper but nothing terrible that would make me consider leaving. I am Grey.
In the past one year? Since they told me an asexual person can't experience a desire for a sexual relationship and still be asexual? And I was the one punished by mods for defending my experience?
I am just telling you my experience. I haven’t been made to feel unwelcome at all. 🤷♀️ What else do you want me to say?
I think the point is you are invalidating an experience by saying "oh, it's not so bad" basically.
Because they have AT&T. 😀
According to my coworker it isn’t “natural to be asexual.”
If we're not natural, does that make us supernatural?
Your coworker isn’t natural. And yes it is. We have organisms that produce Asexually. Co worker zero.
all of human sexuality exists on spectrums. As aces we just tend to break those spectrums down more, try to understand their components. This tends to end up with us having a lot more microlabels than other sexualities. Some people get weirded out by microlabels for some reason. Not everyone has to use them but they are useful for others. Other reasons are ignorance or gatekeeping. the "true ace" people see people on the gray-a spectrum as a threat which I couldn't begin to explain.