#and how sexuality is defined both by what you're attracted to and also what you are not attracted to

[velvetvexations]

It's frustrating when any radical feminism is called out in trans circles, the whole thing is "well since I'm trans I can't be a TERF"!!! Like, transmisogyny is not the only thing TERFS and radical feminists preach?? Like if you're anti sex work, anti kink, anti bodily autonomy for any kind of transition or sex, think men (whoever the individual bigot defines as such) are genetically predisposed to evil, think women (whoever the individual bigot defines as such) are predisposed to good, and anti-ace/aro people, like one or two differences in opinion will not preclude you from radical feminism. Idk, out of the "trans inclusionary" radical feminists, I feel as though you either fall hard into transmisogyny or transandrophobia.

But a lot of the people who believe in all the same things as the normal strain of radical feminism but support trans women just,, only seem to think that transmisogyny is what TERFs preach?

Also like lowkey I never understood the Shinigami eyes extension because TERF dogwhistles are kinda easy to spot and easy to check. Like, overly judgmental of a random woman? Overly judgmental of a random man? Seems to think x kink is evil? Implying porn is disgusting and evil (without any actual criticisms of the industry, just talking about it inherently)? Weird about ace/aro people and their attraction or lack thereof? Wow! Probably a terf.

I think there is some issue with "OP is a TERF" that made shinigami eyes appealing for a lot of people. I once saw someone make a really good point about how a theater production that sexualizes nuns is not progressive for sexualizing women who don't want to be sexualized, but whoops, OP was a TERF. Often moral rationality is not an issue of logical reasoning as it is motivation. For instance, I also saw a tankie shitheel give a pretty good rundown of Chiquita's bullshit in Central and Southern America. In both cases, Bad Group A was opposed to Bad Group B, whether that be imperialism or the patriarchy, so they can call out legitimate issues when they want to before going right back to complete bullshit and supporting their own evil shit.

But absolutely no one actually knows what TERFs are anymore because they do think it's literally all just hating trans women and are incapable of connecting the dots between TERFs and second-wave feminism, and realizing that they have a whole suite of beliefs that goes beyond that. It's partly obscured nowadays for exactly the reason that they'll often be aimed at cis men, which TRFs simply don't count as evidence of them hating men because of course you should be against like, Cis Male Celebrity Getting #MeToo'd, as though the issue with TERFs isn't that they see that and trans people as being products of the same patriarchal system because their view of the entire world is warped.

Especially funny is the claim that you can't call TRFs TRFs because they don't self-identify as TRFs. I mean, even putting aside Talia Bhatt's book, we have a very famous meme of Sonic the Hedgehog telling TERFs to fuck off for using that exact same "that's just a slur to silence me" argument. Like, no! You may not recognize what you're saying is nearly identical to everything TERFs say just because you add "trans" behind "women," but that's a you problem!

[neverendingford]

.

[cepheusgalaxy]

"So, you wanna make them ace?"

Asexuality 101: Making your characters asexual

Indroduction: Ok, so, from what I've seen in fandom and in general, most people don't really know how to write an asexual character. Many just quit it and make them allosexual, others just struggle their way without having much of a guide. Prime example is Alastor from Hazbin Hotel, whom many people want to involve in sexual scenarios so they go with the "asexuality is a spectrum" route. Problem is, they don't understand how asexuality is a spectrum exactly and then they just end up writing their characters as allo. Now, how to avoid this? Teaching them!

If you're looking for a good way to get started with your own asexual oc, an ace headcanon or a media charater, I've got you! (i mention sex briefly here in some parts)

My credentials: I'm ace.

The basics

What is asexuality?

Asexuality is a sexual orientation that is generally defined by the lack of sexual attraction, or a very little amount of it. Sexual attraction is many times confused with libido, which is the sexual desire. Sexual attraction is more accurately, "the desire of having sex with this specific person." Therefore, some ace people do have a libido, and do want to have sex, but mostly are just not attracted to a person.

Myths and misconceptions

Asexuals can't have sex - as many shippers say, "asexuality is a spectrum", and while some aces don't have sex indeed, they can want it and have it as well. Person to person scenario

Asexuals don't know nothing about sex - unless the ace in question is a child, they probably may know, in fact, a lot. Many ace people like reading, watching or consuming smut, and by this and other means, even if they don't have sex themselves, they pretty much know how it is and how it works. Sex is everywhere, after all. Hard to miss

Asexuality is caused by trauma - it can be! Just not always, and most aces are simply born this way

Asexuality is a medical condition - much like homosexuality, asexuality is frequently treated as an illnes and many ace people are forced into conversion therapy. Some people also hold the belief that asexuality is caused by an anormality in a person's hormones, a mental illness, etc. But it is not true! Asexual people can obviously also be mentally ill in some way, but these are different things. It is just a sexual orientation like any other!

Asexuality is caused by HRT - hormone replacement therapy, ie. taking testosterone or estrogen, is one of the most common type of medical transition for trans people. Some hold the belief that taking hormones like those can "break" your sexuality (estrogen does sometimes decrease a person's libido, but it depends on the person's organism and it doesn't take your sexual attraction away from you), and turn you asexual

Asexuality is caused by autism - this myth may be originated from the fact that many autistic people are in fact asexual, or by the fact that both asexuals and autistic people tend to be infantilized a lot. However, as much as autistic people are very commonly also ace, asexuality is not, in fact, a symptom of autism

Basic terminology

Ace - short for "asexual".

Aro - short for "aromantic"; someone who experiences little to no romantic attraction, aka typically "doesn't fall in love".

Allo - somebody who does experience attraction. "Allosexual" is someone who is not asexual, and "alloromantic" is someone who is not aromantic.

Aspec - short for "a-spectrum". The a-spectrum is an umbrella term for anyone who is in any way ace, aro, aplatonic, afamilial, or other identities that fit here.

Acespec - short for "asexual spectrum/ace spectrum". It's a part of the a-spectrum and contemplates all asexuality.

Aesthetic attraction - finding someone pretty or beatiful, without necessarily wanting to have sex with them. Many ace people who didn't know they were ace report to having used to mistake it with sexual attraction.

Sensual attraction - similar to sexual attraction; the desire to touch someone, but without wanting to actuall have sex with them. Many ace people also confused this with sexual attraction.

Aphobia - discrimination against aspec people.

Amatonormativity- the belief that everybody is happier in a relationship, wether they want it or not, and should want and seek to be in one, and the general root of aphobia.

The Split Attraction Model

If you are looking on the ace community for a while, you might have heard of the split attraction model--if you haven't, here it is:

Image description: The Split Attraction Model, a cross chart inside a square, with four ends. The first end of the cross is labelled "ace", its opposite is labelled as "alloce", the third end is labelled as "alloro" and it's opposite is labelled as "aro". The section on the "alloro" and "ace" square is labelled "alloromantic asexual", the section in the "ace" and "aro" part is labelled "aromantic asexual", the section on the "alloro" and "alloce" square is labelled as "alloromantic allosexual" and the section on the "aro" and "alloce" section is labelled "aromantic allosexual". /end ID.

The split attraction model divides all orientations in four groups: The aroaces, the aroallos, the alloaces and the alloallos. It is usually shortened to "SAM".

Many people find this model useful, because it sorts your attraction into two groups: allo- and a-, and yes and no. It's simple and easy.

Many aces do not use this model to explain their attraction/lack thereof though! Hence the first distinction of aces we have here: SAM-aces and non-SAM-aces. Basically aces who use the Split Attraction Model and aces who prefer not to!

A non-SAM ace may define their asexuality as their romantic orientation as well, or label themselves differently altogether. While a SAM ace could call themselves an "asexual aromantic" or an "asexual alloromantic", a non-SAM ace could call themselves just "an asexual". In this case, they can be neither "alloro" nor "aro".

If your character is aware of their sexuality and identifies as ace, it's good to know wether they use the Split Attraction Model for themselves or not.

The spectrum

You may have heard that "asexuality is a spectrum" a thousand times, but what does it mean?

Just like "non-binary", "asexual" can be an identity on its own, but it is actually an umbrella term for a bunch of orientations. When we say that it is a spectrum, we are saying that there is Nuance. "Ace who doesn't date", "ace who dates", "ace who experiences just a little bit of sexual attraction", "aces who like sex" and so on. 'But Angel', you ask me, 'didn't you say that asexuality is when people don't have sexual attraction?' It can be! But there IS nuance, and that's what I am here to tell you.

There are two more factors beyond the SAM that you can consider:

"Are they sex repulsed, sex favorable, or sex neutral?"

Here is the "aces can still have sex" thing. A sex repulsed ace is probably what the majority of people think when they hear "asexual". It is an ace person who doesn't like sex. Doesn't want to have it, is disgusted by it, despises sexual intimacy, etc. They are the aces who tipically just don't want to have sex, and are very happy without it.

A sex favorable asexual is someone who likes it. Sure, they don't feel sexual attraction, but who's letting it stop them, right? They like sexual acts, they are fine and happy with having sex in general, and that's what the "aces can still have sex" point means. Yes, they can, if they want to! Maybe your character themself doesn't define themselves as neither repulsed nor favorable, but it's good to know what their instance on sex is.

Sex neutral asexuals are aces who are not repulsed by it, but are not really into it either. They may have sex, they may be fine with it, they may like it even, but they generally don't have a desire or strong feelings regarding it. It's just sex, after all.

Sex ambivalent asexuals are another thing I want to touch on. They are tipically aces whose instance on sex changes! Sometimes they may feel repulsed by it, sometimes they may want it, sometimes they may not care. They are neither strictly one, nor another. Their feelings change!

It's good to see where in this categorization your character or blorbo would be.

Inside the asexual spectrum, where do they stand?

If I were to represent the ace spectrum as a linear thing, I'd do it like this:

Image description: A linear representation of the asexual spectrum, in the shape of an arch. In one end, it is written "asexual", on the other, it is written "allosexual" and on the very middle, at the top of the arch, it is written "gray-asexual". /end ID.

or like this:

Image description: Another linear representation of the asexual spectrum. One of the ends is a black circle and the other is a white circle. Between them, a gradient goes from one circle to another, passing through different shades of gray. The black end is labelled as "asexual", the white end is labelled as "allosexual", and the gradient with shades of gray is labelled "different kinds of Gray-As". /end ID.

What is graysexual, you ask me? We all know that the world is not black-and-white, and as so, sexuality is also not. Grayace is a term for a person that is also asexual, but not strictly: that is, they are the "feels a little of sexual attraction" part of the spectrum. It is called like that because when we put asexual and allosexual in two ends of a spectrum, graysexuality stands in this gray area.

Gray sexuals may:

Experience sexual attraction only sometimes

Experience light sexual attraction

Experience sexual attraction under certain conditions in certain scenarios, for example, when they are already very intimate with a certain person

And many more! Graysexuality is on itself a spectrum, but having an idea of allosexual -> graysexual -> strictly asexual is already a good guide. Graysexuality can also be described as "having partial sexual attraction".

Fun fact about gray-aces: The asexual flag has four stripes; purple, white, gray and black. The purple stripe is meant to be a color signifier of the community, the white means allosexual, the gray means the gray aces and the black stripe represents people with strictly no sexual attraction. Hence the term "black stripe asexual" (which is not very popular but I personally like).

Micro-labels

You already have a basic understanding of the asexual spectrum and how it works, so you can think on where exactly in the spectrum your character/blorbo is. To help you out further, I present you the microlabels! Much like non binary is an umbrella term with many microlabels like genderqueer, xenogender and demigender, that help one explain their identity with more and more specific explanations, asexuals also have a lot of microlabels! Here are some:

Cupiosexual - asexual person that wishes to have a sexual relationship (example: i am cupioromantic person and i am basically a hopeless romantic and a yearner. cupiosexuality is similar, but with sex)

Gray sexual - asexual person with partial sexual attraction

Demisexual - asexual person who can only be attracted to people they already have a bond with

Abrosexual - person whose sexuality is fluid, and may be asexual at one time, bisexual at another, gay at another, etc.

Aceflux - asexual person whose sexuality changes, like abrosexual, but only between asexual identities

Aegosexual - asexual person who likes the idea of sex or fantasises about it, as long as it doesn't envolve them

Lythosexual - asexual person who is only sexually attracted to people they are not close with, and their sexual attraction fades out once the become closer

Myrsexual - asexual person that uses multiple asexual identities to describe their sexuality

Aroace - aromantic asexual person

Alloace - alloromantic asexual person

Apothisexual - sex-repulsed asexual person

These are not all micro labels in the asexual spectrum, but they are quite a lot. Maybe even if your charater is not sure if they are in a certain label or not, you may find them in some of these descriptions.

Links to resources with more microlabels: Tumblr post by @aroacesafeplaceforall (no images) /

/ A slightly longer list on asexuals.net (undescribed flags) /

/ Another guide for microlabels on lgbtqia.fandom.com (undescribed flags)

Bonus questions

Is it okay if I make my asexual character autistic? Is it not stereotyping? Yes, it's okay. There are actual asexual autistic people, and I'm sure they'd love to get represented as well!

Is it okay if I make my asexual character have sex? Is it not erasure? Yes, you can do that too! As long as it is where they stand in the spectrum (as explained in the topics above), you are doing a good thing by representing sex-favorable asexuals.

Do I have to make a romantic orientation for them too? No. Your character may be a non-sam ace, and identify as ace alone!

I heard that it is erasure if I make smut fanfic of ace character X. I don't get it how! While it is true many ace people have sex, many people when writing that just ignore their sexuality when writing/drawing smut of them! The spectrum is wide, so when you are doing that, remember where they stand on it.

Why can't I headcanon this ace character as allosexual? I headcanon straight characters as gay/bi/pan all the time and nobody says it's wrong! If people don't like my headcanon why can't they just look away? Because asexual people are a marginalized group, unlike straight people, so it is as okay to make them allo as it is to take an asian or black or jewish character and make them white. Because it is not just an individual headcanon; it's a part of a much bigger problem, and by avoiding headcanoning ace characters as allo, you are confronting your own internalized aphobia, which is a good thing! If you still want to make them have sex, well, that's what I made this guide for! So you can make them have sex as you wish without erasing their identity.

I am ace and am basing myself or my own experiences here. Is it okay if I...? The answer is generally yes. If you wanna write about a different ace experience than your own, a little bit of research won't hurt, though!

Is this enough for me to write my ace character? It is a start. This is a general guide, and there are some things I haven't touched on this guide (like aphobia) so I'd advice you to do more in-depth research on topics you want to focus more on, but this should get you pretty far.

Extra

"Is Alastor from Hazbin Hotel canonically ace or aroace?" (slightly related, because some people looking for this guide to write this guy might want to know this too)

Answer: link to a post clearing this up this with some sources. Short answer though, is that he is confirmed to be ace, not aroace.

"If I didn't understand something here, or I have more questions, can I ask you?"

Answer: Yes! You can reblog this post with questions, and my inbox is also open, and I make sure to always let anon on. I will be happy to help if I can.

"One of the image descriptions on this post was off or confusing, can you change it to X so it is better to understand it?"

Answer: Of course! I will need you to signal me in either the notes or in the inbox what I need to change, though.

"Are asexual people queer?"

Answer: Yes! Because the queer community, as the name suggests, is for people who are different, odd, and are not considered "normal" because of that. Asexual people are not a part of "the norm", because we don't feel sexual attraction, and therefore, we, and by extension your ace characters too, are queer.

<2

[p1utofairy]

PAC: “cause every little thing that we do, should be between me & you.” 🕯️💭✨

• what are your person’s dirty thoughts about you?

disclaimer ✩: 18+ mature themes. thank y'all for 1K omg <3 y’all really fw with lil ol’ me?! ily ily ily. 🥹 here’s a lil sumn sumn to celebrate. 🥂 p.s. take what resonates, leave what doesn’t. enjoy!

pile 1 ⭐️ —

“you don't need me, please believe me. this ain't easy, you know i've been feindin'. let me unleash my demons on you.”

“innocent” is what i’m hearing pile 1. your person will underestimate just how much of a hold you have on them lol initially they’ll think that you’re more of the submissive type, but oh are they in for a treat! you hold your cards close to your chest, so it’ll surprise them when this other side of you comes to the surface. i’m hearing “classy in the streets but a freak in the sheets” LOLLL. oh i’m also picking up that some of you may be inexperienced (or may not have as much sexual experience as them) but it won’t come off that way to them...they’ll just think that you’re playing coy and teasing them. your person will be eye-fucking you a lot, i can see them sitting across from you just looking you up and down…locking in on your legs — they’ll really love your legs. “you’re just too good to be true, can’t take my eyes off of you. you’d be like heaven to touch.” just started playing in my mind. awww your person is very sensual 😩 and as much as they want to have you…they’ll be patient. they want to make sure you feel comfortable. all i need by lloyd just came to mind, “get up on it. i’m so horny and i want it. so get up on this, get up on the dick.” LMFAOOOO ik i said they'll be patient but i’m ngl they'll be internally tussling with themselves because they’re used to just getting what they want and people falling for them at the drop of a dime, but you make them work hard for it. i can see you two having a heavy make-out session before they drop you off home and then you pull away and you're like BYE 😘👋☺️ and they'll just be sitting there with their mind racing a mile per minute like FUCK?????? lmfaooooooooooo my gosh you will rile them up so bad pile 1. i feel like there will be a height difference between you two or an age gap. they could be older than you! you give them butterflies <3 they think they’re making you soo nervous/giddy inside (and they are) but you hide it a little better than they do. after every interaction with them you’ll feel all mushy inside hehe and you’ll be able to tell that you make them nervous. they’re just blown away by how beautiful, hot and how well-put together you are. i can see you talking and they’re just watching your mouth move like 👁️👁️ LMFAOOO bye pile 1. they’re feenin’ for you.

pile 2 🪡 —

“i just wanna live in a fantasy. i think we deserve it, right? top all the memories. i’ve ever made in my life.”

oouu this is my pile that doesn't take shit from nobody, okayyyy! hi pile 2 welcome to your reading <3 i can already tell that your person loves how you carry yourself. you do not allow many people to have access to you, and when you do, people can’t help but feel special inside because you have such a ✨big✨ presence. you may not take your person very serious at first. they have youthful/playful energy while you have a very disciplined and mature demeanor. that’s what will make them so attracted to you; how you're always on your shit…there's no cutting corners with you, you do not have time for the games and they will respect that. there's something about your lips that they love. you might have a defined cupid’s bow like rihanna or maybe they just like how cute and soft they are; especially after they just got done kissing you. i see them teasing you and slightly biting your bottom lip after they pull away from the kiss 🥵 ugh don’t count them out pile 2. they might have youthful energy but they're a pro when it comes to seduction lol you both are similar in a sense — you both want something serious and passionate with a hint of playfulness. they'll loveeeee watching you get ready! like i can see you standing in front of a mirror, in a rush to make yourself look presentable and they're just laying back on the bed…giving you the look. just ready to POUNCE. whew pile 2! this person’s love language might also be physical touch, cause they’ll be fighting the urge to squeeze your ass or constantly have their hand on your lower back. you’ll secretly love all their physical affection though hehe.

pile 3 🔪 —

“out of breath, take it slow. i wanna feel it in my soul. yeah, i know you love it when i’m on top. gotta keep it going, baby. don’t stop.”

heyyyy pile 3 🤗 i’m immediately hearing that you have a way with words. you know exactly what buttons to push to get your person aroused mhm! your person knows your worth just as much as you do, they’ll put you on a pedestal and treat you with so much care and devotion. they may have a worship kink? i see a bedroom setting — lightly-dimmed, candles lit, red rose petals on the floor and they’re slowly taking your shoes off for you…their hands trailing up your bare legs slowly 🥵 OKAYYYY pile 3! the sexual attraction is strong in this one wow. that scene from the wolf of wall street where naomi (margot robbie) and jordan (leo dicaprio) are on a date and naomi is giving him the fuck me eyes while saying “aren’t you married?” is coming to mind. now i don’t feel like there’s any third parties/cheating involved…you two just might be into role-playing. like i can see them booking a spontaneous getaway trip for the two of you & y’all just slut each other out and explore each other’s wildest fantasies the whole time 🤭 you both know how and what will make the other person tick; i can see them teasing you a lot in public. a lot of dirty talk in your ear, hand on the back of your neck gently squeezing and kisses. they were never really like this in their previous relationship(s) but you bring out a whole different side of them. agora hills by doja cat just started playing, “kissing and hope they caught us, whether they like or not. i wanna show you off. i wanna show you off.” THEY REALLY DO, PILE 3. they can't believe they bagged you…every-time they look at you they’re in awe.

[codywanweek]

How to write aro/ace codywan for the non-aspec

Want to write something for the aro/ace codywan prompt but you're not sure how or you're afraid you'll offend someone? Here's a hopefully useful post to help you out.

Disclaimer:

I, Yellow, am only one aromantic* person and opinions may differ. This post is to be taken as suggestions for possible configurations of codywan being aro- and/or ace-spec. At the end I'll mention some pitfalls to avoid. *formerly used the label ace for 1+ year, so is fairly familiar with pitfalls for acespec characters as well, but again ymmv.

These suggestions are focused on aro/ace people in relationships. The reason for this is that this is still a ship week, but obviously there are also aro/ace people that are not interested in partnering at all.

Suggestions and pitfalls under the cut! If you, an aro/ace-spec person, have suggestions as well, feel free to reblog them on this post, or to DM/send an ask and I'll add them!

Suggestions:

Note: a QPR = queerplatonic relationship is a relationship type that "queers the platonic". There is no defined list of things that need to or shouldn't occur for a relationship to be queerplatonic. In general you could think of it as being platonic lifepartners, but it's not strange for a QPR to be sexual or even romantic as well.

These suggestions are formatted as: Codywan's specific identities and then a (fluffy) idea for their relationship. There are infinitely many options for how relationships work, and you can definitely mix and match between these "flavors". Angst is a bit more difficult to write, but you could look at the pitfalls and use those to go for a self-doubt/acceptance route.

Flavor: Any. You're more than welcome to write a platonic relationship as well!

Flavor: Codywan are both aromantic and asexual and have no interest in romance or sex: QPR Idea: They have such a close bond as commander and general that they feel like they are integral parts of each others lives and continue on like this after the war.

Flavor: They are not aromantic and one or both of them are asexual: romantic relationship/QPR Idea 1; they don't have sex: "basically" write a romantic relationship without sex. Maybe you can write the conversation they have about their expectations in the relationship. Idea 2; they do have sex: ace people can have sex if they want to, maybe they like the closeness of it or that it feels good, but they may not feel a need for having sex.

Flavor: They are not asexual and one or both of them are aromantic: sexual relationship/QPR Option 1; no romance: Maybe they are friends with benefits and do not consider themselves in a committed relationship. Or maybe they are in a QPR and also enjoy having sex together. Option 2; romance: Maybe they are in a romantic relationship and the aro character enjoys the "romantic" aspects just because they are pleasant to do/experience, but they may not feel a need to do these things with their partner. Here are some ideas from another aro person!

Flavor: One or both of them are demiro and/or demi-ace: anything Demi = you only feel romantic or sexual attraction to people you are already close to (does not mean you feel the attraction to everyone you're close to). Idea: Maybe codywan reaches a certain point in the war where they fully trust each other and have gotten close on a personal level and they get an "oh" moment where they suddenly realize they're attracted to the other.

Flavor: One or both of them are grayro and/or gray-ace: anything Gray- = you only feel romantic or sexual attraction very rarely or weakly (below the "average" for allo people to the point that you relate to aro/ace identities) Here you can have the fun "wait this is what you people have been talking about??" when someone has their first crush ever, but in general you can assume suddenly feeling attraction like that is very unexpected and maybe they find it very impractical to be happening right then.

Flavor: Anything! I am not a spokesperson for the whole aspec community and you're more than welcome to do your own research about identities and relationships.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Pitfalls:

CW for implied ace/arophobia.

Note that these things can be explored when dealing with self-doubt and self-acceptance, but please do not present the things stated below as facts.

When writing aro/ace codywan getting together: do not imply that something has been "fixed" about them.

Do not imply that being a virgin is bad.

When questioned about being aro-/ace-spec, do not make statements such as "but I can still love!!" as this throws people that don't love/are distanced from love under the bus. [see Lovelessness. Originally from the aro community, but valid to use when you're not aro as well]

In that same vein: "love is what makes us human" (or sentient in star wars I suppose) is a no.

Another in that same vein: "But I can still X" statements in general get icky very quickly, as it feels like you need to make up for a lack of something.

Don't portray an ace character as "innocent" or "childish" due to their aceness. Don't portray them as not knowing anything about sex by default unless you have good (relevant) in-story reasons for it. (e.g. Cody doesn't know anything about sex because the clones had no sex-ed and he wasn't interested in learning anyway, or Cody/Obi-Wan knows the anatomical basics but nothing further because they were Not interested.)

Addition by @data-plays-viola: Don't portray ace characters as sex negative by default, unless you have good (relevant) in-story reasons for it. Sex negative asexual people exist but the two are not connected (though some may use their asexuality as an excuse, unfortunately.)

If you write an ace character that has sex, do not imply that this is a redeeming quality. Same for an aromantic character that does romantic things.

Note that not all ace people are sex repulsed and not all aro people are romance repulsed, they may also be indifferent or favourable to the idea. (X repulsed is usually being repulsed by the idea of participating in X, though for some it means being repulsed by X in general.) Do not imply that being sex/romance repulsed is the standard for aspec people.

Note 2: some aspec people see a clear event in their past that had an effect on their sexual and romantic orientations (such as trauma), but for most people being aspec is just as random as e.g. being gay or being trans. Do not attach a reason to a character being aro and/or ace without doing your research into people that feel like that.

[genderkoolaid]

actually fuck it im gonna deconstruct this carrds shitty argument about bi dykes and stereotypes

"Every woman is attracted to men in some capacity, even lesbians." The implication is that lesbians can be attracted to men, which is LESBOPHOBIC.

Again: bisexual women who used to identify as lesbians until they found themselves attracted to a man can also be used to say that all lesbians are attracted to men.

"It's possible for lesbians to be in a healthy romantic or sexual relationship with men." This is blatantly LESBOPHOBIC, as lesbians are often pressured to enter relationships with men (compulsory heterosexuality).

This one is just fucking ridiculous. It is not up to you to define what a healthy relationship is for other people. To suggest that any relationship between a self-identified relationship and a man must be unhealthy deprives the lesbian of the autonomy to decide how they feel about their relationships. Even if the lesbian ends up not wanting to date or fuck men- there are lesbians who dated men and have nothing but fondness for the relationship, they just realized it wasn't for them. This is like saying its impossible for an asexual to have a healthy sexual relationship or for an aromantic to have a healthy romantic one.

"Bisexuality is a phase. Bi people always end up picking a side." The implication is that bisexuality does not really exist and that the bisexual label is just a temporary placeholder until they find their real identity, which is blatantly BIPHOBIC.

See the first statement but in reverse. This would suggest that lesbians who used to identify as bisexual- perhaps because of that compulsory heterosexuality that exclus love to throw around as the answer anytime a dyke does something they don't agree with- are being biphobic because they can be used as "proof" that bisexuals will always "pick a side." If we are judging the worth of person's identity based on how it can be used by queerphobes, we have already fucking lost.

"Bisexuality means that you're equally attracted to men and women." The implication is that you're no longer bisexual if you have a preference for one gender is BIPHOBIC. "You cannot be bisexual unless you date both men and women." The implication is that you're not bisexual anymore if you don't have dating history to "prove it", which is BIPHOBIC. "Bisexuality means that you're half-gay half-straight / part-gay part-straight." By supporting bi lesbians (and bi gay men or bi straight people) you're treating bisexuality as a modifier rather than a full identity, which is BIPHOBIC

grouping all these together because they are essentially the same argument: "bi lesbian meaning this which means that "bisexual" must mean that!!!!" which is not true. Bi lesbians existing do not mean anything for other bisexuals' definition of their identities, & the same applies for lesbians.

Some trans men define their manhood as being just like a cis man, but in a female body. They may transition and no longer identify as trans. Meanwhile, other trans men feel like their manhood is fundamentally trans, and while they and cis men may both be equally male, their manhood is fundamentally different to cis man's.

By the above logic, the second group is TRANSPHOBIC because they "say" that trans men can't be the same as cis men. Unless.... just maybe........ we consider that one label can be used to describe a multitude of experiences........

Of course, the creator of this carrd couldn't stand for that idea. Since their second argument as to why bi dykes are bad is:

"We have created these labels to understand ourselves and each other and to effectively communicate with one another. Once you abstract it to the point where it is impossible to communicate an idea to another person without them having to ask for further clarification, those labels lose their functionality and become useless."

Which is funny, because there are plenty of bi lesbians who are active in both their local bisexual and lesbian communities without issue. Because they can still effectively communicate; people, surprisingly, have the ability to understand abstract concepts and nuanced identities.

Not every asexual never wants sex; there are asexuals who enjoy sex. The fact that you can't assume every asexual is nonsexual does not pose this great, existential threat to asexuals who don't fuck. The fact that you have to ask people things about them & can't just assume based off of a single label is not the end of communication itself, actually. If "lesbian" tells you that someone is attracted to women, either in a WLW way or in a way that is rooted in lesbian culture, then all you have to fucking do is not assume that they never fuck or date men.

The problem is, of course, that most of these people are "anti-TERF" radfems who don't realize it, and they have gotten in their brains that if there is no special "women only" term then the entire fucking world will collapse into a blighted misogynistic hellscape. And of course they don't need to think critically about why they feel this way, they just know its bad... but they think trans women can be lesbians so it has nothing to do with TERFs and how dare you imply it does!!!!!

[ploncc]

The A-Sexy Talk

sup mothers and fuckers, i always wanted something more comprehensive than the cake metaphors and it took me like a whole ass decade to work this out because i was assigned dumbass at birth, so for all the other adab folks out there, here:

disclaimer: this is just one way of breaking down sex and sexuality, and our definitions of asexuality are likely to change with different contexts, and that's okay

Sex (for the purpose of this discussion) is the action. Solo play, getting pounded, frottage, oral, whatever, wherever, with whomever, we don't care. Sex is all of it, baby.

Arousal is a state your body can be in. Your heart rate goes up, if you were online in the superwholock days then you know those damn pupils dilate, you might start feeling warm, and you might get wet, get a boner, or both, or neither, depending on what the normal for your junk is!

Libido or sex-drive is how often/much you want sexual stimulation. This might be very frequently and A LOT. This might be occasionally, or only a little. This might be never.

Consent isn't an inherently sexual topic. Consent is when someone agrees to specific activity/activities with another person/people. A lot of places have an age of consent, over which you can consent to medical treatment, legal contracts, and yeah, sex. And just like consent is integral to medical treatment and signing contracts, sex has to have consent.

Sexual Attraction is when you want to engage sexually with someone, even if you wouldn't should you ever have the opportunity. Sometimes we call it desire, or lust. A lot of times it's based off physical appearance, or vibes, or personality. This can overlap a lot with arousal, but sometimes someone you feel sexual attraction towards won't be that arousing, and sometimes the opposite is true.

Sensual Attraction is when you want to engage with someone using your senses. Usually this refers to the sense of touch. Ever look at someone and go "Damn, I bet they'd give wicked awesome hugs," or "Fucking hell, their voice, I could listen to them all day," or "I just want to feel that person's body close to mine," or similar? That's sensual attraction, baby! Similarly to sexual attraction, just because you're sensually attracted doesn't mean you'd physically engage with the person if given the opportunity.

Romantic Attraction is when you want to engage with someone romantically. I feel like you're getting the pattern now, yeah? Yeah. Cool.

Sexual Pleasure or sometimes just pleasure is when you feel good from sexual stimulation. Straightforward for once. Nice, right?

Kink is something we culturally defined as being not inherently sexual (or not sexual to that degree) that gives arousal and/or pleasure to someone nonetheless. Sticks and stones may break my bones but whips and chains excite me, BDSM, fear play, fetishes, all that good shit. We also refer to the kink community and engaging in play as just simply "kink" sometimes.

And last, not but not least, Abstinence is when someone abstains (see what they did there) from sex for practical reasons. Injuries, disease prevention, an unavailability of safe and reliable birth control, stuff like that. Celibacy is similar, but folks that are celibate are abstaining from sex for religious/moral code reasons. Get it? Good.

Okay.

So.

Asexuality is when someone does not experience sexual attraction.

That's it!

An asexual person (an ace) might have any range of libido, might experience arousal, can give consent so long as they are above the age of consent, might experience different forms of attractions like sensual attraction or romantic attraction (or even attractions that we didn't cover here), may or may not have practical/religious reasons for engaging or not engaging in sex, might have kinks, and can (if they so choose to) have sex.

That's all there is to it! The same depth and breadth of experience that exists outside the ace community is also found within the ace community, because individual variation doesn't give a shit whether your population is queer or not.

"But wait!" someone cries out, "what about people that hate sex! I thought they were called asexual?!"

That's called being Sex Repulsed and it is also a normal experience for humans to have! Sometimes it's caused by trauma or something else, and sometimes it isn't. But as you'd think, feeling extreme discomfort/disgust/repulsion at the idea of sex and/or the act of it means the likelihood of feeling sexual attraction is pretty fucking low. Not impossible! Just low. So yeah, a lot of sex repulsed folks are a part of the ace community, are vital to our history and culture, and are loved by us. And, not all aces are sex-repulsed.

Makes sense?

....hopefully?

Cool.

[jennelikejennay]

There's an experience a lot of aspec people have where they do like the idea of sex, just not of themselves participating in it. So they get off from porn, erotica, voyeurism, etc but they don't want to be touched sexually themselves. Everything is better second-hand.

I could go on and on about this: about what the appeal is, about why it's so frequently taken as problematic or fetishizing, about how a person who feels this way (cough, me) can have sex in ways that are satisfying to them and the people they love. I even wrote a fic about it (although normally, I'm writing fics because of it, not about it).

But today I just want to talk about the name.

See I mentioned it and somebody said "oh that's called aegosexual."

A: Greek for not

Ego: both Latin and Greek for I

Sexual: latinate suffix meaning, well, sexual. Generally used with reference to attraction.

Not-me-sexual.

I hate it SO MUCH. Not as an aspec person so much as as a classicist. Who is coining these things and have they even been peer-reviewed?!

First off, the a- Greek prefix becomes an- before a vowel, such as in anemia and anarchy. Putting a+e together makes a diphthong ae which is pronounced differently in ecclesiastical Latin (ā), classical Latin (ī), American English (usually ā) and British English (often ē). So faced with aegosexual I simply don't know how to pronounce it. Is this one of those words, like Latinx or m/m, that we readily use online but suddenly hang fire when we have to say it out loud? A word that works in only one medium is nonfunctional. So somebody better decide how we're all saying it or we'll be having a gif/gif debate forever.

Second, there's a general rule that we use Greek roots with other Greek roots and Latin with Latin. Hence why we say astronomy and not stellonomy, stethoscope and not thorascope. I will admit that we break this rule all the time: homosexual rather than similisexual or homoerotic, automobile rather than automaton or ipsemobile. Still, all things being equal I would prefer nonegosexual or perhaps sinegosexual (without-me-sex) just for the sake of smoothness. I'm discounting anegoerotic because of the two vowels in a row problem.

But then I start thinking, why are we defining this thing by what it's not? I don't mean I'm not attracted to myself (I think I'm cute, transporter clones please call me). I don't mean I will grudgingly accept sex so long as it doesn't involve me. I mean I actively am into sex that doesn't involve me. I tried calling it third-person sexuality but in English we can't compound with English roots really.

So let's go back to the drawing board!

The Greek pronouns for self and others are taken: autosexual means you're into yourself, allosexual means you're into other people (as opposed to ace). But the Latin ones are all wide open, and Latin is what I want, to go with sexual.

Latin has tons and tons of pronouns. SO MANY PRONOUNS. Nonbinary Romans would be looking at an absolute banquet. Along with our usual me, you, it, etc, we have a raft of pronouns which work well for distinguishing different subjects in their long-ass sentences. So you have hic, this, but you also have ipse, That, you know, The One, Himself, Her Upstairs. It's mildly emphatic. Then you have iste, which means something like "that over by you," but sometimes also kind of "that one, ugh." When a sentence begins Iste Caesar you know the author isn't a huge fan of Caesar. Like saying "your Caesar, not mine." But it could be more like istud poculum, hey can you pass that cup, the cup over by you? All of these are of course available in all three genders, two numbers, and five cases, giving us 30 forms to learn for each. Yay!

The one I want for this purpose is ille. It's the most general kind of that. Rather than "this by me" and "that by you," ille is "that over there, not near either of us."

So what about illesexual? Attracted to something over there in which neither you nor I am involved at all?

illesexual

What do you think, is it too late to make this happen?

[ugly-anarchist]

I've seen a lot of debate on what is/isn't considered "alloaro" and I just wanted to give my opinion on that.

The meaning of allosexual has been debated but I think the best way to define it is "feels sexual attraction in a non-ace way". I like this definition because there's some gray area between "ace" and "not-ace" that's important to acknowledge and it leaves more room for discussion and inclusivity than just "not ace" or "feels sexual attraction"

I for one think that labels are optional and that it doesn't matter where you "technically" fit but instead what matters is how you feel about a label. If you're technically somewhere on the ace-spec but you don't want to identify as ace then... You can be allosexual instead. Also, non-sam aros exist and they shouldn't be forced to pick between the two.

However, while I do believe that labels can be loose and fluid and I want to prioritize inclusion, labels do still have meaning and I don't think you should use both allosexual and an acespec label at once. I don't think you can be both. I know that aceflux people exist but I don't think they should be using the label alloaro.

I don't want alloaro to be this exclusive thing where you have to be only one specific thing in order to be one but at the same time, the distinction is important.

The entire point of the label alloaro was to say, loudly and opening, "I'm not asexual!" Because it's important. It became important because people constantly assume we're ace and the distinction needed to be made. I don't like people who say "you can't be __ if you're already __ >:(" and I've already said that I accept people with "contradictory" labels but there was a reason alloaro became a thing. I think that there's just some things you can't be because it completely butchers the original intent and the importance that it has to the community.

So, if you don't want to use the ace/asexual/acespec label then you can absolutely be allosexual because that's the whole point of the word, but you can't be both. (In my opinion)

[bloomshroomz]

Reworking the A/Grey/Allo/Orchid Attraction System

As it stands currently, the a-spectrum encompasses any identity involving little or no attraction. This includes all grey orientations by default. The allo spectrum is treated as less of a spectrum, but more of a term for people who aren’t a-spec or grey. I think that this ultimately ends up being confusing, and could use some reworking.

(Some people might be getting a little anxious about where I'm going with this, especially if you're greysexual/demisexual/etc, so I want to make it clear right away: This rework is not designed to invalidate or exclude you.)

I keep seeing the a-spec get stretched to encompass more and more experiences, such as meneromantic: a term for people who experience romantic attraction easily, but prefer not to act on it unless they think their crush will reciprocate… Which just describes how most alloromantic people approach their attraction.

This was described as an “aro-spec” orientation, and as an aromantic person, I feel like that misses the point of the spectrum completely. I admit, it is a pretty niche term, and isn’t the end of the world, but it’s a symptom of a larger problem.

It’s becoming clear, at least to me, that people are unsure how to draw the line between a-spec and allo, due to the subjectivity of what “little attraction” even is, to the point of both terms becoming less meaningful over time. I don’t even know where I’m supposed to fit among those terms myself, at least when it comes to sexual attraction. I’ve actually opted not to label my sexuality largely for that reason; it’s why I’m a neu aro.

So I wanted to take a shot at proposing a change. Not for the sake of excluding or assimilating, but for the sake of making attraction/orientations more easy to navigate and explore, especially for people who are questioning. I made an effort to make this rework as inclusive as possible, while also being much more clearly understood. If you experience attraction and identify as a-spec, don’t worry! The rework still includes you; it just includes you in terms which are easier to define.

A-spec

The a-spectrum, under the rework, includes any identity which is defined by zero attraction, as well as experiences adjacent to that. In other words, if a person experiences absolutely no sexual attraction, no romantic attraction, and/or no tertiary attraction, they are a-spec. This includes:

Asexual: Experiencing zero sexual attraction, or having an adjacent experience to this.

Aromantic: Experiencing zero romantic attraction, or having an adjacent experience to this.

Aplatonic: Experiencing zero platonic attraction, or having an adjacent experience to this.

Cupio: Experiencing zero (sexual/romantic/platonic/etc.) attraction, but desiring a relationship commonly associated with that attraction anyway. For example, desiring a sexual relationship as an asexual person.

Apothi: Experiencing zero (sexual/romantic/platonic/etc.) attraction, and feeling repulsed by relationships and/or activities associated with that attraction. For example, being asexual and sex-repulsed.

Icula: Experiencing zero (sexual/romantic/platonic/etc.) attraction, but being open to relationships/activities commonly associated with that attraction anyway. For example, being asexual and open to sex.

Etc.

“Experiences adjacent to that” refers to anyone who doesn’t necessarily experience zero attraction, but still:

Feels strongly represented by a-spec identities/experiences.

Strongly relates to a-spec identities/experiences.

Needs access to a-spec resources, communities, and support.

Finds it easy, useful, and/or helpful to identify as a-spec, especially as opposed to not identifying as a-spec.

Finds one’s attraction to be irrelevant to one’s life, either because it’s so vague or infrequent that it has no impact, because one has negative interest in acting on it, or because one’s attraction otherwise has no relevance.

Note that “experiencing little attraction” is not a qualifier on its own, because what’s “little” is entirely subjective, and can be incredibly difficult to define. Note that you do not have to check each bullet point in the list above to be a-spec; just one is enough.

Greysexuality, greyromanticism, etc. can be a-spec, but these identities are not a-spec by default. It depends on the individual, their own experiences, and how they define/feel about their own identity.

Grey-spec

The grey spectrum, under the rework, includes any identity which doesn’t fit neatly into an a-or-allo binary. This includes:

People who aren’t sure whether they’re a-spec or allo-spec.

People who resonate with both a-spec and allo-spec identities/experiences.

People who resonate with neither a-spec nor allo-spec identities/experiences.

People whose identities are in constant flux, and thus difficult or impossible to pinpoint as a-spec or allo-spec.

People who fit into the a-spec category, but feel like the a-spec category is still insufficient in some way.

People who fit into the allo-spec category, but feel like the allo-spec category is still insufficient in some way.

People who feel like they fit somewhere between “experiencing attraction” and “not experiencing attraction” in some way.

Anyone else who can’t or won’t fit themselves into an a-or-allo binary.

Greysexuality, greyromanticism, etc. can be a-spec and/or allo-spec, but these identities are not either by default. It depends on the individual, their own experiences, and how they define/feel about their own identity.

I think this is a much needed change, not just because this is easier to define than figuring out what “little attraction” means, but because grey-specs don’t always want to be pigeonholed into being a-spec by default. It is a grey area, after all.

Allo-spec

The allo spectrum, under the rework, includes any identity in which one experiences attraction, no matter how much or how little. This includes:

People who experience little attraction.

People who experience a moderate amount of attraction.

People who experience a lot of attraction.

I’ve decided to include all experiences of present attraction in this spectrum because it can be extremely hard (or impossible) to quantify how much attraction you experience in comparison to other people. If you experience attraction, it isn’t necessarily going to be clear whether you experience a lot or a little or something between. Including all present attraction under the allo-spec, no matter the amount, makes it much easier to define where you fall within these spectra.

Greysexuality, greyromanticism, etc. can be allo-spec, but these identities are not allo-spec by default. It depends on the individual, their own experiences, and how they define/feel about their own identity.

Orchid-spec

This is an additional spectrum for people who experience attraction, but do not want to act on that attraction. For example, an orchidsexual person experiences sexual attraction, but does not want to have sex under any circumstances.

I didn’t come up with this spectrum, but I’ve decided to include it here, because a person may feel that orchid-spec is the only spectrum that feels relevant to their experience, with a/grey/allo being completely irrelevant or inapplicable. Though, a person may resonate with orchid-spec in addition to other spectra, which is also valid!

Overlapping spectra

All spectra within this proposed system can overlap in some instances.

For example, if a person experiences attraction, but feels strongly represented by a-spec identities, they could be a combination of a-spec, grey-spec, and allo-spec. They might identify with one spectrum more than the others, but they would be included in all three.

As another example, a person may fall under all four spectra, because:

Their attraction is irrelevant to them, so they identify as a-spec.

They relate to both a-spec and allo-spec, so they identify as grey-spec.

They experience attraction, so they identify as allo-spec.

They don’t want to act on their attraction, so they identify as orchid-spec.

A person might also identify as both grey-spec and a-spec, but not allo-spec, because they don’t know whether they experience attraction or not, but they relate to a-spec identities and experiences.

Another person might fall under both allo-spec and grey-spec, but not a-spec, because they experience attraction, but feel that the allo-spec is insufficient to describe their identity, while also not resonating with the a-spec at all.

These are just a few examples of how spectra could possibly overlap. There are other ways that these spectra could be combined which have not been listed here.

And of course, it's up to you how you identify! I just wanted to propose a system which (hopefully) makes attraction easier to understand and navigate.

[lestats-ovaries]

putting in my two cents as an aroace hazbin fan to the whole alastor shipping debate (adding a cut below because this got long-)

before I start, it's important to remind everyone:

alastor is canonically ace and (semi)canonically aro, and that should be respected the same way we'd respect angel dust's identity as a gay man, or vaggie's as a sapphic woman.

"ace" and "aro", while also functioning as labels unto themselves, are umbrella terms for a lottt of identities. Some of which do include the ability to experience sexual and romantic attraction, in different ways and at different levels (demi, cupio, lith/lithro, grey, aro-and aceflux, the list goes on).

So, given all that, is it possible to interpret alastor as experiencing some level of romantic attraction, or sexual attraction? Of course, identities like the ones I listed above are just as valid as any other acespec and arospec identity.

So, what's the issue then? Right now, a lot of fans are using the breadth of aspec identities and experiences as a shield, to excuse them shipping him like they would an allosexual/alloromantic character.

Just to make it clear, that in itself is erasure. And I know that's a strong statement, and that there being such a broad aroace experience adds nuance to any statement you can make on that, but we have to acknowledge as a fandom that there are objectively wrong ways to handle aspec characters, both in the way we discuss them and in the way we portray them in fan works.

And before anyone says it, saying "alastor isn't real" or "fanon content won't change his canon sexuality" doesn't work when real life aspec people can't even look in a tag of a character that's supposed to represent them without seeing their identity erased. It's the way I feel attempting to engage with a lot of hazbin content, and I know a lot of my fellow aspec hazbin fans are feeling it as well.

So, what's the solution to all this? That's unfortunately kinda complicated. Everyone has a different opinion on what constitutes as erasure, what is good rep, how much benefit of the doubt we should give people, et cetera, and so everyone's solutions look different. In a way there also isn't a way to solve it, since aroace erasure is so normalized in fandom culture (not just the hazbin fandom; fandom culture as a whole) that there will always be a significant portion of fans who will ignore, erase, or otherwise deny alastor's or any other aroace character's sexuality.

So, to put my two cents on it:

My philosophy is that if you're going to ship alastor (or any aspec character for that matter), it's best to have an identity in mind for him to use as reference. For example, I think of alastor as sex-repulsed aroace, and I write him with that in mind. Whatever you pick can be a steadfast headcanon, an identity tailored to the story you want to tell, or one you want to explore in your fanwork, whether for fun or to educate yourself on it better.

What's better is that you don't even need to mention the sexuality itself in the work! Show don't tell is a great writing tool, and for alastor specifically, who canonically isn't aware of his sexuality, it works perfectly. Just simply creating with it in mind, asking yourself, "how would someone with [insert identity] experience this?" and going from there, makes a world of difference.

Just in terms of good fanfic etiquette, I'd also make sure to include it in the tags if you're posting it on ao3, just to make sure your readers know what's up and to help with filtering (I personally don't read any alastor ship fics that don't include the asexual or aromantic tag at this point). Bada bing bada boom, that's representation right there!

Since Alastor is one of very, very few ace characters in mainstream media, and even less aro characters in media period, us as a fandom creating good representation with him is really important, especially in terms of the breadth of aspec identities. We don't get much representation, so claiming he's definitively one label or another isn't productive, and hurts the community in the long run. Fanfiction is first and foremost an exploration of canon, so why not play around with what "aro" and "ace" can look like for him?

Case and point, I've seen some incredible ship fics that headcanon him as demisexual and/or demiromantic, and do a great job representing those identities. I've also seen some really good fics that portray him as sex-repulsed, and others that portray him as sex-neutral or positive. All of that is great, and again, even if it isn't directly mentioned: adding subtext, putting it in the tags, and even simply writing the fic with the sexuality in mind does wonders.

Me personally, I headcanon Alastor with the same identity as me; sex- and romance-repulsed aroace, but open to queerplatonic relationships. That doesn't mean fics that interpret him with a different aspec identity are less valid, or are interpreting him wrong. All of it is valid representation.

And that's not even getting into queerplatonic relationships, which is what I put Alastor into for my own headcanons (queerplatonic radioapple fic when). For that, please do your own research, but remember that queerplatonic relationships tend to look different for every couple. They can be poly, include kissing and physical intimacy, or look just like what most people would consider a regular friendship or regular romance.

So, can you ship aroace characters? Sure you can, as long as it isn't at the expense of their sexuality, or more accurately, the representation their sexuality gives to a historically underrepresented group.

That's pretty much it from me, please remember to support aspec fanartists and fanfic writers, and happy (early) aromantic spectrum awareness week for all my fellow arospecs!!

[percheduphere]

What's frustrating about being a supporter of a mlm ship is the immediate presumption of the shippers' identity as a "cis heterosexual woman" who fetishsizes homosexuality (not that that problem doesn't exist, but that's not what this post is for).

Our identities also include:

Cis gay man

Gay/bi/pan trans/woman/man/enby

Cis/trans polyamorous gay/bi/pan woman/man/enby

Cis/trans gay/bi/panromantic asexual woman/man/enby

On and on, the intersections within the LGBTAI+ community are infinite.

Yet our mainstream media shies away from canonizing mlm relationships on screen, by whatever arbitrary measure deemed correct by the heteronormative power structure, which means bi or pansexuality and gender fluidity can be masked beneath an optically cis heterosexual relationship that is spoken of as queer only in dialogue.

I am a queer person. The argument I most often see is that being in a relationship with someone of the opposite gender doesn't negate a person's bi or pansexuality. This is ABSOLUTELY TRUE in real life. I'm in such a partnership, and here's the thing ...

When I share my queer identity with others and they see my partner of 15 years, the question I get asked is:

"How can you still be ×-sexual if you're in a heterosexual relationship?"

It is as though, by committing to someone who presents as the opposite gender, my lived experience (all the people I loved deeply in the past; the pain of coming out not once, not twice, but three times; the pain of permanently cutting off people in my life) was completely erased. My partner and I are optically viewed as "straight" despite how we actually define our individual genders and sexuality. Despite continuing to feel queer attraction. Despite continuing to remember previous queer loves with incredible fondness. Despite still celebrating with friends in the community and proudly bearing my flags.

This is why I truly believe there needs to be a greater push for more same-sex representation ON SCREEN in the MAINSTREAM. We cannot have authentic stories of the queer experience without it. It is a stepping stone to representing all the other identities that are swept under the rug. There is a big difference between knowing who you are in real life and interpreting what big money media is doing with your identity for the sake of pleasing the heteronormative masses and offering only subtext for the queer community in order to get the highest amount of views. Subtext, which by the way, is immediately dismissed as reading too deeply into it!

Well, guess what? Being queer inherently means reading deeply into subtext. This has been our language for decades. I should know, I'm OLD. Picking up subtle cues was and is part of queer courtship in real life because you absolutely could not out yourself in public. In more than half of the U.S. that is STILL the case!

I have a very close cis straight friend who thought Korrasami came out of nowhere. I had to sit them down and explain all the little cues, including the infamous hairpin in Asami's lips close-up. They remarked, "Wow, that's a lot of work. Is that how it worked when you tried to meet someone in public?"

YES! And it's 2023 coming on 2024, and we still have to go through this extra bullshit cis heterosexual people take for granted! If there is even a hint of queer mlm romance, you know what happens? They either get separated or killed or BOTH!

They are separating us and killing us on screen because we can only exist in subtext and tragedy. And then, when we dare to hope another ship might make it, that finally, we will have our moment in the sun, we are told:

"You weren't baited. Nothing was confirmed. What did you expect? They're just friends. You looked too deeply into it and did this to yourself. You are gross and keep migrating from one gay ship to another, you homosexual fetishsizing misogynistic pervert."

These people take intersectional social justice language and weaponize it against us. They moralize us on our own identities without even knowing who we are or what we've been through. They think we're desperate and delusional for the audacity of hoping we might see a happy ending that reflects us in the mainstream.

I am so, so tired.

[my-castles-crumbling]

hi cas!! im back with an update about me, M, and F!

okay so, i told M how i feel about F and she was... sort of okay? like she said she was fine, had picked up on it, and had decided she wasnt going to try anything anyway because she wanted to work on herself before going for a relationship with anyone, so thats good (honestly im more just glad shes planning to work on their mental health etc because she deserves to feel good about herself and i could tell recently theyve not been feeling great)

as for F and i, we're... something? idk, we had a sort of movie "date" and after she walked me to my flat (we live literally like a minute from each other bc we're both living on university campus) we did kiss but then weve just... not acknowledged it since? we flirt a bit still (we did this before bc neither of us were brave enough to do anything more ahaha) but thats it

to add to whatever that is, ive hit a roadblock in regards to my feelings. idk how much you know about abrosexuality, but thats how i identify, which means (for me, at least) that my sexuality changes (im also genderfluid so i usually describe it like that but with sexuality instead of gender). and right now im not really romantically attracted to women? maybe not anyone, its bloody impossible to tell most of them time, but as much as i know that i like her, its kinda turned to really strong platonic feelings?

this is the first time ive had any sort of romantic interaction with anyone since finding the abrosexual label, so i dont really know how to navigate this, especially because even though i have come out to this friend group as abro, i dont really know if she properly understands what that means. honestly, im nearly at the point where i might just send her a fic i wrote with abrosexual!sirius even though that would expose my ao3 ahaha

i dont want to make her feel like i dont like her anymore because i do, just not in the same way all the time, if that makes sense? it also really doesnt help that idk what we are, so its not like i could just rock up and be like "hey, so i know we might be dating or may date in the near future but i actually only like you as a friend right now, sorry!" because what if it actually wasnt a date?? we never defined it as one but it felt a lot like one

on another, separate note (my apologies, but life is hard and navigating it is even harder) im feeling really shit about my name at the moment, but i have no solution. when i went to uni, i started going by my chosen name (for online's sake, we'll say im using dorian which is what i go by here, though i use a different one irl) and it felt really great to use something i was more comfortable with

but recently i went back to a show i watched years ago because it came up on my recommended and i was bored, and since i stopped watching, one of the characters changes his name. hes not trans, but his storyline sort of- triggered something in my brain? idk how to describe it, but ever since then my chosen name just hasnt felt right

ive tried looking at other names and ive really thought about it a lot but now absolutely *nothing* feels right and its making me feel really dysphoric any time anyone speaks to me using any name (like, my chosen name now feels as shit as my deadname) and i know you cant just pick a name for me but do you have any advice about what i can do? i feel like ive looked at a thousand or more names and nothing feels right

sending love as always! <3

Ooo okay so for the first situation, could you bring up your sexuality to F in a hypothetical way. Like "hey I'm figuring out my sexuality and I need someone to talk to"? That way you're not saying how you feel about HER, and neither of you has to deal with rejection, but the point gets across.

As far as your name, do you have a supportive friend that might be willing to try a few names with you? Like actually refer to you by those names, to see how you feel when they're used for you? Maybe it's that you have to hear the names used to see how you feel, you know?

[bookshelfdreams]

aaaaah no i saw another "Izzy can't be homophobic you idiot I headcanon him as gay and anyway, he's right to hate Stede for being soft and inexperienced and rich" post send help (ik all of this has been said before and better, I just need to get it out of my system)

First of all, Izzy is a white and maybe not straight but definitely traditionally masculine man in a society where racism/sexism/homophobia/associated bigotry exist. Okay? Okay. These things exist in the ofmd universe, there's no arguing that away. It therefore stands to reason that Izzy, who grew up in that environment, harbours homophobic sentiments, because it is literally impossible to avoid that.

Detesting Stede for being effeminate and gnc is homophobia. Plain and simple. That's the core of homophobia. It's not about who someone finds attractive in their heart, it's about doing gender wrong. It's not so much about who you have sex with, but how you're doing it.

(And this is what Izzy and Calico Jack and the Badmintons and everone who ever bullied him hate about him. It's not that he's upper class. It's not that he's rich. It's this.)

Homophobia and the patriarchy go hand in hand. Under patriarchy, anything masculine is good and superior and anything feminine is weak and detestable. A good man, a proper man is defined by what he isn't (=not ever feminine), and any association with femininity is degrading. This is why Stede is called a woman (derogatory) by people who are perfectly aware he is a guy, why he's called Baby Bonnet: Both these things say You are not a real man. Does anyone who hurls abuse at him think he's gay? Who knows! It's well known he's married and has children, for fuck's sake! But it doesn't matter what's in Stede's heart, it matters how he behaves, how he speaks and carries himself, his interests, his inability to fit it.

Why do you think he's called fat when he isn't as an adult and wasn't as a child? It's the same thing, it's not logical, just a way for people to express their vague discomfort with him in the most hurtful way possible.

The way Izzy talks about him and the way the Badmintons talk about him parallel each other and that's not a coincidence. Izzy talks about Stede as having "done something" to Ed's "brain", Chauncey Badminton says he "ruined" Ed, that he's "not human" and a "monster". This is the exact violent, dehumanizing rhetoric that has forever been flung at gnc gay men, effeminacy as a corrupting, contagious influence, good upstanding manly men being seduced (hah!) into the Gay Lifestyle. You're not a person, you're a disease.

Fop and ponce may be old fashioned but they are also homophobic slurs.

Izzy doesn't detest the upper class. He has no trouble at all weaponizing his whiteness against Ed when he sends the English after him, when he attempts to buy Ed for himself with Stede's life. Izzy can fit into that world well enough to use it for his own gain as long as it will let him, and sure, he'll be crushed as soon as he's no longer useful but that doesn't stop him from aligning himself with the literal enemy, does it? That's what makes Izzy a class traitor (derogatory) btw, and why analysis that tries to paint him as "just a working class guy who hates the rich" a little silly.

("We're not bigots we are just ordinary salt-of-the-earth working class guys who hate the out of touch liberal elite and anyway, they're all perverts" hmmm, where have I heard this before?)

It's baffling to me that people watch this show and genuinely think "Izzy isn't homophobic, he just hates Stede because he's rich" is a good argument like??? Who expresses this exact sentiment in the show????

Look. I know where this comes from. I too read Izzy as queer. But queer people are perfectly capable of being homophobic towards each other.

Izzy can accept Ed having sex with men who are not him. He's fine with that, and sure, that seems to be proof that He can't be homophobic! at first glance. But, under patriarchy, not liking women sexually is - well, maybe not ideal but under certain circumstances acceptable (after all, under patriarchy, not liking women is perfectly reasonable and encouraged, so it's not a huge leap). But what is not acceptable, what needs to be violently suppressed at all costs, is men being insufficiently masculine.

Which is what Izzy detests about Stede, and what he attacks Ed for in ep10. And this is homophobia in a nutshell.

[j4zz4lop3]

You know what? I have more unpopular lgbt opinions. I am going to get "pressed" and this is going to be long. Because I'm a dramatic person, deal with it

The fact that you identify as something doesn't mean you understand what it is.

Source: I used to identify as heterosexual.

I keep seeing people define bi, pan, omni, and poly as this

Bi - attraction to men and women

Pan - attraction to all genders with no preference

Omni - attraction to all genders with a preference

Poly - attraction to multiple but not all genders

Now, here's the thing. Pansexual and omnisexual in these definitions are completely sensible and understandable definitions. Poly and bi are, however not.

You know why?

Because the gender spectrum doesn't look like this

It doesn't even look like this, which I have seen before

No, it look s like this, and guess what

This is all nonbinary

Moreover, gender expression ≠gender and sex ≠ gender, and nonbinary people don't have to be androgynous to be nonbinary, just like men can be feminine and women can be masculine

To make an example, I will use Demi Lovato

Now, Demi is nonbinary, uses she/they pronouns, and is, let's not kid ourselves, attractive

A lesbian could look at Demi and say, "Well, I'm a woman who likes women, and I find this nonbinary feminine person attractive." Does that make her no longer a lesbian? No, because she's attracted to someone that she sees as a woman, it does mean that homosexuality includes nonbinary people, and is nmlnm, not wlw, that's pretty commonly accepted. Now, if this could happen to masculine enbys (I'm not making an example again you get it) and a bisexual is attracted to both men and women, why would they not be attracted to nonbinary people? Because by all means, if you are into both masculinity and femininity, you should be a) also attracted to the mix of the 2, androgyny, as it is both of those mixed, or if you're not, at least be attracted to femininity and masculinity separately, because nonbinary people can be either.

The definition of bisexual given above is implying all nonbinary people are androgynous and everyone who doesn't not pass as androgynous is a man or a woman.

This is why nonbinary people are included in all orientations

And if so, it's not a far strech to say that the definition of polysexuality doesn't make sense because if you can't get rid of all nonbinary people from any sexuality, you are left with this

Attracted to all but men - lesbian/ straight

Attracted to all but women- gay/straight

Attracted all but nonbinary people - transphobic and doesn't see nonbinary people as nonbinary unless they're androgynous

So how do i feel these should be defined?

Bi - attraction to all genders with or without preference

Poly - not a thing. Like generally, we don't need it.

Thank you for coming to my ted talk and all my fellow enbys: Remember, you don't own anyone androgyny, happy pride guys <333

[lesblizzard-ultradyke]

i keep thinking about this lately so I'll post to stop thinking about it so much. so.

they say gender and sex are different things. but you can not claim that and say that words "woman" and "man" and all alike are words that mean gender. if you think about it, "woman" and "man" mean both sex and gender in some way, if we define gender as "set of stereotypes forced on people because of their sex". "woman" has always meant an adult female human and with being a woman people are associating a certain set of stereotypes and also people often use "woman" and "man" to mean gender like "he's so woman-like" (works for other ways to point out someone's sex, too, like "she got balls" and stuff) so, yeah, you could say "woman" and "man" and all alike mean sex and (imply) gender.

so back to why you can't use "woman" and "man" to mean only gender. very simple point actually, it already means sex. you can not just act like it doesn't mean that anymore because you said so, not only do these words were used for centuries in both ways but also it was always to mean sex first and only after it implies gender.

so how can you keep saying that sex and gender are different while also calling female humans "(trans)men" and male humans "(trans)women"? if you do then you believe that having certain behaviours or appearance makes you both different sex and gender which does not really align with you saying "gender and sex are different things". or a secret third thing: you think sex doesn't exist and there's only gender(you're denying physical reality over a social concept!). which is kind of a whole other thing to talk about. (I did end up talking about it a little in the end)

in my opinion, the way to say "gender and sex are different things" and not be a liar(or well, one of the steps to it) is to actually separate sex from gender, or separate gender from words like "woman" and "man". in fact, it has already been done! words "masculinity" and "feminity" literally describe gender perfectly. it means a certain set of stereotypes which are usually expected from members of certain sex but using which to describe someone does not mean that they are a member of that sex (like if I'll say "she's a masculine woman" I will not mean that she's a man, but a woman whose behaviour or appearance in one or another way resembles behaviour or appearance which is usually expected from men).

separating gender in sex in this way has actually so many benefits! it clears out the endless confusion and argue in modern western spaces regarding sexuality and women's rights. this separation is being followed by the recognition of sexuality being an attraction to certain sex(es), so words "lesbian", "gay", "bisexual" and "heterosexual" will have a clear meaning. and by recognition of the fact that misogyny is a sex based oppression.

if any of what I said in this post is somehow offensive or wrong or even transphobic to you then you're either lying about thinking that sex and gender are different things and/or you're trying to reconceptualise sex, only sex is not a concept but a material reality which you can not reconcept. it's just there. not much to do about it! at least not without harming your body(for such reason as different social recognition??!!). what you can do though, is reconceptualise gender. or just abolish it completely.