#sympathy for cis women before cis men on the axis of oppression

[yovelknell]

Asexuality & LGBT: Adding New Axes of Oppression

Before I begin, I want to emphasize that although I hold a different opinion on ace discourse, it genuinely does not mean I hate asexuality or want to hurt aces. I recognize their validity and the importance of ace-related activism related to sexual autonomy. I think it is valuable to have ace voices involved in conversations on the breadth of human sexual experiences.

However, this does not mean that asexuality is systemically oppressed. There are no laws, sanctions, or practices that condemn asexuality. Individually, there is prejudice against it, which can lead to awful violence and shaming. But this is due to misogyny and homophobia and how it shapes our societal understanding of sexuality.

It is true: there are gender roles tied to intensity of sexuality. Men must be sexual. Women must be sexual for men and not for themselves. So, asexuality could be considered gender nonconforming in the same ways that transness and gayness have historically?

No. These “oppressions” that asexuals face do not applying equally in the ways that real oppressions do. Gay men are not hurt more if they do not want or have sex. If anything, they would be better tolerated since the physical affections they express are the most hated. Straight men, though, are stigmatized for not being sexually aggressive enough. However, their individual experiences are rooted in the misogyny they should enact on women and the gayness they should avoid. Would we include the cishet men and exclude the gay cis men? Or rather, include both but insist that the gay men defer to the cishet on matters of sexual attraction?

Or, could we acknowledge that cis gay men are harmed by the sexual expectations that the ace community tends to uphold as allosexual privilege? That gay men are not praised for their sexual attraction to other men but instead reviled and excluded from spaces? We must acknowledge that a proposed axis of oppression that does not hurt all who are subject to it is not an oppression at all. It may be a prejudice. It may be the after effect of another oppression, expressed in multifaceted ways. But it is not on par with other modes of sexuality-based oppression when it does not function in the necessary ways. When definitionally, it is incongruent.

In this way, asexuality is not gender nonconforming like transness or gayness at all. It is, instead, an identity useful for sexual definition. It’s members can be sexually oppressed in a myriad of ways, each that deserves sympathy and support. But not for their asexuality.

For those hypersexualized by society, it can be a reprieve, a space to deconstruct harmful expectations. For those denied sexuality at all, it could be a danger. An asexual community that understands and respects the infantilization of autistic, disabled, nonbinary, and transmasculine people as well as gays, lesbians, and poc denied sexual autonomy is needed. It is one that can safely interact and coexist with the LGBT community.

Note “coexist” — Not include. Through a series of violent events, harmful laws, and long history of death and suffering, LGBT formed. It was not formed based on misogyny, although some members experienced it. It was not formed on your intensity of sexual attraction. It was created over time as a response against policy brutality and punishment for gender nonconformity. There was a time where trans and gay people were considered two sides of the same coin in the worst way. We were both classified medically as sexual inverts. Gay men were trying to act as women by being with men. Gay women were the opposite. And trans women were seen as merely gay men. Where do asexuals fit? It’s nonsensical to input them where they were not. The term “asexual” was used but not in the ways that it is today. And even so, even if it were, it does not change our current reality.

In closing, I want to add more nuance to my goal. It is not to discredit, shame, or disregard asexuality as a community or a tool. For some, it is a space of comfort and belonging, and I would not take it away from them. I would ask that cishet aces and aros respect the boundaries between the LGBT and ace/aro community. I know there are differing opinions from each community, so I won’t claim to speak for the whole LGBT side. And I can’t stop asexuals from including themselves in the LGBT community and convincing others to do the same online or offline. Further, I recognize that including asexuality on a pride post is not the same as including it among our understanding of oppressions.

However, I would ask you to consider what your goals are? General inclusion and support are wonderful. But we must consider the other negative side effects that may result from some ace rhetoric. Why would you instill unnecessary (or at least inaccurate) fears into asexuals? Why must they expect to be medically or sexually abused for their asexuality when they will not be? This misinformation disempowers them from exploring resources related to the true cause(s), such as misogyny, racism, ableism and more. What do you gain from muddling the waters around what real oppression is like?

Why not simply create a separate space for this inclusion of divergent sexual lifestyles, for whatever intensity or situational factors they entail? The LGBT community is not the only validating space, especially when membership comes a such a high price of violence and mortality. Do not align yourself to communities that do not serve you, whose goals do not for your own. All of this discourse has been the result. I would rather we focus inward on intracommunity biphobia, transphobia, transmisogyny, and lesbophobia and outward on laws, marriage, domestic violence, murder, sexual violence and more. Issues that affect our material existence.

[viqueens]

i said we don't know because, again, as i already said, cis people often think trans men are amab. not sure why i have to repeat this, it seemed pretty easy to understand, hopefully you got it this time. maybe you could try rereading it more slowly? idk

as for calling me a bigot because i don't believe in misandry, you just sound like a plain idiot. i'm a trans man, who's attracted to men. you could say i'm pretty obsessed with men, normal and cis, in my everyday life.

but you see, me being a man attracted to men doesn't suddenly make misandry real, because misandry is not a systemic axis of oppression and never has been. so if misandry isn't real, transmisandry, in the way transmisogyny is used, isn't real either. i'm sorry if you don't understand such simple logic.

people capable of sympathy don't put their personal feelings ("i'm a man who's been a victim of bigotry, it must mean all men are oppressed for being men!") before actual societal problems that have real life consequences, like what trans women face.

i could make the same claims as you and call you a transmisogynist for suggesting that what trans men face is in ANY way close to what trans women have to go through after all that we know has been going on during these past few years to target them specifically. but i'm just gonna call you ignorant instead, then it means you can still educate yourself and stop thinking the world revolves around you.

but wow, isn't it ironic that you're going to call me hateful when you clearly have not been listening to trans women all these years? what's your excuse?

welp