• Makeshift@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      7 months ago

      My sexual preference Is “no” and I have to say that instead of asexual because sexual people have decided that the prefix “a” in front of the word “sexual” does not mean “not sexual”.

      What used to be safe spaces for people whose sexual preference is “no” are now filled with people whose sexual preference is “yes, but I don’t feel horny by looking at people”.

      And if anyone dare speaks up they get bullied, called acephobic, and told to just accept asexual people are sexual too and how dare we say please use a different label for that.

      I am far from the only one who’s noticed this. It also leads to things like romantic asexuals (people who want a romantic relationship just without sex) having a harder time than they already did because people are learning “Oh your ace? But you’ll have sex for ME, right?”

      • WalrusDragonOnABike [they/them]@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        Why can’t aces be both? The “sexual” in sexual orientations has always referred to attraction. Sex repulsed aces are like victim-playing US Christians in most of the interactions I see. They bully and make fun of anyone who has sex and then play the victim when asked to not insult others.

        • Makeshift@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          Why does it have to be both?

          Why do other orientations get to be easy to understand, but the ones that just want to say ‘no’ absolutely must be comfortable in the same label as yet another ’yes’?

          What is wrong with having graysexuality and asexuality be as separate as homosexuality and heterosexuality?

          Why do people want to force others to be comfortable with what they’re not comfortable with?

          Why is it so important to dismiss and erase people who just don’t have a sexuality that it’s acceptable to take over their one safe word and sexualize it?

          I genuinely find antisex spaces more welcoming than asexual spaces and I hate that. Because people born without sexuality often don’t care about other people having sex. It’s normal, it’s natural, it’s fine, it’s just not our thing. So why do people insist on sexual themes in a community started to be safe for those who are just born not sexual?

          Many of us already feel broken when we don’t get horny as teens. Yes, we’re freaks. We’re weirdos. We’re biological failures.

          We create a space to feel not broken. To vent among others born the same. So why take that away? Why take away the one safe term for people who already struggle with feeling like something is wrong with them by coming in and saying that people who DO like sex are the same label and the ones who don’t want sex at all are outsiders among outsiders?

          It hurts. It genuinely hurts to finally find others like you, to then be told that no, you’re still a weird broken minority even in this supposedly “fitting” label.

          Why is it so important to have a special label that it’s worth hurting the people it was made for to make sure more people can claim it?

    • mortimerkahn@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      If you’re queer you should be supporting us aces, not acting like we’re some sort of anomaly yeah? It may not be your cuppa but we’re all on the same side here