Asexuality and Aromanticism on Reddit
561 subscribers
33.4K photos
539 videos
2 files
42.3K links
Mirror of /r/asexuality, /r/asexual, /r/aaaaaaacccccccce and /r/aromanticism.

Run by @reddit2telegram.

@r_channels
Download Telegram
Unpopular opinion on microlabels

It’s early in the morning and I couldn’t sleep properly today, so please bear with me. As a disclaimer, I want to make it clear that I think it is wonderful that our understanding of asexuality broadens and that people can find a place under our umbrella.

However, I think like hyperfocusing on giving a label to every different and borderline individualized manner asexuality manifests loses grip on our group identity and starts to say more about personality than sexuality. At some point we start using descriptors that relate only very faintly to our shared experiences as a sexual minority and obsess over finding an incredibly specific niche with which we’ll never be entirely satisfied with because each of us has a particular and individualized manner of experiencing asexuality.

For instance, although I could identify as “aegosexual” because I experience non-object-oriented sexual desire, this does not add anything to our common understanding of sexual attraction as object-oriented sexual desire. Instead of using that microlabel, you could simply say that asexual people may, in certain circumstances, experience sexual desire as opposed to attraction. The microlabel thus seems to be more divisive than unifying and more about personality than sexuality.

In other cases it is the opposite. Demisexuals or Grey-asexuals for example are two cases where the microlabel is broad enough to, in some cases, defeat the conceptual power of asexuality altogether. There are some situations where people who by any societal standard would be considered straight fall under those categories. In fact the microlabel can be applied so broadly as to include people who do not fantasize about having sex with random people of the opposite gender, which is probably just about everyone, and there is validity in the claim that if everybody is asexual, then no one is asexual.

I propose instead that we try to focus on defining asexuality in a way that is not gate-kept, but maintains conceptual power and a potential for community-building around shared experiences. The core concept there is how to define “sexual attraction”. This is challenging, and different people will have different experiences, but we should address this plurality of experiences in a more responsible manner than simply flooding the community with labels.

Tl;dr: microlabels either hyperfocus on aspects of personality or weaken the conceptual power of asexuality, we should avoid them and focus on building a shared understanding of sexual attraction instead.

https://redd.it/rg10a7
@asexualityonreddit
My friend thinks Asexuality shouldn't be in the LGBTQIA+ community...opinions?

My friend was making a presentation on homosexuality and the lgbtq+ community, she also mentioned she thinks the asexuality shouldn't be counted as part of the community. I partially agreed, but 90% disagreed as ace myself. What do you guys think, and why?

​

EDIT: thank you all for your replies! I did send her an email about it stating how Asexuality IS apart of the LGBTQIA community, I'll update you all if she ever responds.

https://redd.it/rg807t
@asexualityonreddit
I am finally joining ace book club. Can't wait to read it.
https://redd.it/rg9etu
@asexualityonreddit
Was helping my Mom make something with these paper strips that come in little batches of 6 and...
https://redd.it/rgffe1
@asexualityonreddit