I watched the Huffpost Live feature on asexuality.
Overall it was really great—everyone who was on the program interacted well with the very respectful and curious host as they discussed “love without sex”—which really should have been called “asexual relationships” (because they DO sometimes…
Trust and support
Honesty and accountability - communicating openly and truthfully, admitting mistakes or being wrong, acknowledging past use of violence, and accepting responsibility for one’s self.
Economic partnership - in marriage or cohabitation, making financial decisions together, and making sure both partners benefit from financial arrangements.
Negotiation and fairness
Key factors of healthy relationship: http://www.bpdfamily.com/bpdresources/nk_a115.htm
Sex isn’t mentioned once, which as an asexual, makes me very happy. Sex has nothing to do with communication or accountability, and nothing really to do with developing a relationship as anyone who has had a one night stand will attest. Respect, trust, and communication, however, are essential components to ANY relationship.
Below the cut is a very negative piece on Belle and Rumbelle.
I’m tagging this because I want a response. Deep down I want someone to prove me wrong, I want to believe in Rumbelle again. Though I doubt it’s possible at this point… but I still hope.
If you feel you won’t be able to reply to this with something other than “Fuck you” please scroll past this.
If you click on ‘read more’ you acknowledge the risk that your mood can be ruined.
Enter at your own peril.
Here’s my response, and it’s polite.
The parallel doesn’t add up. Asking your loved one to let you in, to not be dishonest and deceptive with you does not equate to pressuring a loved one for sex. You can have a healthy, functioning, and fulfilling relationship without sex. But you CANNOT have a healthy, functioning, and fulfilling relationship without honesty and communication. That goes for EVERY relationship—for friendships, for romantic love, and for family relationships as well.
Rumplestiltskin, as much as he loved Belle, was not giving her that. Frankly, Rumplestiltskin has had a bad habit of behaving this way in other relationships, such as his relationship with his son. Saying that she was pressuring him to ‘bare his soul’ and that that equates to abuse is highly unfair to Belle as a character. Belle was asking him for simple honesty and communication—which is acknowledged, when Charming advised Rumple.
And let’s go back to Rumple here. Painting him as the victim does absolutely no favors to him. Rumplestiltskin has done some evil, horrible, and despicable things in his life, for the sake of gaining power. His addiction to power is slowly destroying him on the inside. It is NOT abusive to insist that a drug addict drop his habit. It is NOT abusive to say that your alcoholic partner MUST STOP DRINKING. Belle laying down the law with Rumple—giving him a chance to mend his ways, but leaving when he didn’t—is tough love, not abuse.
I feel like you’re projecting things onto Rumple and Belle that simply don’t exist and ignoring other parts of what make them such crucial and compelling characters.
You can have a healthy, functioning, and fulfilling relationship without sex. But you CANNOT have a healthy, functioning, and fulfilling relationship without honesty and communication. That goes for EVERY relationship—for friendships, for romantic love, and for family relationships as well.
Thank you for this. This is my thought exactly - especially as I identity as on the asexual spectrum. No one has the right to my body, but anybody I’m in any sort of relationship with has the right to expect honest communication and the sharing of thoughts and feelings, or what’s the point?
Submitted by: aelnova
This has never come up, to my knowledge, but if they’d dislike me for being gay then fuck them. Metaphorically, obviously :P Homophobes are probably also ace-phobic too. Straight monogamy or nothing!
Submitted by: anonymous
YUP. Hello and welcome to Social Justice Tumblr. I shudder to think that these people actually have lives and friends and families outside of tumblr who…
I just don’t know what you expect us to do, critics. When we’re isolated and alone, you use our rarity against us. When we find strength in numbers, you dismiss us as a fad. Yes, this, exactly. I think what they want is everyone to be having exactly the same sort of heterosexual relationship they have and to fit in their narrow little boxes regarding gender, sexuality, and identity. I really didn’t need this today. But at least there are a lot of positive responses calling the original poster out.
Asexual Relationships: My new article published in Good Vibrations.
I discuss asexual relationships of many types, briefly, for a sex-positive audience. Mentioned are aromantic relationships, asexual/asexual relationships, and mixed-sexuality relationships.
Please note that Good Vibes is a sex-positive magazine and tends to have very explicit articles and images in the sidebar, so if sexual language, pictures of sex toys, or sexual imagery would be inappropriate for your screen wherever you are or would be objectionable to you in general, please don’t click.
List of ways “asexuals” are discriminated against because of their asexuality:
List of reasons why “asexuals” belong at a pride parade for people who have sex:
List of reasons why someone would choose asexuality:
- Being abstinent intentionally for a variety of reasons.
- Being abstinent unintentionally for a few very specific reasons.
- Not having sexual organs.
- Being Nikola Tesla (uncommon).
Pride parades are for people who have sex? I thought they were for sexual minorities. Huh.
Yeah, LOL. You know, sometimes people who are this ridiculous make me wonder if they’re honestly that ignorant or whether they’re trolls.
Because people who actually know how to make a point don’t say pride parades are “for people who have sex.” Or else there’d be a request to prove that you actually sleep with your gay partner before you’d be allowed to dance on the float in rainbow underwear.
And because people who actually know how to make a point don’t pretend they’re social justice allies while claiming asexuality is something you “choose.” If we say it’s a sexual orientation, isn’t suggesting we “chose” it an awful lot like what the bigots say about gay people?
And because people who actually know how to make a point don’t generally try to claim we’re “not oppressed” (as if our main point in declaring our existence is to assert that we are) … by mocking us over how we don’t get mocked. You’ve told us we don’t exist, but that we’re hilarious for trying to spread the word that we do. Does this kind of silencing and enforced shame on people who are trying to be heard sound like anything you’ve heard recently from the mainstream?
And because people who actually know how to make a point don’t put people’s identity in scare quotes.
And because people who actually know how to make a point don’t leave a bunch of empty bullet points that I could easily fill out.
List of ways “asexuals” are discriminated against because of their asexuality:
- Taught that sexuality is compulsory, and that anyone who doesn’t want it is “dead, dying, or lying”—currently backed up by the Diagnostic Statistical Manual of psychological disorders, where we’re listed as a disorder (sound like institutional intolerance to you?)
- Not given a “box” to check when identifying sexual orientation—literally and metaphorically—thereby reinforcing the message that feeling this way is not okay
- Master narrative constantly insists that “everyone wants sex,” and laughs or concern trolls if we say otherwise; therapists, partners, and family will apply near-constant pressure to change you
- Targeted for corrective rape because “I can fix you”
List of reasons why
“asexuals ”belong at a pride parade for people who have sex:
List of reasons why someone would
choose asexualitybe asexual:
Being abstinent intentionally for a variety of reasons.
Being abstinent unintentionally for a few very specific reasons.
Not having sexual organs.
Being Nikola Tesla (uncommon).
- Because they are
Asexuality isn’t abstinence. We can be abstinent for a variety of reasons. We often are. Some of us are not. (Does it scramble your brain to think that some asexuals are sexually active, and that it doesn’t invalidate their asexuality any more than a gay man having straight sex turns him straight?)
For most asexuals abstinence isn’t “unintentional” (and yeah, the veiled suggestion that we call ourselves asexual because we’re trying to save face since we can’t get laid is a totally new and insightful observation).
The bullshit with “not having sexual organs”—also known as “lol amoeba”—is only the lowest form of ignorance. Our sexual orientation is asexual. Not our organs or bodies.
And maybe Nikola Tesla is less UNCOMMON than you think. Perhaps if we had a chance to be visible, form community, sow fellowship, and educate more, you wouldn’t find our orientation so baffling that you’d feel compelled to attach empty bullet lists to your supposedly unanswerable questions when you could have filled them yourself through a damn Google search.
That or just not made a post designed to do NOTHING ELSE besides invalidate and erase your fellow human beings. (Or, what was your reason? What do you get out of this again? What urge does this satisfy for you?)
This is how anti-discrimination advocacy is done. Brilliant.
Haven’t we all heard some of these before? Though, to be fair, I personally gained some perspective on the view from the non-ace side when I heard the “like not eating” one from someone I trust who has no problems with asexuality. It would be weird to hear someone didn’t need to eat, but then, if I never saw them eat and they never got hungry, would it really be an issue? What do you think?
And then there’s the representation of aromanticism in fiction. Oh, oh wait. No, there isn’t. There’s sexual aromanticism which is often misogynist (guy players are cool! girl players are hoors who need a man to settle her down!). Asexual aromanticism, however? That’s what you pull out when all your inhumanising methods have failed. The most normal thing in media is wanting a romantic relationship. If someone doesn’t want a romantic relationship (and if they’re not just waiting for the right man~~) they are probably going to commit genocide.
On the flip-side: romanticism is often used to humanise and/or reward a character. It’s lazy and it’s cheap, but it works. Robots want to be human? The thing they want the very most is a romantic relationship. Ex-villain is being rehabilitated and redeeming themself? They’re gonna start dating. Previously creepy/whacky side character starts being more important? Get them a significant other stat. Saved the world? Get a prospective girl/boyfriend. Realised they don’t need someone to be happy? Suddenly: someone to make them happy.
(This is why so many aces have a difficult adolescence. We know we’re different, but so often we don’t have the words for it, and no one understands when we try to explain. And then we finally recognise ourselves in a character on TV and… and they’re a serial killer or an alien, and a lot of people go “well no, they’re actually probably totes gay”. Media told me that — just because I didn’t feel like dating or having sex — I didn’t have the right to consider myself human. I am still — more than ten years on — dealing with the venomous headspace that created.)"