all 28 comments

[–][deleted] 43 insightful - 4 fun43 insightful - 3 fun44 insightful - 4 fun -  (8 children)

They experience discrimination based on being gay. The asexual part is honestly pretty irrelevant and I don’t think it needs to be included, there are plenty of straight asexuals, are they now in the community too? If you include all asexuals you’re including straight people that don’t experience oppression from being same sex partnered. Asexual doesn’t need a category in LGB. This is ridiculous.

[–]RedditHatesLesbiansHomosexual Not Queer[S] 22 insightful - 1 fun22 insightful - 0 fun23 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Very good points. If you're asexual and in a same sex relationship, calling yourself asexual is similar to specifying that you have a dead bedroom, doesn't change how the relationship is viewed legally. Straight asexuals don't experience any discrimination from what I've seen, apart from what counts as "oppression" nowadays which is telling people they should be having kids and getting married.

[–][deleted] 23 insightful - 1 fun23 insightful - 0 fun24 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Asexuals already have communities of their own that they made themselves, and apparently they are full of many variations on asexuality. This will cause confusion and even more infighting within the LGB if we start transferring all that drama over here. LGB asexuals belong with us and have already been with us without having a whole ass letter on the dumb letter list. Lol.

[–]BiHorror 16 insightful - 2 fun16 insightful - 1 fun17 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

telling people they should be having kids and getting married

Which is really no different to non-asexual straight people, especially women.

[–]reluctant_commenter 6 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Yeah, that's a really good point.

[–][deleted] 10 insightful - 3 fun10 insightful - 2 fun11 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

Also: I think asexual’s experience is much much different than the average “norm” human’s experience of sexuality and they honestly do need a whole ass community of their own and will not get the proper support trying to bring these issues to the LGBT hater cesspool anyway haha

[–]RedditHatesLesbiansHomosexual Not Queer[S] 15 insightful - 2 fun15 insightful - 1 fun16 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Right, what should happen is LGB, asexuals, then whole TQ+NQJSIJWN nonsense by itself. When you huddle so many vastly different concepts together into one a group tends to lose focus. I can't remember the last time lesbophobia was seriously discussed in the LGBT community for example.

[–]Astrid2448 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Straight asexuals actually are being included in the community. A big number of the girls identifying as “ace” are straight and using it as their way in

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)


[–]haveanicedaytoo💗💜💙 20 insightful - 2 fun20 insightful - 1 fun21 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

There's two things:

1 - There's what people call themselves (asexual homoromantic)

2 - and there's what people actually are (a dude dating another dude, but has no libido and no sex life, and the partner is okay with it. And by the way plenty of LGB and S couples are like that, especially as they get older.) Does it really need a special label beyond "gay guy"?)

Looking at it from the angle of #2, I have no clue why this person would choose to label himself "asexual homoromantic" rather than just "Gay guy" like... It's none of our business if they have sex or not. People are always saying how this stuff is none of our business but then they want to make it our business whenever it's convenient to them (this is more a rant towards Trans people who both get mad about people wanting to know if they had the surgery and also announcing to the world how delicious their girldicks are. It's almost like it's only fun to give us this information when we have to receive it against our wills.)

I can see why you would want to say just being "homoromantic" wouldn't be gay, since the definition of gay is "homosexual" and where's the "sex" here? But idk, if two dudes are dating each other, and are in love with each other, that's "gay" enough for me. I'd draw the line at a sugarbaby/daddy or gay-for-pay situation where a straight guy is dating a gay guy, because there is no "homoromantic" in that scenario, but... Yeah, so we're definitely working off different definitions there.

[–]RedditHatesLesbiansHomosexual Not Queer[S] 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I think people call themselves asexual as an identifier. It's a simple way to let people know what you're looking for on a date or on a dating app - a sexless relationship. An asexuals experiences are also unique in terms of sexual attraction so I can understand them wanting a community to discuss their experiences in, and the label asexual allows them to find other people like that easily.

[–]haveanicedaytoo💗💜💙 14 insightful - 1 fun14 insightful - 0 fun15 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Oh definitely, it's good for them to use it when they're looking for partners/friends, but I just meant specifically in the hypothetical with the guy who already has a boyfriend. At that point, he's part of team LGB. Of course he can still identify as A and be active in AVEN or whatever, but his A doesn't need to be a part of LGB because he's already a part of LGB.

What grinds my gears are the asexuals who have sex (I don't mean have it unwillinly to please their partners, I mean they are 'asexual' but they want sex and have sex. Like.............................. Dude. Come on. Just let the actual asexuals have their label without ruining it for them!)

[–]reluctant_commenter 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It's almost like it's only fun to give us this information when we have to receive it against our wills.

Yup, nailed it.

[–]ghostraider 13 insightful - 1 fun13 insightful - 0 fun14 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I don't think "asexuality" has a place in the LGB community. It doesn't really bring anything new, if they face any discrimination is because of their non-sexual homosexual relationships, not because the asexual part, which it is just a way of declaring the amount of sex you have. And it opens the door to bullshit, specifically asexuality is used by political "lesbians" to justify platonic relationships between women as lesbian relationships.

[–]MezozoicGayoldschool gay 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

By my lesbian friend words, most political lesbians does not even have romantic feelings towards women.

And I've only met political gay only once, it was MRA woman-hater to an insane degree that he refused to even date women, so was spending time only with men, trying "relationship" (he was straight).

[–]SeasideLimbs 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

The problem with asexuals is that the root cause can be a number of different things (the ace community itself agrees with that) and the exact cause influences whether I would consider such a person LGB. If you fall in love with people of the same sex, truly love them and want to be with them, I'd say you're 100% gay (or lesbian or bi.) If, on the other hand, you're messed up due to some trauma which has nuked your libido and crossed your wires so you're now looking to be in same-sex relationships because they are less painful since they don't remind you as much of your abuse, then, no. In such a case, I wouldn't consider that person LGB. Nor if it was due to fetishization, gaytrending, or whatever else reason somebody might have to be in a same-sex relationship other than genuine attraction. That's just me. If you feel actual love toward people of the same sex and want to be with them, you're LGB, sexual intercourse or no.

[–][deleted] 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I think asexuals who parter bisexual or same sex are already covered under LGB and don’t need a category. Plenty of Ls and Bs and Gs have sex trauma and whatnot complicating their sex lives, same with heterosexuals. I think what matters the most is potential to be same sex partnered in the world, because people can’t tell when they see a same sex couple if they are having sex. Lol. Skip over to late bloomer lesbians. Loads of straight couples not sexing anymore.

[–][deleted] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

No. Asexuality is not a sexuality.

Asexuality is the lack of sexual attraction to others, or low or absent interest in or desire for sexual activity.

How can it be a sexuality if they do not have a sexual attraction to anyone?!

[–]fuck_reddit 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Imo, no, they aren't LGB. A big part of the gay liberation movement was getting people to be comfortable with the idea that some men have sex with men and some women have sex with women and bi people have sex with both. A lot of the issues of the LGB movement evolved from sex (ie. the idea of men as bigamous sexual deviants, straight men fetishizing lesbian sex, ideas of gay people as sexual predators, etc.). We have since moved on to more second and third order issues (ie. marriage, adoption, employment, housing, etc.) but almost all of those issues still included sexual elements (consumption of marriage) or are objected to based on sex (ie. adoption and child abuse). So no, the issues LGB people and asexual people face (I frankly don't even think asexual people face that much opposition) are nowhere near the same. They only appear to be similar at an extremely surface-level view. Edit: for clarity. I am not saying LGB people have to have sex. I had zero sex in my first relationship, but we were not asexual nor did we call ourselves asexual. Imo, the presence of any sexual desire in a person's life undermines the idea that they are asexual.

[–]LasagnaRossa 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Are gay people who don't fuck discriminated because they're gay? Yes, then they belong to the LGB community.

[–]BiHorror 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Eh... If they're speaking on the experiences of being GAY, then sure maybe if the rest of vote in favor of allowing them to be apart. But them being asexual is irrelevant, becuase it's not like society sees them being as such (but would with gay if they were out with another man and thus facing homophobia). Overall, don't they have their own groups and sectors? They should just stay there.

[–]ChunkeeguyTeam T*RF Fuck Yeah 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

I like to think of everything to the right of B in the alphabet soup as Tumblrgendersexuals.

[–]YoutiaoLover 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I find the meaning of "sexual" in "asexual" isn't clear.

When we think of sexuality as "being attracted to someone based on their biological sex", asexuality doesn't make sense. An asexual will find themselves falling in love and getting attracted to women-only, men-only or both sexes; which what the terms "straight," "lesbian," "gay," and "bi" have nicely covered.

Asexuality only makes sense when we talk about sexuality as "the feeling of necessity to have sex" (or the lack of it)... which is related to the popular definition of asexuality; and, in this case, doesn't fit with LGB narrative.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Not my monkeys not my circus. They can have their own circus re the asexual part.

[–]SedateApe 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)


[–]RedEyedWarriorGay | Male | 🇮🇪 Irish 🇮🇪 | Antineoliberal | Cocks are Compulsory 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

If you're asexual and you're in a same sex relationship, just say you're gay or bisexual. You wouldn't be in a same sex relationship otherwise. Not every gay or bisexual person wants to have sex.

[–]INeedSomeTimeAsexual Ally 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Homoromantic and biromantic asexuals should be welcome. Heteroromantic and aromantic asexuals shouldn't because they face no discrimination, harassment or opression because of the way their attraction works.

[–]MarkJeffersonTight defenses and we draw the line 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Same-sex attracted Aces are already in the LGB. Another letter is redundant. The labels should not have overlap anyway. The L, G, and B are all mutually exclusive labels for people. This is the same reason why I want the T to be separate. Because one can be a Trans and be "lesbian" or "gay". The quotes denote another reason.