fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #2474 ]

[ SECRET POST #2474 ]

⌈ Secret Post #2474 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

[Once Upon a Time]

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

[ ----- SPOILERY SECRETS AHEAD ----- ]

07. [SPOILERS for NCIS]

__________________________________________________

08. [SPOILERS for Breaking Bad]

__________________________________________________

09. [SPOILERS for Dangan Ronpa]

__________________________________________________

10. [SPOILERS for Breaking Bad]

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 00 pages, 000 secrets from Secret Submission Post #353.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 1 - not!fandom ], [ 1 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

I'm not sure I actually believe that asexuality or demisexuality are (or should be) a thing.

I just don't like it when asexuals claim their treatment is equivalent to the treatment of those in the LGBT community. Nope. Nobody oppresses asexuals as they do LGBT people so the comparison just can't be made.

Would you like some cheese with your whine?

Get over yourself. No one ever wins the Oppression Olympics.

Uh, you're not oppressed?

I can't even figure out if you're asking or assuming. Either way, it's irritating.

But people do lose the Oppression Olympics. And for all intents and purposes, asexuals and demisexuals lose.

*grins* I honestly enjoy your wit.

I think it kind of depends on what exactly you're talking about and who is doing the oppressing.

If you're talking about the people who generally oppress LGBT people then yeah I definitely don't think they oppress asexuals or even know they exist in a lot of cases.

But more liberal generally "open and accepting" people? I've definitely seen people who are incredibly supportive of LGBT people, and even LGBT people themselves, give asexuals shit and call them sick and wrong and tell them they need therapy or to "go get laid" and that they're only asexual because they were molested or had a bad experience with sex...all things that LGBT people have been told themselves. Oppression is probably too strong a word but to say asexuals don't have to put up with any of the things the LGBT community does isn't quite accurate imo.

If the LGBT people are treating the asexuals exactly the same way that they're treated by their "oppressors" why, exactly, aren't the LGBT themselves "oppressors" of the a- & demisexuals? If it's oppression when done by straight people, it's still oppression when done by gay people. Bad behavior is bad behavior, regardless of the actor's sexual orientation.

I suppose they are when you look at it that way but there are different levels, I guess. I mean, when LGBT people are being denied marriage rights and the right to adopt and being discriminated against in jobs and housing etc. not to mention "corrective rape" and violent hate crimes against them, being told you're sick and you need therapy is mild in comparison. Of course, I've heard/read about asexuals also experiencing all the aforementioned things but I don't have any actual evidence, at least not offhand, that it actually happened. But as for the other things, I've seen gay people tell asexuals that there's something wrong with them and they're only asexual because they haven't met the right person and no one think there's anything wrong with it while if someone told a gay person that there was something wrong with them and they were only gay because they haven't met the right person (of the opposite sex) no one (at least no one that's considered to be a decent person) would think that was ok.

I guess in a way it's kind of similar to bisexuals? A bisexual person could be in a relationship with someone of the opposite sex and "pass for straight" while an asexual person would probably be assumed to be straight if they're single, so neither of them would have to deal with what someone in a same sex relationship would. And both of them get some people thinking they're in denial and not believing they actually exist.

So I think it just kind of depends. In some ways, I think there's a double standard in that people say things to asexual people that if they were to say them to gay people it absolutely would not be accepted. But gay people have to deal with harassment from other groups of people where asexuals aren't even on their radar at all. Historically it's not even a fucking question that LGBT people had it far, far worse but it seems we're getting to a point where most people (and I realize it depends greatly on where you live) are accepting of gay people but not a lot are of asexuals. I'm not saying asexuals have it worse but I don't think it's completely ridiculous to suggest that they go through at least some of the same things LGBT people do.

I feel like I'm talking in circles so I'm gonna shut up now but hopefully that made some sense.

[Disclaimer: I'm not gay or asexual but I have several friends that are gay and a few who are asexual so I can see both sides.]

Considering how much grief virgins get at the student health clinic, regardless of orientation, I think that a- and bisexuals get a lot more grief than you give them credit for. And I suspect that "always a bachelor" is probably as big an impediment as "sleeps with same gender" to marriage and adoptions. And by the way? Rape isn't just something that gays have to deal with, corrective or otherwise. And anyone can "pass", yes even gay people, and yes, I've known a few. And frankly, it sounds like your saintly gays are doing enough harassing of a- & bisexuals for everyone.

Honestly, this attempt to justify quantifying others' suffering makes my skin crawl. Suffering is suffering, regardless of who is doing the suffering and who is doing the hurting. I can and will judge your gay friends for tormenting an a- or bisexual just as harshly as I'd judge someone who tormented them because I stand by my statement: bad behavior is bad behavior, regardless of the sex, color, or orientation of the person doing it.

And if you really feel this strong of an impetus to do complicated mental gymnastics to excuse bashing by gay people, then I respectfully suggest that you reconsider some of your personal relationships. Because whoever you're making the excuse for isn't justified. They're as poorly behaved and as to blame for their behavior as anyone else.

ayrt

I'm sorry. I was trying to avoid offending one group of people and ended up offending another and I truly did not mean to.

Anytime I've ever suggested that asexuals go through just as much shit as gay people I've had gay people saying saying that how dare I suggest such a thing because asexuals don't have it hard and only they do and I was horrible for saying they did. I was trying to avoid that but in doing so I minimized what asexuals go through which I honestly didn't intend to do.

But to be completely honest, yes, I do think it's the same thing, and it's awful in either case. Hell, even though I'm straight, I'm single at the moment and have gotten some of the same shit from people about how I must find a husband and have babies because it's just not right to not be in a relationship.

I really am sorry that it came across like I was justifying anyone's bad behavior. It's equally bad when straight people do it to gay or bi people and when gay or bi (or straight) people do it to asexuals. Basically I wish everyone would just stop harassing other people about who they want to have sex/relationships with.

Re: Unpopular opinion thread

(Anonymous) - 2013-10-12 20:32 (UTC) - Expand

Guh, this EXACTLY. I have had to put up with those kinds of comments from people who would never dream of saying them to someone who came out as gay. Even someone I once considered my best friend was apparently saying them about me behind my back. :P

And then as noted below, because I'm in a same-sex romantic relationship, I get the same crap as lesbians get too, because people who don't know/believe in asexuality assume that I'm one of them nasty godless homos trying to cover my tracks. Double-whammy!

person from above

Yes. If something is wrong to say to a gay person then it's just as wrong to say to an asexual person.

And I'm sorry if anything I said above upset you because a couple people commented that I was trying to defend gay people saying horrible things to asexuals and when I look back over my original post it does seem that way, but it honestly wasn't my intention. Anyone giving anyone else crap about their sexual orientation is wrong whether they're gay or bi or asexual (or straight for that matter).

So a homo- or biromantic asexual have some sort of magic shield that protects them from the institutionalised oppression gay and bisexual people face when in a same-sex relationship? Cool!

ayrt

No. In the past I've had gay and bi people jump all over me when I suggested that asexual people could have it just as hard as they did, and in trying to avoid that I went way too far in the other direction, which I'm sorry for. It's equally awful either way.

Even if you don't believe in it, asexuality has been a thing since the kinsey scale. Lumping it in with demisexuality is just mean.

Because they're different things or because you don't believe in demisexuality?

It's not that I don't believe in it, I just don't understand why it's a thing. I know it exists but until recently people used to just say someone didn't like sex or wasn't interested in it or didn't have a sex drive or had a low sex drive or whatever and everyone understood that. Why does there need to be a separate word and people saying it's a separate sexual orientation? There are people of every sexuality (straight gay bi whatever) that aren't all that interested in sex itself but they're still considered gay or straight or bi. Why insist that they need a separate word to call themselves? I've read the explanations that it's actually about sexual attraction and not whether you like sex or have a sex drive but for me sexual attraction and sex drive are basically the same thing or at least they're so closely related that they might as well be and any distinction is just a semantic thing. But I guess I'm missing something because it doesn't really make sense to me.

until recently people used to just say someone didn't like sex or wasn't interested in it or didn't have a sex drive or had a low sex drive or whatever and everyone understood that.

But, I love sex. I have a high sex drive and masturbate a lot. But I have absolutely no sexy feelings for people unless I know them very well. So that guy or girl you may hook up with after a few dates or even after a first run-in at a bar or party? I'm happy for you! But I can't do it.

Now, maybe that's really just another facet of The Big 3 (or 4) Sexualities, but it's a facet that -- in my experiences -- is not typically "JUST LIKE THE VAST MAJORITY!!!" as people are wont to rage, and it's nice to have a label for that facet, even if it's not 100 percent accurate. But noooooo, that's not a good enough answer. All the agender, asexual homo- or heteromantic consensually incestuous people on the internet are wonderful human beings. People who have a wall about who they feel sexy about are just speshul snowflaikes.

ayrt

From what you're saying I'm guessing you mean demisexuality? I was talking about asexuality, but I guess it's the same kind of thing. Why the need for the label? Why not just say "I'm not into having sex with people until I get to know them"? I mean, to me gay, straight and bi (what's the fourth?) are more cultural/social identities and I get why they're useful. Who you want to date, fall in love with, marry, live with, possibly have children with, etc. is a huge part of who you are and wanting a term that encompasses all that makes total sense to me. But how much sex you want to have and/or what circumstances you want to have it in doesn't seem like something that really has a great impact outside of you and the person you're having it with (or not, I guess, as the case may be). So going around telling people you're demisexual just doesn't make a ton of sense to me. Maybe I'm underestimating it, I don't know, but unless they want to date you I just really doubt that anyone cares that much.

Not that the asexual label makes any more sense to me because I also don't see how "I like the opposite gender but I'm not interested in having sex but I'll do it anyway to please my partner" (for example) is really relevant to anyone you're not romantically interested in. Why not just discuss these things with potential partners by just telling them what you actually want or don't want instead of using labels that not many people outside the internet are even aware of and are unlikely to ever become widely used?

It sounds like you're against the over-share more than anything else. And, I've got to admit, I'm not that fond of it myself. I don't really need to know everything about everyone, whether I've met them or not. But then, that's also why I didn't sign up for twitter.

ayrt

Yeah, exactly. That kind of thing is definitely important to discuss with your partner or potential future partner but putting it all over Twitter or Tumblr just doesn't make sense to me. Why does anyone care? And it's interesting that you mention Twitter, because now that I think about it, I think it's the same impulse that leads everyone to share everything on Twitter or Facebook. I don't think anyone cares what you had for lunch, either. Social media is another thing I just don't get, though, so I guess this is kind of along the same lines.

You are aware that an asexual person can be interested in a relationship on an emotional level, but not on a sexual level?

I'll rephrase your sentence for you:

Asexuality is a cultural/social identity and it's useful. Who you want to date, fall in love with, marry, live with, but at the same time, don't want to have sex with is a huge part of who you are and wanting a term that encompasses all that makes total sense.

People can get irrationally angry if you give all the "sure, relationship would be great" signals but then, you don't want to have sex with them. So better to get that out of the way first, sort of a disclaimer. How is that any different than any other person's oh-so-useful cultural/social identity?

Re: Unpopular opinion thread

(Anonymous) - 2013-10-12 20:24 (UTC) - Expand

Yes, I was referring to demisexuality.

But how much sex you want to have and/or what circumstances you want to have it in doesn't seem like something that really has a great impact outside of you and the person you're having it with

And this just goes back to what I was trying to say before: It's not about who I *want* to have sex with and under what circumstances. It's literally about who arouses me. Give me someone I just met? Not going to interest me sexually or romantically in any way, no matter how attractive he is or how great his personality appears to be, or how fun it might be. That same guy some time down the line? Yes, please.

And yes, I was calling asexuality the potential fourth sexuality. And the label matters because it fosters community. Deviating from the norm, whether you have any choice in it at all, can be difficult and lonely. But when there's something you can call it, there's a way to find people that don't make you feel so alone.

Re: Unpopular opinion thread

(Anonymous) - 2013-10-12 20:46 (UTC) - Expand

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only