Projects > Irregular

Episode 3: Asexuals

(1/11) > >>

Lemon:
Now it's time for the asexuals to get their say! We sat down with three webcomic artists who have no shame in telling you that they have not had sex in their lives. Might they do so in the future? That was discussed in a great conversation that went from Racists' who want promiscuous children to things to do in Las Vegas when you're asexual to the correct title of a Pixar parody porn title, and all logical points in between.

fluffy:
So, I liked this episode for showing some reasonable balance with some asexuals who weren't AVENites, and weren't ashamed of what quirks they actually had. However, I did take issue with the short-sightedness of them stating (one outright, the other two agreeing) that the gay marriage issue doesn't involve asexuals at all.

A lot of asexuals still form romantic attachments, and those romantic attachments can still be same-sex and still develop into a desire for marriage (even without sexual involvement).

Plus, there's the general issue of how wanting other people to have rights even if those rights don't affect them is just plain, you know, neighborly.

There's also been some pretty good writing about how asexuality is legitimately on the queer spectrum. It's a bit alarming how many people only want to be inclusive to other people who are just like them, and their fight for equal rights, respect, and visibility and so on ends with their own personal issues - and then those people turn around and try to still differentiate why other people shouldn't get those rights, respect, or visibility.

Meanwhile, the AVEN forums themselves are pretty terrible, but David Jay seems to have his act together pretty well, and he's pretty well-spoken when it comes to relating with the media, at least.  So, here's a two-for-one in which David Jay addresses these issues.

Chaz:
I did take issue with the short-sightedness of them stating (one outright, the other two agreeing) that the gay marriage issue doesn't involve asexuals at all.fluffy, February 02, 2013, 05:00:08 pm
--- End quote ---

Hi there, I was one of the three guests on this episode, so I'm here to discuss this. I think I know what part you're referring to (Our response to the question "Is there any consideration to asexual rights?"), and I think you might have gotten confused with the wording we used. I agree that same-sex relationships and marriages of any kind, whether sexual or platonic, are important and should definitely be made legal. What we were talking about in response to that question was this whole notion that asexuals are demanding the right to be asexual and nothing else, and how plain silly that notion was.

If someone is a romantic asexual and wants to enter into a same-sex relationship and get married, then yes, they should have the right to do that. However, that still falls under same-sex marriage rights, rather than asexual rights. If someone is asexual and isn't interested in having a relationship at all, they already have all the rights they need as a human being, they don't need anything more than that.

Keetah's on this forum too, and Icarus might drop by as well, so if I haven't answered your response appropriately (I do sometimes have a hard time finding the right words to respond to these kinds of issues), then hopefully one of them can help clear things up!

Keetah Spacecat:
I'm going to echo Chaz too, since I was also in the podcast, that everyone should have marriage rights regardless of their sexual preference. I apologize for being really short sighted about the romantic spectrum of asexuality (seeing that I'm in it) in regards to same sex romantic relationships. If someone is in a homoromantic relationship by all means they should be allowed to get married! All of us are for marriage rights in general.

Asexuals for the most part enjoy the same rights as a straight person (unless of course they want to be married in a same sex relationship or are trans*), so we were focused mainly on the individuals (mostly idiots on tumblr) crying oppression over everything while GLTBQ members risk being killed for just the simple act of coming out. Of course everyone deserves to be treated with respect, but we we're for the most part calling out the more....stupid and non-nice parts of the asexual community as a whole. Especially when compared to the struggles the GLTBQ community had to go through just to keep from being JAILED for being who they are.

fluffy:
Okay, that's a lot more reasonable!  I do agree that the idea of asexual-specific rights is more than a bit silly.

However, even if people don't tend to get violent against asexuals SPECIFICALLY, there's still a lot of marginalization and microaggression type stuff that occurs, not to mention all of the heads-I-win-tails-you-lose stuff around it where asexuality gets marginalized, ridiculed, and shamed.  Of course that all falls under the banner of basic human decency and it's not like it's only asexuals who experience that, but the phrasing I heard in the podcast seemed to just sort of go along with that being okay.  But it's also easy to take it out of context.

I do worry that a non-asexual non-supportive asexuals-are-just-repressed-homosexuals type might take that part of the podcast out of context and say, "See? Even asexuals don't think they need to be considered queer!" but people are always going to try to shit on other people no matter what, I guess.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page