#i respect the split attraction model and that people like it

[stag-bi]

what a whiplash going to see my 2016 tumblr dash (as linked in that last post) and getting slapped in the face w full blown ace discourse 😭😭😭

#i was an exclusionist too lmao i was so pissed as if hordes of cishet aces were coming to Invade Our Spaces?????? CRINGE #i still have beef w the split attraction model when non-aspec ppl use it ON BI SUBREDDITS CONSTANTLY TO DISCOURAGE ANY SELF-REFLECTION #like telling newly out bi's their internalized homo/biphobia is just an inborn trait that cant be helped so dont bother looking into it :) #thats more of a personal pet peeve than anything though #honestly the whole discourse was so stupid and the fake stories and moral panic coming from it was ridiculous #u kno whats real and can be trusted? peoples own experiences and interpretations of themselves. and that needs to be respected and accepted #i got so fed up w the dehumanizing and circlejerky nature of the exclusionist side. not to mention the victimhood complexes and the #black and white thinking that were being normalized by the entire discourse. and the essentialist thinking and public shaming #identities are not inherently above examination and there needs to be a balance between inclusion and exclusion in any context #bc both have negative and positive sides when applied to any group or identity. it should be approached w common sense #i wanna veer away from any generalizations and approach things on a case by case basis #but when it comes to someones personal identity and their lived experience. thats none of my business whatsoever #no matter what. basic respect is believing ppl when they say who they are. thats the bare minimum of interpersonal acceptance #fighting against that in order to uphold some us vs them dynamic is straight up awful #if you cant respect someone bc you cant personally understand their experience youre stuck on the wrong thing #you shouldnt need to relate to someone in order to treat them w kindness and empathy #if you need to find someone relatable to accept their validity then youre not genuinely someone accepting of differences

[nullcoast]

Hmm it's almost like gender is a construct so getting into minutia arguments about microlabels is a complete fucking waste of time and an expression of extreme ignorance. almost like the million different ways queerness has been expressed all contradicting eachother for hundreds of years is for a reason and they all equally have important things to say about HUMAN EXPRESSION

#it's almost like gender isn't real guys #it's almost like a gender system of rigid labels and is ontologically and biologically fucking ridiculously #I'm so sorry but asexuality and bi lesbians and gold stars and guy dudes and bi women who have only been with women #they're all the same they're all human #and I don't give a FUUUUUUCK #all I know is respecting individuals and how they'd prefer to be interacted with #bc I love people and want friends who know I see them and hear them #crazy #guys I found the secret to ontological purity and it all has to do with the split attraction model #/j #shoutout to the Magnus archives mutual I had who blocked and black listed me bc I said I was a gender abolitionist #and they confused that with gender criticalism #how do I say this #yes straight ppl are different but I legit do not believe in 'straight ppl' #gender and sexuality are not something different from any other emotion or human action #and as such WHAY a queer community should be based on is not purity of who is oppressed #or like. who is Actually Gay And Different #but a rejection of the oppressive structure that seperates us #and anyone who rejects that structure in any way is welcome #in my book #dialectical material queer theory

[scretladyspider]

Let’s talk about what demisexuality is not.

First off: what is demisexuality? We have to establish what it is to talk about what it isn’t.

‘demisexuality’ describes not experiencing sexual attraction until a close bond is formed. This doesn’t mean demis are attracted to everyone we bond with, and we can have differing desires towards sex. Demisexuals may or may not be demiromantic — they’re not one and the same.

While demisexuals can also be demiromantic, this isn’t true as a rule. Just like being asexual doesn’t necessarily mean you’re aromantic. It’s possible to be both, nothing wrong with that — but they’re not inherently synonymous.

*For some people who are aroace, include demi aroaces, their sexual and romantic orientations are deeply intertwined and there isn’t a big difference between the two. Other people use the split attraction model, which recognizes a difference in sexual and romantic orientations.

Many people think that “everyone is demisexual” because they read the definition and say “oh, that’s just being normal”. They’re confusing not experiencing sexual at ALL with waiting until a relationship is serious to have sex.

Demisexuality is a sexual orientation. The thing people confuse it with is a decision regarding sexual behavior that can be made regardless of orientation— the decision to wait to have sex until you’re emotionally close. That decision can be made by anyone, demisexual or not.

Often people read the definition and say “I’m demisexual, I wait to have sex until it’s not just sex. I want emotional fulfillment too.” When it’s explained that demisexuals rarely have sexual attraction and only under certain conditions does it occur, one of two things happens:

they misunderstand and assume that demisexuals are also experiencing sexual attraction without the bond and just not acting on it, or

they begin to understand that there’s a difference between sexual attraction and action.

More often than not it’s the former.

It’s interesting that this misunderstanding happens when demisexuality is described because allosexuals (people who aren’t ace) abstain from sex all the time but still feel sexual attraction. There’s this underlying assumption that everyone experiences sexual attraction.

But… just imagine that feeling of not being attracted and expand it. It’s doubtful that you experience sexual attraction to every person you see is physically attractive. Just expand that and there you go. Or imagine it like not seeing a particular color until you suddenly can.

Demisexuals aren’t all cisgender and heteroromantic. But there’s nothing wrong with demis who are! If ace isn’t enough for you to respect someone is LGBTQIA+, you don’t understand or accept asexuality or the orientations under its spectrum.

Demisexuality is NOT “just being a woman”. Demisexuality also isn’t “the patriarchy convinced young girls not having casual sex was a sexuality”.

There’s so much wrong with both of these, and they tie together, so I put them together here. Not only does this thinking see cis women and feminine people as being inherently “more” asexual, it robs allos and aces alike of bodily autonomy towards sex and sexuality. It bleeds out from conservative Christianity — it’s the same ideas that lead us to abstinence only sex “education” and that women must be sexually available at all times or their husband will cheat to “get his needs met”. Saying that cis women & feminine people are just all demisexual or ace removes the bodily autonomy of those who want sex and those who don’t by assigning a culturally acceptable narrative as more important than lived experience. But sexuality isn’t limited by cisheterosexism.

The truth is there are still a lot of people learning they’re under the asexual umbrella as educators and advocacy groups get education out there, and even in queer spaces asexuality isn’t always accepted, let alone its spectrum. A lot of people don’t even know it’s an option!

In addition, and partially because of, tropes like this, asexuality and everything under it are considered more “feminine”. Sex is seen as a symbol of status and depending on your gender and presentation, that status gets lowered or raised depending on the number of partners had.

Cis men and masculine aces exist, and also have to contend with cultural pressures to “perform” sexually, whether they want to or not. Erasing these experiences doesn’t help further acceptance towards asexuality or just sexuality in general.

And! Cis women and feminine people can have and enjoy casual sex! Others don’t but still experience sexual attraction regularly. Being allosexual isn’t limited to the masculine. Libido can also exist without sexual attraction. Human sexuality is just not as narrow as you think.

That’s where I’ll leave this one. Remember, it’s okay to be demisexual. It’s not okay to dunk on a group of people you didn’t bother to try to understand. Keep an open mind. There’s room at the table for learning, not bigotry.

#lgbtqia #queer #demisexual #Demisexuality #asexuality #ace #demi ace #text #sexuality #purity culture #heterosexism #asexual #acespec #asexual spectrum

[gay-otlc]

Transmasc Lesbianism

I'm a lesbian. I'm also a straight trans man. This might confuse you, but you may want to consider looking at perspectives of gender and sexuality that differ from your own and don't fit into neat little boxes.

A definition of lesbian that has been gaining popularity in queer spaces is "non men loving non men." This was meant to be inclusive for nonbinary lesbians, as an alternative to "women loving women." However, the phrase is very flawed. I've spoken about this elsewhere, but the main points are

It categorizes all nonbinary people alongside women. In this context, "non-men" comes off as "women or nonbinary people who are basically women." Not all nonbinary people, even if they're non-men will feel comfortable being labeled as a lesbian, since the term has feminine connotations and can cause dysphoria. It's unfair to put them in this box just because they're not a man.

Attraction is complex and cannot be divided into "attracted to men" and "not attracted to men." This disregards people who use the split attraction model (different romantic and sexual orientations), people who experience alterous attraction, people with fluid sexualities, and more.

Gender is complex and cannot be divided into "male" and "all genders that are not male." The identity most blatantly erased by this is multigender identities- people with multiple genders can be both male and a gender that is not male. There are also genderfluid people who are sometimes male, demigender people who are partially male, or nonbinary people who don't identify as male but may refer to themselves with masculine terms such as boy or man anyway.

The focus of lesbianism should not be excluding men. Mindsets like this are echoing TERF rhetoric that seeks to exclude transfeminine lesbians because TERFs wrongly consider them to be men. And it's annoying to make our identity about men or lack thereof, when we don't need to be talking about men at all- our community is about our shared attraction for women, because women are great!

Awesome, we've got that out of the way. If you're still reading this and going "but you can't be a trans man and a lesbian, lesbian means non men loving non men!!!!!", then I don't know what to tell you. Read the list again? Go through the other posts linked? Maybe log off tumblr?

If you read all that and you're willing to accept that not all lesbians will fit into "non men loving non men," and you don't understand but you're open to learn, read on! By the end you might still not understand, but you don't need to understand me to respect me.

For some context, here is a description of my gender and sexuality.

Gender: I'm a bigender trans man. To put it as simply as I can, my gender is primarily male, but I also have some of the female gender. I'm comfortable being seen as solely a man or both a man and a woman, but not solely a woman.

Sexuality: I'm sexually attracted to women almost exclusively. As mentioned at the beginning of the post, I describe myself as a lesbian (or gay, sapphic, etc). I also describe myself as a straight man (or straight transmasc, transhet, etc).

How can I be both?

That's where my multigender identity comes into play. I'm a man and a woman. I'm attracted to women. This makes me both a man attracted to women and a woman attracted to women; a straight man and a lesbian.

Like I said earlier, male is my primary gender and being female is more secondary. So, I'm primarily a man attracted to women, and to a lesser extent a woman attracted to women. Internally, I perceive myself as more of a straight man than a lesbian. I get a lot of gender euphoria from calling myself a straight man, and the feminine connotations of lesbian can sometimes make me uncomfortable.

So, why do I still identify as a lesbian?

Although I consider myself and my attraction to be mostly transhet, that's not really how I interact with the world around me. I'm out as bigender to some people, but I'm also closeted in many contexts, and I don't pass very well even where I am out. This means I navigate my life as someone generally perceived as a woman, who is attracted to women. Even if I don't always consider myself to fit fully with lesbianism, a majority of people will interpret me that way when they find out I'm attracted to women.

Lesbianism is a label I found my home in, for many years, and it still means a lot to me. I spent a long time defining myself as a lesbian and existing in our community, and it's a significant part of my identity.

The way I experienced my attraction growing up was a lesbian experience, not a straight experience. I consider myself a straight man now, but I didn't grow up interacting with the world as a heterosexual child. I was expected to have crushes on boys and was mocked for not fitting into that. I was called a lesbian in a derogatory way when I was ten, and I found power in reclaiming that. When I realized I was attracted to women, I spent years feeling like a freak for it until lesbians communities helped me to be proud. Lesbian is the label that most accurately describes my history and my experience as a young queer.

Also, although the label lesbian sometimes causes dysphoria, I sometimes get euphoria from referring to myself or being referred to as a lesbian. I especially get euphoria from being a butch lesbian. I take so much joy from my butch identity. And while referring to myself as lesbian in a joking manner, with phrases like "I'm so gay for her" or "not to be a lesbian but oh my god," might not count as gender euphoria, saying them makes me happy, and that's enough for me.

So, why do I identify as a man? Because I am one.

Why do I identify as a lesbian? Because it describes my past experience and the way I interact with the world as someone perceived as a woman. Because it's important to me. Because I want to.

Why do I use these labels that contradict each other? Because these are the labels that are right for me, and I have every right to have a confusing identity.

Thank you for your time.

#holy shit this is a long post #i'm so sorry if you actually read all that. i don't know when to shut up </2 #lesbian #men and non men #transmasc lesbian #male lesbian #transhet lesbian #bigender lesbian #multigender lesbian #bigender #multigender #transmultiphobia #<- because it is transmultiphobic to be an ass to me about my identity #gender shit #pride tag #important #so many tags jfk #i will shut up now

[lassieposting]

Fletcher for therapy please

Oh Fletcher would do great in therapy. Like, 10/10 client good job

It'd take him several years - and probably some prompting from Ghastly, whose opinion he respects - to get him to realise he should really go, largely because he's surrounded by a social circle that isn't very open to the concept.

When we meet Fletcher, he's a hurting teenage boy who badly wants approval from a role model. And while he does eventually get some good solid advice (as well as time and empathy) from Ghastly, that's only after he splits up with Val and feels like he has nowhere else to turn. Prior to this, he actually spends several years fruitlessly trying to win that approval from Skug. Which is a problem, because Skug isn't in the market for a surrogate son. He sees Fletcher primarily as a rival for Val's attention and secondarily as a nuisance, which leads to a situation where Fletcher is consistently trying to impress him and getting knocked back. And we see that Fletch remains selfconscious about Skug's opinion of him for years after he gives up trying to bond - he makes two really obvious attempts to reestablish their relationship on an even footing and remove himself from that subordinate clinger-on role (i.e. shaking hands as adults); he clearly expresses that he's not thought of or treated as part of the team; he knows he's Mickey to Skug's Doctor and Val's Rose. He's the tin dog.

And that's the thing: from what we see of Fletcher, he's actually very introspective. When he speaks to Ghastly, he's clearly done a lot of thinking about why and how his life has ended up the way it has. And he's done that all on his own, because who's going to listen to him?

So like. He's not going to ask Skug and Val to recommend a therapist. He knows exactly how they'd react. Skug is an incredibly macho manly man - Special Forces, law enforcement, and from a time before anyone knew or acknowledged that mental health was a thing - so he's fiercely adamant that he, traumatized as he is, doesn't need therapy (ha) and he's openly dismissive of the concept to Val. He'd laugh, or take the piss, or make a shitty little comment, and Val would laugh along with him because that's what they do.

But approval from Ghastly - who's equally macho, equally manly, but far more well adjusted - gives him the confidence to start thinking about it. And then after Moira tries to kill him, he actually makes an appointment.

A lot of Fletcher's issues come down to trust and abandonment. He has no dad. His mom died on him. He's been used and undervalued by Val and Skug and the rest of the gang for years. Val cheated on him. Reflectionie died on him as well. This is a boy for whom nobody has ever stuck around long term. A boy nobody has ever prioritised. And he has to learn to work through the negative impact that has on self-worth and self-esteem, and learn to stop Yes Man-ing Valkyrie and her friends and prioritise himself. And he wants a more normal life - Lardo makes him teach for some reason, I keep him with the Monster Hunters. So that means distancing himself from his ex and the people in her circle, even though he feels like they're all he has. He knows he'll never get to have that more normal life while he's hanging out with people who seem to attract trouble in various eldritch and evil forms. He has to learn boundaries - how to make and defend them. He has to learn to stop being drawn to girls he wants to save, and start looking for partners who are as mature and invested as he is. He has to completely relearn how to relate to others.

And like. He knows he needs these skills. He wants things to get better. So he goes to his sessions, he does his homework. He comes in with theories and suggestions and ideas.

His therapist loves him. Good job, Fletcher.

#skulduggery pleasant #sp headcanons #fletcher renn

[merely-a-caricature]

Happy Asexual Spectrum Awareness (Ace) Week!

Ace week has started! Asexual awareness week takes place during the last full week of October, and will be taking place in this wonderful year of 2023 from October 22-28! I will be linking my sources at the end if you want to check them out and get extra info!

Ace Week is a time for us in the community to focus on all things asexual! Part of this involves campaigning for a greater understanding and acceptance of ALL of those in the ace-spec! It’s also a time to reflect on how far we’ve come as a community!

Now, since been talking about asexual it’s and awareness, but what exactly does it mean to be asexual?

Some who is asexual (shortened ace) experiences little to no sexual attraction, and what attraction is felt may be expedience in a way that is different from the norm. Asexuality is an umbrella term used for those on the asexual spectrum (or ace-spec). Being asexual may mean you’re not interested in sex, it may be that your repulsed my the idea of sex, but it could also mean you feels disconnect from sex. There a multitude of reasons why some may identify as asexual. One reason why someone may be asexual is because they have a low sex drive/libido

Being asexual is not the same as having a low sex drive or libido. Someone who is celibate may not have sex but still feel sexual attraction or have a high libido but not act in those desire for various reasons. Sexual attraction is not the same as a sex drive. Sexual attraction is wanted to perform sexual acts with a specific person or gender whereas libido is defined as sexual desire. What is meant by sexual desire is essentially a physiological response in which one gets aroused. Just because a person gets aroused does not necessarily mean they want to have sex either. It can simply be a response from your body due to hormones or other things without any of the psychological desire for sexual acts.

Sex drive is one’s general “appetite” for sex in general, not a specific person like with sexual attraction. Bottom line is, asexuals may have a sex drive, they may experience physiological arousal, but they rarely if ever experience the attraction to a specific person to want to have sex.

Although asexual people may not experience sexual attraction, they can most certainly experience other types of attraction like romantic or aesthetic attraction. For example, you can be a heteroromantic-asexual, or a homoromantic-asexual, and so on and so forth. I won’t get super in-depth here, but I can link some stuff about the Split-Attraction-Model (SAM) if you want to learn more. I just also want to mention not every asexual (or aromantic) person uses or likes the SAM. Personally, I find it helpful, but you can also chuck it out a window if if you want

Additionally, there are various cultural and personal attitudes asexuals may have towards sex. I have made post about the cultural attitudes towards sex and the personal attitudes towards sex respectively. As an example, I would say I am sex-ambivalent and sex-neutral personally. If you want to know what that means, read my posts or check out some resources I have linked at the end

Asexuality is a spectrum. Some people, like me, experience no sexual attraction. Other aces may experience attraction on occasion or in certain circumstances, like demisexuals who only experience sexual attraction after forming a strong emotional connection with someone. People who experience sexual attraction infrequently may be called graysexual . There are many microlabels out there, and it’s a personal choice whether or not to use them

I have the sources I used and some more resources linked if that interests you, and you can, of course, do some of your own more in-depth research! I would highly recommend checking out the Asexuality Visibility and Education Network as they have a lot of good information, answers to questions, and you can finds links to forums and such!

Sources/Extra Resources

What is Ace Week

Asexual

Sexual Attraction vs Sexual Arousal

Split Attraction Model

Asexuality Visibility and Education Network

#asexual #asexuality #acespec #ace #ace week #ace week 2023 #asexual awareness week #asexual post #asexual pride #ace price #lgbtqia #lgbtq #queer #ace pride #I don’t usually tag with lgbt but the whole point of this is awareness so better get it out there XD #asexual spectrum #I literally forgot to post this cause I thought I set a reminder on my calendar #but noooooo #i should’ve used queue #I feel dumb

[bilesproblems]

hi we have one question

we heard the argument "the split attraction model was invented before, but it was spread by asexuals for asexuals, so using the sam not on the a-spectrum is aphobia, the use of sam is only allowed when in the a-spectrum".

can u say something about this?

our thinking ended with “according to this logic, using microwaves without being in the military at war is bad because they were created in war, by the military and for the military". we don’t understand what else can be written.

we hope u will find time to answer us.

Seeing as I am asexual and arospec, I am more than qualified to talk about this

The idea that split attraction can only exist for people with aspec attractions and can't be a divergence of orientation unless the divergent orientation is completely a(n)- as an argument against mspec lesbians is utter bullshit that doesn't give any respect to the complexity of the anattractional spectrum, argues against people's real lived experiences (you literally can't say the SAM is only for aspecs when people in real life have split attraction, that's like disagreeing with being gay, you aren't able to have an opinion or stance on it because it's just fact and not subjective in any way shape or form that people are gay, and that non-aspecs experience split attraction), and completely ignores the nuances that being aspec might have on one's identity- including identifying as an mspec lesbian

I'm ace and arospec. I'm asexual, specifically black stripe ace/suptiliasexual/absexual (all terms for no attraction at all not even a little), cupiosexual, and pseudosexual (other attraction can mimic sexual attraction), and I'm both demiromantic and apresromantic. I have somewhat complicated relationships with attraction and favorability, as I experience them differently than most people. I also consider myself para-oriented as an ace, because I feel like I have a sexual orientation despite feeling no attraction, because of my favorability (I would only want to be with people I'm romantically attracted to, so my orientations aren't divergent, but keep in mind some para-oriented people might feel their para-orientation is different than their other orientation(s).) Given my complex experience with attraction, not only do I think there's no way on earth it could even be remotely appropriative or offensive for a person to describe a phenomenon they experience in similar terms to us, even if we experience it differently, but I actually think it's more aphobic to take the stance that only aspecs can use the SAM. For one, there's a lot in between totally ace and totally allo, so the idea that orientations described by split attraction like bi lesbian or straight gay are aphobic ignores that a demisexual alloromantic could be biromantic and attracted to all genders, but exclusively sexually attracted to women. For two, saying split attraction doesn't apply to split orientations, only splits in where someone is on the ace-to-allo scale, delegitimizes asexuality as an orientation itself, when it often is one, and further argues that sexual and romantic attraction cannot be truly separate, because how could your orientations differ unless they are separate? Aces and Aros have been arguing for years that sexual and romantic attractions are different, that you shouldn't equate sex and romance, etc. Saying people who are alloallo or have split attraction that includes different orientations is literally furthering aphobic arguments while trying to convince the aspecs who will call you out otherwise that this person is The Enemy

It's also really dumb based on the principle that someone saying they have a certain lived experience can't be discrimination or appropriation. Not only was the SAM first described for bi straights, but if a person says they experience two forms of attraction differently, that's split attraction, period. You can't say they don't get to use the model that describes that experience and aren't allowed to separately label the two attractions they feel differently as two different labels because of some bullshit about how only aspecs can use it because they made it popular. If a single non-aspec ever experienced split attraction, then the model isn't allowed to be aspec exclusive, period.

It's also worth noting that not only can some aspecs be mspec lesbians and experience split orientations, but sometimes that unique and complex relationship with being aspec is why a person would identify as an mspec lesbian. Para-orientations and being favorable towards having sex/relationships with genders that they're not romantically/sexually attracted to (order of which comes before or after the slash matters), experiencing attraction rarely enough that one could be a pan straight because they've only been attracted to people of the opposite gender so far, but in theory would totally be open to anyone, one could be orchidspec and feel attraction to many genders but be repulsed by all but one, being aroace and feeling two very significant, different forms of attraction and calling yourself a straight lesbian because you're a woman who's only platonically attracted to girls and some enby folk, while feeling strong aesthetic attraction towards men, exclusively, the list goes on. Being aspec is complicated and leads to very different relationships with our orientations. It's ignorant to claim labels like bi lesbian aren't SAM compatible, because aspecs "own" split attraction, when our complex relationships can lead to identifying as an mspec lesbian or other "contradictory" SAM term.

[genderstarbucks]

Hello, I’m gonna call myself uh..(checks emojis indecisively staring at them) 🥥 I like coconuts. Coconut anon.

Listen, I’m not a bi lesbian, nor Turiboy/girl/nonbinary nor any other conflicting labels that have somehow found their way into honestly meaningless controversy. Nor do I expect to really understand them, (I think it’s Bisexual Homoromantic right?) but everyone has a different way of experiencing gender and sexuality and if that’s what makes you, you then that’s wonderful man.

I’m more confused how they even ended up controversial in the first place.

We're controversial because our identities are "contradicting" because according to exclus, you can't bisexual and a lesbian at the same or be a boy and a lesbian because lesbian is non men loving non men (it's not)

If you'd like to understand, here's some common examples as to why people like me identify this way! Obviously these aren't all the experiences people experience, these are just the most common reasons why we identify like this

Turigirls: being a trans woman but still feel connected to the gay label, gay bigender individuals, gay genderfluid individuals, fem gay individuals who use girl = fem, femme gays, she/her gays, transfem gays, being cusper between a trans woman and a cis femme gay, being cross-aligned, and many more!

Lesboys: being a trans man but still feel connected to the lesbian label, lesbian bigender individuals, lesbian bigender individuals, masc gay individuals who use boy = masc, butch lesbians, he/him lesbians, transmasc lesbians, being cusper between a trans man and a cis butch lesbian, being cross-aligned, and many more!

Mspec lesbians/gays/straights: using the split attraction model (such as being homoromantic bisexual like you said), being abrosexual and being fluid between those identities, feeling like ones identity is in between said identities (such as being bisexual and gay because they're attracted to any genders besides feminine ones and women, so their identity technically counts as mspec but it can also be considered gay), being duosexual (being both at once) and many more!

Straight gays/lesbians: using the split attraction model, being abrosexual and being fluid between those identities, being duosexual, being bigender so their attraction is both gay/lesbian and straight, being genderfluid so their attraction is both gay/lesbian and straight, feeling like ones gay/lesbian attraction is straight and vice versa, being a man/woman with straight attraction to women/men and gay attraction to men/women but not necessarily being mspec, and many more!

Either way, thanks for being respectful even when you don't understand these types of identities!

[asexual-means-no-attraction]

The other day I said something and I guess I just wanted your thoughts on it. What I said was that the term "asexual spectrum" really bothered me for the following reasons:

It implies that allosexuals are inherently crazy nonstop sex machines (which is already a stigma bisexuals face) and it can create confusion among people struggling with their identity (which genuinely happened to me, a so-called allosexual with what was at the time an extremely low libido due to various mental health struggles)

There are near infinite ways to experience an emotion (ie attraction), but there's only one way to not experience said emotion

I just wanted to run it by you since you pop up a lot in my feed, seem to have a good head on your shoulders, and are actually asexual and can provide insight that I wouldn't have as an 'allosexual' (God I hate that word, it feels bad in my mouth lol)

Just a quick note: I am not asexual. I thought I was for 7 years (those last two years I used the split attraction model and believed I was asexual AND a lesbian). But after more of my own journey I realized I was just a straight trans man (the lack of attraction stemming from dysphoria in my case). And while I may not be asexual I 1. Was very much involved in the community for a long time, and 2. Firmly believe that everyone has a right to their opinion and are allowed to voice it even if you aren't in that group (with there being respectful ways to discuss things).

Also you can just say non asexual lol. Or just what ever your sexuality is. It's all good.

That said, I 100% agree with you. Your two points are some major ones. My FAQ has links to a ton of posts where I explain more issues with the split attraction model. But a quick summary based on my memory:

-like you said. There's only one way to experience a lack of something.

-boundaries (ie. What you want out of a relationship) are not a sexuality.

-it allows so much overlap between other sexualities that it starts to invalidate and take meaning away from them.

-the model is so broad that anyone can fit into it. It can be used to define anyone, asexual or not. And that leads to lots of confusion and makes the asexuality lose meaning.

-defining every single part of yourself and how you experience attraction is harmful. How you experience/express attraction can change with time. Who you are attracted to (used broadly) cannot. By defining things based on something that can change you head down the slope that sexuality is a choice rather than just who you are. This fuels homophobia and will fuel aphobia. I have met actual people who claim to be asexual and claim sexuality is a choice without any understanding of how homo/lesbo/bi/aphobic that is to say.

-asexuality at this point means something different for everyone. This means I know nothing if you tell me you're asexual. You could be dating everyone on the block or have no interest at all and saying you're asexual. I can't tell. What's the point of using a word to describe yourself if the word doesn't have any concrete meaning?? If someone says their gay or bi I know what that means. I can't say the same for asexuality and I feel bad for actual asexuals who's identity has been taken away like that.

-I have legitimately seen it used to justify being with someone you aren't attracted too. One of my links in my FAQ has stories from asexuals who have had the split attraction model used to coerce them into dating or having sex and how much that messed up their mental health. The justification being "I can have sex to make my partner happy even tho I don't actually find them attractive." When no partner should be asking you to do that. Ever. Every single one of those stories explained how the person thought they were fine until they realized how fucked up it made them.

Check out the FAQ for more. Hope that helps.

#answered #ask #discourse #lgbt discourse #asexual discourse

[thirtheenprimes]

Sorry I'm not done about Vampire in the Garden. I guess most people's criticism is not just the 'bury your gays' trope (didn't happen here, there were lots of queer characters and the movie is supposed to be a tragedy). Other complains concern it feeling rushed (its a movie in 5 parts, not actually a series) and the age difference between Momo and Fine (they aren't lovers, girls being very close friends isn't lesbian erasure when the whole point is they are both lesbians mourning their lovers and searching for paradise together).

It's elder gay helping baby gay. They love each other, obviously, but I really don't think it was romantic love. Maybe is because I'm demiromantic asexual and have a general respect for split attraction model, but there is a step between platonic and romantic, there is that fuzzy space that can make a qpr, there are people who can not be romantically connected but still love each other the way Fine and Momo so clearly do.

I know I'm screaming into the void, but isn't that what we're all doing? I don't normally make posts like this and I try to enjoy media the internet culture is deeming 'problematic' but I'm so /tired/ of seeing things I like wildly misinterpreted and universally agreed upon as 'bad'.

You didn't like it because you don't like the genre and don't give a damn about QPRs and have to ship people romantically to be fulfilled. Move on.

#vampire in the garden

[bi-kisses]

What do you think about "barbie is asexual and why that matters" (Tumblr doesn't allow me to put links so look it up) vid? I know your opinions about split attraction model, so I guess I already expect what it's gonna be like. Also I don't like the fucking weird part about that "women have to put up with being sexualized every time we go outside". Like, I know that it's true to some women but... I can't relate to that? I don't have to put up with this and I'm a woman? Borderline radfem take bru

I don't think there's really any subtext suggesting she's asexual, nor would it improve the messaging at all.

No offense because I get the desire for representation, but people not actively having a love interest in a movie is not ace coded. People in real life often have relationships, like with barbie and ken, that just aren't... emotionally invested. The "no genitals" bit is because they're literally dolls, I think we can all agree asexuals have genitals and to equate the two (being physically sexless and not feeling attraction) is actually very regressive as it wraps back around to this idea of asexuality making you broken and/or incomplete.

I think trying to warp the messaging to be about sexuality is missing the point. The sexualization of women can be contested and criticized without actually robbing women of our sexualities.

I know it does feel like a radfem take to say women get sexualized whenever they're out in the world, but it's a bit more complicated than that. Some women don't at all, usually because of where they live, or if they don't fit into the modern view of "sexy" to begin with. I know that I've been getting catcalled and leered at since I was in my preteens, it's especially a problem with (this will sound weird) some of the Indian men who have immigrated here and just culturally have zero respect for women. I was in a bralette at the gas station and the old guy behind the counter couldn't find the decency to look up from my chest while I paid. That's one example of something I get pretty regularly, and tbh I don't even HAVE nice tits.

All that to say that I didn't find the barbie portrayal of being a woman dressed in tight/revealing clothes navigating the public to be unrealistic. I don't think it's meant to imply this is what every woman gets constantly, I mean, there are other women around in those scenes (and, I almost forgot, ken also gets ogled), it's moreso discussing the way we're all forced to portray ourselves in a muted and "sexed down" manner if we want to be respected, which really shouldn't be the case. Women with skimpy shirts should receive eye contact at the gas station.

#anonymous #barbie #long post #this got really rambley sorry haha

[paras-doxical]

Hi! I'm Vash, and this is my para blog. I use any neos along with they/it. I am an adult.

I am the creator of the term paraqueer.

I am strictly anti-contact for any paras that would nonconsensual if acted upon. Children and animals can never consent.

I have multiple paras, and I am neurodivergent.

My 'DNI'/stances explanation

Pro-contact, contact neutral, or contact complex - children and animals cannot consent.

I consider myself a radinclu and am a mspec gay. If you exclude mspec lesbians/gays or lesboys/turigirls, you probably won't like my account. I also include all aspecs, not limited to: aromantics, asexuals, folks who don't use the split attraction model, loveless folks, aplatonics, alloaros, aroaces, alloaces, oriented and angled aroaces, aspec paras, and any others I may have forgotten.

I am anti harassment. If you harass people for their ships or believe it's okay to do so, you will get blocked.

If you are anti kink or kink critical– why are you interacting with this blog? You can't support paraphiles but not kinksters.

If you are a radqueer, I would feel more comfortable if you didn't interact. Not every radqueer is a bad person, but so many of them are and do not respect boundaries or excuse others who are doing bad things. If you are willing to learn, you may interact with this account.

TransID skeptical - I am willing to talk about TransID alternatives, but please don't bring discourse about TransIDs onto this account.

If you are pro-IRL consang (consensual incest), please do not interact with me for my own comfort

'Narcissistic abuse' does not exist. PwNPD are not secretly abusers and do not have a special way of abusing others that cannot be described in other terms, such as emotional abuse.

#vash.txt #para safe #pro para #paraqueer #anti contact #paraphilia #paraphile #para

[aro-culture-is]

Hi! I’m struggling to figure out if I’m aro or not. My main difficulty is that I’m bisexual and frequently feel attraction of some kind, so I’ve been struggling to disentangle whether I’m experiencing romantic attraction somewhere in the middle when I respect or like someone platonically as well as finding them attractive.

I can say confidently that I’m not interested in or comfortable with the idea of being in a romantic relationship with someone. I don’t really relate to any super sappy romantic ideas or the idea of being in love, but I can’t distinguish between whether I just have more casual or slight romantic feelings than others around me or if it’s nothing at all. I am also only 16 so it’s fully possible I just haven’t got there yet.

The final thing is that if I am aro, or decide to identify as arospec in some way, I’m just.. personally not super comfortable with using the split attraction model to label myself. I don’t know why, to be honest. I totally respect it and people who use it, but for me attraction in general all just feels like one big grey area and I wouldn’t find it that easy to split it up like that. Trying to figure out how I would begin to label myself has been kind of distressing. I don’t know how to reconcile this, or if I just need to get over it? My solution so far has been sticking to just the bisexual label but I feel a bit alienated from some of the discussions within the community about love. Again, this could just be a me thing and not an aro thing. In all honesty the idea that what I feel for those I’m attracted to is just sexual attraction without any possibility for romantic attraction makes me feel a bit sleazy and gross when I dwell on it too much - I know this is unreasonable and I would never think it about anyone else, but I’m struggling to get over it.

Any advice? Sorry for leaving you such an essay but I ended up having a lot to say 😅

ngl, there is no easy answer for this. I want to offer a few things - for one, you don't have to use labels you don't want to use. but... it absolutely sounds like you experience (internalized) alloarophobia.

my main comment with regards to that is honestly? follow allo aro people. follow sex-positive blogs. practice noticing sex negativity in your life, and addressing the fact that sex is a neutral action - why is sexual attraction sleazy? if it's not bad to feel aesthetic or sensual attraction - why is sexual attraction, similar to each, somehow "sleazy" or "bad"?

it could be worthwhile to also examine if that's some swerfy rhetoric you've absorbed, portraying sexual attraction as an agent of patriarchy and therefore bad, instead of like... literally a physical thing that a LOT of people experience. anything can be an agent of power, and while our current culture abides by "sex is power", that doesn't mean sexual attraction is some sort of inherently oppressive thing.

#Anonymous #not aro culture #aro #aromantic #actually aro #actually aromantic #ask #mod alexander #alloarophobia #sex negativity

[transmascpetewentz]

WAIT OH ANOTHER THING

I recently saw an archive of what "basic DNI criteria" means and apparently people who use the "toothpaste/Listerine flag" are part of that because the creator supports mspec lesbians/vincians???

First of all idk about you but I believe there's literally nothing wrong with those identities because I for one respect multigender people, people who use the split-attraction model, abrosexual or other sexuality-fluid people, etc.

But also even if it WAS a bad thing it's literally stripes of color??? Why do people care???

Anyways I will use the toothpaste flag til I die bay beeee. I like how it matches with the sunset flag and how they both look like beach towels.

When did lesbians decide they got a say in what flags gay men do/don't use, anyway? Anyway idgaf about mspec lesbians but I love mspec gays because y'all are amazing. Digitally separatist gayboy micronation forever!

#asks #flag discourse

[genderqueerpositivity]

Reading up on the faq and specifically asexuality posts from that blog... was infuriating. I could go on a rant about more details of their conviction and other shitty things, but. Just. How dare they?? It's incredibly invalidating that they claim I just straight up can't exist either. They have their stupid stubborn "a*sexual* = no (overall??) attraction" definition, mudding different forms of attraction whose distinctions are important to many who identify with the label, though yes not all, and gatekeeping people who feel on only one form (no acknowledging aros or the term aroace or aspec)/partly/specifically and refusing to distinguish between attraction/practice. I am bi, I'm very much attracted to more than one gender, and I'm ace, which I'm incredibly aware of. But because I'm bi they say I have no right to ID as ace too? That doing so is "harmful and wrong" because it "invalidates asexuality as its own identity" (it does not) + "split attraction model sexualizes the other IDs" (no??)??? That I'm not ace? And if I'm ace I can't be bi too? FUCK them. They're also conflating so many stupid attitudes of individuals into things, and just their grasps on these concepts are UGH.

You--you get it. Thanks for being like the only the second person who understands why I was so angry.

The arrogance of trying to erase or define another person's sexual orientation is something I will never understand. Just imagine legitimately feeling like an authority on someone else's sexuality. I can't do it. It's incredibly disrespectful.

Of course you can be bi and ace at the same time, that's up to you to determine! You know yourself best and if you say that you are bi and ace, then you are and I will respect that. That's basic human decency here folks.

Identifying with both terms and both experiences of sexuality is NOT harmful to either community. That person is an ignorant fuckhead, block them and continue being your badass bi ace self. 💜 (Purple heart emoji)

#ask box #exclusionist bullshit tw #acephobia tw #biphobia tw #not a positivity post

[the-ace-lesbians]

Bi lesbian doesn't mean what that answer to that ask says though, that would be bad. Bi lesbian is biromantic homosexual which if homoromantic asexuals exist follows logically. Not saying you have to be comfortable with it, I'm still untangling my feelings on it, but it's important to have information when you're talking about these things. As an ace its weirdly close to the 'if you're asexual you can't be gay because your romantic attraction and sexual attraction have to be the same' argument to be entirely comfortable.

I have a lot of thoughts but tl;dr

The SAM shouldn't be used outside of aspec identities, I respect people who identify as bi lesbians but I'm not gonna be social with them, and I feel like the main difference in 'if you're ace you can't be gay' and 'lesbians can't be bisexual' is that gayness does not require sexual attraction, but lesbianism does require no attraction to men.

I maintain that the split attraction model could and should not be used outside of asexuality. It just doesn't work outside of sexuality because it was made specifically to define an identity including a lack of allosexuality or alloromanticism, where you can lack sexual attraction but have romantic attraction to, say women. The SAM works for aces and aros because asexuality and aromanticism do not contradict with queer identity, but benefits in more correctly defining yourself can be had from a modifier being used such as 'biromantic' or 'homoromantic' instead of simply 'bisexual' or 'homosexual'

Issue is, the foundation of being a lesbian is not including men and loving women. Bisexual and lesbian, while of course we share similar attractions and love and experiences, contradict each other if used together to explain a single identity, because one specifically requires the absence of attraction to men. To me, using the SAM to say you're a biromantic woman but you only like women sexually just feels like internalized comphet to an extreme degree - everything about a lot of it (of course not all and not every definition because it's a nuanced discussion) just feels like comphet to me.

Outside of that, the answer from that ask is absolutely one of the many different meanings to the term 'bi lesbian'. I've never even seen it applied to biromantic homosexuals, only bisexual sapphics who don't want to use the term bisexual sapphic.

I've seen plenty of people say other meanings, but the main one I see is people using it instead of bisexual sapphic or any other term we have specifically to avoid including men in lesbianism. It's a label that has an incredible amount of meanings, and it's definitely different to everyone who uses it or talks about it. There is no defining meaning.

I think, personally, the conversation is still different from the aphobic things people say - Primarily because gay doesn't specify sexual or romantic attraction. Like I said above, asexuality does not contradict anything about a lesbian identity. Lesbianism about loving other sapphics and only other sapphics - a loose definition because gender is so strange and confusing, but we can at least all agree that women.

It was absolutely acephobic and arophobic rhetoric that guided the OG hatred and aphobia we saw in the queer community, and it still is, but the reason that it's wrong to say we can't be gay and ace is because we literally, by definition, can be. Gayness and queer love isn't defined by sex, you know?

I do hear how it can sound too similar, and in the beginning that was a big reason I didn't have any opinion. I think the main difference is that in this, one of the labels used is quite literally defined by the lack one thing that the other has.

Even then, I'm not going to campaign against people identifying with the label bi lesbian, and I'd protect them if they needed help, they're still my queer siblings even if I don't particularly feel comfortable with the way they're labeling themselves because that's genuinely just none of my business, and my feelings don't mean anything about their identity!

And, in turn, their identity and feelings have no effect on my identity because I'm always going to consider lesbianism something devoid of men and attraction to men, that's sort of the whole point of it.

I also feel the need to say that I am actively reading more into this because I do want to know more! I have a lot of thoughts, and my main one tends to be that labels evolve and change with time and old definitions shouldn't be gospel while new definitions deserve to change, but at the same time some definitions sort of just... can't be changed.

Just as well, side note, another reason I dislike the term bi lesbian is because I have also seen it used by TERFs to describe sapphics dating trans women or sapphics who have had relationships with men, and I feel like if your label is used for transphobic and hateful purposes maybe we should all use the regular terms we had to describe this identity like 'sapphic' or 'sapphic bisexual' or literally just 'bisexual' because bisexuals aren't inherently going to date multiple genders and bisexuality is a beautiful word and identity with a beautiful history but idk I am definitely biased because I love bisexuals so much

#long post #deerly beloved #discussion #cannot cannot CANNOT stress enoguh #that it does not matter. ill talk about it on my side blog but the majority of the time i am not even thinking about this #i wont be friends with someone actively identifying as a bi lesbian because that's not something i think id be comfortable with #knowing i define my lesbianism as a love for women that doesnt include men #and therefore feel like our ideals would just class too much for comfort you know #but also like. we are all queer siblings. we all need to love each other. i can say 'idk i think it's odd' on tumblr but there's legislatio #trying to kill us so at the same time i'm going to fight for anyones right to call themself a bi lesbian and use whatever name and pronoun #and labels they want because queerness is good and it deserves to be confusing