Hey /lgbt/, this includes, all the gays, lesbians, bisexuals, transexuals, pansexuals. Can we all get behind one campaign and push for Hiroyuki Nishimura to make an /as/ board for asexuals?
Asexuals are not apart of /lgbt/ and their threads keep cluttering our boards and bumping actual legitimate /lgbt/ threads off.
Can we all just put aside our differences within the actual /LGBT/ community and fight for asexuals to have their own board so they will stop posting here?
It's becoming quite the nuisance.
I dunno, I just keep seeing asexual thread on here which have nothing to do with being LGBT.
There's no asexual float in the LGBt parades of people sitting in chairs looking lonely, there's no workplaces that fire you for being asexual. It's so out of place and screaming of,
>I'm going to associate with you because I want to be a snowflake even though I'm not oppressed and for many people it's not being about a snowflake.
Asexuality is just the absence of sexuality, wow like celibate people ar being oppressed and need their own board.
If we allow asexual threads we might as well allow threads talking about the difficulty of being straight, it's stupid.
What about the biromantic and homoromantic asexuals..?
I definitely don't think heteroromantic asexuals have a place in the LGBT community, but homoromantic asexuals face the same discrimination that actual homosexual people do IMO.
Ultimately, as a group we represent a refusal to conform to gender roles in various ways that allow us to live in a way that better reflects our desires, preferences, and needs. LGB and A (and a bunch of other letters I'll not look up but will hopefully imply) all do not perform sexually as they are expected to for reasons integral to themselves.
So in order to express that you choose to use a defined biological term? A term which I might add if accurate to your sexuality would mean you are incapable of romantic attraction and lack the desire for sex.
It's hardly the first biological term to have a different meaning outside a lab setting, and it won't be the last. Sometimes the word is just a really good fit. I think unless specified otherwise, you're right that a lack of capacity for romantic attraction or sexual desire is implied.
I'm not Asexual, though, so perhaps they'll offer better insight. My use of "our" in my previous post referred to the LGBTQ+ as a whole.
Please don't add anything more to it, I think it's fine at LGBT, people keep wanting to add more and more to it and some of it is redundant.
these people while I assume are well meaning don't realize that it hurts the movement because it confuses the fuck out of people who are not part of the community when we keep adding and adding to the term to be all inclusive.
Why even bother having an LGBT organization and just call it humanity if were going to include every group out there that has ever been oppressed?
We literally have only one general, and it's so slow that it's not going to bump any threads off the board unless they're already on page 10. There have been a handful of other ace threads, but they mostly seem to be people new to the board who don't know how to search before making a thread.
Uh, there have been asexual groups appearing in pride parades. And winning the oppression olympics isn't a requirement to post here.
>accurate to your sexuality would mean you are incapable of romantic attraction
Incorrect. Sexual and romantic orientation don't always match. Asexual just means they don't experience SEXUAL attraction.
Because all the other groups' oppression isn't really based around sex/gender.
>and people aren't sure whether or not it exists or is a hoax or some sort of conspiracy
The same is true of homosexuality and transgenderism. People doubting the legitimacy of something is not a sufficient condition for it to be an appropriate topic for /x/.
But that doesn't make sense because if someone wasn't gay why would they engage with other men?
Asexuality as a myth makes sense because of someone's psychological block to any sort of intimacy or fear of it.
One is irrational and just dumb to doubt the other makes sense to doubt psychologically.
>But that doesn't make sense because if someone wasn't gay why would they engage with other men?
That's the whole point of it being a "hoax" or "conspiracy". You know, they're not REALLY attracted to men, but the jews / feminists whatever made them think they are.
Both asexual and homosexual behaviors are objectively known to exist. So unless there is actual evidence to point to one being legitimate and the other not, there's no reason to assume one is an orientation and the other is a myth or psychological disorder.
And in a purely biological evolutionary sense, asexuality seems MORE adaptive than homosexuality. Neither aces nor gays reproduce, but gays must still deal with STIs and so on.
>Being so assblasted about a general that barely is even active that you would rather see a whole new board created for the express purpose of, for all intents and purposes, moving that one general there, rather than just ignoring it or filtering it
I refuse to believe people like this aren't underage, whether physically or mentally. It baffles me how big of a tantrum they will throw over such a small problem.
Nah. Split /lgbt/ into a sexuality and an advice board (or something like that). One where I can talk about who or what I want to put inside myself and one where I can ask how to suck dick, get golfball out of my anus etc.
Why do asexuals need a safe space? Can't you just like wait for everyone else to get old? When you're old, hookup culture goes from being mainstream to the thing everyone else points and laughs at.
>When you're old, hookup culture goes from being mainstream to the thing everyone else points and laughs at.
Yeah ok man. Old people in retirement communities account for a huge portion of STDs. Something about the invention of viagra, being extremely close to death and being too old to give a fuck about bullshit social standards makes people fuck a lot. Who knew?
nah, you're just being a dumbass.
Moot has already stated that when he created /lgbt/, it was actually a GSM (gender & sexual minorities) containment board. Trannies and asexuals and non-binaries and even wolf-kins all belong here. /lgbt/ is the place for all the freak-o-sexuals to whine about their lives, hate on each other, and get trolled by /pol/.
MAYBE you could petition the new owner to rename /lgbt/ board correctly to /gsm/ but even then I would say you are still being a dumbass.
>Nah. Split /lgbt/ into a sexuality and an advice board (or something like that).
Stupid idea, it would end up being filled with straight guys asking for advice on how to get womenz, it would just be an adult version of /adv/
Why do asexuals bother coming out at all?
Choosing a life of celibacy is not that uncommon and isn't being persecuted in anyway shape or form.
It's literally pointless to have an asexual movement or even come out as asexual.
>Why do asexuals bother coming out at all?
Well obviously it's a good idea to come out to anyone you're considering dating, or even just discussing relationships with. And it's usually better than making stuff up if people ask why you don't have sex.
>article on how the bone structure of whales is influenced by sexual selection
>this somehow proves most asexuals are gay