How to be nice to people, part 2

source

Welcome to “How to be Nice to People, Part 2”! If you missed part 1, it is here. This post deals with a slightly different topic – instead of acephobia, this is about allophobia (in other words, prejudice against those that feel sexual attraction to people other than themselves). A more common word that you may recognise would be “slut shaming”. And slut shaming is very much not okay.

 This post also deals with asexual elitism, in part, because that ties in with the "I don't want to have sex, I must be better" morality.  Asexual elitism can be two different things - one idea states that asexuals that have never had sex are "true asexuals" whereas any asexual that has is not as asexual.

The other line usually runs along the "wow I can get so much more done because I don't think of sex". Before you jump to conclusions, I don't agree with either line.

 As a little aside, for those who may not be familiar with the terms “allosexual” and “allophobia” and their origins, the need for them stems from the need to find an opposite for “asexual” which would incorporate all of the non-asexual groups. “Sexual”, while being the first that most people come to, has severe negative connotations (mostly due to it being a trigger word for some people, and the way it hypersexualises individuals it is used to describe) and thus is not an acceptable noun. “Allosexual” was coined by a German sexologist around ten years ago, and was recently adopted by the asexual community. “Allo”, I am told, can also mean attraction to something different to oneself, and therefore can be used to describe sexual attraction to the same/opposite/both genders. “Consexual” stems from the word “consensual”, in order to describe the fact that you are attracted to the gender you have consensual sex with, which removes the negative connotations.

Ace elitists think true asexuals only think about this.
Well, don't you? Source

That little bit of housekeeping aside; I want to talk about asexuals slut shaming. Now, I know most readers will think “but slut-shamers aren’t only aces – they’re just general douchebags” or at least, you should think that. The vast majority of aces are sex-positive, or respect someone’s choice to have sex. As a rampant feminist, occasionally I have been told that I can’t argue against slut shaming. Apparently, as an asexual I am not allowed to defend the rights of other people to do as they like with their bodies. Because hell, it’s not like it’s their choice to have sex, it’s obviously the choice of who likes it least. What’s the matter, are you afraid that they can do what they want?

Anyway, I’m here to talk about slut-shaming aces, because they have the stupidest reasons for it. Now, let’s get something quite straight here – nobody is “better” than someone else because of how they’re born. No race is “better” than any other, no orientation is “better”, no gender identity. You’re just born some way. And then you make yourself “better” or “worse” by your actions. So when aces go “I think I’m better than [allo]sexuals, because they only think of sex all the time”.

Sorry, allosexual readers, you heard it here first. You are just far too busy thinking about sex. I mean, that’s how it goes, right? Yeah I didn’t think so either. This is an unfortunately common phrase is some circles – the myth that allosexuals are so obsessed with sex that they are just completely unable to get something done, and that aces have more room in their minds for the “important” things. Personally I think the only thing that sets me out from my peers is my knitting, but as far as I’m aware that’s not exactly the asexual stereotype.

Alienating allosexuals will not do the ace community
any favours, guys

 Now, ok, you can be sex negative. You can never want sex, ever. You can want to wait until you’re married. But at no point can you say that your way of thinking should be the only one. You can’t claim superiority over someone for it. You can hold that opinion, and all due respect to you for holding that, but it doesn’t mean you are allowed to claim superiority over someone that engages in consensual sex with as many different partners as they want. In the same way, they’re not able to claim superiority over people who are virgins – by choice or otherwise – because there is nothing wrong with not having sex either.  
 
Some of the aces I found saying ridiculous things were on AVEN, and in general if you read through the threads you can always see the admins and established AVEN users coming down on the ace elitists like a ton of bricks. Generally most of the aces are very friendly, so I was surprised when a user actually posted “do I think I’m morally superior [to allosexuals]? Actually, yes … I don’t try to make other people asexual, but I do point out my opinion of their sexuality.”

Did anyone else facepalm a little, just there? I mean, what opinion of sexuality can you possibly hold that makes it out to be a bad thing? No legitimate criticism for two adults engaging in consensual sex, certainly, especially since they were (as the song goes) “born this way”. It gets even better, though.

They then went on to say “I have this whole theory set up wherein once there were not two genders, and everything on planet Earth thrived happily because they all reproduced asexually. Sex messed everything up. So asexuals may be more like the human ancestor mentally.” Now, correct me if I’m wrong, but asexual reproduction died out before creatures became vertebrates, let alone evolved into humans. So laugh if you want to. It’s a nice idea, but I’m no closer to the human ancestor than anyone else reading this.

Another ace took a slightly different line of asexual elitism. “Behaviour is all that matters.” Remember the gold star gay? Yeah, that would be this. By this logic someone that has never had sex is asexual, whereas someone who has had sex is an allosexual. Obviously whoever you’re sleeping with at the time defines your orientation (none of those icky bisexuals and pansexuals are real obviously – only gay and straight exists).

What flag is this again?

Yeah, that hurt me to write as much as it probably hurt you to read. Because it’s not true. Behaviour doesn’t define who you are – an allosexual can abstain from sex, or an asexual could have sex, and it doesn’t make their orientation any less valid. In the same way, an allosexual can have sex and an asexual could not, and they are still both as respectable as each other. You'd think that a person with an orientation that is frequently overlooked and - for a lot of people - non-existent would steer clear from trying to invalidate other orientations. But apparently not.

Am I getting through to anyone yet? Essentially you’re not allowed to call anyone better than anyone else for the amount of sex they have had compared to you. “Slut” and “prude” may be antonyms, but they both imply that whoever says the insult should be the one that decides how much sex you have. And that is very much not okay. There is also the prevailing view that asexuals and feminists are mutually exclusive groups, due to asexual elitism and the occasional feminist's view that female asexuals and demisexuals only exist to slut shame. We need to integrate the two groups more, does anyone else agree? Because feminism isn't about having sex all the time, it's about a woman's choice to do what she wants with her body. 

Sorry, male aces, that view on feminism kind of alienated you there, but I would definitely say that, if women get insults for both having sex and not having sex (which believe me we do), then men that have less sex definitely have it worse than men that have more sex. There needs to be a general shift away from how sex, or the lack of it, defines you as a person. People need to learn how to play nice.

That’s about all I can say on asexual elitism. I’m conscious that a lot of readers will be wondering why I’ve missed something – if I have, please tweet me or put a comment below. Just don’t agree? Argue with me. It’s your right to do so.