When I first heard the word asexual over a decade ago, as a teenager dealing with the twin manifestations of compulsory sexuality that are purity culture and hookup culture, it was a weight off of my back. It was a light in the darkness that said you do not ever have to compromise on this boundary. Not now, not later, not ever. You can live a life where your body only belongs to you and no one else can tell you what to do with it.

This is the most important thing we can fight for, in my opinion. A world where everyone can do whatever they want with their own bodies forever— including never have sex.

There is no sexual freedom without indefinite refusal. Those who choose indefinite refusal are not your enemy. You only stand to gain from recognizing and fighting for us.

The thing about how when I tell people offline that I'm aroace they usually go "Oh, I didn't know that was a thing!" is like. It’s a good response, it’s good that the response I get generally isn’t outright aphobic, but it reminds me just how much they don't know. Like. The sheer range of the aro and ace spectrums and the experiences relating to attraction that I see people in those communities talk about, the amount of breaking down of attraction and relationships, the amount of discussion about ALLLLLLLLL the hecking nuance both of those can have, and like. So many people literally Do Not Know that even the words "aromantic" and "asexual" exist. And just "doesn't feel attraction" is the easiest and most basic thing here to understand. It’s the tip of the iceberg. It’s the tip of a really really freaking huge iceberg. And plenty of allos have a hard time wrapping their heads around even that, let alone all the many more identities and many many more kinds of experiences on these spectrums. So many people literally do not know that not feeling attraction the way they do is a thing. So many people, like, the VAST majority of the population, are entirely confined to this incredibly freaking limited ONE standard concept of how attraction and relationships can work that seems mandated for everycreature. So many people don't even know that anything outside of that exists. And SO MUCH outside of that can exist. It's some straight-up allegory of the cave junk.

Demisexuality exists under the asexuality spectrum because it describes an experience of rare, conditional sexual attraction which only occurs under the circumstances of a close bond. While it’s true many people don’t know they’re demisexual, not everyone is demisexual.

((btw if you like this please reblog this crowdfunding post!!! It’s time sensitive. please and thank you!))

Asexuality, under which demisexuality is housed, describes an experience of little to no sexual attraction. Aces (short for the asexuality spectrum, also abbreviated as acespec) may or may not be aromantic - meaning they may or may not experience little to no romantic attraction. Allosexual means someone isn’t ace, and alloromantic means someone isn’t aro (similar shorthand for aromantic spectrum, also abbreviated as arospec). Here when I say “allo(s)” I will be referring to example persons who are both alloromantic and allosexual.

Demisexuals don’t have sexual attraction at all to anyone without a close bond. It is also only felt towards that person because of the circumstances required to experience sexual attraction. The sexual attraction here doesn’t happen outside of these conditions.

This isn’t the same as experiencing sexual attraction regularly (as an allosexual, not ace, person) but choosing not to act on it before emotional trust is established. Sexual attraction and action can be intertwined, but they don’t have to be.

People always think “sexual attraction and action aren’t the same” is about asexuality and sex favorable aces— and it absolutely can be. But I think most of the time it applies to allosexuals, who don’t act on most sexual attraction they experience, as it’s part of everyday life. I think this is why so many allos don’t understand that demisexuals truly don’t experience sexual attraction at all to anyone until a close bond, if then. They see “oh, that person, like me, waited to have sex until there was trust. Sexual attraction here must mean having sex.”

For the demisexual, sexual attraction is a new, distinct experience, as it only occurs under a specific bond. If a demi is alloromantic and attraction forms towards a romantic partner, it may appear that the act of sex is tied to romantic love, or ‘waiting for the right person’.

This ‘proves’ to the allo, who doesn’t understand that the demisexual didn’t have sexual attraction at all before a bond with the person in question, that demisexuality is about waiting for the right person, but experiencing sexual attraction regularly, as they do. The allo is also assuming the demisexual “just needed to meet the right person”. But the demisexual is only experiencing sexual attraction to the person in question, and not in the everyday manner that the allo is describing in their dismissal of demisexuality. Here the allo is projecting their own experience of waiting to have sex onto what the demisexual is trying so hard to describe. The allo ironically believes action and attraction must be linked, and simultaneously that everyone has sexual attraction (is allosexual).

The reason has to do with allonormativity, amatanormativity, and compulsory sexuality. Both the demi and the allo have been taught that everyone has romantic and sexual attraction, that whether it’s okay to have casual sex is gendered, and that most people don’t have casual sex. To the allo outside looking in, there isn’t any need to differentiate the experience when sex is finally had, because they were just waiting to be in love to have sex. The demisexual isn’t different from them in any way whatsoever in this view because everyone has sexual attraction they don’t act on.

This misunderstanding is also often gendered, specifically in a way that’s cisheterosexist and that reflects ideas of purity culture - namely that all women* wait to have sex and don’t really want or enjoy it, all men* need sex, and that women exist to provide sexual pleasure. (*men and *women are used here to demonstrate the false idea where gender can only align with sex designated at birth. This ignores that presentation doesn’t equal gender and that trans and nonbinary people do exist. This transphobia is common with those who dismiss asexuality).

Asexuality and demisexuality also force the allo to consider that some people they find attractive will never feel the same way, which is a painful ego blow, as part of allonormativity is that someone’s worth is tied to whether they are sexually attractive to other people.

These misunderstandings are a result of not wanting to challenge that internal status quo. People will do anything to keep from being uncomfortable, even if it’s hurting them. But these misunderstandings don’t erase the spectrum of asexuality, or that demisexuals exist within it.

There are people who will never experience sexual attraction. There are people who don’t experience sexual attraction at all unless they form a particular close bond with another person. It’s not about allos, and many allos get very offended about that. But being ace, no matter if sexual attraction is ever felt, or if the ace is favorable towards participating in sex, is not about allos. It’s just not. Being ace is a fundamentally different way of experiencing and interacting with a world in which sexual attraction is expected.

This doesn’t mean that waiting to have sex is wrong. This is to say that there is a fundamental difference in waiting to have sex and not experiencing sexual attraction except under a select circumstance, and then only experiencing it in that limited way. Asexuality and everything housed with in it, including demisexuality, will challenge how you think about sex and sexual attraction. That will not be comfortable. But consider that it’s not about you. Because if everyone were demisexual, we would live in a very different world.

So I know calling attention to compulsory sexuality within the queer community is not something you should do if you want allies as an ace person but that stupid fucking "art got boring in the 80s because all the Cool Fun Horny Gays Died and everyone left over was a Boring Sexless Vanilla Prude" Fran Liebowitz/James Somerton thing is just. Wow. Thank you for telling me that not being a sexual being means my art is never going to be important or transgressive in any meaningful way, dude. Thanks. I had no idea. Clearly I should just stop making art because the fact that I'm sex-averse means it's never going to be fun enough for you. Fuck you for real.

I didn't see anything from somerton until about a month ago when he popped up in my recs and I ended up binging his content for about 2 days, but something kept being off and I noticed some of the lies/ignorance, and there was something really dismissive and weird about how he talked about aspecs and women in particular... I stopped watching him cause I watched one of you guys' podcast and realized I also just felt like crap after his videos.

I did end up getting his rwrb video in my recs when it came out cause of the binge and I just remember leaving a comment about the way he talked about aces in it. It was especially upsetting seeing people in the comments who were simply happy he mentioned aspecs at all. He replied to me just saying his cowriter was ace. I don't reply to youtube comments but I just remember wanting to point out that same co-writer he was using as a shield said aces don't face discrimination or conversion therapy, and in that video wrote that aces have to have sex to find out they don't like it. Being something doesn't make you instantly know everything about it, as somerton himself demonstrates with his ignorant comments about gay history.

I'm not really one of his victims since I avoided him as soon as I found him, but I feel bad for all the people he tricked and/or guilted into believing him. I hope some other creators make videos exposing the weird way he manipulated the queer community, cause I think a lot of young folks could use a breakdown of it.

Anyways I just wanted to finish by saying I love you guys' work and learning from you. You helped me understand why certain phrases make me upset, and that and watching your podcast back to back with his videos helped me figure out what I didn't like about Somerton, so you helped protect me from him and not convince myself I was just being Weird as I often do when I get Bad Vibes from someone.

Thank you so much for reaching out <3

It's so fascinating that you stopped watching Somerton after finding us. We've tried to keep things as professional as possible these last 2 years by only citing directly harmful things he's done to us and direct members of our community, and even then it was sparingly and as kind as possible.

When we first spoke with him about including Asexual representation in his future Telos endeavors, he assured us that not only was there already an Ace in the writers' room, but that two real, fully-fleshed out Ace characters were already being written. This was encouraging! After all, we had no way of knowing if he was the kind of cis gay man who loathes Aces or doesn't view us as queer. Since this didn't seem to be the case and rep is important, we supported him. We now deeply regret not doing our research on him first.

Even before his video "The Queer Erasure of Asexuality", we started watching a few of his YouTube videos for the first time and some of the subtext was NOT kind to our community. Subtle things that we'd see get repeated by his fans over and over again, like how queer art is bad these days because all the "artists" and the "exciting queers" who "really lived" died in the AIDS crisis. Or the implication that the Interview with the Vampire reboot was *more queer* because the vampires actually had gay sex on screen, despite this being a complete departure from the source material and neglecting the fact that Anne Rice's vampires have always been undeniably queer *and also* sexless. In fact, we didn't say his name, but we did mention some vague "bad takes" we saw about the series in our podcast episodes 75 & 76 The Triumphs and Failures of AMC’s Interview with the Vampire Part 1 and Part 2...At least some of those came from James.

We did not see his rwrb video, because we had long given up on him by that point, but it is not at all surprising to hear that he had bad takes and also hid behind Nick once again to shield himself from any criticism. It was very much his MO, and yet we're also certain we've heard him chastise straight women for using the "I have a gay friend" defense.

It is so good to hear that our podcast has been helpful to you. There are FAR too many Aces who are willing to let bad behavior or ill-informed takes slide just because someone with a decent following noticed us. We deserve so much better.

"Being asexual can provide these powerful new perspectives, but the frameworks have limited power when they are still so hidden. Learning about and claiming asexuality can be transformative, but the world won’t be a safe and positive place for aces—or for anyone—until compulsory sexuality itself is dismantled. We do not dismantle compulsory sexuality by waiting for each person to catch up and then starting over again. We do it by fighting for structural change.

Fighting compulsory sexuality does not mean that everything must be desexualized but rather that the rights of the other side must be prioritized too. It means, as Wake Forest scholar Kristina Gupta writes, 'challenging the unearned privileges that accrue to sexual people and sexual relationships and . . . eliminating discrimination against nonsexual people and nonsexual relationships.' It means resisting pharmaceutical companies that sell desire drugs by using the language of sickness. Creating more books and movies with diverse ace characters and themes. Teaching therapists and doctors not to assume that a lack of sexual attraction is a sickness (while also not holding ableist beliefs about sickness). Getting rid of amatonormativity in marriage law. Asexuality should be discussed in sex education, which can be as simple as teaching students that never developing sexual attraction is fine. The ace perspective on consent must be a universal concern."

-Angela Chen, Ace

Compulsory sexuality/amatonormativity real life example:

I was telling a friend at work about my divorce situation, and one of their first thoughts was - “So when do you think you’ll get remarried?” Gave me the ‘you’ll change your mind’ when I told them emphatically that will NEVER happen. (In truth, if it did happen, it would be a lesbian QPR, but I’m not ready to be that honest🤭.).

A lawyer I consulted also stressed to me that I’d want sex and dating again once I got over the trauma - hard NO. I’m traumatized, yes, but this has always been my identity even if I struggled for years to accept it.

Why is wanting to be alone and independent a bad thing if it makes me happy? Why are people so uncomfortable with the idea that I don’t want sex if I… dislike sex…? This society of ours is seriously messed up, isn’t it?

Hey tumblr, My aromantic ass has a question for you---

Tinglies in this case mean--The sparkly, excited feeling that comes from spending time with another person, them showing you thoughtfulness or affection, them complimenting you, etc. This is not an April fools. I was talking to my roommate about ~Romantic Attraction~ once again, and she defined the difference between platonic and romantic as "You get the tinglies in romantic attraction and want to spend more time with them." Then I confused the shit out of her by confessing that I get the tinglies for friends too, and it's part of why I can't parse the difference between romantic and platonic love other than intensity and what you agree to do with each other.

In this era of post-feminism, the utterly reasonable claim that women should be afforded sexual freedom – that they should be able to declare their desire loudly, to be perverse and lustful and up-for-it – slid into the more dubious insistence that women are and must be so. And something of this insistence – that in the name of sexual equality, women must hold their end up and be assertive, declamatory, unashamed – found its way into the affirmative and enthusiastic consent initiatives.

Critics then and now – Katie Roiphe and Laura Kipnis among them – have worried about the sexual timidity and fear conjured within consent culture. I’m arguing instead that the current consent rhetoric has taken something from post-feminism’s positioning of sexual uncertainty and fear as abject – from its framing of sexual hesitation as belonging to history. To be a contemporary and empowered sexual subject in consent culture, one has to be able to speak one’s desires out loud with confidence. Silence does not belong with us here; it belongs to the past and to the abject female subject of yore.

from Tomorrow Sex Will Be Good Again: Women and Desire in the Age of Consent by Katherine Angel

things that are imaginary according to Dean Winchester:

unicorns

Bigfoot

angels

virgins

Everything you know about sex and asexuality is (probably) wrong.

The notion that everyone wants sex–and that we all have to have it–is false. It’s intertwined with our ideas about capitalism, race, gender, and queerness. And it impacts the most marginalized among us. For asexual folks, it means that ace and A-spec identity is often defined by a queerness that’s not queer enough, seen through a lens of perceived lack: lack of pleasure, connection, joy, maturity, and even humanity.

In this exploration of what it means to be Black and asexual in America today, Sherronda J. Brown offers new perspectives on asexuality. She takes an incisive look at how anti-Blackness, white supremacy, patriarchy, heteronormativity, and capitalism enact harm against asexual people, contextualizing acephobia within a racial framework in the first book of its kind. Brown advocates for the “A” in LGBTQIA+, affirming that to be asexual is to be queer–despite the gatekeeping and denial that often says otherwise.

With chapters on desire, f*ckability, utility, refusal, and possibilities, Refusing Compulsory Sexuality discusses topics of deep relevance to ace and a-spec communities. It centers the Black asexual experience–and demands visibility in a world that pathologizes and denies asexuality, denigrates queerness, and specifically sexualizes Black people.

Me: *looks at passing photo or video on screen* 

My brain: Hmm. Based on the societal information we've gathered, that person fills the standard official requirements for Attractiveness TM. You're not attracted, right? 

Me: What? No, we’ve been over this, I’m aroace.

My brain: No? Are you sure? Are you positive? Just to check, here's an image of you kissing them. I’m plugging you into it right now. How do you feel? Heck, maybe some imagined physical sensations just to be extra certain. Mouth on mouth, hands in various places on torso, all that jazz. What's it feel like? 

Me: *loud noises of disgust, pushes away as hard as I can* 

My brain: Hmm. We got a fraction of a second of that to assess your feelings on before you shut it down, which really isn’t much. Should we try again?

Me: *vomiting all over the floor* 

My brain: ...That's a no? 

Me: FRICK YOU.

I have a love-hate relationship with the song 'Brown Skin Girl' by Beyoncé, Blue Ivy, Saint JHN and Wizkid. I love the message. I love the music video. I love the uplifting of so many skin types and afrocultural qualities. I kinda vibe with it. But I hate the poor lyricism; I hate the inclusion of how desirable we are to men.

Now, I understand the concept they may have been trying to put forward: that we're just as beautiful as every other-skinned woman. It is a great to remind those who struggle with feeling like they'll never find love if they look a certain way.

But good lord, can black female-aligned people be affirmed in our own right without being reminded men will find us hot! I'm aromantic and asexual but this is an issue for all brown skin girls and femmes.

Can't there be an amazing, empowering song in which we're reminded of our magnificence just for existing so the worth of one's beauty can stop being chained to how attractive we are to opposite sex?

Just one.

Every time I try to talk about aphobia or amatonormativity or compulsory sexuality in paganism/occultism I inevitably get people saying things like "but I'm aromantic and I worship Aphrodite" or "but I'm asexual and Beltane is my favorite holiday" and I just want to be like. okay? good for you. I am aroace and identified as a Thelemite for a while. that doesn't mean Thelema accepted me as an aroace person, or that the pagan/occult communities as a whole aren't really, really bad about assuming allo as default at best and actively hostile to non-allo existences at worst. that doesn't mean we don't need to have conversations about the place of aro and ace people within these communities or about inclusive pagan theologies.

...anyway. Beltane is, allegedly, about creativity, not just sexual fertility.

so I'm spending it working on an ace pride shawl.