In other (rather random) news: http://queersunited.blogspot.com/2009/01/march-of-married-penguins.html

All together now! Awwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww...

Also, penguins are really gay.

http://jatgab.blogspot.com/2009/02/asexuals-united-give-me-break.html

I feel so angry about this. I had to comment... possibly one of the angrier ones there.

I HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE how I'm not a 'proper gay' because I don't define LGBT.

I STILL EXPERIENCE HOMOPHOBIA!! When I kissed that girl in that club, I was approached by a randomer who asked if all lesbians do that. She's bi, I'm queer-ase. JUST BECAUSE IT HAS A DIFFERENT NAME DOES NOT MEAN IT IS ENTIRELY ALIEN AND THUS NOT YOUR BATTLE TOO! Because we can 'pass' as straight does not mean we are, and it does not mean that we are happy!

I am FUCKING FED UP of this bullshit, fed up fed up fed up. I have been faced with outright hostility, lied to and belittled by my pride group this year because I'm not LGBT. Sure, I like the ladies, but that's not good enough.








SO ANGRY.


 

Anger will help me write.

I am angry that society doesn't accept me. It is unfair that people like me - people who aren't perceived as heteronormative - gay, bi, trans, queer, pan, ase and everyone else - have not enough representation as 'normal' people. We're up to 10% of the population, yet on television we're still taboo or unheard of, and rarely not sensationalised or stereotyped. It makes me angry that almost every representation of a healthy, desirable or sexy relationship in the media: film, literature, theatre, tv, advertising, magazines... and if it is mentioned, it's in terms of gayness first. The legitimacy of people to love each other gets ignored.

I am angry that so many people find themselves alienated against their own will from society because of this, and I'm angry that society turns it back on so many people. Feeling that society doesn't appreciate or care about you, that you are superfluous, that you are ineffective and have no purpose in society, because you cannot see how you can change it - it faces many people when confronted with a societal structure that doesn't include you. I am angry about the ridiculously heightened levels of suicide amongst LGB people, and the rate for trans people - up to one in two - is so shocking it makes me want to cry. I am angry that low self-esteem is so common amongst LGBTQA people - and I'm angry that from the scarce scientific sources I have, that ase people come out worst. Almost a quarter of the posters on AVEN have depression, and only 30% can happily say they've never had it.

I am angry that difference makes people fear. I am angry that my lack of attraction to people makes people inform me that I am a peadophile. That I am incapable of love. That I 'probably could and should be fixed'. That they are entitled to know intimate details about my sex life. That they pity me. That I'm making it up. That I'm mentally ill. I am angry that other LGBT people have been accused similarly.

I am angry that people who appear non-straight in the eyes of others can suffer at any moment from bizarre homophobia. I am angry that whenever I see a gay couple be affectionate in public, or someone comes out, I can't help thinking that they are brave, or to check the crowd for danger.

But most of all, I'm angry that LGBT people don't stick together. Bisexual people suffer biphobia from the gay community a lot - too straight, not gay enough. 'Greedy' 'cheating' 'promiscuous' 'fickle' 'phase' 'manipulative' - not just straight stereotypes. It's gay people I've seen be most demeaning to bi people. Trans people get almost as much crap from the gay community as from the rest of society, with the added insult of having stood by gay people since the beginning. Groups like Stonewall UK and Cymru refuse to acknowledge transgender people for no good reason it seems, whilst appropriating the name of a riot in which trans people were instrumental, and nominating a journalist for their awards next month who has made blatant transphobic comments in the past.

I am angry that the National Union of Students LGBT does not recognise anyone who is not strictly LGBT as worthy of their support, endorsement or time. I am angry that I am summarily dismissed from their presence because I am not LGBT, although I have so, so many of their issues in common. I am angry that certain members of my pride committee want to change the name to 'LGBT' - not because of their reasoning, but because they don't seem to have realised how important pride is to me - as pride. As a place where all the stupid politics is irrelevant and it's just a safe place for people to hang out in, where sexual orientation is a non-issue. Pride at it's best symbolised what I want society to be like - caring deeply about everything except your gender, or your partner's,

If you remember my thrilling possible appearance with asexuality on Channel 4, this is the minor followup. I was invited to be a part a studio audience, be shown small sections of the show, and then asked questions on the themes brought up by them. 

It was overall, a good day. Very exciting, being on tv and all, and some of the people were very interesting to chat to.

Unfortunately, I got the feeling that someone really conscientious and wanting to educate came up with the show, collected some really good material, and then it got handed to some writers who just wanted something cheap and mass produced to fill a slot as soon as possible.

It made me sad that a highly intelligent group of people were herded into the room and split up, girls on one side, boys on the other. That was quite uncomfortable (especially as I wanted to sit next to Micky from the Queer Youth Network, who I'd just met!) and utterly unnecessary. It made the uneven boy:girl ratio obvious, made us feel about 12 and in school sex ed, made it boys vs girls and very hetero- and gender-normative, which I detested. (I made a very strong point about the fact that if there are any transpeople going to be there for the sexuality section, this will make them feel very uncomfortable and asking anyone to 'sit in the middle' would be more than insulting. They did have unisex toilets though.) There were a lot of comments about 'what guys do with a girl' and 'how to please your boyfriend, ladies!' which made the space less welcoming for people who aren't in a sex-filled male/female relationship. Once it became obvious that not everyone was straight ('I worry about STIs' 'Don't you worry about getting a girl pregnant?' '...Girl?') the presenter responded by laughing and by trying to appear open minded from then on by stuttering the possibility of a person's partner not being the opposite gender on the end of questions, but it was a very conscious effort that made it seem forced and a little awkward. There remained a great deal of 'guys, you do this. Oh my!' 'Girls, dealing with men, honestly,' and all that. Very frustrating. Of course, the fact I was a virgin was very surprising, because everyone over the age of 18 *must* have had sex (a very unfair and untrue view!).

Also, some of the filler audience members (mainly on the guys side, alas) were pulled from the street, or even the pub, given alcohol and expected to be intelligent. They weren't (and in some cases became abusive) and sometimes made terribly ignorant and giggly, and generally made the guys look bad. It makes me sad that this was so.

It annoyed me that it didn't focus solely on sex ed, and instead tried to talk about spicing up your sex life, talking about bikini waxing and stripping for your partner. All very appealing on tv, and all very forgettable and done-before and frivolous. It also frustrated the professionals and made some of them leave when they could still have said some good relevant stuff. All of this stuff was terrible: 'Would you do this for your man?' Um... well, what if it's for a woman? What if you don't want to go out with one? The burlesque dancing bit was the worst... 'Women, ever done a sexy dance or performed for him? Men, ever received one? Like it?' Why couldn't men perform in the bedroom, or wear something silly or sexy? Why should it be presumed that women must do something to titillate a man or he'll be bored and leave them? Definite thumbs down on that, and I said as much, since the presenter seemed utterly unaware that this was possible.

It also did a good old 'slut' judgement which was less than brilliant. 'I'm not judging you but...' which was, again, uncomfortable and unfair. The presenter did seem to be very good at getting people to speak, but not good at keeping things unbiased and safe and comfortable.

The relevant stuff was very good; I just wish that it had been more of it taken more seriously. It skimmed over real issues like the fact condoms usually fail because men do not know they should wear an appropriately sized one. It also discussed STIs briefly, but it then failed to discuss HIV, or mention the scarily high rates of STIs in young people, or in middle aged people, instead focusing on whether kids should watch porn by discussing 2girls1cup. I mean, that's not even porn to most people, it's just shock.

I feel I got to make my views known - that sex is not damaging as of itself but in it's abuse, that 'slut vs stud' is bad, that men are human too and defining gendered behaviour was not a good thing to do, that early or late sex is not good or bad, it is if you have a responsible, positive experience and you and your partner(s) are happy with yourselves.

It was more interesting talking to the people there and finding these very openminded and interesting individuals with fascinating knowledge and experiences! I talked to some amazing people and wish I'd thought earlier in the day to ask about asexuality. Of the two teen sexual health educators I asked, one had had people enquire about not fancying anyone and would have referred them on to have a physical exam and then be given a psychological assessment to see what caused it. The other one hadn't but would encourage people to discover what feels best for them and not try and fit in with everyone else (brilliant guy! Said some good points). I liked both of them and they both seemed very interested in asexuality and definitely agreed to look it up. I also talked to another woman who worked with teens, but those who had caught herpes, so it wouldn't really have been about things like that. She advised me that I'd find someone hot one day, once I feel ready to cope with a relationship. (Way to go believing me!) She was also being interested in asexuality though (I think she'll look it up on the internet to see how repressed and damaged we are. Joys.)

It was intriguing how little asexuality was recognised, how a lack of sexuality was thus pathologised, but how eager people were to LEARN about it, and that made me very happy.

Afterwards, Micky and I went and explored a small area of London then, and I really enjoyed his company. Yay! Definitely meet up again some time, and discuss lots more sexual health business.

I was going to post about (and still am), my glee at finding a reference to asexuality in 'Homophobia: A History' by Byrne Fone. While discussing the ancient Greeks and Romans, he describes Lucian of Samosata's play the 'Erotes', which describes four men. Theomnestus likes men and women, Charicles likes the ladies and is described by as possibly the first recorded homophobe. Callicratidas likes young men. They call upon Lycinus, the narrator, to be an impartial judge as to who is best, 'since you incline to neither passion'. (Homosexuality wins, just about.) It is a good bit of evidence to throw back at people who refuse to believe that asexuality's been around for very long, but I've realised quite how much I look out for asexual characters, mentions or role models.

I watched John Barrowman's 'Story of Me' about (mainly biological) reasons for being gay, and got a bit saddened by his constant need to be biologically different, as if that validated how he personally felt, when surely biology was irrelevant to that. But am I not doing something similar? Searching through history, fiction and people's personal lives in the hope of finding someone like me, to validate my existence by feeling the same way?

That seems rather unhealthy, but I know I'm not alone; lots of queer people feel the need to find people like them to identify with. Society tells us we're supposed to be in straight relationships, so we consciously or unconsciously look for examples where this doesn't happen? Gay celebrities, trans movies, lesbian tv characters, bi singers, queer fiction...

I just wish there were more ase ones. There's a handful of ase 'celebs' that I've never heard of (a comedian and an author, and then people who're famous within the ase community like David Jay), but none that other people have really heard of.

As for fiction, I'm pretty fond of Wall-E and Dr Who. But it'd be nice to have some thoroughly human and explicit examples out there. That's why the asexual character in Shortland Street is so exciting. OK, now we need a human and *cool* role model...

I am now awaiting the first movie to deal with asexuality. I may have to write the screenplay...

I've heard people say that places like AVEN are places people go to hide from their sexuality; they go there to be 'indoctrinated' somehow into not being sexual people, beacuse they're cut off from all other options. As David Jay says - you don't go to AVEN and just stop talking.

Thread like this show just how unrealistic it is. It shows the true spirit of AVEN.

It's an amazing place for self-discovery.

It's something that ase, gay and trans people do. 

It's understood as important for bi, gay and trans people - after all, if you're going to be true to yourself, your friends and love ones are going to notice, and it would be sensible to get them used to the idea beforehand. It's also seen as a scary, scary thing to do. This is, again, very understandable, considering some people's reactions and feelings towards bi, gay and trans people.

But I've had many people ask what the big deal is for ase people to come out. I've been told that there is no point - it's a lack, not something you need to go on about. Who needs to tell anyone about their lack of sex life? (Thanks for reducing asexuality to not having sex, but yea.) If you're heteroromantic, surely it's only your partner who 'needs to know'. You can appear to be completely normal and heterosexual (again, thanks for claiming that anything non-hetero is 'abnormal').

Why is it scary for an ase person to come out? I was terrified when I mumbled to my mother when I was 15 that I might be asexual. There is little prejudice against asexuality. There are no people saying we shouldn't be allowed to adopt children, or have a position in the church, or marry (as long as it looks 'normal'). But what we have in common with other queer people is that it changes people's perceptions. I've seen people back away from friends who have come out gay - they're now seen differently. Ase people are not backed away from - we are not scary, we do not unsettle many people. But we are pitied. Some people find the concept of asexuality as something that can be 'fixed' something that can be overcome, something that can be changed so that we can be normal. We do not know how fun it is to be sexual, so we must be turned - and if we can't we are missing out on something, and we should duly be pitied. Or maybe we just aren't trying hard enough to experience and enjoy attraction, and should thus be patronised.

I suppose it boils down to being put into people's shoes - some people find the idea of suddenly becoming gay gross, terrifying, shameful (considering what society has told them over the years) but the find the idea of being ase depressing and lonely, so they pity us.

In terms of perception, ase people certainly don't get it as badly, but it's still scary to reveal something so personal and opinion changing about yourself. We're also objects of curiosity at the moment - almost alien, and thus we become the focus of a lot of questioning, a lot of disbelief, and I often find myself defending the very thoughts that go around in my head, because the person I'm talking to refuses to believe me when I say how they work. I find my own experiences discounted, as the other person feels they know better than I do about my very being, since I am 'broken' in some way, and they are not.

This opinion needs to change. There is not only one way to feel. People are mostly getting over the must-have-partner-of-the-opposite-sex thing now, although there is still plenty of latent and more blatant homophobia about the place. One person is not more 'correct' or 'normal' in their tastes, attractions and feelings just because they are in conflict with another person's, and that person should not have to edit their innate self to be more 'acceptable' to a majority view. We are all very different, and it's important that society understands this.

We are all presumed heterosexual in a world where plenty of people clearly aren't. Society pressurises us to be as 'normal' as possible, and to stray from this worldview is worrying, and may not be tolerated - and all too often, that's all it is, tolerated. I'm humoured in my feelings and beliefs, they are not embraced.

The more people stand up and deny the narrow world-view that everyone must be straight, cisgendered, monogamous, in a long-term relationship, not be too kinky, not be too vanilla, not sleeping around (only if you're female of course) and say that it's fine to be all or none of these things, the freer and happier all of those non-conforming people can be. And that's one reason why I'm out.

It's a very interesting and crushingly depressing book. I feel very lucky to be alive today.

Like all sensible readers of a big fat textbook, I started in the middle with the end of the renaissance, and I'm nearing the end of the Victorian era.

Some fun facts about the treatment of 'convicted sodomites' 
Henry the 8th made sodomy a secular rather than religious crime to help get rid of those monasteries and steal all their money.
Gay people actually did get burned to death... including the women.
There's all these lists of executions... One of the ones that touched me the most was the strangling and burning of a 14 year old in Holland, 1731. 'Remained silent while sentenced.'
People were really scarily homophobic... really scary. I'd always imagined that being put in the stocks was a humiliating but mainly harmless punishment - you would get pilloried for being gay if they couldn't prove it in the 17 and 1800s, and some people died, because it became a stoning.
You could be executed until 1871 in this country. Then it was reduced to life penal colonies and such like. And re-named 'gross indecency with another male' which is blimmin vague and thus very dangerous.

...

I can see why there is such in-born fear and hatred in some people with this much precedent. 

But it's changing.

Some of the quotes from these nineteenth century guys are amazing. 1891, and John Addington Symonds said: 

'If I have taken any vow at all, it is to fight for the rights of an innocent, harmless, downtrodden group of outraged personalities. ... We maintain that we have the right to exist after the fashion that nature made us. And if we cannot alter your laws, we shall go on breaking them'
A Problem in Modern Ethics

Oooh... that's good. 
And ridiculously brave.