A quick note on identities & labels

[kaberett]

Don't ever label me "sexual". Not ever.

Just. Don't.

(I can probably face explaining in comments, but I don't have words to send a post into the void.)

Comments

[liv]

Meh, sorry to hear that you've had to deal with people being judgemental about your sexual choices.

[kaberett]

I bristle really hard every time "sexual" gets used in opposition to "asexual", because there's just so much baggage tied up with that - so much problematic bullshit in describing someone perceived as a woman with that term, even before you get to "are they poly" or "are they of colour" or whatever - that I cannot. even. (I have just been reminded of this again, by an absolutely horrifying "sexual privilege checklist" that simultaneously erased and added to the oppressions of LGBT folk, disabled folk, people of colour, trauma survivors, etc etc etc ad fucking nauseam, while the author sat around in comments claiming that this was okay because it was only trying to address one axis of oppression.)

[liv]

This is why I have a big problem with privilege lists in general. The whole point of the meme is that if you have "privilege" you get plenty of media representation of people like you, you are assumed to be the unmarked default and not compared against stereotypes of your group etc. It's really, really hard to do that in an intersectional way, so you end up with weird assumptions about who counts as "people like you". With sex it's even more complicated because "lots of media representation" and "unmarked default person" actually suck, because we're in a culture that is utterly messed up about just about everything to do with sex.

It may well be that the only plausible opposite of asexual is "not asexual", clumsy though that is. All the baggage around sexual means that even with a prefix it's pretty problematic; funnily enough people don't usually self-identify as transsexual or bisexual or homosexual, but prefer trans, bi or gay. Even asexual itself often mutates to A or ace.

[pretty_panther]

I'm sorry you are having problems with people saying that. I'm asexual but I don't feel that every label in this world requires an 'opposite' that HAS to be stamped on people. Life is fluid and not everything can be A or B and nothing else. People suck and I will poke them with sticks for you. :3

[milkymoon]

That's never really gone over well with me either. There are lots of stereotypes and problems that arise from labelling someone 'sexual' too, especially if they've got a history of dealing with sexual harassment or abuse.

[azurelunatic]

I hear from the rather more aware and empathetic trenches of ace!tumblr that "allosexual" is the current binary pole linked with "asexual".

[birke]

I like this explanation of allosexual, in particular:

HOWEVER, allosexual is not the opposite of asexual like ‘cis’ is the opposite of ‘trans’. ‘Allo’ is the opposite of ‘auto’. Allosexual means having sexual attraction outside of themselves, autosexual means only having sexual attraction for yourself (and it was used to described asexuals who masturbated, but it’s kind of a stupid word).

Sorry about the ableist language there, but that passage contains the reason I like allosexual. The absence of sexual attraction to others is what makes us asexual, so someone who is not-asexual should have a word that means "attracted to others." Allo-sexual, other-sexual, boom there you go.

[tim]

I'm fine with someone coming up with a single word that means "interested in / enjoys sex with >= 0 other partners", but "allosexual" to me has connotations of "allopathic" (that is, term that quacks use to describe medicine that isn't quackery).

[highlyeccentric]

It has a // term in "allitistic", the word used in some circles for "not autistic".

[tim]

Yeah, that bugs me for the same reason (although maybe it didn't originate from the same place as "allopathic"... it sounds like that to me, though).

[azurelunatic]

Well, the "allo-" bit in both cases is "other", via Greek roots. Heterosexual is already taken. Ceterotic?

[tim]

I like the sound of "Ceterotic". It does sound a bit like whale sex, but it's certainly no worse than the endless kitchenware jokes provoked by "pansexual" :-)

[silveradept]

At this point, I think "sexual" as a descriptor requires a prefix to be of any use at all. Much to the horror of the Moral Guardians. Dealing with the Cultural Default will be more difficult.

[shehasathree]

:s

[kaberett]

(I have rechecked this post because of Reasons; if you would like me to expand then I can.)

[shehasathree]

Definitely interested in hearing more if you'd like to tell me more about it. But only if you want to.

[kaberett]

[Erm. Angry, but not with you.]

1. I think it is intensely problematic to apply the label "sexual" to people indiscriminately, especially when the people you're applying it to are (as in my case) read-as-female and poly, because of all the bullshit slut-shaming it drags with it as baggage (never mind applying it to PoC). Also all the stuff about "reducing people to their sex drives", which is fundamentally gross and dehumanising and Not Okay (especially with how often it is done to... yep, people from marginalised groups, cf "gay lifestyle" being blocked by the UK's ~porn filter~.)

2. I have a Lot Of Feelings about how I have 0 interest in claiming any labels along the lines of "demisexual" or "grey-A" because of Reasons (to do with broken cultural ideas of relationships-going-the-way-Hollywood-portrays-them, even though I am pretty certain this isn't normal at all), but I resent people labelling me inaccurately within their own paradigm because they want to claim I have privilege that I don't [and, to be clear, that I am deeply suspicious about the existence of at all, because I think it's actually better described by combinations of misogyny, heterosexism, etc].

3. I have a fucktonne of issues with the way that the (Internet) asexual community keeps churning out lists of "sexual privilege" (fuck off fuck off fuck off) that completely erase the lived experience and oppressions of anyone who isn't a straight white temporarily-able trauma-free cis man, "but that's okay because we're only talking about one axis" no it isn't you are contributing to oppression.

4. Which is actually what prompted this post - I got linked to another fucking awful checklist that completely erased and added to the oppression and difficulties I experience as a queer trans autistic crip with significant trauma and dysphoria issues, never mind erasing my experiences as poly (which I note I am not comfortable lumping under the title "oppression").

5. Fucking single-issue campaigners gleefully ignoring intersectionality and claiming that it's legitimate to do so even while actively causing harm, basically.