A Thought: A Acenegative Ace?

[Nøxesis]

A thought occurred to me while I was in the kitchen doing kitcheny things (I like to think of myself as a philosopher-in-training, so these things occur often), and it stuck until today.

What if there is an anti-asexual asexual?

Just a lingering thought that I thought to bring up. Thoughts?

Man. I said "thought" a lot. Hey, that rhymed!

...

*walks awkwardly off to awkward corner*

[Ciri]

Pifs one of them!

[KAGU143]

I hadn't thought of it that way, but you might be right, Ciri. (PiF is taking a break from Apositive, otherwise I think he would be all over that comment like white on rice! )

Nox, there are any number of asexuals who stand in judgement of other asexuals and disparage them for not being "true" asexuals. The reasons will vary, but it's usually because they want to re-define the definition of asexual in order to exclude those whose asexual experience threatens to invalidate their own. Not that anybody's opinion can invalidate anybody's else's sexuality, of course, but those who are plagued by self-doubt can sometimes try to twist the definition, and then make others agree with them in order to boost their own confidence.

Examples that the exclusionists will use to narrow the definition of asexuality include: whether or not others masturbate, whether or not they're sure that they've always lacked sexual attraction, whether or not they have other things going on, like autism, gender dysphoria, a personality disorder, a genuine hormone imbalance, a past history of abuse, an actual revulsion toward sex, or anything else.
None of those things actually determine whether or not a person is asexual, but some people want it to be that way.

Now . . . an anti-asexual asexual? If not an exclusionist, then maybe they would be an asexual who doesn't like other asexuals, erm . . . just because?

There's an awkward corner? I wish I had known that - I could have used it a lot of times! *makes mental note*

[flergalwit]

Well there are certainly homophobic gay people so I'd expect it to be possible for aces too...

[Nøxesis]

Nox, there are any number of asexuals who stand in judgement of other asexuals and disparage them for not being "true" asexuals. The reasons will vary, but it's usually because they want to re-define the definition of asexual in order to exclude those whose asexual experience threatens to invalidate their own. Not that anybody's opinion can invalidate anybody's else's sexuality, of course, but those who are plagued by self-doubt can sometimes try to twist the definition, and then make others agree with them in order to boost their own confidence.



There's an awkward corner? I wish I had known that - I could have used it a lot of times! *makes mental note*

I know that. I meant an asexual that was completely, 100% acenegative, like some of the allosexuals on Tumblr recently with the whole "ace discourse" thing... *disappointed sigh*

What if there is an asexual out there like that, who is completely acenegative and maybe even in denial?

How would that affect the asexual community as a whole? If an "insider" is against what they are inside, what would happen?

This is all just speculation, of course. And an interesting discussion.


And sure, you can join me in my awkward corner! I'm in there practically all the time, so you'll never be lonely!

[CatBunny]

You mean an asexual Daffyd Thomas? "i'm the only ace in this village!"