weexist-weresist:

unbrokencircle:

ejob:

unbrokencircle:

cloveflowers:

iamabutchsolo:

I’m really specifically referring to asexual people in this, but I’m sure that there are other groups that can fit into this.

Asexuality is an identity that I sometimes wish didn’t apply to me. I feel belittled by my friends, I sometimes feel erased, and I am nervous about finding a romantic partner who will understand. However, although these are situations that occur because I am asexual, these setbacks are mainly examples of interpersonal disadvantage, and not consequences of institutional oppression. I think we need to take a step back before we say that asexuals are oppressed and that we are oppressed by sexual people.

Historically, people have not been systematically punished for being asexual, there are no jobs that asexuals couldn’t be hired because they are asexual (outside of the sex industry obviously), and no laws or rights implicitly require people to be sexual. This whole idea of “sexual privilege” also neglects to mention that people’s sexualities are constantly used against them, whether it’s systematically punishing women for engaging in sexual activity, forced systematic sterilization of racial or disabled groups of people, laws and organizations that try to control people’s sexualities, etc.

Though being asexual can be a disadvantage, it’s not one that inherently causes institutional discrimination against us. Living on the margins of society and not being included as a “norm” by the masses does not equivocate to being an oppressed group. We misunderstand the ramifications of oppression and discrimination when we try to assume that every marginal group is a victim of some form of oppression, when really we just stand a little bit outside what people are used to.

This is really interesting, and I would like to hear what other people think about this/hear from asexual folks who define their experience as oppression.  I don’t identify as asexual, so I’m not gonna voice an opinion here, but I’d love to hear more of other folks thoughts!

I’m not ace, but I have done a lot of research on asexuality and its relationship to the sexual disorders in the DSM, and I have found evidence for institutional oppression of asexuals at the hands of the psychiatric establishment. I wrote another post more recently about how asexual invisibility is a key part of this oppression. Basically, the oppression asexuality receives from the psychological establishment at the moment manifests primarily in those who are asexual but who don’t identify that way because they are not aware of it. Unfortunately, those are precisely the voices you just aren’t going to hear from in these kinds of discussions.

^^^  Yep, I was thinking that too.  I have read about women who were labeled “frigid”-for whatever the reason, whether it is asexuality or something else- being institutionalized for not having sex with their husbands.  But maybe that is a manifestation of sexism, not a separate oppression against asexual people.  

The sexual disorders in the DSM are also sexist and heterosexist (I could write a whole ‘nother 5000 words about that), but in this case there is also oppression against asexual people specifically. The clearest example of this is that someone who has never experience sexual attraction to anyone (one manifestation of asexuality) but was distressed about this fact would be considered to have a disorder. Rather than viewing that distress as culturally based, today clinicians would view the lack of sexual feelings itself as a disorder, and attempt to treat them in order to turn them in a normal, fully functional sexual person.

A rigid conceptualization within the medical world of something like asexuality is problematic but hardly imparts systemic oppression. I don’t think that the world of Western medicine on its own is a fantastic indicator for assessing social justice-y stuff.

1. Sometimes asexuality *is* caused by health issues and it is in the best interest of the people involved to get that taken care of. Some people might not experience sexual desire but they would like to. To suggest they just embrace their queer political identity or naturalize that, even if thats not what they want, isn’t the right way to go. There are medicines and diseases that suppress sexual desires, just like there are perfectly healthy people who do not have sexual desires. There are also people who are asexual because of health problems but are okay with it. I am just suggesting that there is a range of possibilities and they are all acceptable. Some autistic folks pathologize their autism and for other autistic people to suggest that this is wrong is wrong in itself. If said autistic person endorses the pathologization of autism for *all* autistic people, then there is a problem. But if they personally just don’t enjoy being autistic and look at it like a disorder, then its their prerogative.

2. The medical world is by no means impartial or not oppressive. Diseases and disorders are socially constructed in many ways. Even with clear cut mental disorders like schizophrenia, there is a cultural aspect to diagnosis and symptoms. So yes I do agree that for some asexuals, the constant pathologization of a situation they are comfortable with is problematic. But again, this does not indicate systemic oppression and more of a misunderstanding of the specific issue. Asexuality is misunderstood but a lot of things are misunderstood.

which leads too…

3. Oppression is a word not very well understood or used colloquially. Oppression is not just the shittiness of comparative disadvantages or of having a set of experiences- physical or psychic- that are not understood/naturalized/included in the discourse of dominant society. Oppression is not simply living in the margins.

I stopped growing at a very young age and my size is basically in the 10th percentile. When I was in middle school, my doctors urged my mom to put me on aggressive hormonal therapy to jump start my growth but she decided against it since I didn’t have any real subset of problems from being small. My body doesn’t fit into the medical conceptualization of ‘normal’ even while I am healthy, and physicians routinely suggest aggressive therapies to push physical growth. This doesn’t entail that I am oppressed because I am short and small, but that I embody certain marginal features and a medical establishment *always* pathologizes marginality. This is not oppression though.

Oppression is structural and systemic disadvantage. In thinking that the pathologization of asexuality reflects systemic disadvantages for asexuals, we are not examining the peculiarities of the situation clearly and being too short sighted.

If you want to vet oppression, you have to look at a large set of institutional disadvantages. Asexuals are not institutionally disenfranchised.

• GLBT+ folks can institutionally be denied rights to things such as marriage, employment, medical treatment, access to relief resources, etc. asexuals are not.
• i’ve seen stories of asexuals being coerced into physical activity, but the harms in the situations are not unique to asexuality and instead to larger issues of sexism, rape culture, and a systemic misunderstanding of consent. if you say no i dont want to have sex, you could have any reason and it would be legitimate. it could be that you dont like your partner’s mattress, and if they violate your consent, the harm in the situation is not related to the oppression of people who dont like sleepnumber mattresses but due to the simple incident that consent was violated.
  
• there are no laws passed that mandate sexual behavior. certain types of sexual behavior are regulated and certain types of gender expressions are also regulated. but whether sex is had is not regulated by the state or by major institutions.
• just because your narratives or standpoints are not reflected in the mainstream doesnt mean you are oppressed. these existential and psychic points to oppression are actually secondary to systemic devaluation and arise from systemic devaluation. consider this an almost marxist argument but lets apply it to the idea of race. black folks are not disenfranchised mainly because their individual lives and diversity and beauty is not reflected by the media. this is secondary to things like the prison-industrial complex, wage gap, inadequate access to social support, etc etc. asexuals might not have their experiences reflected in dominant discourse but a) not everyone’s discourse can or should be represented and b) this type of organic erasure is not caused by systemic devaluation, thus it is not oppression.

if you want to talk about this further let me know through my ask, i dont look through notes or notice notifications.

^ Yeah, this is just a great response.

I’m really specifically referring to asexual people in this, but I’m sure that there are other groups that can fit into this.

Asexuality is an identity that I sometimes wish didn’t apply to me. I feel belittled by my friends, I sometimes feel erased, and I am nervous about finding a romantic partner who will understand. However, although these are situations that occur because I am asexual, these setbacks are mainly examples of interpersonal disadvantage, and not consequences of institutional oppression. I think we need to take a step back before we say that asexuals are oppressed and that we are oppressed by sexual people.

Historically, people have not been systematically punished for being asexual, there are no jobs that asexuals couldn’t be hired because they are asexual (outside of the sex industry obviously), and no laws or rights implicitly require people to be sexual. This whole idea of “sexual privilege” also neglects to mention that people’s sexualities are constantly used against them, whether it’s systematically punishing women for engaging in sexual activity, forced systematic sterilization of racial or disabled groups of people, laws and organizations that try to control people’s sexualities, etc.

Though being asexual can be a disadvantage, it’s not one that inherently causes institutional discrimination against us. Living on the margins of society and not being included as a “norm” by the masses does not equivocate to being an oppressed group. We misunderstand the ramifications of oppression and discrimination when we try to assume that every marginal group is a victim of some form of oppression, when really we just stand a little bit outside what people are used to.

stormjh:

I find that 90% of feminists are fundamentally unlikeable people that blame people treating them badly on sexism, when in reality, people treat them badly because they treat others badly.

Your perceptions of feminism are probably based on stereotypes of feminists, because I guarantee you, the reason why feminists are fundamentally unlikable to some people is that feminists reveal that sexism is still a big part of society, and people don’t want to believe them, so they dismiss them.