![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
potboyvia http://bit.ly/2PYVe3T
nextstepcake:
likelikedirtycute:
Things I can’t deal with: “aces aren’t oppressed because not being sexual is considered pure and good”
Yeah, if you’re a white woman. I am sick and tired of people dismissing the complicated relationships POC have to sexuality (in the “being sexual” sense, not the orientation sense, though that’s it’s own maze of complexity). And when we do talk about, it’s solely about hypersexualization, which is only half of the puzzle.
Brown and black people of all genders are also desexualized. That’s true overall, but I can only speak in detail about the experience of being a south asian brown woman. Me being non-sexual is NOT seen as pure and good. It’s seen as my default state. Even more so because I am not thin by any definition (fat people, and fat POC in particular, have that extra layer of desexualization to deal with). I am not “pure” when I don’t have sex and “dirty” when I do. Non-sexual is seen as my “natural” state of being. Having sexual desire/being sexual, for a brown fat girl, speeds right on past “dirty” and into “repulsive”. It’s not naughty or scandalous, it’s unnatural, gross, the abject.
Asexuality as an identity is already so much to try to grapple with when you have this history of colonialism and white supremacy defining what it means to be sexual. I don’t fucking need white lgbt people preaching to me about how society ~values~ lack of sexuality/sexual desire, when imposing that lack upon us has been one of the historical tools of white supremacy.
On a separate but related note - it also smacks very much to me of the whole “society’s ideal woman is bisexual”! Which again a) completely misunderstands the definition of the identity and b) imposes a ridiculously narrow white-centric understanding of sexuality onto the whole goddamn world.
Good commentary about desexualization and how it can complicate asexuality politics for groups that have historically been affected by those stereotypes!
I’d also like to note one additional thing about what makes desexualization so tricky for aces to navigate is that desexualization isn’t just about whether certain groups are seen as being sexual, but whether they are seen as having a sexuality or sexual identity at all. Desexualization not only opposed the idea of certain groups engaging in sexual behavior, it also attempts to erase the possibility of even thinking or talking about sexuality.
In that way, even if asexual people may often be seen as “fitting in” with the desexualized stereotype from a behavioral perspective, they still meet resistance because acknowledging asexuality also requires acknowledging sexuality. Active claiming a lack of sexual attraction or desire requires discussing the possibility of sexual attraction or desire in the first place - which is exactly what desexualization is trying to shut down. Despite how it may seem at first glance, desexualization doesn’t want people to identify as asexual - it doesn’t want them to identify as anything at all.
Because of this, asexual people from commonly desexualized groups (like people of color, fat people, disabled people, etc.) often face a dual pressure - with people on one side telling them to stop talking about asexuality, because “what if it just reinforces false stereotypes about our groups”, while people on the other side are telling them “hey stop talking about your sexuality, that’s weird and gross and TMI”.
I think it’s also worth noting that desexualization isn’t necessarily even about whether groups are seen as experiencing sexual attraction, but whether they are seen as sexually attractive - when dominant groups desexualize others, it’s not because they somehow perceived that group as being “too asexual” or anything like that - it’s because they don’t see them as attractive and don’t want to even think about the possibility of being subject to unwanted sexual desire from that group (because you know, having a sexuality means they must obviously be attracted to you). It should also be noted that desexualization doesn’t necessarily reduce at all the demands to still be sexually available, which is a whole ‘nother complicating factor.
On that note, though, I’d also like to add an additional criticism of phrases like “aces aren’t oppressed because not being sexual is considered pure and good” (and it’s cousin, “oh, it must be so easy for aces in conservative or fundamentalist religious areas, because they’re not even tempted by desire!”).
In additional to sexual purity culture often being a white-coded thing, it’s also a very temporary ideal. Sexual purity is prized in women only under the assumption that they will ‘resist temptation’ until they can find the opportunity to have the right kind of sex - i.e. the heterosexual, married, and in some cases procreative kind. For women who do enter long-term relationships, or who reach a certain age after “waiting too long”, the pressure switches - because it’s time to please your heterosexual male partner and make some babies! Even in contexts where sexual desire might be discouraged in women, sexual availability is still absolutely demanded.
Because the thing is, sexual purity culture isn’t actually about “not having sex” - it’s about “not having the wrong kind of sex”. Women who continue to reject even “acceptable” kinds of sex (like asexuals who form long-term asexual relationships and marriages, or women who for whatever reason don’t desire sex with their husbands), or those who make no attempt to ever seek it out (like women who continue to decline to seek out relationships, even as they reach “childbearing” or “marriageable” age.) are not protected, and instead will be demonized for that failure to make themselves sexually available under ‘appropriate’ circumstances.
nextstepcake:
likelikedirtycute:
Things I can’t deal with: “aces aren’t oppressed because not being sexual is considered pure and good”
Yeah, if you’re a white woman. I am sick and tired of people dismissing the complicated relationships POC have to sexuality (in the “being sexual” sense, not the orientation sense, though that’s it’s own maze of complexity). And when we do talk about, it’s solely about hypersexualization, which is only half of the puzzle.
Brown and black people of all genders are also desexualized. That’s true overall, but I can only speak in detail about the experience of being a south asian brown woman. Me being non-sexual is NOT seen as pure and good. It’s seen as my default state. Even more so because I am not thin by any definition (fat people, and fat POC in particular, have that extra layer of desexualization to deal with). I am not “pure” when I don’t have sex and “dirty” when I do. Non-sexual is seen as my “natural” state of being. Having sexual desire/being sexual, for a brown fat girl, speeds right on past “dirty” and into “repulsive”. It’s not naughty or scandalous, it’s unnatural, gross, the abject.
Asexuality as an identity is already so much to try to grapple with when you have this history of colonialism and white supremacy defining what it means to be sexual. I don’t fucking need white lgbt people preaching to me about how society ~values~ lack of sexuality/sexual desire, when imposing that lack upon us has been one of the historical tools of white supremacy.
On a separate but related note - it also smacks very much to me of the whole “society’s ideal woman is bisexual”! Which again a) completely misunderstands the definition of the identity and b) imposes a ridiculously narrow white-centric understanding of sexuality onto the whole goddamn world.
Good commentary about desexualization and how it can complicate asexuality politics for groups that have historically been affected by those stereotypes!
I’d also like to note one additional thing about what makes desexualization so tricky for aces to navigate is that desexualization isn’t just about whether certain groups are seen as being sexual, but whether they are seen as having a sexuality or sexual identity at all. Desexualization not only opposed the idea of certain groups engaging in sexual behavior, it also attempts to erase the possibility of even thinking or talking about sexuality.
In that way, even if asexual people may often be seen as “fitting in” with the desexualized stereotype from a behavioral perspective, they still meet resistance because acknowledging asexuality also requires acknowledging sexuality. Active claiming a lack of sexual attraction or desire requires discussing the possibility of sexual attraction or desire in the first place - which is exactly what desexualization is trying to shut down. Despite how it may seem at first glance, desexualization doesn’t want people to identify as asexual - it doesn’t want them to identify as anything at all.
Because of this, asexual people from commonly desexualized groups (like people of color, fat people, disabled people, etc.) often face a dual pressure - with people on one side telling them to stop talking about asexuality, because “what if it just reinforces false stereotypes about our groups”, while people on the other side are telling them “hey stop talking about your sexuality, that’s weird and gross and TMI”.
I think it’s also worth noting that desexualization isn’t necessarily even about whether groups are seen as experiencing sexual attraction, but whether they are seen as sexually attractive - when dominant groups desexualize others, it’s not because they somehow perceived that group as being “too asexual” or anything like that - it’s because they don’t see them as attractive and don’t want to even think about the possibility of being subject to unwanted sexual desire from that group (because you know, having a sexuality means they must obviously be attracted to you). It should also be noted that desexualization doesn’t necessarily reduce at all the demands to still be sexually available, which is a whole ‘nother complicating factor.
On that note, though, I’d also like to add an additional criticism of phrases like “aces aren’t oppressed because not being sexual is considered pure and good” (and it’s cousin, “oh, it must be so easy for aces in conservative or fundamentalist religious areas, because they’re not even tempted by desire!”).
In additional to sexual purity culture often being a white-coded thing, it’s also a very temporary ideal. Sexual purity is prized in women only under the assumption that they will ‘resist temptation’ until they can find the opportunity to have the right kind of sex - i.e. the heterosexual, married, and in some cases procreative kind. For women who do enter long-term relationships, or who reach a certain age after “waiting too long”, the pressure switches - because it’s time to please your heterosexual male partner and make some babies! Even in contexts where sexual desire might be discouraged in women, sexual availability is still absolutely demanded.
Because the thing is, sexual purity culture isn’t actually about “not having sex” - it’s about “not having the wrong kind of sex”. Women who continue to reject even “acceptable” kinds of sex (like asexuals who form long-term asexual relationships and marriages, or women who for whatever reason don’t desire sex with their husbands), or those who make no attempt to ever seek it out (like women who continue to decline to seek out relationships, even as they reach “childbearing” or “marriageable” age.) are not protected, and instead will be demonized for that failure to make themselves sexually available under ‘appropriate’ circumstances.
no subject
Date: 2018-12-27 12:50 am (UTC)I suppose I'd never given much thought to POC aces and what desexualization would mean for them, this is an eye-opener and no mistake.
no subject
Date: 2018-12-27 11:05 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-12-27 03:43 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-12-31 05:08 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-12-31 06:10 pm (UTC)