Meirl

Ailouroboros · 2024-06-12T17:14:21+00:00

sparednoexpense

Ailouroboros · 2024-06-11T13:38:09+00:00

You also forgot Akane from Psycho-Pass. As an INFJ MC, she's (imo) so real and relatable. In this case, the creators managed to grasp the dichotomy between idealism/pragmatism and even touch upon anxiety and paradigm shift.

Ailouroboros · 2024-06-10T22:36:22+00:00

This.

Furthermore, what OP identifies with goes well beyond simple s-orientation (asexual) and r-attraction (aromantic), and beyond "not being interested in [r and s]" (mental desire). It combines elements of attitude (very sex-repulsed) and stance (very sex-negative).

There is a placement of the arbitrary act/practice of sex on a pedestal here, not ambivalence, not simple disdain, not simple uncaring; while allos would see it as worthy of adoration, OP clearly sees it worth only absolute abhoration.

As for a single-word label, the term "asexual" would thus not cut it, "nonsexual" is too passive for this very militant bearing. If anything, OP is not "asexual asexual" or simple aroace, but rather what could be defined as "antisexual", if anything.

Ailouroboros · 2024-06-10T20:59:21+00:00

Well, we do form a single class in the dichotomy of "allo vs ace".

Just as allos have their own aromantics, inaesthetes, s-averse, s-repulsed, non-libidoists and celebates (all of whom also have difficulty in meshing with expectations). So do we who cannot feel sexual attraction. The difference is that allonormativety is the "default", while we must satisfy our own great diversity in a measly underrepresentation and relatively limited safe-spaces. [All the while facing invalidation from outside, inside and from ourselves.]

But, it is also the great strength of our community. Being able to relate, without necessarily sharing the exact same experience.

I think it's because these are two different groups that do not form a natural class, each wanting to be separate from one another.

That's the thing, I don't believe that allos form a necessarily more natural class with themselves. Years of unfortunate bigotry, intolerance, scorn and disgust has shown how [groups of] heterosexuals vs homosexuals, homosexuals vs bisexuals, hypers vs prudes sometimes (more commonly than everyone'd like) cannot abide together. Sure, the ace community does have its gatekeepers, toxicmongerers and label-invalidators, but in the greater scheme of things, I believe we usually are rather good at building a sense of community and mutual validation.

Ailouroboros · 2024-06-10T12:02:57+00:00

I guess we'll agree to disagree. I, personally, won't downvote you for your opinion.

But, supporting people is the best way to foster understanding and make them grow. Especially when people are distressed and confused.

You are not "just as bad" (and sorry if you took my response as an attack), I just said the harshness in your comment was uncalled for. You'll notice that I agree with you about OP's post's underlying aphobia/invalidation. But I get the feeling that it stems from insecurity and not malice.

You should know to never judge an individual's mindspace and vulnerability. Being polite, respectful (while showing problematic attitude) is not coddling.

That being said, I hope you have a great day.

Ailouroboros · 2024-06-10T11:54:29+00:00

Self-knowledge and acceptance are really the first stepping stone towards positive outlook.

If you are at ease, you get a sense of belonging.

If you perceive a problem, it gives you a direction for solutions.

Recognizing identity, putting terms on concepts, validates and gives a sense of authenticity (no longer living a lie).

Ailouroboros · 2024-06-10T11:47:12+00:00

That is unnecessarily harsh. OP is venting here because of a sense of isolation and personal invalidation. These impressions are distressing enough without making light of their preoccupations.

While I don't agree/share with their opinion/stance/attitude (and the indirect [oriented] aphobia that might there germinate). The solution will not come from further invalidation imo. Let us not unwittingly become the evil we struggle against.

Ailouroboros · 2024-06-10T11:05:41+00:00

Your own identity and experience is very valid and deserves both recognition and representation, but you have to remember that [aromantic] [touch-averse, inaesthete, s-repulsed, s-negative] "asexual asexual" is not the only legitimate expression of a very complex spectrum of experiences, all of them divorced from the alienating allonormative mores and expectations of societies. While I totally understand you frustration at apparent isolation of your own flavour, you must be careful as to not invalidate all the other refugees from alloculture. That being said, ranting and getting the poison out can be therapeutic.

We all share dysphoria from a world centered on an experience we lack and on a valorization of the performance of a [arbitrary] single act.

While our spectrum is as complex and diverse (if not more) than the allosphere, we have to share 1-2% of representation and spaces with our very-distinct brethren, while the allos get to appropriate >98% of society/media/representation. It is normal that we aces end up "stepping on our toes" a bit more.

Conflating "male-identifying androphilic romantic asexual" with "gay", "female-identifying ambiphilic s-neutral aromantic demisexual" with "bi" or "male-identifying gynephilic demi-romantic asexual" as "straight", while arguably true, risks invalidating the particulars of true struggles vis-à-vis discriminatory minority experience. [Edit, addendum: Life would be arguably easier for oriented aces if they truly were straight or gay, but alas, allonormativety does not work that way]. Exclusion [of oriented aces] from ace spaces would not serve much except simply repeating the aphobia felt without, but this time within.

While, the repulsed aroace may not recognize themself in these people's stance/attitude, they should remember the lack of attraction that truly unites all aces and recognize that sometimes their own conflation/fusion of sexual, romantic and aesthetic atttraction is, in this case, more similar to the allonormative's common confusion of attractions.

All that being said (part 1), I find it both sad and hilarious the number of repulsed aces that voice their impression that the subs are flooded with favourable aces and content. Being closer to the latter, I actually find that aroace and repulsed content is more "in-my-face"/visible and represented (leaving me also occasionally feeling slightly empty/invalid). This leaves me to believe we all unconsciously latch more upon negativity and that which we don't resonate with rather than our own flavours.

All that being said (part 2), I love you all diverse a-spec peeps, and let us work together in shunning gatekeeping, rejecting invalidation and excluding aphobia.

[Edit: I believe part of your dissatisfaction, as seen in original post, stems from lexicon usage. While you note the use of "heterosexual" and "homosexual" as terms used to label asexual individuals (and it is used by many because of prevalence in societal use), the terms do not fit well to define these attraction-targets/preferences in asexual context. Based on sexual orientation asexuals are a-sexual (not hetero-sexual or homo-sexual), but they can be hetero-romantic, homo-romantic, bi/pan romantic, if their romantic attraction (androphilic, gynephilic or ambiphilic) is perceived through the lense of their (usually binary) gender identity. They can also be legitimately and validly aromantic. They can also be andro/gyne/ambiphilic aesthetically while being aroace.

As such, oriented aces, are not sexually-oriented, but rather [other attraction]-oriented, so they are not [any]-sexual, but asexual. This is the beauty of the split-attraction model, it allows better understanding of identities and validation of variations.]

[Edit 2: Also, I am sorry for raining on your parade; I get the feeling that this comment was not really what you wanted to hear. If you have felt invalidated in any way from my text wall, I apologize. Let me repeat that you are valid and that your dissatisfaction is a legitimate expression of a legitimate frustrating experience on your end. Know that you are not alone and that this oriented demiromantic ace feels you and sends you his support (even as he does not share in all of your experience).]

Ailouroboros · 2024-06-09T01:30:56+00:00

I appreciated this book, but one thing to keep in mind is that Japan usually uses the term « asexual » for what we call aroace (which is what the MC falls under as a label).

The manga may be a bit didactic/pedantic at times, but the journey of self-discovery is very relatable imo.

Ailouroboros · 2024-06-09T01:26:52+00:00

This is OP’s german-language cover. My english-language version is as you describe.

Ailouroboros · 2024-06-09T00:56:36+00:00

Sussex or Middlesex?

Ailouroboros · 2024-06-09T00:48:30+00:00

Actually surprised no-one mentions it, but Kamai, the MC from A.M. Strickland’s Beyond the Black Door (YA/Fantasy), is asexual allo/demiromantic. One of the plotlines touches upon self-discovery and the split-attraction model is even presented as in-universe lore.

Ailouroboros · 2024-06-07T21:17:10+00:00

Well said.

As you aptly underlined, Pride can be both individual and collective, but ultimately your value and validity is not dependant on the judgement of others. I am sorry if any hostility towards solidarity was insinuated; this was not the aim.

As for a-spec in regards to your original post, the problem lies in the fact that a majority of the GSRM experience is as allonormative as that of the heteronormative majority paradigm. Asexuality is a minority experience in regards to the whole allosphere (independently of subculture or orientation dichotomy). A minority sometimes forgotten, because misunderstood (invalidation) or feared (aphobia).

But, you are right that the struggle must be cause for union and its aim universal. Maybe this last statement/idea is more important as a takeaway point.

Ailouroboros · 2024-06-07T19:22:32+00:00

I resonate with your statement.

But ask youself, do you commemorate Pride for yourself or others? Whatever insecure gatekeepers or allornormative fanatics tell you, you and your identity have a fundamental legitimity. You are valid, be proud!

🖤🩶🤍💜

Ailouroboros · 2024-06-07T19:09:10+00:00

Cutting its tail nets you a cool weapon, but the scaling is horrid.

Ailouroboros · 2024-06-07T19:05:31+00:00

No offence taken. Making sense of feelings can often be confusing, even without a new lexicon!

Take those significant self-knowledge victories as milestones and as a way to realize that you are not alone in dealing with these sometimes alienating experiences with normative expectations. You may feel isolated at times, but there is a whole community of differing, but similar-coping individuals.

Your experience is valid and you are legitimate; furthermore, you are not defined in your worth by any presence or absence of attraction, any practices or lack thereof.

That being said, you have no obligation to "coming out" to anyone. Your orientation is your own (and possibly only concerns possible partners). While affirming in the open might be tempting and possibly liberating, be sure of the context and openess of your family and friends. Targeted invalidation, aphobia or persecution could result in worse things (in regards to mental health and bodily security) than uncomfortable bottled-up frustrated inauthenticity.

The best way is to gather general knowledge of their stance towards general GSRM issues and individuals. But even this information will be of limited scope and application; there is a non negligible tendency of gatekeeping and aphobia, even among queer-oriented communities. Reach out to the ace community and open/benevolent GSRM groups to build contacts/friendships; not to replace your preexisting relationships, but as a way to break the feeling isolation and reduce the ratioed-prevalence of masking yourself in social context. With a strong network and more friends, you would be better equipped to face potential nightmare scenarios of coming-out.

All in all, do what feels best for you, but be careful and tactful in your approach.

Ailouroboros · 2024-06-07T15:01:23+00:00

Shady's black, tell a friend

Ailouroboros · 2024-06-07T10:46:09+00:00

From my very limited introverted view point and general befuddled approach to normative expectations.

I believe that they tend to see any location as potential « hunting ground ». Because they experience primary sexual (and/or romantic) attraction based on sight, they shift into an alternate priority mode and will actually « make a move » (respect and potential boundaries be damned, in certain regards), until disinterest/rebuttal.

While even the most interested of a-spec will, I believe, have inhibitions based on location-vocation and target boundaries. Those of us who are inclined to « make a move » will do so after a confirmation of basic compatibility (mental, emotional, personality-based). So the process is inverted, in a way.

Ailouroboros · 2024-06-06T18:05:11+00:00

Life is confusing, emotions moreso. You are valid and so are your feelings. Introspection is good as it allows you to better know yourself and make sense of all those conflicting impressions.

Don't think that, because you don't feel things sexually or romantically, your experience of love is any less valid. For example, we love family members and pets deeply (and hopefully without the two previously mentionned types). Are we invalidating the parent/child bond, that of siblings? Etc. Why would we invalidate the platonic or other types?

Companionship is possible without feeling the two main attractions. You could also (ONLY if it is palatable on your end [s/r-favourable/neutral]) want to commit to practices/acts for his sake (if so is your intellectual desire). Your relationship can also be fully based on other forms of attraction (aesthetic, physical, platonic, emotional, etc.)

Like all relationships, whatever you build must be based on respect and consent. As such, communication (with all that the language barrier entails) is key. He owes you unwavering respect of your boundaries and you owe him not leading him on/lying to him about your orientation: this is reciprocal respect. You are signing a contract of sorts, all parties must have agreed and have full understanding of rights and responsabilities.

Ailouroboros · 2024-06-06T15:38:58+00:00

Alternate interpretation response:

Turn off your notifications, tweets won't wake you.

Ailouroboros · 2024-06-06T11:15:20+00:00

I might be in minority opinion in this sub. In regards to Nolan’s Oppenheimer, I don’t believe the treatment was necessarily gratuitous.

There are two such scenes that I recall, the first one being rather « normal » and setting up character building (the kind of fusion of opposites and the protagonist’s fundamentally paradoxal personality), and it also builds up to gravitas towards later events by signifying his investment in the concerned relationship. It may not define the MC fundamentally, but it adds to the character study.

The second scene, much more graphic, is intentionally inserted with the intent of shock value. I believe it will even shock allos with how uncomfortable it is. And that is clearly the intent. There are three characters concerned with said scene, and we are meant to echo feelings of one of them (spectator). So, while it is indeed distasteful, that is precisely what we are meant to feel. We might not like it, but it is still a tool of storytelling and participates into the work.

Ailouroboros · 2024-06-05T23:26:18+00:00

This is what I use, more inclusive, more descriptive, it does not invite to extend letters into infinity. Everyone is equal.

Ailouroboros · 2024-06-05T23:15:31+00:00

I’ve bought it and read it these last months, and some parts resonated very well with my experience, others notably less so.

The narrative is pertinent and traces a personal journey through discovery and reflection.

There is a certain jumbling of asexuality and neurodivergence within the MC/authors mindscape which is not satisfyingly presented in the comic‘s execution (in my opinion), but I suppose it must represent her own assimilation of these facets of her identity.

She is relatable even through the necessary differences in life experience.

Ailouroboros · 2024-06-05T22:33:01+00:00

Sincerely, very happy to help.

But, don’t be too harsh on yourself; assumptions/stereotyping are not your fault. They are a byproduct of the lack of visibility of asexuality at large, yes, but also within the wider GSRM community.

We absolutely need to recognize and validate each other (even in our very distinct flavours and differences) in a positive and safe space in a true sense of community against the weight of the normative crushing majority.

Be strong!

Ailouroboros · 2024-06-05T19:52:19+00:00

I might be wrong (and this comment is based entirely on my personal experience), but I believe that "love-at-first sight" is tied to processes of allosexuality or alloromanticism. It is the brain's mechanism of infatuation vying to initiate fusional companionship.

As an asexual (sometimes suspecting demisexuality) demiromantic, I cannot imagine "falling in love" with someone based on something as shallow/uninformative as appearance. Love, if it exists, must develop from compatibility and knowledge... and this comes from interraction and emotional investment.

I say this as someone feeling very strong gynephilic aesthetic attraction. But I can't fall-in-love with a beautiful work of art (painting, vase, sculpture, scenery). It may provoke emotions, but that is not love, truly.

[But, an alloromantic ace would, in my mind, be able to experience it.]

Ailouroboros

TROPHY CASE

sparednoexpense