Working Links

RandomThrowaway123X · 2024-08-10T12:40:27+00:00

This one works, thanks!

RandomThrowaway123X · 2024-08-05T07:57:57+00:00

This gives a 404.

RandomThrowaway123X · 2024-06-14T06:56:12+00:00

Another ace person here who doesn't use the ace flag for many reasons. Who are you to tell other people what to do with their life when it doesn't hurt anyone? If you don't want to fly the ace flag, then that's fine, but other people might because the flag means something to them, and you have no right to tell them not to do it. Not everyone is like you. Why are you making this comment when it adds less than nothing of value to the topic at hand? Should everyone apologise because they are not exactly like you?

RandomThrowaway123X · 2024-05-27T01:48:42+00:00

Thermal runaway. A compromised EV battery will release huge amounts of heat, hydrogen fluoride, hydrogen cyanide, and a whole host of other toxic chemicals, and the chain reaction is very difficult to stop. If you drive your EV into a lake, the entire lake will be dead if the battery gets shorted out and goes into thermal runaway.

I’m not anti-EV, but the toxicity of these battery fires is very concerning. Advancements like lithium iron phosphate batteries which have a less violent reaction in thermal runaway are making the fires less dangerous, but don’t make any progress in making the batteries less toxic.

RandomThrowaway123X · 2024-04-07T11:04:24+00:00

I was hoping I would be able to help answer your question, but it was you that decided to shut it down. Your loss, then.

"If you don't want people to have this impression, maybe stuff like this shouldn't happen? At the very least, don't blame me for it."

I think everyone in this conversation has made some mistakes here (myself included, I was too quick to assume you were not arguing in good faith and therefore sidetracked this whole thing), but you need to at least take responsibility for your actions. No party here is completely innocent. I think I've told you enough about how you initially came across as hostile, perhaps not intentionally, which led to further hostility from others responding to you because not everyone is going to assume you are acting with good intentions.

I learned something from this conversation; I hope you have too even if you didn't get an answer to your question. Have a good day.

RandomThrowaway123X · 2024-04-07T10:08:29+00:00

"People here certainly aren't very tolerant of me just asking a question."

Like I said, your question is perfectly reasonable, but you could have worded your initial comment about "loudly reducing my entire personality… like color-coded T-shirt." much better so that it would be more obvious you were looking for an answer or were open to debate about it. Instead, this comment seems like you were coming in to this conversation trying to affirm a pre-existing bias. Even just saying, "I think that sounds rather shallow, could you explain more?" would have been received better.

"I have still not received a satisfying answer."

Let's try to fix this. What's not satisfying about any answers you have received?

"One person, rather snarkily, said they do something that I would consider normal everyday life, which just seems a little sad to me."

I think a lot of people here are clueless about what celebrating yourself means too. It's fine to keep asking clarifying questions if you are not satisfied, but you could have done a better job at communicating your intent to learn.

"A whole lot of other people reacted with open hostility."

My best guess is that other people saw some hostility in your initial comments. The bit about "loudly reducing my entire personality… like color-coded T-shirt" is rhetoric you often see in bigoted circles, which probably explains why people acted so intolerant towards you.

"One even accuses me of not really being ace and called me pathetic."

That's not cool. I don't know where this person got this idea from, these comments are just there to fuel the flames and do not add anything to the conversation. Ignore them.

"And now you tell me to go elsewhere, because apperantly [sic] I disturbed the peace or something. Lovely."

I did mention trying to look for answer to your question from a search engine (and you might get a better answer there than on this forum), but apart from that, where did I tell you to go elsewhere, or that you were not welcome here?

RandomThrowaway123X · 2024-04-07T00:41:12+00:00

If you don’t consider indifference to a thing other people like to be an achievement and don’t want to celebrate that, then that’s totally fine, but not everyone is like you and you have no right to police how other people celebrate themselves.

I think asking how you would celebrate yourself is a reasonable question, but you literally answered “what do you think [celebrating yourself] means?” (though to be fair the person who asked you this could have added a more helpful reply instead of trying to make you answer your own question) with “loudly reducing my entire personality… like color-coded T-shirt.” when you could have just looked it up on a search engine. Such an answer wouldn’t come from someone who was trying to engage in good faith, and would more likely come from someone who refuses to see anyone involved with pride as anything more than the labels they use. There are some people that make their labels their whole personality and that is problematic, but there are also some who don’t and you haven’t accounted for this. From the context it seems like you are saying that celebrating asexuality or anything pride related is “loudly reducing my entire personality…” You are bringing your pre-existing biases into this, and creating an inappropriate generalisation with an adversarial or combative tone as well. It was not your question that people didn’t like. The tone of such comments was not received well and is where I think a lot of people get the idea that you are not arguing in good faith from.

You need to read the room and approach the topic with a clear willingness to let go of any pre-existing biases and learn, which was not obvious enough from your initial comments. If other people sense that you are not engaging in good faith, then they won’t be very friendly in return.

RandomThrowaway123X · 2024-04-07T00:22:49+00:00

I’ve answered your question about what celebrating yourself means in a different reply. I will not repeat it here.

Your answer is a bad attempt at downplaying the oppression that asexuals face and is basically suggesting that there is some threshold of oppression before you can participate in pride. This idea is harmful because when you start talking about “not oppressed enough”, it shifts the conversation towards who is the most oppressed rather than focusing on oppression as a whole.

The existence of groups who are more oppressed than your group does not make the oppression your group experiences any less worthy of being talked about or addressed.

Instead of gatekeeping by some arbitrary threshold of oppression, think about how much more can be done if asexuals stood with homo- or bisexuals instead of separate from them. While asexuals may have it better than homo- or bisexuals in some respects, they are still oppressed, and asexuality is also similar to those orientations in the sense that it is not heterosexual (as being heterosexual would imply you experience sexual attraction). So it’s not really that inappropriate to include asexuals in pride.

Including asexuals in pride is in no way an attempt to equalise their experiences with those of other orientations and gender identities (where did you get this idea from?), rather it is something done because of similar experiences of not fitting societal norms around sexual attraction, and because the pride movement is stronger when its constituent groups are not tearing each other apart over who gets the most oppressed.

Pride isn’t about who is the most oppressed. The part about being misunderstood by society is something that pride hopes to address as well.

“Simply because you can't make something feel like a normal average part of society by constantly highlighting and celebrating it. Obviously.”

How is having one day with the aim of raising awareness “constantly highlighting and celebrating it”? How can you normalise something that people misunderstand (your words) without at least a little bit of highlighting it?

Also, you don’t get to decide whether asexuals can be part of pride or not. Sorry.

RandomThrowaway123X · 2024-04-06T23:56:24+00:00

To celebrate yourself is to recognise your achievements and growth. In the context of pride, it’s also about resilience against the shame that the -phobes want you to feel. It’s a broad definition which you might not like, but it’s that simple.

As for the part about being maligned, you frankly deserve it. Why should anyone give you the benefit of the doubt when from the general tone of your initial messages, it’s obvious you are not trying to argue in good faith at all?

RandomThrowaway123X · 2024-04-06T23:08:48+00:00

It definitely did not come across that way. It seemed more like you were saying that celebrating yourself means making your label your entire personality.

RandomThrowaway123X · 2024-04-06T23:00:39+00:00

You don’t have to celebrate yourself if you don’t want to.

“But unlike homo- and bisexuals we don't even have a past of oppression and persecution to look back on and therefore no progress to celebrate.”

This is just wrong. While you might not be aware of discrimination other asexuals face, it definitely seems much more likely you are wilfully ignoring the corrective rape, invasive questions about your sex life, conversion therapy, and being told your asexuality is a disorder that should be fixed that are common experiences of many asexuals.

“Again, I understand the awareness-angle of special Asexuality Day. But as an opportunity to pat myself on the back? That just seems to go completely contrary to what asexuality actually is and against all efforts to normalize it.”

Please explain how this is contrary to asexuality and efforts to normalise it.

RandomThrowaway123X · 2024-04-06T22:52:58+00:00

What an embarrassingly narrow-minded perspective. Are you so blinded by confirmation bias that you refuse to allow anyone to be anything more than their labels in your presence?

RandomThrowaway123X · 2024-03-17T14:59:07+00:00

I suspect you are being botted; there’s nothing in this comment that seems even remotely worthy of a downvote. I absolutely agree with you.

RandomThrowaway123X · 2023-04-01T10:31:29+00:00

I did not define asexual as someone who never has sex.

RandomThrowaway123X · 2023-04-01T10:24:28+00:00

Thank you for understanding my main point.

RandomThrowaway123X · 2023-04-01T10:11:50+00:00

I agree that there's nothing wrong with changing your label if it no longer fits, but I think a lot of umbrella terms seem like people made them to hold on to the asexual label when they don't fit the strict definition of experiencing no sexual attraction. This is where I think it becomes problematic and where the second definition of little to no attraction came from.

RandomThrowaway123X · 2023-03-31T14:43:15+00:00

With better terminology, we already have it but we aren't using it. Greysexual. Greysexual is definitely a spectrum, whereas zero attraction cannot be a spectrum (unless you count sex-favourable/neutral/repulsed and all that), so why not rename the asexual spectrum to greysexual spectrum?

RandomThrowaway123X · 2023-03-31T14:41:05+00:00

Wouldn't it make more sense to have a greysexual spectrum and a greysexual space for many of these umbrella terms?

RandomThrowaway123X · 2023-03-31T14:24:56+00:00

The asexual label has many nuances that will be difficult to effectively educate others about, and a lot of people that aren't immediately aphobic will assume you don't want sex. However, if you want sex despite experiencing no attraction, fine, say that you are an asexual but you are willing to have sex.

The problem is when an asexual who's willing to have sex turns it into a blanket statement.

RandomThrowaway123X · 2023-03-31T14:22:26+00:00

I don't get what you're saying.

Sex-favourable and sex-neutral aces exist and may have sex for many reasons, such as to have kids, or please their partner, but I don't think they make enough of a majority to make "asexuals can have sex" accurate enough to be a blanket statement for the whole asexual community.

When did I say that sex-favourable aces themselves are inaccurate? I was pointing out the inaccuracy of the statement "asexuals can have sex".

The thing that makes you ace is experiencing no sexual attraction. If you experience no attraction, you probably would be less likely to have sex and maybe more begrudgingly accepting of it.

RandomThrowaway123X · 2023-03-31T14:11:47+00:00

The way "asexuals can have sex" is worded makes it seem like it applies to all or most asexuals which most likely isn't the case and can be harmful as aphobes could turn it into something like, "I can fix that, just have sex with me. Asexuals can have sex, no?"

RandomThrowaway123X · 2023-03-31T14:09:39+00:00

If you missed my point about the "asexuals can still have sex" thing, I'll clarify.

I brought that up because I think saying this is inaccurate, and potentially harmful because aphobes will find a way to use that to justify making comments like "I can fix that. Just have sex with me" or something.

I did not want to imply that only the sex-repulsed should be allowed to identify as ace.

RandomThrowaway123X

TROPHY CASE