What is the reason for Aros/Aces sometimes not being considered "real" LGBTQ+?

[whatistheromance]

Like legit the full acronym is LGBTQIA+ why do some people not have the mental capacity to process that it is a valid orientation and not just "virgin"? Legit some people just say "no b!tches" whenever I even slightly mention aromanticism to them. I seriously dont understand why some people dont think it isnt valid. I have seen no arguments for the invalid side, just "it invalid lul". So, please, other more experienced people, enlighten me: Why do some people think it's invalid?

Edited November 22, 2022 by whatistheromance

[Jot-Aro Kujo]

Cause they're bigots next question

[whatistheromance]

9 minutes ago, Jot-Aro Kujo said:

Cause they're bigots next question

Yeah I get that but do they actually have an argument to support it at least a tiny bit or are they just idiots

[The Gray Warlock]

In listening to LGBT+ discussions, and hearing accounts of that community, there seems to be this weird victimhood one-upmanship. E.g. Lesbians are more accepted in society than gay men, queer blacks are less accepted than queers whites, bisexuals aren't real gay/lesbian. Drag queens are gatekept in the trans community. Ok I haven't actually heard anything about that last one, but I'd believe it. Whatever the cultural causes (that could be a whole discussion in itself) there's an underlying pathology of I-suffer-more-than-thou. In fact many minority groups seem to have this kind of gatekeeping. The "you're not black enough" mentality for instance. I've even directly observed it among the local Native American population, displaying a similar "you're not Indian enough for me!" way of thinking. Personally, I think it's one of two things. Either a type of self-emisseration where one projects their own low value on others, or a narcissistic status game.

[Apex]

There is, unfortunately, a good amount of infighting in the LGBTQ+ community.

The main arguments against aspec inclusion (that I've seen at least) are

1. Aspec identities are subject to different forms of discrimination and oppression than LGBT identities, or not subject to oppression at all. Which if you actually do research you'll find isn't true
2. Straight aros and aces aren't "real" LGBTQ+, which also doesn't hold water because straight trans people exist
3. Aspec identities are internalized homophobia. This ignores the fact that that argument has also been used against bi/pan and trans people
4. There are people who could call themselves aspec, but they prefer allo labels, so why do you need to be ~special~? This doesn't make sense as an argument because you could apply it to nearly every identity. There will always be people in the outgroup with traits of those in the ingroup and vise-versa

ngl I feel like a good portion of aspec exclusion is just people wanting to target others out of a misplaced sense of anger and self-righteousness. Aspec, m-spec, multigender/genderfluid people, etc. etc. have all gotten flak, sometimes it honestly depends on which group is more "acceptable" to pick on at any given time.

Edited November 22, 2022 by Apex

[nonmerci]

16 hours ago, whatistheromance said:

Yeah I get that but do they actually have an argument to support it at least a tiny bit or are they just idiots

Well they have arguments, but not valid arguments if you ask me, so they are still idiots.

What I've seen (I don't agree with these arguments, they upset me) :

-what matters is who you are attracted to, not how, aces and aros are just modifiers of the real orientations; aces or aros with another identities are already included and the other don't belong (well sometimes people with that view also include aroaces)

-there are no stigma against aros/aces that doesn't affect celibate or single people so there are no prejudice/discrimination/oppression against them specifically and there is no difference between them and single straight people

-oppression olympics (aka, not oppressed enough to be in the community)

-aros/aces have the same experience as single straight people, they pass as such and you never know if they don't tell you

-het aces and het aros will come so the community will be invaded by straight people

-het people will use the grey identity to come even if they have a perfectly normal experience, they just want to think they are special or were brainwashed by a-spec people who thinks that anyone who doesn't feel attraction constantly is a-spec

-A is for ally, nothing else

-aces and aros didn't help creating the LGBT community so they don't belong

-they will steal the ressources and the money of the people who really need it (one time with the idea that if we somehow prove that we are able to survive without them and produce events, ressources etc, they will make us the honor to accept us)

-problems faced by aros and aces are different than the ones faced by other LGBT identities so they should form their own community (this is the only argument I get, but we can say that about other identities, like, gay and trans people have different problematics as well)

-problems faces by aros and aces will be better handle by feminist associations (the fact that men can also suffer from amatonormativity, corrective rape, etc, is ignored, as well as the fact that the oppression is due to the orientation and not patriarchy)

 

I think I've seen other things, but I forgot them. They are all as invalid as these ones.

[Keith]

I think that it's mostly because they just don't know about aromanticism/asexuality or any identity that falls under the A-spectrum, or they just think that it's not real because "how can you not experience something that makes us humans?" (I obviously don't agree with this statement, it's just something I've seen non a-spec people say about us).

I've also seen people saying that we don't belong in the community, because our struggles are too different from those allos/not aros/a-spec ppl have, which is just as invalid as the previous so called 'argument'. 

 

[DeltaAro]

20 hours ago, whatistheromance said:

Like legit the full acronym is LGBTQIA+ why do some people not have the mental capacity to process that it is a valid orientation and not just "virgin"? Legit some people just say "no b!tches" whenever I even slightly mention aromanticism to them. I seriously dont understand why some people dont think it isnt valid. I have seen no arguments for the invalid side, just "it invalid lul". So, please, other more experienced people, enlighten me: Why do some people think it's invalid?

If you try to "steelman" this: they probably would object to LGBTQIA, because they think being aro is too subtle or too unimportant to be part of a movement (this isn't directly entailed in LGBT... acronyms, but hinted at).

The "virgin" conflation is just too stupid... I don't care. Even for aroaces it would be completely wrong.

[Neon]

I think it's a few factors.

1. Biphobia/Transphobia/Ableism. So much of aphobia is just regurgitated biphobia, transphobia, and ableism. With the exception of the disabled community, we are seen as an easier target. In fact, TERFs report that being an ace exclusionist was what set them on the path to being a TERF. I included ableism because of how often aphobia is excused as "well I was talking about disabled people not you so actually it's totally fine" as if that isn't just aphobia and ableism now. And biphobia can be seen in the concept of "straight passing" (which is ludicrous, as that would mean any queer person not actively engaging in PDA with someone of the same gender is straight passing), the idea that we are greedy, and the idea that simply being in any relationship is abuse.

2. Amatonormativity. Romance is a central facet of the modern queer rights movement ("Love is love", etc.), to the point where queer media isn't seen as queer unless two people of the same gender get and stay together. Aromantic people (and trans people, and many other alloromantic queer people) push back on the idea that queerness is defined by being in an active relationship, and that is an uncomfortable challenge to the status quo. Furthermore, romantic love is seen as inherently good (even when used for objectively terrible things). This is compounded with heroes doing anything for love, and villains either being redeemed for feeling love or painted as irredeemable for not feeling love. As a result, aromantic people, especially loveless aros, are immediately perceived as lesser, sometimes even as the villains on the road to queer rights.

3. Misunderstanding/Ignorance. This is really just the result of amatonormativity, but if someone has never seen anything about aromantic or asexual people, or if they've never seen anything about aromanticism or asexuality made by aromantic and asexual people, misunderstandings could lead to bigotry.

4. Just being awful. Some people are going to choose hate no matter how many outs they are given, because they don't want to change. Even confronted with facts, logic, understanding, etc., some people just will not listen.

Edited November 23, 2022 by Neon

[nonmerci]

1 hour ago, Neon said:

Just being awful. Some people are going to choose hate no matter how many outs they are given, because they don't want to change. Even confronted with facts, logic, understanding, etc., some people just will not listen.

Oh yes. I've seen people just vanished after being destroyed by logic and examples, only to spread the same bigotry later. Or they answer with arguments that are nothing to do with what you are saying and get mad when you come back on topic cause "you don't listen to me". They do like you never used convincing rhetoric...

 

Makes me think of something else : some LGBT people are afraid to see that they will no longer be the center of the movements. I've seen some gay men being transphobic cause they think trans people will turn gay men into women and makes them invisible or things like that. I think I've seen it argued about aces and aros people to.

Like, I've really someone argue that the SAM will lead people who has internalized homophobia as heteromantic homosexual so they can treat gays badly for sex before going back to their wife, so we should stop using it and gay aces should just sa they are gay, not aces. And though the person didn't say, it was clear they consider gay aro as a red flag cause they don't want the romance.

And no matter how much we told them he was wrong, he kept sayong the same things without listening...

[Neon]

15 minutes ago, nonmerci said:

Or they answer with arguments that are nothing to do with what you are saying and get mad when you come back on topic cause "you don't listen to me".

That reminds me a lot of this video. It's not focused on aspec people, but internet arguments in general, but I've definitely made an active effort to stop engaging since then (I will be the first to admit that I was and still am not great at this). Honestly, I don't really think any individual on the internet is going to get someone out of bigotry, except for maybe trained professionals (such as in cult deprogramming).

[DeltaAro]

2 hours ago, Neon said:

except for maybe trained professionals (such as in cult deprogramming).

The problem of bringing all this to the meta-level is that the other side can and actually does this too. I see this all the time with TERFs and the like.

It's kind of like the West has its fact checkers, exile Russians against Putin, socio-historical analyses of post-Soviet Russia, and duh, the Kremlin has all that, too, in reverse, even "exile Westerners" (must be a well-paying job).

Many transphobes or aphobes believe (or at least pretend to) that "TRAs" ("trans-radical activists") and aro/ace-activists are the real bigots and need cult deprogramming.

It's a common hobby for them to imagine a future in which it turned out they were on the right side of history.

Like some sort of reckoning happened, a future where kids get psychotherapy to cure their transgender identity or aromanticism, GRS is banned (it's categorized as a "conversion therapy"), and most trans-activists nervously deny they were ever involved.

A future in which you can watch documentaries with aroaces, trans-people "finally waking up " and deeply regretting their mistakes and explaining how they got sucked into it (think "interviews with Omu Shinrikyo ex-members").

To this comes the extreme persecution complex: they've been banned from most social media platforms and built their own, which is "obvious" proof of the truth being suppressed.

In case of TERFs they see themselves as "persecuted wise women" (silenced by the patriarchy?). Usually an avatar of a witch stands next to a transphobic comment.

Sorry, this is just an unfocused stream of consciousness post.

Honestly I'm totally confused how most people's thinking seems to work... it's so tribal and so extremely "meta". More intelligent people produce even more complex "meta" justifications. But to me it results in two perfect mirror structures facing each other, detached from anything concrete, and no real insight is ever gained.

So given that how do people actually make up their or shock ... change their minds? I feel like an 👽 please explain, maybe I'm totally wrong.

[Neon]

11 hours ago, DeltaAro said:

Many transphobes or aphobes believe (or at least pretend to) that "TRAs" ("trans-radical activists") and aro/ace-activists are the real bigots and need cult deprogramming...So given that how do people actually make up their or shock ... change their minds? I feel like an 👽 please explain, maybe I'm totally wrong.

oh wow. okay. yeah. Honestly, I thought of it because I read a few articles by people in "Karen" videos, where they explain how their loved ones intervened and they went to therapy, and are currently working through all the hatred. So I do think it's possible. Just maybe not by strangers.

[Holmbo]

This post made reflected broader about the LGBT+ community.

My view is that it's not that useful to view LGBT+ as one contained community. For example is a straight, cis, alloromantic demisexual person part of LGBT+ ? I would say so, but that doesn't mean other LGBT+ will feel they have anything specific in common with them. There will be experiences that only some LGBT+ people can relate to and they might want to form separate spaces in which they can share them unhindered.

On the other hand some of the prejudices affecting LGBT+ can affect straight cis people as well. Prejudices tied into gender expectations and amatonormativity. It's useful to make common cause I think rather than to see all of LGBT+ as one group clearly distinct from other.

[EternallyTBD]

Sorry, I completely misread the topic. 
 

I find that pretty often I see people claim that it is more important to have homosexual media representation than aro or ace representation. I think this is mostly because, again, we are often not seen as fully LGBTQ+, so representing us is viewed as less important. 

Edited November 27, 2022 by EternallyTDB

[Collie]

I think it's mostly cuz they think LGBTQ is the "not straight or cis club", and that including the A is broadening the inclusion too much. I've also seen sentiments that we don't have anything we're demanding from society (so they say), whereas the LGB and T are fighting for equal rights. 

All that said, of course we are fighting for something: awareness. And marriage laws do potentially affect us as well, as some religious people insist that a sexless marriage is not a legitimate marriage. If the religious right takes over and asexuality becomes more well known, they may insist on making laws about sex inside marriage.