Anyone else has no interest in joining LGBTA community??

[Holmbo]

It seems to me a big topic in the Ace and Aro community is the inclusion in an overall LGBTA-community. But really is there that much corelation between LGBT and aromanticism? Aromantic people can be gay, straight, trans, cis gendered, etc. To me joining an LGBT-community for being aromantic feels a bit like being an atheist and joining the Catholic church because one does not feel at home in the Lutheran. Why join either church? Are people who are non-hetero or non-cis less likely to be romantic? All gay people I know wants to have a romantic partner to spend all their life with and have children.
 

Of course I feel that asexual and aromantics who wants to be part of a LGBTA-community should be welcomed. But for me it's not enough.

[Tal Shi'ar]

I've never had an interest in it. As I thought for a logn time that I was normally straight, I felt that I had no place there. I also didn't see the point of aces latching on and piggybacking on a rights movement that's had mostly nothing to do with them.

[paporomantic]

* raises hand *

 

The LGBT+ discourse takes too much time to learn. I'm lazy.

[NullVector]

Yeah, same as @Tal Shi'ar, pretty much.

 

I guess it's up to the people actively participating in the LGBTA movement to define the scope and inclusivity of it (or even what the acronym itself should be. lol)

 

But I (as an outsider, please bear in mind) would see it as an umbrella term for people whose sexual orientation doesn't coincide with the 'norm' (in the purely statistical sense) of sexual attraction solely to the opposite gender (which I suppose, logically speaking, includes people who don't experience sexual attraction to either gender i.e. asexuals). Or, people with gender identity issues in general, such as not psychologically identifying with your biological gender and wishing to bring the two identities into alignment i.e. transsexuals (also given that the vast majority of people actively participating in the movement have decided that the latter group should be included). But these groups don't include me. So I'd feel uncomfortable knocking on the LGBTA door and asking to be included. Plus it would feel unnecessary for me to me to do so, as I feel like I've not personally experienced discrimination as a result of choosing not to actively pursue romantic relationships (although others may have experienced this and feel differently about it and/or think there are various systemic biases in society against aromatics or aro-spec people?)

[aussiekirkland]

I think with all identities, LGBT+ spaces (specifically spaces that include the + in this case) should be inclusive but it's altimately up to the individual whether they want to participate, provided they're a respectful member of the community.

 

That's generally my experience, anyway.

[SoulWolf]

I don't really feel like I 'belong' either. But I'll happily support them in any way I can.

[Kojote]

I'm usually on the fringes here... if your metaphor is "atheist" than I'd be "agnostic". I know there's a discussion going on, but I am indifferent towards it. I'm certainly for a united community of minorities in gender, sexual and romantic orientations, but due to a lot of infighting in LGBTA I certainly don't feel like I'd belong either and I wouldn't want to be a part right now.

 

Honestly, debating on whether or not I have the right to be included (as in: how much correlates and how much doesn't) is draining and doesn't help my self-worth (like whether or not I'm a "good enough" NB person even though I'm easily recognized as bio-female and in the closet to most people), so I stopped wondering and started to look at people as individuals rather than "communities". I'll support whoever I love and whatever I believe in no matter what the community is called or what labels the person uses or whether or not I'm perceived as part of it or an ally by others.

[Cassiopeia]

On 11/22/2016 at 5:09 PM, Holmbo said:

It seems to me a big topic in the Ace and Aro community is the inclusion in an overall LGBTA-community. But really is there that much corelation between LGBT and aromanticism? Aromantic people can be gay, straight, trans, cis gendered, etc. To me joining an LGBT-community for being aromantic feels a bit like being an atheist and joining the Catholic church because one does not feel at home in the Lutheran. Why join either church? Are people who are non-hetero or non-cis less likely to be romantic? All gay people I know wants to have a romantic partner to spend all their life with and have children.

 

The LGBTQPIalphabet soup communities act as safety nets, unions to protect us. It's mix and match group of solidarity, and that diversity is a good thing. We totally need straight people to advocate gay rights. We need cis people to stand up against transphobic hate crimes. We need non-aro and non-ace people to watch our backs.

 

I think the ultimate difference is that you choose your religion.

 

But thank you for bringing it up, religious and spiritual solidarity is also important. I'm an atheist, but I want to stop this wave of antisemitism and islamophobia, because its inhumane. Catholic people did not join the local mosque, but they did form circles around praying muslims to shield them from harassment. And muslim girls were giving jewish girls hijabs to disguise them for protection. 

 

Quote

All gay people I know wants to have a romantic partner to spend all their life with and have children.

 

Hi there, I'm gay people, I am in my mid twenties and I don't want kids or (a) romantic partner(s). Nice to meet you. 

 

Anyway, people's orientation/gender and their individual life choices are two separate things.  

There are aroace people who are gay passing.

There are gay people who pass as aroace.

There are gay people in straight passing relationships.

There are bi people in het relationships.

There are trans people who choose not to transition.

But they can still stand up for the rights of others who have issues they don't have to deal with.

 

If you don't need those resources, you are fortunate. 

If you don't get bullied at work, at school, at home because of your orientation, you are lucky. Some of us aren't. 

If you don't need to call a helpline around 4 am because life feels pointless, you might not even consider how much it means to have well educated people on the other side who say the right thing to you.

If your doctors and shrinks don't try to pressure you to attempt fix something that's not broken, you are in a good position.

If you don't need the community to be safe and heathy, you are privileged.

Some people aren't that fortunate, and we have to protect them because otherwise no-one else will.

 

Quote

 But for me it's not enough.

 

Not enough in what aspect? What do you think needs to be improved? (This is not passive agressive, I am really interested, I want to know what is needed, what common issues do we have as a community.)

[Mark]

On 23/11/2016 at 9:16 AM, aussiekirkland said:

I think with all identities, LGBT+ spaces (specifically spaces that include the + in this case) should be inclusive but it's altimately up to the individual whether they want to participate, provided they're a respectful member of the community.

Just because something should be (or even claims to be) inclusive does not mean that will always be the case. Biphobia and/or transpobia from "LGBT" communities and origanisations exists. (With it being unlikely that any organisation would call itself "cishomo".)
The belief that everyone experiences romantic attraction is ubiquitous within many societies. Thus someone who does not and, especially, who desires non-romantic interpersonal relationships can seem a very radical concept.

[Mark]

On 22/11/2016 at 5:09 PM, Holmbo said:

 Are people who are non-hetero or non-cis less likely to be romantic? All gay people I know wants to have a romantic partner to spend all their life with and have children.

To an aro homoromantic amantonormativity is likely to be just as unattractive as heteroromatic amantonormativity.

IMHO at least some of this is side effect of "marriage equality" and the decades long political push for it. Whilst it's something of importance to alloromantic LGBTs it is not to aromantic LGBTs. The latter may be concerned about a right to marry becoming an expectation of marriage.

18 hours ago, Kojote said:

Honestly, debating on whether or not I have the right to be included (as in: how much correlates and how much doesn't) is draining and doesn't help my self-worth (like whether or not I'm a "good enough" NB person even though I'm easily recognized as bio-female and in the closet to most people), so I stopped wondering and started to look at people as individuals rather than "communities".

I've found that trying to explain that I'm not a cis gendered heteroromantic heterosexual male tends to be rather futile. if someone has made up their mind that I am, then there's little I can say (or do) to convince them otherwise.

[Kojote]

1 hour ago, Mark said:

I've found that trying to explain that I'm not a cis gendered heteroromantic heterosexual male tends to be rather futile. if someone has made up their mind that I am, then there's little I can say (or do) to convince them otherwise.

Yes, that's why I decided to skip the definition. I am fortunate enough not to need the community or it's resources, but I will defend anyone who does and therefore wants to be considered a part of it.

Because in the end, whether or not I'm considered an ally or LGBTA isn't important. What matters is, that people have each others backs and stand up for one another if they need to.

[Guest]

I indentify as trans but i just don't feel that connection with them.. "Hey, I'm trans and completely aro ace, uh, nice to meet you! it's not that i have serious issues or something but hey it's good to be here" while i think: "What am i doing here????"

I have a hard time trying to find the right words how to explain im not heteroromantic/heterosexual and what asexuality and aromanticism is. I can do that just fine on a forum but it's different irl. I guess i'm too shy and i don't really feel like trying to become a part of some LGBT+ group.I'm sure there are wonderful people in it but i just wouldn't feel very comfortalbe just being in such a group. I'm lucky i'm not out to anyone so im very safe at work and in my own enviroment. So there is no need to worry about the consequences or something like that despite that it has been on my mind a couple of times how they would react if i would be open about my gender identity and me being an aro ace.

[Confirmed Bachelor]

Really doesn't matter to me one way or the other. I do know from my handful of gay friends that most LGBTQ groups are used as places to hook up or find partners.

[aussiekirkland]

13 hours ago, Just like Jughead said:

Really doesn't matter to me one way or the other. I do know from my handful of gay friends that most LGBTQ groups are used as places to hook up or find partners.

 

In my experience it's also rare to find LGBT+ spaces that are minor friendly. My local LGBT+ community is almost exclusively 18+ and while I'm a 19 year old aro ace cis female so it has almost nothing to do with me, I still think it's pretty unfair.

[Philbo Wiseroot]

6 hours ago, aussiekirkland said:

 

In my experience it's also rare to find LGBT+ spaces that are minor friendly. My local LGBT+ community is almost exclusively 18+ and while I'm a 19 year old aro ace cis female so it has almost nothing to do with me, I still think it's pretty unfair.

Similarly, the local LGBTQ+ communities/spaces here are all university-based, so they're mostly (if not exclusively) made for adults.

[Hey you in the corner]

I just don't feel that I'd gain anything about joining the LGBT++++++. Though I do with they'd rework their acronym, it's getting way to long. 

[meesemouse]

I agree that aromanticism is kind of awkward in that it doesn't quite fit in with the whole thing or almost isn't "different" enough to be included. However, I personally have had very good experiences with LGBT communities. At my high school, we have an after school club for this, and I went once for the first time last week. I went because after coming out to a few of my friends recently, they really didn't take it seriously which really sucked, so I really wanted to just talk to some accepting people. Despite my worries of feeling like an outsider, everyone was really nice and I was genuinely glad I went. This is only my experience though so I can understand where others are coming from.

[Holmbo]

On 2016-11-23 at 6:40 PM, Cassiopeia said:

Not enough in what aspect? What do you think needs to be improved? (This is not passive agressive, I am really interested, I want to know what is needed, what common issues do we have as a community.)

I don't think it needs to be improved in any way. It's a great community and I know it helps many people who face harassment or isolation because of their orientation. I just don't feel like because someone is L/G/B/T they'd have anything more in common with aromantics than a straight person. If I ever found a aromantic community in my town, or close to it, I'd be very happy and immediately join. But I'm not gonna go to a LGBT one and start talking aromantic issues as it's not more likely any of them are aromantic than any other person (I might be wrong, perhaps aromanticism is more common among non hetero non cis, I haven't seen any statistic on this, I can only speak from my own experience) That doesn't mean I'm not an ally. Of course I support all rights to people to choose their gender and choose partner regardless of gender.

 

On 2016-11-23 at 6:40 PM, Cassiopeia said:

If you don't need the community to be safe and heathy, you are privileged.

 

Some people aren't that fortunate, and we have to protect them because otherwise no-one else will.

Yes I think that's the main topic. Apart from some very insistent "you just haven't found the one, keep trying" I haven't gotten any beef for my aromanticism. Perhaps if I lived in a country were all women were expected to marry and had few rights of their own I'd have more issues in common with others who did not want a hetero marriage. Though I find it more likely I'd just want to join general feminist movements.

[Mark]

12 hours ago, meesemouse said:

I agree that aromanticism is kind of awkward in that it doesn't quite fit in with the whole thing or almost isn't "different" enough to be included.

I'd tend more to the view that it is "too different".

Since romance is so ubiquitous and normative.
I imagine that it could be difficult encountering someone for the first time who dosn't want to do something that you've always believed everyone wants.
(Even more so if they want to do something you have never heard of instead.)
Even amongst LGBT+ people the concept of romantic orientation being something distinct from sexual orientation isn't always known.

[Cassiopeia]

54 minutes ago, Mark said:

I'd tend more to the view that it is "too different".

Since romance is so ubiquitous and normative.
I imagine that it could be difficult encountering someone for the first time who dosn't want to do something that you've always believed everyone wants.
(Even more so if they want to do something you have never heard of instead.)
Even amongst LGBT+ people the concept of romantic orientation being something distinct from sexual orientation isn't always known.

 

Well, I guess being trans is like that. As a cis person I can't even imagine what it would be like to have those felings and experiences. 

[Blue Phoenix Ace]

Personally, no. I've been fortunate not to face any discrimination from being aro or ace. I didn't come out until I was 37 either though. That being said, when I got an opportunity to visit a local high school's LGBT club, I took it. They asked the Asexual Outreach to get an asexual person at their meeting and I heard about it and, anyway, I went. I got a chance to explain what asexuality was and some of the others at the meeting said they've felt the same way too. It was nice to show that there was nothing wrong with being asexual and be a role model for them, if only for a short time. At any rate, if I were to have more involvement with the LGBT community, it would be an effort to help them more.

[Cassiopeia]

So how do we define "joining of the alphabet soup groups"?  

[Kojote]

I heard arguments from trans people against the T being included, since L, G and B is about romantic and sexual attraction while trans (or NB in general) is about gender.
It reminds me of the argument we're making right now, aka that LGBT+ addresses different issues than Aro's.

 
There are so many layers to the LGBT dispute, it's mind boggling at times and none of them are inherently wrong, but a lot of them aren't all that helpful to people who actually need the support, no matter their label (at least I feel like some discussions miss a point). That's why I do not particularly like the alphabet soup. It kind of forces you to identify with one of the letters and debate over which ones can or can't be in there and why, aka it forces us to think of individual people as groups. I really would rather have an all inclusive term, that is not tied to specific identifications, but I do realize that that's not gonna happen anytime soon, given the debate around the word "queer" and the public recognition of "LGBT".

Truth is, everyone benefits, if we are as diverse as possible and "membership status" shouldn't really be dictated by label and more by your ability and willingness to contribute or your need for support. 

[Hey you in the corner]

I don't think that the LGBTABC123 !@# can actually do anything to benefit aromantics, so I don't see the point in joining.

[Tal Shi'ar]

I personally, since finding out about asexuality and all the rest, have came to a conclusion that there's a difference between LGBT and the LGBT+ (well yeah, there's a + for starters). Since the LGBT, (yes, the one without the +) was the struggle for gay, bi and trans people to have rights and not be treated as criminals and less than the people they were, I find that asexuality, since it's so hidden has had nowhere near the same amount of struggles to exist nor has it had to fight for the right to even exist. This has just been my observations though, and I've pretty much spent my whole life having spent no time whatsoever near any of these sorts of circles, so I can't exactly make that many comments nor assumptions.