Ily of Asexy Beast points out how asexuals are subject to… well… not exactly heteronormativity so let’s call it maybe “sexnormativity.” Whatever you want to call it boils down to pressure felt by asexuals to conform to the expectations of people who aren’t themselves asexual.
Apparently, there’s an ideal asexual. It’s not me, and no offense, but it probably isn’t you either. Who is it, you ask? Well…
It’s a cool, cool post getting into issues of self-doubt, self-censorship and conformity among asexuals. Which you’d think (if we were trying to construct stereotypes of asexuality!) would be silly since (constructing that asexuality again) you’re obviously either asexual or not, right? No? Good answer! Like trying to answer for another whether they’re gay, or kinky, or trans, or even straight, it’s not for for someone else to decide what it means for you to be asexual. Here’s Ily again (emphasis mine.)
I didn’t realize that “trying to be asexual” can actually mean “trying to be an ideal asexual”, and that it could be a problem, until I read this post/manifesto, also on Apositive. Its author talks about how our increased visibility in the media has also led to the rise of an “ideal” or “good” asexual. Of course, this person doesn’t actually exist, because asexuals appearing in the media no doubt conceal aspects of their asexuality that might be seen as contradictory or confusing.
From conversations I’ve had in person and online with asexual people it’s as messy as, well, any other orientation. Which, if you think about it, is only fair — orientation being a quality of human beings and not much about humans is clear cut.
The first out/activist asexual I met when she joined a pre-blogging online forum on sex. She got just about everything in the book thrown at her from neurosis to buried trauma to unfortunate prescriptions to inhibitions to religious zeal to “just haven’t met the right boy/girl/goat” to… well, the book. To be as cheerfully disinterested in sex as she was just really got people’s… well… goats. Anyone else might have withered in the withering criticism she received, and so I can see how the pressure to conform to outsider’s stereotypes could be intense.
But as Ily also hints, in part because asexuality is so unclearly understood, the more “ideal” the definition becomes the more pressure flesh and blood asexuals are going to face. And, perhaps worse, it raises the risk that people who might otherwise find comfort, camaraderie, and identity are likely to think “well, that can’t be me either.”
And if all that sounds familiar…




Submitted by 3180 (not verified) on Fri, 2009-09-04 16:00.
It might be also helpful if there was not a tendency to name everything and it variation or to be identified with some group.
Submitted by 3180 (not verified) on Fri, 2009-09-04 23:44.
Interesting. I suppose I might fill a lot of those tick boxes if I identified with the concept of asexuality.
Since I have a functional libido and having little sexual desire doesn't necessarily correlate with not having sex I call myself a life-long celibate and leave it at that. The media doesn't seem to be interested in that label... yet. :)
[I think that's just one of the many possible messy details an "ideal" asexuality tends to paper over, Reader. It's not that uncommon to be functional but not interested. Or, for that matter, to be uninterested but to still have sex (for one's partner's benefit, for instance.) As you describe it then you'd probably find you had a lot in common with a lot of other asexuals who don't fit... a stereotype that's too small. Check out her site and follow some of the links she's got blogrolled (hers are more current than mine plus, unlike me, she's actually asexual.) Thanks for commenting. --fl]