GSRM Community

[Lily09]

yes venika twoc paved the way

[Lily09]

as a homosexual demiro person please think of me as gay. not gay aro. of course i cant speak for everyone in the ace / aro community but im gay.

[Zelda]

Originally Posted by venika

1. i mean aren't heteromantic aces / aro heterosexuals hets? like it's like... in the name isn't it? it's not denying their asexuality or aromanticism, it's just describing the ppl theyre attracted to afaik

2. also my knowledge of lgbt history isn't extremely detailed so correct me if i'm wrong but, weren't trans people at the forefront of like? modern lgbt activism? like w/ stonewall for example?

3. i/any1 else never said aces don't belong (or that they don't face social discrimination bc that's definitely a thing that happens) but i did say that straight ace people don't belong in a community that fights for the rights of same-gender-attracted and trans people? like it's not that they're excluded bc they're ace and bc gay ppl think aces are bad or something, it's bc they don't like the same gender and aren't trans, therefore they don't face the same issues... and therefore having a separate ace/aro community that focuses on the discrimination you mentioned would be a lot more helpful for both groups


also tbh i've never rlly seen anyone use the split attraction model outside of tumblr so does anyone know if like there are any articles abt it or smth?

1) I guess it would depend on the person? Because like, some people might rather be referred to as ace, or het ace, than simply het, because in their mind het people might be people who enjoy sex and want to have it, and that would feel like the wrong definition to them.

but, as Elliot demonstrated, some people obviously prefer gay over gay aro, or het over het ace.

probably it would be safest just to ask the person before presuming to call them anything.

3) yes, thanks, that's already been covered.

^p.s. sorry if that's snarky or something, i'm kind of in a bad mood for reasons completely unrelated to kp, and also sleep deprived, :s

[venika]

Originally Posted by Zelda

1) I guess it would depend on the person? Because like, some people might rather be referred to as ace, or het ace, than simply het, because in their mind het people might be people who enjoy sex and want to have it, and that would feel like the wrong definition to them.

but, as Elliot demonstrated, some people obviously prefer gay over gay aro, or het over het ace.

probably it would be safest just to ask the person before presuming to call them anything.

3) yes, thanks, that's already been covered.

^p.s. sorry if that's snarky or something, i'm kind of in a bad mood for reasons completely unrelated to kp, and also sleep deprived, :s

oh yea tru, ppl will defs use different labels ^

also YEA i know it's been said b4 but i think someone (idr who and im too lazy to go back and check) had said smth like that in response to my most recent post so that's why i repeated it lol

[pluzzle]

Originally Posted by venika

1. i mean aren't heteromantic aces / aro heterosexuals hets? like it's like... in the name isn't it? it's not denying their asexuality or aromanticism, it's just describing the ppl theyre attracted to afaik

2. also my knowledge of lgbt history isn't extremely detailed so correct me if i'm wrong but, weren't trans people at the forefront of like? modern lgbt activism? like w/ stonewall for example?

3. i/any1 else never said aces don't belong (or that they don't face social discrimination bc that's definitely a thing that happens) but i did say that straight ace people don't belong in a community that fights for the rights of same-gender-attracted and trans people? like it's not that they're excluded bc they're ace and bc gay ppl think aces are bad or something, it's bc they don't like the same gender and aren't trans, therefore they don't face the same issues... and therefore having a separate ace/aro community that focuses on the discrimination you mentioned would be a lot more helpful for both groups


also tbh i've never rlly seen anyone use the split attraction model outside of tumblr so does anyone know if like there are any articles abt it or smth?

i agree w/ all this and yes, as elliot said trans women of colour did start the lgbt community so trans people WERE in it all along

tbh i dont have the energy to discourse about this bc im going back to school today but I don't see why calling a het ace/ het aro "heterosexual/romantic" is bad

And the split attraction model, pretty much no one brings it up outside of hell website so ya... but what kind of irks me about it is that it sexualises lgbt identities so much bc the sexual was made as in gender kind of sex not intercourse kind IIRC

[meerkat]

Originally Posted by pluzzle

i agree w/ all this and yes, as elliot said trans women of colour did start the lgbt community so trans people WERE in it all along

tbh i dont have the energy to discourse about this bc im going back to school today but I don't see why calling a het ace/ het aro "heterosexual/romantic" is bad

And the split attraction model, pretty much no one brings it up outside of hell website so ya... but what kind of irks me about it is that it sexualises lgbt identities so much bc the sexual was made as in gender kind of sex not intercourse kind IIRC

yES THANKS FOR THE LAST PARAGRAPH

[pluzzle]

Originally Posted by meerkat

yES THANKS FOR THE LAST PARAGRAPH

haha ty, thats one thing that's always got to me

[AlgebraAddict]

Ok I have a question
If there is someone who identifies as homoromantic and asexual, wouldn't that still make them gay? On what level is defining someone's preferences as purely about who they wanna screw, like, NOT acephobic? I assumed that "gay" could apply to someone's romantic or sexual orientation. I know that "homosexual" applies to mostly just sexual orientation but like ??? It just seems to me (correct me if I'm wrong) that by saying someone's "not completely gay" because they're asexual is just valuing the validity of their preferences purely on a sexual basis. Like "oh you're not sexually attracted to x gender so obviouslu ur not REALLY gay". maybe just Romantic attraction is enough. Idek just my opinion this probably didn't make any sense

[Jesse]

Originally Posted by AlgebraAddict

Ok I have a question
If there is someone who identifies as homoromantic and asexual, wouldn't that still make them gay? On what level is defining someone's preferences as purely about who they wanna screw, like, NOT acephobic? I assumed that "gay" could apply to someone's romantic or sexual orientation. I know that "homosexual" applies to mostly just sexual orientation but like ??? It just seems to me (correct me if I'm wrong) that by saying someone's "not completely gay" because they're asexual is just valuing the validity of their preferences purely on a sexual basis. Like "oh you're not sexually attracted to x gender so obviouslu ur not REALLY gay". maybe just Romantic attraction is enough. Idek just my opinion this probably didn't make any sense

But...sexuality is 100% about sexual attraction. It has nothing to do with romantic attraction.
gay = sexually attracted to same sex
straight = sexually attracted to opposite sex
When I was younger, I probably would've preferred dating girls over guys--but that didn't make me straight.

[meerkat]

@jesse: you make good points, but can you please asterisk out some of those slurs next time? thanks