#BelieveAces Part 2: On the refusal to accept labels

I’ve been thinking a lot about the removal of labels.

Largely posthumously, like in the cases of Stephen Donaldson and Martha Shelley, activists of the 1960’s. In life they commented on how they took flak from leaders for being bi. How their relationship was treated as a scandal because they weren’t visually performing their sexuality in a way that was useful to others. This is such a clear cut case of bisexuality only being valued if it reads as homosexuality. It happened when they were alive, and it still happens when people discuss them, and their specific concern.

Another recent after death label change was done by Rolling Stone magazine. One of their staff writers, with a habit of making fun of asexuals, decided to target Yasmin Benoit for her connection to Bianca Devins. Yasmin is the creator of #ThisIsWhatAsexualLooksLike, and her path briefly, and digitally, crossed with Bianca when Bianca submitted herself to the AsexualLooks instagram. This disbelieve of not only Bianca’s words, but Yasmin’s is endemic of society at large.

People don’t believe asexuals when they speak.

Even more recently, a Wikipedia editor refused to accept that labeling of a celebrity as ace as proof. Locking the page, and claiming that the actress was being too ambiguous. This real time erasure makes coming out an arbitrary bar people need to clear in order for outsiders to consider them as the words they use for themselves. And the point here isn’t even about trying make sure a label sticks to someone. Or the historical record either. It’s to point out that at all points, asexuals say something and are not fully believed at any time of that journey.

A visit to our FuckYeahAsexual inbox shows countless cases of this happening in countless ways. A quick scroll shows three messages raising the concern of people denying their label for wanting to have children. Two express concern that asexuality is being confused with virginity and having their labels denied eitherway that coin falls. Other asks are a point blank statement. “I’ve tried to explain asexuality to people and they don’t get it.”

Asexuality is a sexuality of it’s own, it intersects with queer theory, but like the field of study the reductionist review of outsiders deciding what is of isn’t asexuality is serving no one, and nothing besides ignorance.

Allosexuals need to interact with aces in a way that allows for our infinite diversity. Not only in race, gender, and ability, but behavior. There isn’t a single facet of asexuality that is a fixed point. Any idea to the contrary holds us all back. It’s high time we start believing aces and the words they say. Other people’s sexuality don’t need to meet any’s preconceived ideas of it.

It is my hope that when we start believing people, we will start truly seeing them as the people they are, or were… Whether they be, bisexual, asexual, other any other queer identity.

– Roses from a digital typewriter

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s