Tag: and vice versa

bpdnateruess:

if you’re following me you should know that no matter who you are, you can hurt ace people if you aren’t ace and can hurt aro people if you aren’t aro

like don’t come at me with arguments of “oh but can non-ace and non-aro people REALLY hurt ace and aro people if [xyz]?” like yes. Yes, they absolutely can.

anagnori:

bibliotheca-babble-on:

Here’s the thing: When you say heteroromantic asexuals are not queer, you are saying asexuality is not queer. When you say aromantic heterosexuals are not queer, you are saying aromanticism is not queer. But that fact of the matter is, asexuality is not straight. Aromanticism is not straight. Heteroromantic asexuals and aromantic heterosexuals are allowed, certainly, to call themselves straight if that is the label they prefer, but asexuality and aromanticism? Those, by their very definition, are not straight.

When you say heteroromantic aces and aromantic heterosexuals are too straight or not queer enough, you erase their non-straight orientations and you close them off from communities and support structures. You also invalidate all asexuals and aromantics everywhere because you are implicitly saying that aromanticism and asexuality don’t count.

So I don’t know about you, but my queer community is open to anyone who is not cisgender+heteroromantic+heterosexual.

(Reminder: I am aro-ace and would appreciate feedback if I’ve offended any heteroromantics or heterosexuals on the ace and aro spectrums.)

Agreed completely.

Also: If you treat asexuality or aromanticism as “not queer” unless paired with a homo/bi/pan orientation, then you are treating “straight” as the default for everyone, which is another form of heterosexism.