actuallyasexual:

It is interesting when people claim that asexuality as it is defined by asexual people is valued in conservative/right-wing politics, in order to position asexual people as capable of holding privilege for their asexuality. 

I think back to when asexuality appeared as a discussion topic on Fox News: Asexuality a sexual orientation? (2012), where conservative/right-wing commentators debate the existence of asexuality. To summarize, they:

• Imply that asexuality is a woman’s experience, likening asexuality to the stereotype that women are often not in the mood.  
• Suggest that men were labeled as asexual in a study because they “didn’t objectify women” and “didn’t want to have sex ten times a day”
• Asexuality was invented because of an “overly sexualized” society, and that asexual people are just people with “normal” sex drives.
• Joked that asexual people have already been represented on screen by sketch characters mocking non-binary/androgynous people. (x)
• Joked about adding more letters to the LGBT+ community, implying that there were too many letters being added to the community. 
• Joked about the need for asexual representation, promoting the idea that asexual representation will be boring/uninteresting. 
• Questioning what discrimination asexual people could possibly face, while simultaneously contributing to discriminating ideas about asexuals. 
• Referring to asexuals as “lepers” in society, because we do not experience sexuality the same way as everyone else. 
• Outright stating that since asexuals represent a small portion of the population, asexuals shouldn’t need recognition. 
• Joked that since asexuals don’t “want sex,” they must want something else and therefore asexuals are untrustworthy/unreliable. 

It turns out that conservative/right-wing commentators are just as willing to make the same invalidating statements and promote the same misconceptions about asexuality as exclusionists who engage in anti asexual rhetoric. 

Both erase male asexuality. Both stereotype asexuality. Both downplay the problems asexuals face, while creating problems for asexuals. Both mock the inclusion of more identities to LGBT+ spaces. 

Both make jokes about asexual representation, by likening asexual people to problematic characters. Both refer to asexual representation as unnecessary or uninteresting. Both position asexual people as untrustworthy and unreliable. 

This isn’t to say that asexuals do not exist in conservative spaces, but I really need the idea that asexuals are well loved and accepted in conservative politics to die. I’m an asexual person with a right-wing/conservative family. 

This also isn’t to say that some asexuals do not have privileges that other asexuals do not, but the attitudes represented above impact all asexual people to some degree. 

This is a small example of some of the attitudes I’ve seen and heard from people who are not asexual, especially from right wing/conservative people who often debate our existence altogether. 

Our asexuality as it is defined and lived by us is not accepted, and by perpetuating this lie to support your argument you are erasing the challenges asexual people may face by their family and peers. 

Also, if you claim to be so opposed to right wing/conservative values but your rhetoric mimics the kind of rhetoric that is used in this clip, then I think you need to rethink your values.