Kaz's tumblings: Archive

captainheartless:

introvertactivism:

WHAT DOES INTROVERSION HAVE TO DO WITH ASEXUALS?

Most of us are introverts! Our tendency towards introversion can often be related to our desire to not establish sexual relationships with random people or pursue casual hookups. They’re definitely interconnected and I’m…

I would definitely be cautious about saying “most asexuals are introverts”. All the data I’ve seen (AVEN polls) are incredibly unreliable. Furthermore, it’s usually based on those Myers-Briggs personality tests, and most of the free online ones I’ve seen completely butcher their questions about introversion/extroversion.

According to those, extroversion is usually about talking a lot and being the center of attention. And then I’m usually not an extrovert, because in most groups people are talking about things I’m not interested in (for example: conversations about how hot <insert generically hot person here> is). On the other hand, I definitely get energy by hanging out with people- it just has to be the right kind of people, particularly ones which don’t call me a freak or tell me to shut up and stop queering the place up. Because of this I had always called (and sometimes still do call) myself an INTJ (which is how I’ve scored on all tests), but I think I may be a perfect example of someone who gets energy from hanging out with people.

Yeah, this.

The more I think about it the more I think we can probably throw away most data regarding introversion/extroversion in asexuality. Because, you know, introverted people are more likely to spend lots of time online, and there is very little offline asexuality stuff or asexuality community - which means that a large number of asexual people ended up finding the community online, so in addition to the general problem of online polls skewing towards introversion we’ve got the issue that there may be proportionately more introverted asexuals who know they’re asexual than extroverted, or that online asexuals who know they’re asexuals skew even more towards introversion than the online population in general.

(Also, I may be the opposite of you as I’m an introvert who, in environments I’m comfortable with, can be a *total* social butterfly. At the last two maths conferences I’ve been to I ended up constantly flitting back and forth between groups of people I knew and making friends with all the other PhD students there and, yeah, talking a lot and being the centre of attention - and then somehow making excuses for myself so I could go hide in my room for a few hours every day because people are draining and I need several hours of alone time a day or I go completely loopy.)

Also, my not having casual sex and in fact not having sex at all has nothing to do with being an introvert, okay? It’s because I don’t want to. Because I’m asexual and repulsed so the idea actively puts me off. If some part of me did want to have sex I definitely wouldn’t let introversion stop me from pursuing that, and it’s not as if if I suddenly switched to extrovert mode that would mean I’d want to have sex! If anything you could make an argument for introversion being associated with aromanticism… except that the same stuff applies and a lot of aromantic people are still looking for intimate relationships and people to spend a lot of time around, they just don’t want them to be romantic.

Aug 28, 201129 notes

#asexuality #Introversion

I don't even understand aceslutshamers.

pond-put-some-trousers-on:

What is going on?

Everything on that blog is really convoluted.

A troll? A real person? With real opinions?

So confused.

SO.

CONFUSED.

I have no idea, and honestly enough I don’t want to know - I just blocked them straight off because there is shit I do not need to see.

Aug 26, 20113 notes

#personal #asexual #asexuality #lgbt #troll

There are just so many things.

aceadmiral:

I’ve been trying to make this argument that repulsed =/= bad on the basis that repulsed, in fact, =/= bad, and that most people have things that turn them on as well as kinks they don’t understand, and boundaries about what they feel comfortable doing with and having done to their bodies. But, more specifically?

For repulsed asexuals (not demis or grey-aces, sorry), you are talking about saying “I don’t want to have sex with people I’m not attracted to” is bad. Because by definition there are no people we are attracted to. The reason this whole thing has a word in the asexual community instead of the way it is talked amongst people of other sexualities (namely: “You do what? Ew!”) Is because we are talking about how much we are willing to do with people we’re not sexually attracted to. This word we have? Is entirely about sexual people and sexual culture.

It is entirely about how the world rejects asexual people in favor of the sexual majority.

And that’s why nobody ever calls themselves a “repulsed heterosexual” or a “repulsed homosexual” or what have you. Because sex between people who are attracted to each other is accepted as something that is logical and makes sense, no matter what the moral judgment is that comes after it.

There are a lot of people of all different sexualities who don’t like various sexual acts. Nobody should try and force them to like it, especially not without their permission. I stand behind that general argument and will continue to do so, because it is a sound argument with solid logical underpinnings.

But on a micro level, singling out repulsed asexuals because we’re not willing to have sex with people we’re not attracted to? You disgust me.

It occured to me yesterday that this is exactly it. The reason sexual people don’t identify as repulsed/indifferent/etc. is because they are not generally expected to have sex with people they categorically aren’t attracted to in the way asexuals are, and if they refuse to have sex with people they categorically aren’t attracted to that doesn’t generally make their experience of their sexuality very different. That is, if a straight person says “nah, not having sex with anyone of my own gender”, that doesn’t have massive knock-on effects in terms of their likelihood of finding a romantic relationship or w/e. Whereas, due to being repulsed, I completely dismissed romantic relationships as an option for ages, and there’s a lot of what indifferent and/or aces who enjoy sex say that is totally alien to me. As a result, it can be an important distinction for asexuals, because it actually carries useful information beyond “ew, sex”.

Although I could see situations where it’d be a useful categorisation for sexual people as well, for instance heteroromantic homosexuals or homoromantic heterosexuals. But for most of them I suspect there’s just no point.

Aug 25, 201123 notes

#asexuality #repulsed

aceadmiral:

Hahaha it just asked me if I wanted to report the person I just blocked for harassment.

Yeah. Yeah I do. But I won’t because I can’t trust the people looking at it won’t just say “what is this special snowflake unicorn girl whining about?”

This exact same thing happened to me yesterday. Just.

*HUGS*

Aug 25, 20111 note

Another note on being repulsed

writingfromfactorx:

aceadmiral:

There are lots of things in this world I do not like, to varying levels. Asparagus. People who don’t use their turn signals. Spiders. Toothpaste of any flavor other than green. And many, many more. Nobody’s suggesting I go to a therapist checked over my burning hatred of tomatoes. Why should sex be any different?

Especially because, no one takes issue when I say “I hate tomatoes” and leave it at that. I don’t have to say, “Well, I can’t really swallow them very well, and the choking usually gives me the shakes, but if they’re very, very finely chopped or pureed like in a sauce then that’s okay, although I don’t like the taste either, so if the insides with the seeds leaks onto something I can’t really eat it, and the look of skinned tomatoes makes my stomach turn, particularly cooked ones, but I can handle them whole and even bring myself to cut them for you (although I find it super gross).” No, I just say “I hate tomatoes”!! You don’t need that much detail! You don’t care about that much detail! So why is my sex life any different?

As long as I am not going around smacking tomatoes out of people’s hands before they can bite into them or trampling tomato plants while twirling my mustache, how can my hatred of tomatoes possibly be offensive?

This right here. Seriously, what the fuck is it with the whole “repulsed is an intrinsically offensive term” bullshit?

I am getting really tired of sexual people expecting us to cheerlead for their sexualities all the time when they can’t, in general, be bothered to understand or respect ours. It is possible to be repulsed by sex without, in fact, judging other people for having it or enjoying it! I for one am repulsed by bacon—the texture and smell both are utterly repugnant to me, to say nothing of the taste. One of my best friends loves bacon like it’s going out of style. It is utterly possible for me to go “ewwwww, bacon is disgusting” without judging my friend for loving it; my friend, likewise, is capable of hearing “bacon is disgusting” rather than “you are disgusting for liking it.”

Why is this so hard to extend to sex? Why can’t people hear the words “I think sex is gross” without imagining the implication “I think you are gross, too?” I hate things my friends love all the damn time, and I love things that people I know think are disgusting and vaguely icky, like peanut butter and fluffernutter sandwiches; doesn’t mean that they think I’m disgusting. More for me!

This forever and ever and ever.

Honestly, I think that when people get omgsooffended by the term “repulsed” it says a lot more about their issues than it does about mine. If you can’t hear “I am repulsed by the thought of having sex” without taking it as a personal attack? I respectfully suggest that you might have some problems with sex and sexuality you might want to take a look at and stop getting all over innocent bystanders. Because I for one am getting very sick over having to bend over backwards for the people who find the idea of someone, somewhere, going “ew, sex :/” offensive.

Aug 24, 2011119 notes

#asexuality #repulsed

zincfingers:

Oh no, some people were telling you not to use a homophobic slur to describe straight platonic relationships. HOW DARE THEY

…

Because. You know. The relationships I - nonbinary identifying as in between female and neutrois and presenting as/passing as female in RL - have with two women. Both of whom I love very much and where I really, really want to permanently live with at least one of them (both is looking pretty unlikely :( and this would require a transatlantic move in both cases), maybe raise kids with them, maybe marry one of them if legally possible - because of tax/visa/citizenship stuff and because if I’m ever going to marry *anyone* they’re at the top of the list-

Those relationships are totally straight platonic relationships.

Not even going to touch the rest of it, just. JFC.

Aug 23, 201157 notes

#privilege #lgbtqap #asexuality #queer #queer hierarchy #white privilege #lgbtq #rant. over.

as came up via chatting with Sciatrix

Who on earth came up with the “hey, want to go out for a drink sometime?” = “I am expressing romantic and/or sexual interest! I am expecting you to pick up on this, and if you agree this will be tacitly assumed to be an expression of reciprocated interest!” code anyway?

Definitely not autistic people, anyway.

*remembering a certain incident where ze may have accidentally agreed to go on a date with a guy ze never saw again and only realised three months later? Yeeeaaaah.*

*yeah, the asexuality and divide-by-cucumber romanticism may not have helped.*

*but seriously, you say “want to have a drink?” I hear “hey, let’s go have tea and chat together! this is a good idea!” if you are interested in me nonplatonically say so.*

Aug 23, 201115 notes

#asexuality #autism #dating #wtfromantic #romantic orientation of divide by cucumber #no seriously why can't you just spell these things out #not to be held responsible for any hearts broken via literal understanding #asperger #damn you nts and your incomprehensible codes

weesleyisourking:

Most of which are people replying, saying things akin to “No one cares about your micromanaging of your relationships”; “Stop trying to be pretentious or get oppression street creds”; “I have relationships like this, you don’t need a special word for it”; and even, “Wow, the asexuals always have…

I… had no idea this was going on, and this upsets me so. Damn. Much.

Okay. People. You’ve got issues with the word queerplatonic? Shut the FUCK up. I’m not the originator of the word, that’s s.e. smith/meloukhia of this ain’t livin’, but it *was*, AFAIK, first properly introduced to the world on my blog in a conversation ou was having with me… partially because we had both felt the lack of a word for this so keenly.

I spent two. Fucking. Years. Driving myself up the wall over my relationships - in particular, over my ideal relationship *and* over the relationship I had with one of my now-zucchini. Was it romantic or friendship? Was I accidentally dating someone? Did I have a girlfriend? How could you even tell? And what on earth did you do if the question didn’t lead anywhere because neither of the two options really fit? I agonised over this, and I honestly don’t think someone who has been there, facing not just “this relationship I have, I have no fucking clue how to categorise it, I don’t think the categories I’ve been given work” but “actually, the categories I’ve been given don’t work for my relationships at all, neither in terms of the ones I have but also the ones I want.” All around me were people iding as hetero/homo/biromantic or aromantic and I was sitting there going “…homoromantic? aromantic? in between? NOTHING WORKS NONE OF THIS MAKES SENSE”, do you have any idea what that feels like?

Queerplatonic? Zucchini? I may not have invented those words, but they’re my words all the same. They are, in a a way, some of the most important words I have. More than asexual. More than nonbinary. And if you don’t feel the need for them, then don’t you fucking touch them.

Aug 23, 201157 notes

#privilege #lgbtqap #asexuality #queer #queer hierarchy #white privilege #lgbtq #rant. over.

Why?!

surealfantasy:

Why
?

I mean the roots are -1 and -1/2

Why is not
? :C

It’s freaking me out Dx

Because the x^2 term is multiplied by 2. If you multiply out (x+1)(x+1/2) you get x^2+3/2x+1/2 - that is, exactly half what you’re trying to get. Multiplying a constant doesn’t change the roots.

(saw this randomly in the #mathematics tag, hope you don’t mind me poking my head in.)

Aug 22, 20113 notes

#mathematics #algebra #why

thisisntfarmlife:

hupsoonheng:

megachiropteran:

waiflike:

eateroftrees:

Sex Positivity is Rape Culture in Disguise

[Trigger Warning: Rape, Rape Culture discussed at link]

Or, in which I attempt to alienate all my followers.

Mostly it discusses ways in which rape culture and sex positivity…

I *did* read the post, in its entirety, and I am acknowledging it by trying to clear the name of the sex positive movement. This not just a movement for us hyper-sexual, sex craved folks; it’s a movement for everyone, intended to make everyone feel comfortable with the way they are, the urges they feel, and the level/frequency of sexual activity they want to engage in - regardless of the amount or intended partner(s). Since we’re so caught up on verbiage, I’d like to point out that having “sex” and “positivity” next to one another doesn’t mean that it has to be lots of sex to be positive. All that means is that sexuality, in whatever form it manifests itself, is a positive, natural persuasion that shouldn’t be looked down upon or discouraged. As a part of the movement, I felt offended that I was accused of promoting rape culture because someone doesn’t really know what my philosophy is about. A huge part of my views about sex positivity is that all interactions are three things: informed (both parties know what will be happening), consensual (both parties have agreed that this act is okay with them), and safe (in terms of emotional safety, knowing that at any time, consent can be revoked, as well as in terms of STD and pregnancy prevention, depending on the situation). I refuse to not stand up for myself and my beliefs when someone is throwing around accusations like that which are based on assumptions and gross misunderstandings.

Look - the thing is that you say that this is what sex-positivity is, but for a lot of us this isn’t what we’ve experienced. And I don’t mean occasional exceptions who were prude-shaming and anti-ace, but many people. Possibly the majority of people calling themselves sex-positive we’ve encountered. Large, well-known sex-positive spaces can be dripping with this sort of attitude. I personally take, for instance, a blog being labelled “sex-positive” as a sign that this is a space where I have to be careful and that may be unsafe, not out of any misunderstanding of what the term means but based on my own past experiences. It’s a movement for everyone? I used to think that way; I used to identify as sex-positive, but then I quit because it was clear to me that I wasn’t wanted.

I respectfully suggest that if you get upset by people saying a lot of sex-positivity carries some seriously nasty messages, instead of attacking the people saying this and accusing them of lying about or misunderstanding their own experiences (which, really?) you start looking into why so many people are saying this is wide-spread and, possibly, what you can do to stop it. Honestly, I for one would feel much less alienated by sex-positivity if I saw other sex-positive people calling out these attitudes, but usually that’s not what’s going on.

Aug 22, 2011510 notes

#reblog #text #rape culture #sexuality #sex positivity #informed consent #consensual sex #safe sex #sex #lgbtq #asexual #pan sexual

eateroftrees:

[Trigger Warning: Rape, Rape Culture discussed at link]

Or, in which I attempt to alienate all my followers.

Mostly it discusses ways in which rape culture and sex positivity intersect, especially for people who are less sexual then is normative, such as asexual people, gray-asexual people, people with sex related triggers, people with autism who get completely overwhelmed by sex, etc.

THIS POST OMG.

To all the people saying “but this is not how it works! but we’re not like that!”:

I used to identify as sex-positive. Then, eventually, I realised that my reaction to seeing the word “sex-positive” was putting on my psychological armour and girding myself for attack. Because I was just that used to people calling themselves sex-positive to attack my sexuality - say I must be repressed, have a hormone imbalance, insert all the arguments from asexual bingo here, that asexuality couldn’t possibly exist - or loudly pity me, or make statements about how sex was so wonderful and amazing and an essential part of being human! Sex is great, isn’t it great that all of us love sex? …at that point, I went, “I am not sticking around in a movement that has made me feel like that.”

If you want to say that sex-positivity *isn’t* any of the things mentioned in the article, I suggest you work to make it that way. Otherwise, I will think of you as possible exceptions to the general rule of “sex-positive = Kaz starts going the other way”.

I would also like to point out that it is not, in fact, a great step from “sex is good!” to problematising lack of sex. Because if you’re saying “sex is good!” - not for you, but as a universal - anyone who disagrees with that, who thinks sex isn’t good (for me sex is a definite negative and I am very much looking forward to never having it) is immediately put into question. Because sex is good! How can you not want to have it? Which is why I am very much in favour of “sex is inherently neutral; whether it is good or bad depends on the person and situation.” And if you *don’t* mean it as a universal, I suggest you make that clear - heaven knows I can’t say “sex is disgusting” without couching it in a million disclaimers about how this is how *I* feel about sex involving *me* and has nothing to do with other people having sex.

Aug 21, 2011510 notes

nextstepcake:

So, the most recent issue of the journal “sexualities” had not one, but three new “themed essays on asexuality”. Out of nine articles total. Not bad for us one-percenters. I for one am excited :D

1) There’s more to life than sex? Difference and commonality within the asexual community - Mark…

Oh maaan I hope my uni has access to those because I really want to read them. Especially since, you know, for ages it’s felt like I was the only person talking about asexuality and disability and now there is someone writing academic papers about this ?!?!

Aug 20, 201126 notes

#asexuality #science #research #asexual

sir-kit:

Yes, it was a decent answer. Yes, it was surprising and kind of nice to see something reasonable on the subject coming from that source.

He gave a decent-human-being response to that one. Not going to deny it.

But the couple of times I’ve heard the word “praise” mentioned in the posts about…

It’s worth nothing that he hasn’t appeared to change his opinions on whether asexuals should come out at the start of a relationship, it’s just that this didn’t actually come up in this question. He does seem more inclined to view asexuality as a genuine orientation than he used to, but the main points that made ace people throw up their arms and go “WHY” still seem to be present.

On my part, it’ll take a LOT more before I start praising him. I’ve been more occupied trying to figure out if I fell into an alternate universe without realising.

Aug 19, 201111 notes

#asexual #asexuality

This is what I'm actually angry about:

hernameishelen:

kazaera:

hernameishelen:

aceadmiral:

There is a lot of policing of asexual identities, both inside and outside the community. It you masturbate, if you like sex, if you have sex, if you don’t hate sex, if you were ever sexually abused, if you have a mental illness, if you’re autistic, if you’re disabled, if you’re a woman, if you’re a man, if you’re non-binary, if you’re trans*, if you use sexual language, if you make sexual jokes, if you find people aesthetically attractive, if you’re romantic, if you’re not romantic, if you’re religious, on and on, all these “reasons” why you can’t be asexual that are total B.S.

And then these people come along and say that talking about cake, or Dr. Who, or what have you means that you are policing their asexual identity. No. Nobody is holding your identity or your support hostage based on whether or not you meet some criteria having to do with your pastry preferences or your television habits.

Especially because some of these voices are the same ones that preach about sex-positivity. Sex is not some magic special thing that deserves to be the only one you can like or dislike as you will.

Hah. People aren’t allowed to be sex-negative, not ever. Sometimes I think our community is too focused on being perfect, and not enough on just being. Myself included in that criticism.

Someday… I will talk about how I think a lot of people who’ve just discovered that they’re asexual go through a sort of “detox” anti-sexual phase and I’m not sure immediately jumping on them and telling them they are horrible disgusting people and must go away and hide in shame because they’re making our community look bad is actually in any way productive or likely to help them get through it.

The whole “making our community look bad” thing sends shivers up my spine anyway. It was exactly that reasoning that led to an AVEN mod saying repulsed people weren’t really asexual because they were damaged and repressing and gave sexual people a wrong impression of asexuality (which is what made me leave AVEN), or later people saying that trans* and non-neurotypical asexuals should pipe down and not take up so much space because they were making the community look bad, and that’s just the ones I can think of off the top of my head. How about, as an alternative, we decide that our community is made up out of loads of very diverse people and turn our ire onto the people who are going to judge all of asexuality by the actions of a few?

Ah, so you were the one to come up with the detox idea? I think I picked it off greybrd, and I’ve been trying to preach the good preach since then on it, but no one really listens. And no one is focused on just being regular people anyway.

I sometimes think the ace community is too closely linked to social justice - it makes the community really tweaky and oftentimes really aggressive.

No, the credit for that goes entirely to Sciatrix, who I snagged it from.

I do have to say that I’m kind of surprised you heard it from Greybird, because, okay it’s been a few years but… Greybird is the AVEN mod I was talking about up there, who said shit about repulsed people not really being asexual that drove me off AVEN. So this would be a pretty dramatic change of opinions and. I am currently kind of confused.

As for SJ, I’m… not entirely sure - in fact, I’m coming from a pretty heavily SJ background and am frequently blindsided by stuff in the asexual community that’s really not what I’m used to. I do think our *trolls* are coming from the nasty parts of SJ, and that may be causing seepage.

Aug 17, 201154 notes

This is what I'm actually angry about:

hernameishelen:

aceadmiral:

There is a lot of policing of asexual identities, both inside and outside the community. It you masturbate, if you like sex, if you have sex, if you don’t hate sex, if you were ever sexually abused, if you have a mental illness, if you’re autistic, if you’re disabled, if you’re a woman, if you’re a man, if you’re non-binary, if you’re trans*, if you use sexual language, if you make sexual jokes, if you find people aesthetically attractive, if you’re romantic, if you’re not romantic, if you’re religious, on and on, all these “reasons” why you can’t be asexual that are total B.S.

And then these people come along and say that talking about cake, or Dr. Who, or what have you means that you are policing their asexual identity. No. Nobody is holding your identity or your support hostage based on whether or not you meet some criteria having to do with your pastry preferences or your television habits.

Especially because some of these voices are the same ones that preach about sex-positivity. Sex is not some magic special thing that deserves to be the only one you can like or dislike as you will.

Hah. People aren’t allowed to be sex-negative, not ever. Sometimes I think our community is too focused on being perfect, and not enough on just being. Myself included in that criticism.

Someday… I will talk about how I think a lot of people who’ve just discovered that they’re asexual go through a sort of “detox” anti-sexual phase and I’m not sure immediately jumping on them and telling them they are horrible disgusting people and must go away and hide in shame because they’re making our community look bad is actually in any way productive or likely to help them get through it.

The whole “making our community look bad” thing sends shivers up my spine anyway. It was exactly that reasoning that led to an AVEN mod saying repulsed people weren’t really asexual because they were damaged and repressing and gave sexual people a wrong impression of asexuality (which is what made me leave AVEN), or later people saying that trans* and non-neurotypical asexuals should pipe down and not take up so much space because they were making the community look bad, and that’s just the ones I can think of off the top of my head. How about, as an alternative, we decide that our community is made up out of loads of very diverse people and turn our ire onto the people who are going to judge all of asexuality by the actions of a few?

Aug 17, 201154 notes

This is what I'm actually angry about:

aceadmiral:

There is a lot of policing of asexual identities, both inside and outside the community. It you masturbate, if you like sex, if you have sex, if you don’t hate sex, if you were ever sexually abused, if you have a mental illness, if you’re autistic, if you’re disabled, if you’re a woman, if you’re a man, if you’re non-binary, if you’re trans*, if you use sexual language, if you make sexual jokes, if you find people aesthetically attractive, if you’re romantic, if you’re not romantic, if you’re religious, on and on, all these “reasons” why you can’t be asexual that are total B.S.

And then these people come along and say that talking about cake, or Dr. Who, or what have you means that you are policing their asexual identity. No. Nobody is holding your identity or your support hostage based on whether or not you meet some criteria having to do with your pastry preferences or your television habits.

Especially because some of these voices are the same ones that preach about sex-positivity. Sex is not some magic special thing that deserves to be the only one you can like or dislike as you will.

I’ve been confused by all the cake/Sherlock/DW-backlash going on. I do think it’s become a bit excessive, but I always thought it was clearly just in-jokey fun and can’t remember ever seeing anyone seriously suggesting that someone couldn’t be asexual without loving cake/Sherlock/DW. And although I don’t hate any of those things, I’m not ecstatic about any, honestly pretty “meh” on Sherlock and don’t follow either Sherlock or DW because I can’t watch TV so I’m not exactly the platonic ideal of a cake/Sherlock/DW asexual myself. Have I missed something?

Aug 17, 201154 notes

jazzqueen:

I think it’s completely understandable that some people just don’t grasp asexuality.

I certainly do not understand most other sexualities. I don’t understand hypersexual people and my best friend is one. I will never understand the instinct some people have that makes them want to jump down every…

(Note: I haven’t seen what spurred this post so I’m responding to it outside that context)

To me it depends on what they mean and how they’re using it.

I mean, yeah, I don’t understand being sexual. I can’t properly imagine having an urge to have sex. BUT, even though I don’t understand it, I can accept that it still exists, there is something here I don’t understand, listen to and believe sexual people’s account of their experiences even when I can’t really imagine them and simply take things like “some people really want to have sex and are upset if they can’t” as given. Not understanding sexuality would not be an excuse if I started slut-shaming.

As a result, if people go “I don’t understand asexuality, but I don’t have to - I just have to understand that it exists and asexual people and their problems deserve respect”, fine and dandy. But sometimes people seem to go “I don’t understand asexuality, so I shall now mock the entire concept and refuse to listen to any asexual people.” And that is never okay.

Aug 15, 20118 notes

#text #love #just started following a bunch of new ace blogs and now I have a bunch of ~opinions~ #don't mind me #asexuality

that stuttering thing

Was thinking about this more because I went on holiday and my fluency took a nosedive; I ended up back in that “cannot actually pass for fluent for longer than ten seconds in a conversation with a stranger” stage I spent most of my time in up until three years ago and haven’t been in since. Going back to that has been odd, comfortable and uncomfortable at the same time, and it made me start checking out the stuttering/stammering (#stuttering is full of people talking about some song or another or how they were really nervous at this thing just now omg, #stammering seems to be mostly actual people who stutter) community on tumblr.

Honestly? I find it very, very sad-making to see so many people talking about the shame and humiliation and pain they experience and then follow it up by “but my stutter isn’t that bad/I can avoid it/etc. so I can’t really complain, I don’t have it as bad as those people who have a really bad stutter.”

Because more often than not I’ve been the person they’re talking about. Prior to doing a speech therapy about three years ago, I could not hide my stutter. It went through phases, but even in my relatively fluent ones it was still noticeable, in my relatively dysfluent ones I’d reach the point where communicating by pen and paper would probably have been quicker, and it was always too much to be able to avoid through substitutions etc. (Oh yeah, and I always always always got stuck for something like twenty seconds on my own name. That tends to make the hiding thing kind of pointless after introductions.) After speech therapy I was almost totally fluent, and even though I gave up doing the exercise or really doing it properly after six months it’s taken me another two and a half years to get back to something even resembling how I spoke before.

And honestly? I prefer openly stuttering. I think the pain and shame was greatest in those three years. (Indeed, one of the things that makes me so thoroughly angry about speech therapy is that it managed to *give me* the complexes about my speech so common among people who stutter that I’d avoided up until then.) Now I’m stuttering more openly and although it’s annoying it’s also a relief - because if I’m stuttering openly I don’t have to worry about hiding it because it’s impossible anyway, I don’t have to worry about people making remarks like “oh but you don’t have a real problem” or “I stutter sometimes when I get nervous too!” because it’s immediately obvious that I have a proper speech disorder, people take my issues seriously, and anyone who is going to be unpleasant about it makes themselves obvious from the start so I can avoid them straight off. There are downsides, too, but I still think I prefer it this way.

Even if you don’t feel you have a strong stutter, even if you manage to hide it from everyone around you - you still stutter. You still count. And your pain is still real and deserves to be taken seriously.

Aug 6, 201138 notes

#stuttering #stutter #stammering #stammer #pws #disability #speech #speech disorder #kaz just likes tagging stuff okay #not asexuality for once?

lakalenyu:

kazaera:

lakalenyu:

youarenotyou reblogged this from lakalenyu and added:

I don’t know either but I’d like this to exist too.

I’ve been thinking about where to host such a group and I keep coming back to Dreamwidth, for their diversity policy. It seems like that’d be a place where if the trolls descended, the staff would actually do something about it.

I just worry that the code-based sign-up might be off-putting to some ppl? Even if we had a post where folks could ask for codes and members in the comm who had them on hand could provide? idk, I have a lot of love for Dreamwidth, but if others think it’s unpractical we can look elsewhere.

I’m on DW and I have so many DW invite codes (twenty-one at last count D: ) lying around gathering dust. I have friends who complain about their DW invite codes gathering dust! If people need DW invites I could organise quite a few, I think.

And yeah, there’s a lot more recourse there re: trolls - another community I’m part of is sort of moving to DW for precisely that reason, because we’ve been having neverending attacks of trolling and hatred for months and on DW we could actually *do* something about that.

*adds to general DW love*

Between my scattered accounts I probably have upward of thirty codes just lying around, so hopefully DW won’t seem too inaccessible from someone coming in from the outside?

I think probably the default security level of the community should be members only, but of course folks can make their posts public if they like. What I’m waffling about is what the join settings should be on the community? Open or moderated? I guess the most prudent thing would be open membership until we have a reason to moderate?

/blither blather

Some of the issues with moderation might be - how do we decide who to let in? A lot of the moderated comms do it based on activity so they know the journal belongs to a real person, but if we’re moving *to* DW *from* tumblr that isn’t really viable if a lot of people are only going to be getting a DW just for that comm. Another option is to do it via “who knows who” type - someone who wants in needs someone who’s already in to vouch for them - but that might be a problem in keeping out new people. (For instance, I don’t think I’ve spoken with anyone in this discussion before so by that criterion I’d be out!) A third would be to have people write a comment about who they are and why they want in - which might be a bit of a barrier, puts more of a strain on mods and could still be exploited by trolls.

I’ve only relatively recently started following the nonbinary tag - have there been many problems with trolls?

Aug 6, 201122 notes

lakalenyu:

youarenotyou reblogged this from lakalenyu and added:

I don’t know either but I’d like this to exist too.

I’ve been thinking about where to host such a group and I keep coming back to Dreamwidth, for their diversity policy. It seems like that’d be a place where if the trolls descended, the staff would actually do something about it.

I just worry that the code-based sign-up might be off-putting to some ppl? Even if we had a post where folks could ask for codes and members in the comm who had them on hand could provide? idk, I have a lot of love for Dreamwidth, but if others think it’s unpractical we can look elsewhere.

I’m on DW and I have so many DW invite codes (twenty-one at last count D: ) lying around gathering dust. I have friends who complain about their DW invite codes gathering dust! If people need DW invites I could organise quite a few, I think.

And yeah, there’s a lot more recourse there re: trolls - another community I’m part of is sort of moving to DW for precisely that reason, because we’ve been having neverending attacks of trolling and hatred for months and on DW we could actually *do* something about that.

*adds to general DW love*

Aug 6, 201122 notes

Kaz's tumblings

August 2011

28 posts