I would be critical of the "ace community" regardless because human beings are not fucking amoebas.
"Asexual" already had a meaning before the sparklequeers came along and it did NOT mean "I don't take care of my body/ I have an undiagnosed and therefore untreated health problem, so I don't have a sex drive anymore."
Also you do not have to want to fuck everyone on the planet to have a healthy sex drive. I fucking hate porn, it's warped EVERYONE's expectations of what human sexuality should be about.
So yeah, basically, fuck "aromantic"-ism too.
9 comments
I would be critical of the "ace community"
I wouldn't.
All those people preserving "Dragon's Lair" laserdisc arcade games would no doubt do the same with Don Bluth's sequel game too.
A notable member of the community in Belgium collects other laserdisc games: from the adaptation of Clint Eastwood's "Firefox" to Namco's "Galaxian IV: Attack of the Zolgear" (even building an extension to his collection's games room to fit that 6-seat 'mini cinema' game): his argument is valid.
for humans being asexual doesn't mean we reproduce though nosexual means, it means we have no sexual attraction. I am asexual. I have no interest in sex, I am not attractive to men of women. I am not attracted to anyone.
There's being a pedant, and then there's being wrong.
It's one thing to correct a misuse of a word which the speaker clearly doesn't understand the meaning, or to suggest a more appropriate term when they're using a nonstandard definition which is confusing in the current context, or point out that they're using common-use definitions when technical language would be more appropriate (or vice-versa). It's quite another to insist on words which have a technical definition be used only in that specific manner, especially if there's more than one technical definition or there's no other word to describe what's being said.
I mean, take away "asexual" as used in the sexual orientation sense (which is also a technical usage, like it or not) and all you're left with is "anallophyllic", basically meaning "not into others". Not only is that a very obscure term, but it also collectively refers to asexuals, autosexuals, some compulsive masturbators, and certain kinds of object fetishists who lack any other form of sexuality. So, not very useful if you need to be more specific. I suppose you could go with "nonsexual", but that word is normally used to describe activities or circumstances, not people.
A simpler way to put what Zinnia says, that deals with all kinds of language situations . . . language changes. All the time. New words are coined, uncommon words fall out of usage completely. New meanings are used for words where there has been no word for that particular meaning before. If you're going to complain about language changing . . . remember that the language our most ancient ancestors spoke is now entirely forgotten. But if you can find it, start speaking that. And only that language. Because, hey, that is the proper human language and the only way for it to be used, as proven by the first humans speaking it, right?
So many words used in the English language now have differing definitions from their earlier uses, and we sometimes get so stupid that one dictionary actually defines both bimonthly and semimonthly to mean twice a month, although in any other usage of bi- as a prefix it mean "two of", not "two within". Semi- is used as "two within".
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
