The Friend Zone

Posted by Jenni

The 'Friend Zone'. *cue dramatic music here*

Let's face it, most of us have heard of the friend zone. It's a big enough part of internet culture that it's hard to avoid. If you've been lucky enough to avoid it, take a quick look over at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friend_zone for a bit of background. But why write about it now, you may ask? Some of you may be aware that I did an article a while ago for the BBC on being asexual (find it here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-16552173). Why's that relevant? Well, once again, this article has been used to make a meme, saying that being in an asexual/non-asexual relationship is 'the ultimate friend-zone'.*

The Curious Case of the Multiplicity of Watsons

Posted by Sebastienne





The internets have been roused, and they are very angry.

What can have caused this, you might think - has the US senate passed SOPA, legislation which could destroy the World Wide Web as we know it?

No - the unthinkable has happened.

Some TV execs in the US have decided that what the world needs now is another take on the Sherlock Holmes mythos... and they've cast an Asian-American woman in the role of Watson.

So obviously, the comments under every news article are full of the vilest kinds of misogyny and racism. It's even been summed up in Impact font: http://www.buzzfeed.com/jpmoore/a-note-to-cbs-on-casting-lucy-liu-as-watson-in-the

Ah, Doctor Watson. Sherlock Holmes' "one fixed point in a changing age". A solid and stoic counterpart, sometimes mistakenly represented as unintelligent, but always as devotedly faithful. As the narrator of most of Conan-Doyle's stories, he is the audience identification figure, the "everyman" who provides us with a window on Holmes' unique world.

Of Labels and the Notion of 'The Other

Posted by Jenni


One of the most common arguments I see regarding asexuality is “Why does everything need a word?”


Whilst there are many people who could identify with a label such as gay, queer, or similar, but choose not to, the fact remains that a lot of people who have non-heteronormative sexualities, and non-standard gender identities use labels. And so there must be a reason for it.

Comments on Consent (Based on the BBC Article on Asexuality)

Posted by Jenni

[Trigger Warning: Sexual assault, rape, violence]

As some of you may know, I recently appeared both in a TV program on BBC3 and in a linked article on their news website. Most of the response I've had has either been positive, or curious, but here I'm going to discuss the negatives. (Oh, and the most common 'worry' I've had? “Aren't you worried if you're not out to your parents about doing that?” I'm sort of out – the program just exaggerated. I'm out to my mum, and she even watched the program, whereas me and my dad do not talk about sex. Ever. So it doesn't get discussed.)

Now I'll be clear here and say that these comments weren't all that common, but they still existed. Comments like “Oh, her boyfriend just needs to man up and make her have sex,” were the nicest. Seriously. Other such 'nice' comments included suggestions I was going elsewhere for sex and stringing him along, or that he would eventually cheat on me. The not nice ones? Well, that either the person in question would 'fix me' (often discussing how I 'wasn't half bad looking, bit boyish, but she'd still love it, right?) or that my boyfriend would just have to rape me. Yes, you heard that right. People suggested that having willingly gotten into a relationship with an openly asexual girl, done visibility with her about it and seemed pretty okay with it, the obvious ending to the story is that my boyfriend would turn into a rapist.

The reason these comments annoyed me so much is they don't just manage to be anti-asexual, virgin-shaming and misogynistic – they're also encouraging the view that men can't help their sexual urges, and it's only a matter of time before they have to act on them! Now, speaking as a girl, maybe I'm wrong? But no, I'm pretty sure that all of my friends are adult enough to well, have a minimum level of self-control. You know, not to decide 'I want to have sex with her, screw her feelings on the matter!'. Other comments linked to this included insults to his masculinity, suggestions he must be gay to be happy with the arrangement, or that maybe he was 'too pathetic'.

An interesting opposition to this is my brother's response to the program. My brother is a 'lad', of the most traditional sense – he likes drinking, going out with the boys, discusses 'fit girls' with them, etc. And his only comment on me and my boyfriend as portrayed in the program? “Fair play to him.” He actually appreciates the respect and understanding my boyfriend's role involves – it's not a slight to his masculinity, if anything, it highlights it in that he doesn't feel the need to prove himself.

Now, if you've actually read the article in question, you may notice that nowhere in it do I state whether or not I am celibate as well as asexual, so all of these comments come from assumptions. And these assumptions have led to the idea that it's not okay for me to force someone to be celibate for me, but it is okay for someone to force me to have sex. Now I don't want to argue that the former is okay – it's not – but neither is the latter. Both of these are unacceptable forms of acting in a relationship because they involve forcing someone to do what they don't want to do. Asking someone to do something is great, and if they refuse, then you need to have a good long chat and decide whether it's something you can compromise on – and if it's not, then force shouldn't ever be involved. It's also okay to break up if you don't think you can sleep with someone/can't be in a relationship without sex. It doesn't make you a bad person. Like with marriage, or children, or anything else important to someone – if one person considers something a necessity to a relationship and the other doesn't, and if it's something the two of them can't compromise on, then it won't work. And that's fine - you're allowed to end a relationship that won't satisfy what you need, and it certainly doesn't make you or the other person the 'bad guy'.

Consent isn't just important in sex – I've seen the discussed elsewhere that we have a culture that devalues consent. As a tee-total person, I experience it it elsewhere too:

“Go on, have a drink.”

“No.”

“Oh, why not, go on...” is quite a common conversation for me. The word 'no' is devalued in culture in general, and this obviously plays into consent elsewhere. Equally, with the drink conversation, I've had 'friends' try to spike my drink (Spiking water with vodka? Really? I'm not stupid.) to prove to me that alcohol is okay. Sound familiar? Whilst consent in sex is, I would argue, the most important place for consent to be valued, it needs to be valued all the time – the word 'no' needs to mean something. I'm sure that most people (I know I've done it myself) have done the 'come on, do x' 'no' 'oh go on...' conversation with someone, and I know for one that the responses to my article have inspired me to stop. Even the little things -
"Are you coming the pub tonight?"
"No, I don't want to."
"Aw, why not?"
"I'm just not up for it."
"Oh, come on."
"Rather not."
"Pleaaase..."
- sound innocent enough, but once we stop taking 'No' at face value (yes, maybe asking for a reason is fine, but they don't have to give you one, but once the answer is no, that's when you stop) here, we stop it elsewhere.

Anything that's a minority - like being tee-total and a student - is bound to get this, so if we look from this small example to the bigger minorities, we find that yes, as expected - a minority saying no is often valued less than the majority. As with my example - an asexual saying no to sex isn't taken seriously, and it becomes a problem that needs to be fixed. This can be these case with lesbian women too - the assumption that the 'no' is meaningless and a bit of hetero-sex will fix them - and I'm sure other people would have examples of this happening in other ways.

The point of this then? Even those of us who value consent in sex should look at how we value consent elsewhere, because the less the word 'no' means in society, the less it means in specific, important situations. And the less it means in those situations for those of us who aren't hetero-normative. I'm not sure if other people find it the case, but I find it easier to call out someone pressuring someone to go to the pub than I do to get into a discussion on rape culture - but I like to believe that at least, in doing that, I'm trying to emphasis the 'no means no' point for a potential future conversation.

Lashers in the news!

Posted by Lashings of Ginger Beer

Not one but two of our favourite queer people have been featured in national news in the last week!



Lashings' own Jenni was interviewed for the BBC documentary "How Sex Works" in which she talks in her usual articulate way about being a romantic asexual. The video will be available on iPlayer for another 11 days. Jenni's section is at 17:30. Her story is also discussed in this article.

Meanwhile, Lashfriend Ariel Silvera was interviewed in the Irish Independent for a feature on transgendered folk, where she successfully challenged some of the interviewer's narrow ideas about trans women.


Lest the excitement of this post should detract from yesterday's news.....did we mention we're putting on a PANTO?

Asexuality and Celibacy

Posted by Jenni


I guess I should start with the main point of this post, and that’s:
ASEXUALITY =/= CELIBACY




Asexual people are physically capable of having sex. Seriously, you’d be amazed as to how many people doubt this. I’ve been asked whether being asexual means I look like a Barbie doll, y’know, ‘down there’. I don’t, but thanks for your concern, I guess? It’s got nothing to do with how I’m built, but rather, it just means I lack sexual attraction.

On Being A Christian

Posted by Jenni

Today, I’m going to discuss something I’ve mentioned in passing before – the fact I’m a Christian. This is a very important part of my identity, and it’s also the part that gets questioned most – even more than my being asexual. You see, to many people being Christian, queer, feminist and liberal is a contradiction. I’m not going to go into lots of detail for you all, and I’ll try to keep the bible-talk to a minimum (references will be given if you want to look up the verses in question), but I’m just going to share how the Christian part of my identity fits in with everything else. And maybe give you a view of a Christian you might not have seen before.

Asexuality and the Queer Community

Posted by Annalytica

NB: This is an edited version of a post that originally appeared on annalytica.dreamwidth.org. This post contains discussion of oppression and abuse which is not detailed but may be triggering.


As Jenni mentioned in her post on Tuesday, there has been a lot of debate in some corners of the internet about whether asexuals are queer, and much of that has centred around whether they are oppressed enough to deserve the label.

 When Jenni posted a piece on her personal blog explaining why, as a hetero-romantic asexual, she identifies as queer and participates in queer communities, she came under attack, including being told that she is straight. Some people have argued that, in referring to the fact that she has been welcomed into other queer spaces, such as Lashings, she is speaking on behalf of queer people, and thereby abusing her so-called straight privilege. So, I'm using this post to speak on behalf of myself, as a queer person who recognises Jenni as queer and welcomes her into this community.

Erasure and Identity

Posted by Jenni

This post began life as a discussion of the ‘I’m-more-oppressed-than-you’ game. There’s been a spate of posts on various sites recently discussing whether asexuals have a ‘claim’ to the queer community, and one argument is that we aren’t oppressed in the same way. Rather than argue this out, I’d much rather share with you my experiences of one particular kind of oppression, one I’m sure many of you are familiar with – erasure.

Choosing Not To Have Sex: Why The Big Deal?

Posted by Jenni

As anyone who read my last post will know, I'm asexual.

(Recap time, boys and girls, and those others inside, outside or somewhere in between that binary! An asexual is someone who doesn't experience sexual attraction. Simple, right?)

My aim today is to give you a brief glimpse of some of the difficulties I encountered whilst beginning to identify as an asexual feminist. These opinions may be of the few, but they were a vocal few, and it made it pretty hard to reconcile those two labels for me at first.

Asexuality (or 'How I'm NOT an amoeba!')

Posted by Jenni









So, where to begin? I guess I should introduce myself. I'm Jenni, I'm 20, I study Philosophy and Theology, I enjoy writing, acting, reading, baking, sewing, generally crafting, I like dying my hair fun colours, I'm a geek, I love comics, and...oh - I'm asexual. That's right. Asexual. And not like a plant (awesome as that would be, it's not biologically possible for me. Sorry to disappoint you.) So what does it mean? Well, to summarise a label that's still coming into it's own as best I can - I am not sexually attracted to anyone. Yes, that's right - I don't experience sexual attraction. And just to answer some of the most common questions this gets me in a nice, easy to read list:

• Yes, physically I am perfectly fine.


• Yes, my hormones are all fine.


• Yes, I can experience arousal.


• Yes, I can have relationships (I am a romantic asexual)


• No, I was never sexually abused.


• No, I am not just 'celibate' - that is a choice, this is an orientation.


• No, I am not frigid


• No, I am not scared of sex


• No, I don't need to meet 'the one', thank you.


• No, having sex with you will not change my opinion.

There's probably more, but as you can see - asexuality is not something that's often understood. It took me until I was 18 to work out there was a word for what I was, and that I wasn't broken - all of my friends would talk about how 'hot' someone was, or how they would so 'do that'. And I just didn't get it. It wasn't until I found AVEN (http://www.asexuality.org/) that I realised I wasn't the only one who didn't. Of course, it's now two years later, and I'm trying to get the word out there - I currently vlog for Hot Pieces of Ace (www.youtube.com/hotpiecesoface) who are a fantastic bunch.

I'm aware asexuality is a new idea for a lot of people, so I'm not going to go into too much detail this time round (leave me questions, I'll answer as many as I can on my next post or in the comments!) but I'll quickly tell you something important - we can be romantic! For me, romantic attraction and sexual attraction are separate things, and I only experience one. For some sexuals, they may be linked completely, but I'm sure you can imagine cases where you experience one apart from the other, right? That's basically how it works. Now, for me, this means that if I was in a romantic relationship with someone sexual, I would quite probably have sex. This is because I am indifferent to sex, and since I'm in physical working order, it'd probably be quite enjoyable. I just have no active desire to try it for it's own sake. For some aseuxals, this isn't the case - some are repulsed by the notion of sex, and others just don't fancy it. We're all different people after all.

So, that's my mini-introduction, more next time! I'll leave you with some of my fictional role models who can be read as asexual.

Sherlock Holmes - yes, yes, you slash fangirls, him and Watson are clearly meant to be. But you know, that doesn't exclude his asexuality. Since the Moffat and Gatiss BBC version came out, we've had an influx of younger aces (that's a common term for being asexual) being like "THAT'S WHAT IT IS." Sherlock has been very good for us as a community - people have looked up things about his orientation, stumbled across asexuality, and voila! Everything makes sense.

Sheldon Cooper - when asked "what's his deal?", the response was "I don't think he has a deal." You can't really get much more asexy than that, right? And, whilst there is the fact Sheldon is potentially Aspergers - you would not believe how often it's assumed that 'causes' asexuality, when in fact the two are separate things - the writers are good at never directly linking the two.

The 11th Doctor - Moffat seems to like his asexual characters (and we're not complaining!) Whilst different incarnations of the Doctor vary, Matt Smith's portrayal is particulary ace friendly - he is completely, wonderfully oblivious to sexual advances, and seems positively confused by them.

So, they're the big three - there's more, but I'm keeping this short and sweet and hoping for questions. Ask me anything you want!