because apparently there was some argument regarding whether asexuals belong in the queer spectrum and now this is a thing and they posted this and WTF.

Generally people are doing really well in picking this apart, and I’m raging really hard right now, so this may not be entirely articulate, but WHAT. 

Everything on that checklist is pretty godawful but I’m most flabbergasted at #3, which states:

  If I’m a demisexual woman, I can rest assured knowing that I fit into the category that society deems most appropriate for a woman: One who will not have sex unless in a committed, monogamous, usually marital relationship.

NO NO NO NO NO JUST NO.  This is wrong in literally every way it is possible to be wrong, let me break this shit down:

First off, as stated here by Charlie the Unicorn, Ace Detective, this is not a category that protects us.  This is not a category in which we can rest assured.  Women in committed, monogamous, marital relationships still get sexually harassed, still get raped, still get judged based on what we wear, who we’re in that monogamous, committed relationship with, who we interact with in sexually-coded ways, who we don’t interact with in sexually-coded ways.  We can claim protection under this category by wearing  wedding rings to work, or not leaving our boyfriend’s side at the bar, or following the hundreds of unwritten rules that supposedly separate ‘good girls’ from ‘sluts’.  But society’s ideal of the most appropriate sexuality for a woman is not demisexuality, in fact it’s not something that has a definition.  And how quickly can a woman, even a demisexual woman, lose this supposed privilege of being the ‘most appropriate sexuality’?  She can wear too short of a skirt, keep the wrong company, her committed monogamous relationship can be with someone of the ‘wrong’ race or gender or social class as deemed ‘appropriate’ by ‘society’ and suddenly, her sexuality is considered inappropriate again.  ‘Appropriate sexuality’ for a woman isn’t an asexual or demisexual privilege, it’s a game that we’re all set up to lose.

And second, I’d postulate that demisexuality as it is actually defined is not what society would consider an appropriate sexuality for a woman to begin with.  Rather, the ideal female sexuality according to the definition the kyriarchy would have us accept is a type of monogamy or serial monogamy in which a woman, under the umbrella of a committed monogamous relationship, feels attracted to her partner and wants to have sex with him.  This might fit some demisexual women, but not all!  Some demisexual women might take months or years to become as sexually attracted to a partner as they are romantically attracted.  Some asexual women might be deeply, truly in love with their partner, but never feel sexually attracted at all.  The kyriarchy has a slur for that — frigid.  or ice queen.  Or prude.  Or just bitch.  Having too little sex, or no sex, is just as bad as having too much sex — the goalposts keep on moving depending on who it is that’s telling women they’re unacceptable, and once again, ‘appropriate sexuality’ is a losing game.  ‘Slut’ isn’t the only word used to attack us.  

And you know, even if ace or demi women do benefit from occasionally managing to hit the moving and often invisible target of what the kyriarchy believes to be an acceptable level and focus of sexuality, this is not actual privilege.  This is privilege we only see if we enter into relationships with men, don’t ‘lead anyone on’, don’t stay single too long, avoid talking about our sexuality, and don’t pick partners who gossip about how much sex they’re having or not having or how many dates it took before they got some.  It’s privilege that disappears as soon as those goalposts of ‘acceptable female sexuality’ move again.  It’s almost like passing privilege, as much as one can pass for something that doesn’t actually exist.  If you google up ‘passing privilege’ you can find analyses based on race, disability, and gender identity, and it stands to reason that a heteroromantic asexual would be able to pass themself — and be passed by others —as heterosexual.  I’ve been doing it for years.  But passing for white, or non-disabled, or cisgender, or heterosexual — these are all things it’s actually possible for a human to be.  Unlike this supposed ‘most appropriate category’ of female sexuality, which is an ever-changing definition that the kyriarchy holds above women’s heads just to make sure we all know that whatever any individual woman’s sexuality might entail, she can always rest assured that it’s inappropriate.

This is a lot of tl;dr and I’m not fully comfortable being out of the closet as ace, so there’s a good chance I’ll delete this later even though probably only about five or six people will read it.  But oppression olympics make me rage, the erasure of asexual identity makes me rage, and trying to justify any point by invoking the madonna/whore dichotomy makes me rage like no other.  To anyone who made it to the end, thanks for reading and here is a dancing cat.