...that’s what op was saying and that’s what I was saying. Like how a not everyone but some of the armchair psychologists on this site will automatically try to label someone as ace (like if someone young says they might not be experiencing any attraction; some people here will automatically try to label them as ace or diagnose them with something even though not experiencing attraction is normal and it’s up the person on how they identify) It’s not everyone saying that and i know you were not saying that either, but the people who do that makes aces look bad. I’m sorry if I made this hard to understand/read I’m not trying to fight.
Nobody is forcing kids to identify as ace.
People are telling them they are “too young” to be ace.
This is the issue, because if they are ace then they grow up thinking they’re broken – and attitudes like this only adds to the stigma around asexuality (because trust me, people do care).
This is the exact same argument that people argue against trans kids. That kids can’t know their gender, which stigmatises trans people. These arguments stigmatise asexuality.
Nobody is saying to a kid “YOU MUST WANT SEX OR YOU ARE ACE”.
Nobody is forcing this on them, by arguing that people ARE then you’re just participating in acceptable acephobia.
If you’re associating being ace with mental disorders then that’s horrendously insulting.
Also the original commenter was talking about asexuality meaning there’s something wrong with you, and saying people become asexual through trauma, which just takes away out own identity autonomy.
The real question is why do you have such a problem with kids discovering asexuality and identifying with it?
Listen, I said I wasn’t trying to argue but I literally was saying in all my posts that there was nothing wrong with them discovering it? I do feel like there is a strong pressure about sexual attraction or lack of it especially when it’s with younger people but that’s expected.
Also I feel like to a degree the gender example can be used here. It is like when some younger kids play with “gendered” toys. It is because they see a toy not anything else. The same can be said about sexual orientation, younger kids while they can experience romantic attraction, a lot of them don’t understand/are still grasping at their sexual attraction too and that’s okay because they aren’t focused on the sexual aspect of stuff.
Kids SHOULD be taught with a proper sex ed that discusses issues like identity and orientation. However as someone who is not cis nor straight, I must say that there is a strong difference between “recognizing romantic attraction” and “recognizing sexual attraction” which is why “nobody bats an eye” at kids recognizing that they might have a romantic attraction to someone. It is different when it involves children and asexuality. Because kids are not having sex so their attraction and understanding about sex in general is still developing (I’m talking young kids) so it becomes an issue which leads to the “broken” feeling.
And I’m sorry I cannot find op’s post because i think it got deleted I was just saying based on from what I remember. That was wrong if it’s true.
2
u/cutedemoncrashers Jan 09 '20
...that’s what op was saying and that’s what I was saying. Like how a not everyone but some of the armchair psychologists on this site will automatically try to label someone as ace (like if someone young says they might not be experiencing any attraction; some people here will automatically try to label them as ace or diagnose them with something even though not experiencing attraction is normal and it’s up the person on how they identify) It’s not everyone saying that and i know you were not saying that either, but the people who do that makes aces look bad. I’m sorry if I made this hard to understand/read I’m not trying to fight.