Theme
9:16am June 18, 2012
asexualeducation:

redbeardace:

Yeah, maybe I should’ve just left the back cover blank…  I don’t know, is that text horrible?

Pardon my ignorance, but can you direct me to where it’s called the fourth orientation? I’ve never seen it called that, (I’ve checked the main asexual sites but I may have missed it) and I don’t think that even makes sense, either, truthfully.  Heterosexuality, homosexuality, bisexuality, and pansexuality would already be four and pansexuality, while not always accepted, is actually far more well known than asexuality; I don’t think the potential erasure of pansexuality would be very welcomed or advisable.
I also might be nitpicking, but I see a fairly significant problem with the use of the word “the“in “the asexual point of view”. That “the” is definitive, even if unintentionally. No asexual is the same, and that “the” implies a universal opinion and that’s just not so. While I know it’s just a bit of vocabulary, I think word choices and the implications thereof are incredibly important when speaking in an authoritative manner on something so obscure as asexuality. So that is just something I’d urge you to consider.
I don’t mean to step on toes, I do believe the more asexual material the merrier, just I think these could be potential issues that could be a bit harmful, to be honest. Sorry if this criticism is unwelcome, I just am a bit concerned about it.
-Griff

While it’s not my own view, the Kinsey Scale of Hetero-Homosexuality technically listed asexuality as a fourth possible orientation. The scale shows Heterosexuality, bisexuality, homosexuality, and, recently, asexuality (also two levels between bisexuality and heterosexuality/homosexuality).
While other sexualities certainly exist (e.g. pansexuality— as you pointed out), they are not noted by the scale(my least favorite aspect of it). Regardless of that, it’s likely where the nickname “the fourth sexuality” comes from.
(And, as a (long)side note— asexuality and pansexuality, to me, seem to be right about even in known-ness. I’ve known many people (especially those who were around for the initial discovery of asexuality) who know about asexuality and not pansexuality. Also, the “sponsor” of my nearby GSA noted that in his time, there was an asexual celebrity (didn’t catch the name, though) who, to the sexuality-positive, spread word of asexuality. And— asexuality has been acknowledged for a longer amount of time than pansexuality, giving asexuality more than a chance to become better known. However, pansexuality has the benefit of fitting the sexual-norm of society, so it is accepted for that. So, yeah— I’d say they’re about even.

asexualeducation:

redbeardace:

Yeah, maybe I should’ve just left the back cover blank…  I don’t know, is that text horrible?

Pardon my ignorance, but can you direct me to where it’s called the fourth orientation? I’ve never seen it called that, (I’ve checked the main asexual sites but I may have missed it) and I don’t think that even makes sense, either, truthfully.  Heterosexuality, homosexuality, bisexuality, and pansexuality would already be four and pansexuality, while not always accepted, is actually far more well known than asexuality; I don’t think the potential erasure of pansexuality would be very welcomed or advisable.

I also might be nitpicking, but I see a fairly significant problem with the use of the word “the“in “the asexual point of view”. That “the” is definitive, even if unintentionally. No asexual is the same, and that “the” implies a universal opinion and that’s just not so. While I know it’s just a bit of vocabulary, I think word choices and the implications thereof are incredibly important when speaking in an authoritative manner on something so obscure as asexuality. So that is just something I’d urge you to consider.

I don’t mean to step on toes, I do believe the more asexual material the merrier, just I think these could be potential issues that could be a bit harmful, to be honest. Sorry if this criticism is unwelcome, I just am a bit concerned about it.

-Griff

While it’s not my own view, the Kinsey Scale of Hetero-Homosexuality technically listed asexuality as a fourth possible orientation. The scale shows Heterosexuality, bisexuality, homosexuality, and, recently, asexuality (also two levels between bisexuality and heterosexuality/homosexuality).

While other sexualities certainly exist (e.g. pansexuality— as you pointed out), they are not noted by the scale(my least favorite aspect of it). Regardless of that, it’s likely where the nickname “the fourth sexuality” comes from.

(And, as a (long)side note— asexuality and pansexuality, to me, seem to be right about even in known-ness. I’ve known many people (especially those who were around for the initial discovery of asexuality) who know about asexuality and not pansexuality. Also, the “sponsor” of my nearby GSA noted that in his time, there was an asexual celebrity (didn’t catch the name, though) who, to the sexuality-positive, spread word of asexuality. And— asexuality has been acknowledged for a longer amount of time than pansexuality, giving asexuality more than a chance to become better known. However, pansexuality has the benefit of fitting the sexual-norm of society, so it is accepted for that. So, yeah— I’d say they’re about even.

Notes:
  1. alicechugstea reblogged this from asexualeducation
  2. that-weird-lady reblogged this from asexualeducation
  3. joichang-changing reblogged this from asexualeducation
  4. asexualeducation reblogged this from redbeardace and added:
    All right, thank you very much! I also agree with there being more than one ‘fourth’ one, but I just went with the one I...
  5. redbeardace reblogged this from asexualeducation and added:
    I got it from these places: //www.brocku.ca/research/research-profiles/tony-bogaert...
  6. strawberreli reblogged this from asexualeducation
  7. thingamajig314 reblogged this from asexualeducation and added:
    While it’s not my own view, the Kinsey Scale of Hetero-Homosexuality technically listed asexuality as a fourth possible...
  8. nat-attack said: "more about what asexuality is all about" is repetitive
  9. quantumstarlight said: You also don’t need to indent if there’s a space in between paragraphs. And I would switch to left justification (it makes it more readable). The text itself is great though!
  10. greenchestnuts said: If you’re using American usage, comma goes inside quotes, and it’s a bit choppy, but definitely not horrible.
  11. spookyplantain said: I like it! :)