Comments

1
What a very silly letter. The LW completely misinterpreted Dan, and put words in his mouth. I find this very frustrating because the LW is arguing with no one, and is being overly defensive about nothing.
Asexuality is fine, but there are lots of people who don't want to be in that relationship and they should not have to be. Dan has been very consistent and clear about this, I really don't understand the issue.
2
Whoa. There's two chains of comments going on for this one. .

...uh...slog? Whaddup?

@1 She's an undergrad in gender studies. What the hell do you expect? Rationality?
3
My heads hurt.
4
Putting words in my mouth -- that's the theme of the day here on Slog.
5
Got bored and stopped about halfway, then scrolled to the bottom and saw how they signed the letter. Maybe it makes me a bad person, but I lol'd a little.
6
Jesus fucking Christ that was the longest, most boring Savage Love letter ever.

Reading it caused me to not just lose interest in sex, but in life itself.
7
Dan, your advice to come to a compromise is spot on. I think that people of all stripes have a responsibility to be up front with their partners. The burden should not be on the more sexual partner to change their ways to accommodate the less sexual partner. The less sexual partner should, at the very least, put in a little effort. Once someone is aware of what ever it is about them that they deem 'different' from the 'average' then there's a responsibility to either fix it or find a way to work with it. You cannot blame other people for not rising to the occasion but you can ask for some help while you both muddle through each doing your fair share to make things work.
8
...I sincerely hope I did not offend anyone in the uniheaded, headless, or gray-h communities.
9
If consider the term "abnormal" in this context to be offensive, you are either ignorant of basic scientific terms, or merely looking for any excuse to be offended.
10
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/abnorma…

Well I think most of us operate by the english meaning rather than the scientific one. Which does have a element of strange or bad to it.
But that is the point, Dan never said abnormal
11
Couldn't read it and I have feminist leanings.
12
Wow - Rarely is the letter-o-da-day so tedious and dull that I pull out half-way through. Is there a correlation between asexuality and being a nitpicking windbag?
13
tl;dr
14
@4 - Dan, there are worse things to have put in your mouth...
15
@12, it's signed, "Undergraduate in Women, Gender, and Sexuality Studies." The letter was doomed from the get-go.
16
I would really like to encourage those in the asexual community to get their blood tested for low testosterone levels (both men and women). Testosterone is what makes humans horny (very tiny amounts for women), and having low levels of this in your blood can make you loose all interest in sex. Supplementation is easy and very effective. Not that I am saying being asexual is pathological, but it can have an easily corrected biological cause which would be worth looking into for those open to this, and might prevent a lot of grief, loneliness and conflict in relationships.
17
Ugh!

Call me old-fashioned, but isn't a very close asexual relationship just a friendship? Like... bromance?

And if you don't need to deal with all of the processing and insecurity that goes along with sexual relationships... why would you ever choose to?
18
This letter makes me wish it was the early 90's again, and people like the LW would just chain smoke and listen to The Smiths all night.rather than bother people on blogs.
19
I also wonder how many of these sad, depressed, suicidal asexuals may actually be experiencing a lack of sexual desire due to, you know depression.
I was depressed for ages, was happy to snuggle my girlfriend, and could not for the life of me work up any actual interest in sex. The depression was treated... And then I got off the meeds altogether... And hello! Normal - cough, excuse me - average sex drive! Or above average, if I may boast.
Just seems like an asthmatic identifying as a Cougher, and not trying to treat their asthma.
20
Oh, for fuck's sake...

Dear self-righteous asexuals who enjoy feeling victimized and/or soapboxing,

Please go and educate people who actually require education. There are very few people left in the sex-positive, educated, accepting world (y'know, pretty much all readers of Dan Savage, for a start) who haven't clicked over to any given resource and run through the various over-intellectualized terms for every possible gradation of human sexuality. (I don't know what it is with "the asexual community," but its spokesfolks are really, REALLY into making everyone use exhaustively correct terms for everything and always constructing every sentence so as to never take a risk at seeming insensitive ever.) It's a legitimate use of time and energy to educate the general populace about asexuality, to help free people who really have felt harassed and abandoned and to guide their families and loved ones to understanding. Go and do that. Clever, tech-savvy people who read sex advice columns know asexuality is a thing. They do not have to listen to your canned tirades that don't address any of the issues at hand. You sound like a creationist who jumps into any discussion about science with misinformed talking points about why "evolution" isn't a thing.

If you really want asexuality to be an accepted thing, then what you want is equality, not to be special. Just like the behavior of gay men into barebacking can be criticized without there being any homophobia before, people can say things about asexuals that isn't "Asexuality is made of glitter and bunny rabbits!" without you needing to defend yourself from all the badness, kay?

Sincerely,
An asexual who's aware of real problems (Oh, sorry, everyone who was about to start yelling that I just don't understand your horrible plight.)
21
Yes, letterwriter, that is very....zzzzzz

/snort/ What? Huh, someone was talking?
22
Must... (whack)... beat... (whack)... that... (whack)... dead... (whack)... horse!

Must!
23
"Undergraduate in Women, Gender, and Sexuality Studies"

Oh for fuck's sake. It is beyond irresponsible for universities to send people out into the world with such esoteric and bloody useless degrees. The humanities proper aren't exactly doing well; I can't imagine these myriad pseudo-sciences could be doing any better.
24
@16: Asexuality is the lack of sexual attraction to other people, not lack of libido. It has nothing to do with hormones.
25
LOL @2 and @15.

There's something about undergrad Gender/Sexual Studies majors that in unbelievably douchy. I mean, you generally don't see an undergrad in engineering lecturing working engineers, or undergrads in English lecturing published writers.

But for some reason, undergrads in gender/sex studies who have never been outside the ivory tower feel compelled to pontificate to those with (in some cases) decades of real-world experience.
26
For at least some people, asexuality is a symptom of depression, low self-esteem, social anxiety, impotence, shame, and/or unusually low testosterone levels.

Rather than stamping the "asexual" label on these folks in permanent ink and telling them this symptom (which is frankly kind of horrible) is fundamentally who they are, shouldn't they be encouraged to seek help developing their sexuality?

If not having sex makes you happy, great, but from the sound of this letter is seems like it causes problems for a lot of people.
27
Have fun waiting tables for the rest of forever, LW.
28
@24: So, if someone isn't attracted to others because of low testosterone, they aren't asexual?

Does that mean you have to pass a blood test to qualify as a true asexual?

What is the difference between "lack of sexual attraction to others" and "lack of libido"?
29
I hope that The New Yorker hires her when she graduates!
30
What the fuck is with all the hate on women's studies? I love all the uneducated bullshit about women's studies being a useless degree or pseudoscience, probably from people who don't really know what women's studies is. Here are some career choices for women's studies graduates, some requiring graduate degrees: councellor, social worker, lawyer, researcher, non-for profit sector, communications specialist, NGO work, international development.

Believe it or not, the world wouldn't run if we all had engineering degrees and MBAs.
31
I will never, ever understand why people insist on turning their anger and hatred toward the like of Dan Savage and Modern Family. There are a number of very real, very dangerous laws, norms, and people who are actively attacking queer folk (and others with any kind of non-average sexuality). Yet even recognizing the amazing things that Dan Savage has done for all of us, whether starting his incredible IGB project or just encouraging us to embrace our sexuality, they insist on digging through every sentence to pick out some trace of trans- (or bi- or asexual- or woman-) phobia.

What does this accomplish? Dan Savage is out here, trying to make ALL people's sex lives better, even if that means admitting that you don't want one and finding a partner and compromise that makes a romantic life possible without one! by alienating DS, you are not coming closer to a more just and tolerant society--you are making it impossible for those of us who are sympathetic but realistic to help you in whatever your struggle is (for rights, for recognition, for the ability to have a romantic, nonsexual partnership).
32
H.C. is a D.B.
33
@24: I don't see a meaningful difference. Libido is part of sexual attraction. I've also heard members of the asexual community say they don't lack attraction to others (hence relationships) just a desire to act physically on said attraction. I don't think we can separate body from mind here. This isn't sex/gender, libido/sexual attraction are innately intertwined.
34
@ 12 - My guess is that asexuality gives you a lot of time to think about such matters, since you're not actually having sex, looking for it or watching porn when you're not getting it. The devil makes work for idle hands, as they say.

I do find it ironic that, as others have pointed out, the LW is an undergrad in Women, Gender, and Sexuality Studies. It does suggest that he/she is still somewhat bothered by his/her issues... (sorry, I don't have the courage to re-read the whole thing to figure out his/her gender, if he/she even mentioned it).
35
I agree, Dan. There's nothing wrong with being asexual, but in a "romantic" relationship, sex is an expectation. If that's something that you cannot give, you have an obligation to disclose. I would think that in most situations, the asexual should be quite aware of his/her orientation before marriage.
36
My best friend is asexual. She was in a long term relationship until recently (the break up had nothing to do with sex or lack thereof, but moving away for gradschool).
She told him upfront that she had virtually no interest in sex but that she would try and accommodate him to the best of her ability - making out, fondling, handjobs - and that if this was not good enough he should not date her. Apparently it was good enough for three years and they parted ways amicably. She told him this all ON THEIR FIRST DATE.
37


@26 and 28, yes. Every day, bunches of people sit in their doctor's office and say, "I don't know, Doc, I just don't have any sex drive anymore. Can you help?" And the doctor will try to help the patient regain a "normal" sex drive. There are probably a hundred people in this situation for every one person who proclaims themself "Asexual".

Because of the fact that body chemistry and health can affect the libido, at least some of the people who identify as Asexual are that way by choice; they are choosing not to remedy the underlying physical or emotional problem that is causing the absence of a sex drive. "Coming out as asexual", decades into a marriage, is probably indistinguishable from "I'm tired of you and I don't feel that good anyway, so let me alone."

Also, I doubt that being asexual as a teenager is a reliable indicator that you're going to continue that way all your life. While kids who aren't into sex need to feel comfortable and accepted, they shouldn't be told that they belong to some permanent "asexual" population subgroup.
38
From my own personal experience, the several women's studies courses I took as an undergraduate were almost impossible not to get an A in, as long as you knew what to say. And it was pretty damn obvious what the professors wanted you to say. That's why I kept taking those bullshit classes. I couldn't risk taking a Greek history course that I might not get an A in while working so hard to keep up my 3.8 in biochemistry. Please. Anyone who can excel in real disciplines could excel in Women's studies. It's a pathetic field of study for those with inferior intellect and superiority complexes.
39
@30: I think the issue many people have is that some Bachelors degrees (engineering, nursing, sciences) and all technical schools give you a number of marketable skills upon graduation. The softer humanities prepare you (largely) for grad school.

An engineer could go work for the non-profit sector or in research without many problems. A women's studies or comp lit major can't as easily go and design an airplane.

I know. I studied communications with minors in queer theory and computer science. One of those two things served me much better on the job market than the other. "Learning how to think deeply" is great in theory, but maybe not the most productive use of 4 years and $100,000.
40
@28 Sexual attraction= wanting to have sex with a person

Sexual libido= getting aroused

Testosterone has nothing to do with sexual attraction just libido.
41
@38 Your experiences of taking a couple of women's studies courses are not indicative of the entire field accross the world.
42
@33 you are mistaking physical or aesthetic attraction to sexual attraction. As for a meaningful difference are you suggesting that people only get horny when thinking of a person?
43
@39 But most women's studies majors are in it because they have a passion for that kind of thing. They don't want to design airplanes, and they would be in an entirely different field if they did. An engineer has certain skill sets, but they are not applicable to all disciplines and fields accross the board just because engineering is a more valued degree than women's studies.
44
@30 I won't say it's a useless degree...I will say that those who get it are, by and large douchey 'tards. Much like your defensive blowhard comment.

Also, while asexuals probably have more time to think about this shit, it's the gender studies major that makes this particular LW a boring old bitty. She gets so caught up in hurt feelings and "I'm less than normal" that she loses sight of the fact that SHE ISN'T NORMAL!

People who can't own their quirks should shut the fuck up and deal. Being an asexual is just as hard as being any other marginalized minority. Own the fuck out of it and damn the people who get in your way. You hold your own confidence.

Why the hell dos everybody fear not being average or normal? Especially to the point that they want to dictate everybody else's speech patterns? Gawd.
45
@44 Speaking of large douchey 'tards and defensive blowhards...
46
@40: Umm, "getting [sexually] aroused" and "wanting to have sex with someone" kind of go hand in hand.

Sorry, honey, but you are trying to impose nice neat boundaries on things that are deeply intertwined.
47
@45 I figured if I stepped to your level of blowhardness you might understand it. As always, I forget the self-rightousness of the gender studies major.
48
@46 Paraphrasing a comment from AVEN: if you put a bunch of men on a deserted island, they would want to have sex with each other but they would still get horny.
49
@40: I think many biologists and medical professionals would disagree with you. In your @42 point I see where your going: "Straight women or gay men could acknowledge that a woman is attractive." But I think in common parlance "being physically attracted to someone" implies a desire for follow through. Otherwise it's just aesthetic appreciation.
50
Assuming they are heterosexual of course.
51
@43: My point isn't that one field is better or worse, just that making women's studies the full extent of your academic pursuits is perhaps a little limiting in terms of future choices. I support having passion for the subject (obviously, I studied it) but I wish I had spent more of my undergrad time actually learning skills rather than retreading the same philosophical debates ad nauseam. At the end of the day an engineer could learn how do NGO work quickly on the job -- a communications/comp lit/film studies/gender studies BA would have a much steeper learning curve to learn how to design a circuit board or write the next best selling iPhone app.
52
@6: OMG, it's a cunning recruitment strategy!
53
@48: Actually when heterosexual men are on the deserted island called "prison" they DO get horny and have sex with each other.
54
I wonder if HC understands the irony of her position. The Judeo-Christian ethos expects everyone to be asexual most of the time, and minimally sexual for procreation. The Judeo-Christian heritage is also accused as being patriarchal, dominating of the feminine and of controlling sexuality.
55
@28 "What is the difference between "lack of sexual attraction" and "lack of libido"?"

Now see, I was going to say the 10th anniversary and the 20th....ba dum bum.
56
@47 I don't see any self righteousness, just someone defending something they probably pour their life into from someone who seems to think they are qualified to judge the relevance of university curriculum.
What i do see from you however is someone who clearly places no value on social sciences and theory. my major is History and although that doesn't translate directly into a specific job but it by no means makes it useless.
Do you really think that increasing prevalence of women studies has nothing to do with furthering the understanding of a topic that is rarely addressed in university or in the media?

But i guess if it doesn't translate into a job right out of university and make you money its not important.


57
@30:
Here are some career choices for women's studies graduates, some requiring graduate degrees: councellor, social worker, lawyer, researcher, non-for profit sector, communications specialist, NGO work, international development.
And which of those career choices make use of that women's studies background? None of them. It's quite a damning assessment of the utility of the field if all the career choices you could think of involve leaving the field.

Which isn't to say everyone should be pre-med, pre-law, business, or engineering. Writers, poets, artists, actors, and dancers can all produce wonderful work, and it is the consumption of such work that (frankly) makes life worth living. But I'm having trouble seeing how gender/sexual studies enriches anyone not ensconced within that academic field.
58
@47 I don't see any self righteousness, just someone defending something they probably pour their life into from someone who seems to think they are qualified to judge the relevance of university curriculum.
What i do see from you however is someone who clearly places no value on social sciences and theory. my major is History and although that doesn't translate directly into a specific job but it by no means makes it useless.
Do you really think that increasing prevalence of women studies has nothing to do with furthering the understanding of a topic that is rarely addressed in university or in the media?

But i guess if it doesn't translate into a job right out of university and make you money its not important.


59
OMFG

Now I am cissexual in addition to being cisgendered?

FFS
60
@46: I mean no offense. I do think social sciences are important as part of well-rounded education. But with the current state of the world economy, I have meant many humanities majors who continue to grad school, get another bachelor's degree, or learn a trade because their studies have intense inner value but little to offer for sustenance in the outside world.

I hope you'll have a better experience when you finish university. But I speak from personal experience and the wisdom and suffering of others. I think your perspective may change starkly in the next five to ten years, but i hope it doesn't have to.

(I know how condescending that sounds, but I think you basically accused me of being a shallow materialist, so I'm going to let it slide.)
61
...and by @46, I meant @56 but sadly my liberal arts education did not teach me to count. I kid. I kid.
62
I am a somewhat reformed republican trying to be a democrat, but the words on this page................I can't dig it. What is the deal? Where is all this drama coming from? If you haet sex, and you say so, then great! What is the big deal? Is there an angry preacher somewhere in Kansas saying that people who only have sex once in a great while and under duress are going to hell?
63
@58 As a history major, I would have figured reading comprehension would be your strong suit. I would have figured wrong.

Then, again, I've read my TA friend's test answers. Her students failed just as hard as you just did.
64
@57 No, women's studies is obviously not a trade, but it provides you with the background and the tools to enter into those fields. Much like many other libaral arts degrees, such as history, English, political science, philosophy etc. Some jobs can't be learned through school because the cases you deal with are so varied. There are social work courses, but at the end of the day, you need hands on learning to do it. A degree like women's studies teaches students ways of understanding and relating to other people, and theorizing about their experiences while grounding that theory in material life. These are skills useful in social work. Similarly, a lawyer who decides to work with at-risk youth or abused women or something of the sort can benefit from the interdisciplinary research and analysis skills taught in women's studies classes. Most people do not arrive at their careers through a straight path that is exactly the same as that of their colleagues.
65
@64: I completely agree with you. I think my point is that women's studies (etc) make sense as part of a more trade/skill/career based education and don't make sense as a primary major unless you're planning to stay in the academy. I do think the information and contemplation of theory is valuable and I wish more people chose to integrate it into their work.
66
@41, actually, I took enough classes to have a Women's Studies minor, but I never applied for it because I didn't want it on my transcript.

@56, the increasing prevalence of Women's studies that you claim, if it is true, is most likely due to the increasing prevalence of young adults enrolling in baccalaureate programs who probably should have been persuing different career paths other than academia. College is not for everybody, even though it is pushed on everyone from the middle class an up nowadays. Do we really need more people like LW pontificating and being constitutively offended? What's the purpose?
67
@64 i have no idea what point you are trying to make, but i agree with what you're saying.

@63. Sigh people who resort to this comeback on forums drive me nuts! its a fucking comment not a essay. Sadly i don't really care enough about you to put that much effort into the editing of my comments, so i apologize that it didn't meet your standards, next time ill take it to a professional editor.
Are you going to go through every comment on this forum and correct their grammar? Or are you just going after me because you felt miffed and an insult boosts the self esteem that you get from comment posting.
68
@55: Ha ha ha!

Sigh.

Sniffle.

Sob.
69
@66 Like I said, a minor in one institution does not give you any idea about women's and gender studies accross the world. The program is pretty tough at my university, especially in the upper-years, and saying what you think the prof wants you to say will get you nowhere.
70
@69: Here's my women's studies story. I took one course at an ivy league school as a freshman. I was the only male in the class. My professor gave me a B-, claiming that I never turned in the final paper that I had literally handed to her. Fucked my GPA up, and cost me $ since the interest rate on one of my student loans was tied to my grades. I think she wanted me to experience discrimination firsthand.

This was back in the angry days of Andrea Dworkin. Perhaps things have changed since then. Any men in your program?
71
Aww, was it hard for you? You probably would have cried in P-chem then.
72
@68 Oh, sorry...here's a kleenex, dear, must get back to chapter 12 of "What the Scotsman Wore Beneath His Kilt."
73
I'm pretty sure being a woman in a predominantly man's field gives me pretty good first hand experience on a whole lotta that nonsense you "studied" in class too.
74
@67 Maybe I should just say, your whole post aimed at me was about the usefulness of the major, when I had said I won't say it's a useless degree...I will say that those who get it are, by and large douchey 'tards.

That, my moronic not-friend, is reading comprehension fail.
75
@25, that's probably the most accurate description that I've read about why I can guess writers like HC's major within a couple paragraphs.
76
@13 And how!
77
@73: Having worked with women in a predominantly male field, their example always struck me as more authentically feminist than anything happening in the women's studies echo chambers.
78
@28 and the rest who can't figure out the difference between arousal and sexual attraction, you probably won't read this since all of Seattle is between your questions and this answer. Forget about the letter; it was pretty silly.

Having a libido means that you--any of you, all of you--might become aroused and might want to do yourself. Sexual attraction means you'd also want to do OTHERS, because you're attracted to them. If you're asexual, you don't want to do others. It has nothing to do with your level of testosterone, it has to do with sexual attraction to others.

Get it? Probably not. However, it's not exactly rocket science.
79
@64: I think I did a bad job explaining my point. I'm not questioning the value of a liberal arts degree-- though, like @60, I think those students would be better off getting a degree in something that's directly applicable to the real world, even if they ultimately becomes lawyers or something. Rather, I'm questioning the value of gender studies as a whole.

I can see the value in history as a preserver of past experiences, that we do not repeat the same mistakes of prior generations. English provides both art and communication; political science aids in government; philosophy yields logic, ethics, and aesthetics. I find the so-called "soft sciences" useful as well: psychology explains cognitive errors not predicted by economics, sociology helps structure organizations, etc. So I see the benefits of undergraduates studying and hopefully contributing to those fields, even if most of those students ultimately leave: all of these fields can enrich the lives of people as a whole.

I have difficulty, however, seeing the value in gender studies as a discipline, since the focus seems to be more on navel-gazing than on producing rigorous academic work. Fields that lend themselves to empiricism conduct peer-reviewed studies, and those fields which are "squishier" at least produce lively debate and a hierarchy of esteemed papers and theories. Gender studies, in my admittedly limited experience, does neither of these: the focus seems to be more on hearing everyone's opinion than on testing or criticizing those opinions. There is no emphasis on producing anything. Which is fine for the people within the field, but worthless for everyone outside of it.
80
@78: The problem here, is that you are utilizing words to mean things other than their traditional meanings. Asexual, in its strict dictionary definition and common cultural usage means "does not have libido." I know (from Wikipedia) that Kinsey defined asexual as lacking sexual interest in others, but this is not what most people think when they hear the term.

This brings back the cis/trans debate from a couple weeks: A small subset of society can create and make common use of the term "cisgendered," but when other people don't understand it, who's to blame? The normative person for not being more curious about the other, or the other for expecting mass culture to pick up on esoteric in-group language?

I would have understood your point better if you said earlier "arousal or libido isn't always directed outward" or that "asexuals still can have sex drives they just often prefer not to have sex with others." Is that more the point you're making?

Or, in the immortal words of Tweet Oops. Oh my!
81
@74 So you spent how many posts lambasting womens studies as a major? and you think saying "I'm not saying its a useless degree butttt" exempts you from criticism.

I read your post and the ones preceding it and tailored my response accordingly. When you claim that women's studies majors are not rational and that it is poisoning young minds it comes pretty close to calling it useless and essentially delegitimizes it as a major. So instead of responding to your exact words, i responded to the substance.
82
@78 I see your point, but for *most* people, you're splitting hairs. *Most* people don't become aroused looking at a blank wall or thinking about nothing at all. Arousal happens because you are thinking about someone else, or looking at someone else. And if you're happy to get yourself off, how can you call that asexual?
83
@78: What @82 said.

I guess I don't get it. Are you saying that asexuals can have a desire to jerk off, but not a desire to have sex? Speaking as an "averagely" sexual person, the only times I masturbate are when I'm thinking of having sex with someone else. I can't even conceive of thinking about anything else.

What would an asexual person think of? Couldn't they work that "thing" into sex with another person, like "averagely" sexual people do? I'm honestly both curious and confused.
84
I guess some people really like shoes and maybe could get all horny and tug one out thinking about shoes. Maybe asexuals are like that? Or maybe asexuals get all worked up thinking about themselves, because that seems to be the crux of what two care about, considering many spouses of asexuals who "came out" after marriage write in all the time, and the asexuals pretty much want to end all sex full stop. Maybe we could call them mesexuals from now on. I fuckin' love myself. Mmm baby.
85
Wow, this has dissolved almost entirely into hating on women's studies. Kind of a step down from expressing confusion over asexuality, there.

A postulate: The women's studies majors you remember are the ones who like to rant irksomely. Think of your general pool of acquaintances. Do you know most of their college degree programs? Having attended a school with a lot of women's studies majors, there were ten interested scholars for each pontificating pain in the ass. Selective memory being what it is, consider that.

A second postulate: Women and gender studies is, y'know, a liberal arts thing. The whole point of liberal arts is to study what interests you while preparing to be a well-rounded and sensible person. Not a lot of jobs in the studies of women and gender field, at least not directly, but how many jobs are there for a classical history major? An art history major? Furthermore, women and gender courses tend to be interdepartmental and very customizable, so it's more a specialty within an anthropology/psych/history/sociology degree than anything else, like being a religion major. You can question the liberal arts education model if you like, but women's studies works just fine within that.
86
Asexuals aren't nearly as persecuted as they would seemingly like to believe they are. Not having sex is not considered immoral or abhorrent or disgusting by the society at large, like gay sex is. So some people will think you are weird, big fucking deal.

In my largely hostile and intolerant environment I have never heard a single offensive comment about people who don't have sex. Yet the comments about homosexuality never seem to stop. And don't tell me it's just because asexual invisibility. Gays are largely invisible here too, and in any case, homophobia existed long before any terms for it were coined. I'm pretty sure that if I came out to my co-workers as asexual, I would have far less trouble with them accepting it than if I came out as bi. Sure, some of them would pity me or try to fix me, but none would be disgusted or scared that I would now molest them or something.

So please, STFU with your righteous, tedious, self-victimizing lectures.
87
How can someone MAJOR in Women's studies? A class or two, ok, but as a MAJOR? Come on now, that's some bs.
88
sorry, but another tl;dr
89
@81 Saying that the majority of students are douchey, and that the students are irrational pricks who have been over-sensitized to the Harshness of the World is not saying that there isn't good information in the classes, and in no way invalidates the major. I firmly believe in educating the people on the inequalities of the world. Women's Studies departments just happen to attract and create the douchiest most irrational self-absorbed 'tards of all the majors I've interacted with.
90
Well, if nothing else has been accomplished I think StrangerLabs is now one step closer to finding the perfect comment-bait Slog post.

Stay tuned to hear Dan blogging about an obese asexual pitbull.
91
@90: ...that jaywalks to the Washington state-run liquor store to fetch liquor for its cisgendered tunnel-supporting construction worker owner.
92
@55, 68, 72 ... can't... stop... giggling... arrgghh....

93
giggle
94
It's kind of sad how happy people here are to bash a young person - probably 20 years or so old - who writes in to defend herself and her sexual orientation - as "douchey", "windbag," etc.
How is that any different from bullying gay kids at school? In all likelihood, bullied gay kids sometimes behave a little odd - people who feel they don't quite belong often do. I'm sure many of them, after years of getting homophobic crap, are also a bit oversensitive and see discrimination where there is none. Sometimes, they may seem a little self-absorbed (that's what her classmates actually said about (prom) Constance).
I think we've established that that doesn't make it OK to bully them. So why is it OK to bully the letter writer?
95
Sooooooo, asexuals do masterbate????? Somehow I got the impression that they didn't even do that.
96
I thought Dan's readers would, mostly, be above slamming Women's Studies. But I guess you can find ignorant, privileged pricks on even the best sites. Misanthrope, you're embarazing urself, u gramer nazi. And, judgmentalist, the value of a lib arts degree is in the SUBJECT MATTER ITSELF, not in its ability to instantly land you a cushy job that allows you to stop questioning structures of power/capital/knowledge. (those structures DO exist, whether or not you acknowledge it)

But I must be forgetting that, since a few lib arts majors are douches, the entire field of lib arts is useless and it immediately invalidates all their arguments. Good thing the world isn't overrun with douchey MBAs and engineers, right?
97
@94 if the LW didn't write in to dictate the terms which we are to use to describe her, I may start to agree. As it is, her telling Dan what terms we are and are not allowed to use, including the term "normal," means that we are allowed to choose whatever terms we like to describe what we think of her and her writing style.

Bullying usually means people who are beating up, stealing from, harassing, or otherwise pestering other people for no reason other than their existence. The LW wrote in, and opened herself up to criticism. Being critical of her is not bullying her.
98
@96 I like you. :-D
99
@98 I like you too XD
ur profile pic is very pink
100
@69 -- I hate to break it to ya, but claiming that "the experience in your school is not representative of the field" by describing the experience in your own school is a little lacking, argument-wise. And what do you mean by 'upper years'? Are you talking about graduate studies (at which point the degree _might_ at least let you teach), senior year as an undergrad, or what?

    Please wait...

    Comments are closed.

    Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.


    Add a comment
    Preview

    By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.