#this goes out to all aspecs who are sick of people using preferences to justify aphobia

[aspec-mafia-official]

"Some aspecs want relationships!

Yeah.

And some aspecs want to stab you to death.

Sure plenty of aspec people still want to date/have sex/have platonic relationships/whatever else, but others don't want or can't stand the thought of relationships.

Stop using people's personal preferences to justify your aphobia Chadiffer.

[askanaroace]

[screenshots of a tumblr post: @multishipper-baby asked: Hey, I have a question! Can I identify as a bi aroace if I'm gray-romantic? I know it's still in the aro spectrum, but I don't want to make other aroaces uncomfortable and use a label that's not mine

/end ask

@biaroace answered:I’ll start off by saying that I cannot control what you or anyone else calls themselves. However, I will say that I personally wouldn’t be comfortable with someone aro/ace-spec [a-spec for short] using “bi aroace” for the sake of brevity alone (and this goes for any other flavor of oriented aroace). 

“Why? Ace-spec people call themselves ace all the time. How is this any different?” That’s because the dynamics of the ace community are very different: asexuals are prioritized within their own orientation. They don’t have to fight to be recognized within their own label. They don’t have to question whether a post employing the term “asexual” includes them or not. They aren’t hesitantly listed off fifth in a list of possible definitions at best and outright excluded at worst whenever someone asks “what’s an asexual?”. Rather, those were the plights of a-spec people. 

I believe that’s the very reason a-specs made their own terms, and adopted the terms of the dominant majority (aro/ace) as shorthand. It’s perfectly justifiable! It’s admirable, even! But to transfer this practice onto oriented aroace labels would be a grave mistake, because as of now, we hold nowhere near the influential power aces and aros hold within their own communities. If anything, it is a-specs who are prioritized over us. A-specs who are taken as being the more “acceptable” meaning of bi aroace (as opposed to us weird oriented aroace heathens with our ~non-romantic/sexual unspecified attraction~). A-specs who are the face of our very orientation despite employing it as a mere shorthand. You’re not sticking it to the big man by claiming “bi aroace” as an a-spec person. You’re repeating exactly what was done to you. In order to help us be rid of this dynamic, I encourage you to leave “bi aroace” to oriented aroaces and instead use the equally cool alternate shorthands provided by your very own aro/ace-spec communities. For instance, bi-grayro ace could act as a neat shorthand for you (plus it’s got the same amount of syllables!) :>

Finally, I’d like to thank you for having taken the time to send this message. Your mindfulness as an ally is greatly appreciated, and I hope my response cleared things up!!

/end answer

@babyferrettails reblogs with: Yes! I’m sick of people saying that someone who uses an “orientation+aroace” term to describe themselves are probably grayace or grayro. It completely undermines oriented aroaces which is unfortunately the norm in the community already. @biaroace I’m glad you took the time to type this up it explains it really well!

/end reblog

@aceexplorations reblogs with: So I️ understand where you peeps are coming from. I️ really do. But as someone who would like to identify as a lesbian aroace but can only get up the courage to identify as an aroace who desires a long term relationship but only with other women, I️ really don’t mind people who are aro/asespec identifying as a label-aroace.My reason is this: At the moment you never hear of ANYONE identifying as label-aroace and as a result anytime anyone does people, all people, question how that is possible. The more people use the label the faster others will get used to hearing it. And as long as people remember to include an explanation for how someone who is aroace and not aroacespec can be label-aroace I️ think getting people more familiar with the label can only help.Plus, I️ don’t believe in telling somebody how they should or should not identify. They should do whatever makes them feel the most comfortable.

/end caption]

Yeah... I'm actually incredibly uncomfortable with this push to limit who can identify how, especially in this context. I’m tagging @multishipper-baby to make sure he can see multiple perspectives on this, and thank you @aceexplorations for speaking up as well.

For one, the orientation+aroace format was something people were using before "oriented aroace" came about, and there are still people who identify this way who do not specifically identify as an oriented aroace. It'd be one thing if it was a natural progression of the term changing to mean something more specifically, but forcefully trying to push people out of a term that has been open to them before "oriented aroace" became a named, defined thing does not at all sit well with me.

For two, there are many reasons - all extremely valid - why some choose to verbally identify, identify only as, or in many cases shorten to aro/ace when they are aspec. For example, can be easier than getting into an even more detailed explanation and so plain exhaust them less. It could even mean that they feel more comfortable setting boundaries in not having to discuss personal matters that may make them uncomfortable. We've long been pushing that aromantic and asexual can absolutely be umbrella terms and that you don't have to identify as aspec or some certain aspec term if you don't want, aren't comfortable with, don't prefer, or are unsure where you otherwise stand. To limit that now after we've worked really hard to make these terms open and welcoming to folk who are constantly wondering if they belong... I can't tell you how many times I've seen demia folk asking if they're welcome in the community, and graya in particular was hit extremely violently by exclusionism (at one point, basically dying out as a known label and only recently being talked about again).

For three, it’s long been the tagline of the queer community (perhaps particularly for nonbinary and aspec people, but I am currently most involved in those communities) that labels are, first and foremost, for ourselves. Do we feel a connection to labeling a certain way, even if it’s merging or stringing together multiple terms? Does it help us communicate how we feel? Does it bring us a sense of relief to use the term? Then we should use it (excluding instances of cultural appropriation or other harmful actions)! I am not seeing a reason here why it harms either oriented aroaces or non-oriented aroace orientation+aroaces to both be using the format orientation+aroace.

Finally... I'm sorry, I'm just not at all understanding the point of limiting who can identify as an orientation+aroace. When we're creating strict and limiting turns, we have to ask ourselves: why? What purpose is this serving? Does it help more people than it hurts? Is it unnecessarily leaving people out/making people feel unwelcome and/or invalid?

Honestly, I understand the argument so little, I can’t even make a point against it, nor figure out what the heck question I should be asking. The aspec spectrums simply do not exist in some sort of hierarchy as you are implying. Some folk may have more visibility than others (due to the size of the community, how long they’ve been pushing for education - not due to a particular in community effort to maliciously destabilize ourselves), and it’s true that right now there’s a lot of valid discussions going on about how people need to be careful with their words (stop saying aromantic when you mean asexual), but nobody was gatekeeping orientation+aroace until these ideas on your blog started coming up.

I saw someone trying to argue that they wanted oriented aroace to have full ownership over orientation+aroace because they wanted it to be immediately clear to people that they were specifically aroace and not graya, to which, I’m sorry, but I have to call bullshit. Orientation labels honestly say very little about us and the true complexities of our feelings, and they work well that way!

For example, someone who identifies as bi may be someone: with a strong preference for one gender over another, someone who’s only attracted to a specific amount of genders, someone who’s attracted to multiple genders but may not even include one of the expected binary genders, someone with no discernable preference for one gender over another, someone who’s attracted to all genders but considers gender an important component of their attraction, etc. Someone saying they’re bi doesn’t tell you anything beyond the fact that they’re attracted to two or more genders!

Aro and ace have long been this way as well. Even aroace is as well! There are so many details and intricacies to our feelings, desires, repulsions, aversions, preferences, wants, etc. that no label could possibly encompass all important aspects of our identity! At some point, there’s gotta be a breakdown where we realize that labels are a quick summary of how we feel, not the end all, be all of who we are or how we’re allowed to feel.

Aspec people calling themselves aromantic, asexual, or aroace all know there is a tradeoff to not outright specifying the spectrum part of their identity, and they are making the choice for themselves that they are okay and comfortable with what that entails. It should not be up to us to try and shame them out of that. As aspec people, we are not taking anything from each other by using our own community’s terms!!! It’s a difficult amatonormative, sexnormative, heteronormative world we must navigate. Our terms and our community should make it easier for us to navigate these minefields, not create more minefields to trip each other up in.

I’d be completely fine if “oriented aroace” itself was a term to specifically be defined in a strict manner. I am not okay with the bold claims that oriented aroaces somehow own the pattern of merging together identity terms in non-standard ways to describe themselves, specifically owning oriented+aroace, of which I have an incredibly hard time believing they invented.

So far, I’m not seeing how it harms us to keep orientation+aroace something open. However, I am hearing from people who are hurt by trying to make it more exclusive.