Open Forum: Asexuality and the Sex Positive Movement

The sex positive movement embraces a variety of social and philosophical attitudes towards sexuality. The sex positive movement unlike the dominant framework of organized religion does not pass judgment on various forms of sexuality including homosexuality, transsexuality, BDSM, polyamory, and masturbation and instead accepts individual sexual freedoms.

While accepting and promoting various forms of sexuality is certainly positive it calls into question whether the movement is embracing of asexuality, those who have little to no interest in sex at all. In contrast to the abstinence dogma spread by mainsteam religion, asexuals are not chaste because they feel it is immoral but simply have a low level of sexual desire. Many asexuals consider themselves to be sex-positive even if they themselves abstain from or have a minute degree of sexual activity in their own personal lives but others feels that there is no place for them in this movement and society that idealizes the concept of sexuality.

What do you think? Is asexuality accepted and embraced as part of the individual sexual freedoms in the sex positive movement or is it ignored or bashed in some fashion?

"Welcome to California Where Chickens Have More Rights Than Me"

As a queer vegan blogger I probably have a different perspective on this but I felt the need to rant. I wrote about the Black-Gay Blame Game and how it is wrong to single out African-Americans because the majority of that community voted for prop 8. We must understand that all the struggles for liberation have parallels but cannot be equated as each are unique in their own way.

Black people were enslaved, beaten, and subject to some of the most horrendous discrimination in this country. The queer civil rights movement cannot be compared to that movement because it is fundamentally different, there are parallels but equating that both are the same is doing a disservice to both movements. There are struggles blacks have dealt with that gays have not and vice versa.

Similarly this notion that proposition 2 passed (an animal protection bill) is somehow giving animals more rights than LGBT people is ridiculous and downright speciesist (involves assigning different values or rights to beings on the basis of their species membership).

People are holding signs at rallies saying "chickens can spread their wings, but gays can't marry." Six hens to a tiny battery cage where they cannot move, and are forcefully debeaked without pain killers, and excrete on one another is not on the same level with the marriage equality movement. The parallel is both movements strive to bring basic dignities and rights to all, but they are not on the same level playing field.



The routine procedures such as castration, debeaking, caging, force-feeding, and denial of basic natural practices for animals is far from humane, and no chickens do not have more rights than gay people. That is a ridiculous assertion, animals have no rights in our society. The federal law to protect animals even excludes animals raised for food consumption.

I am very much in favor of drawing parallels between struggles for liberation, after all we are all tied to the same goals of basic dignity for our families and livelihoods and we all face a similar oppressor each and every time. The time now is to understand the struggle for equality and to draw parallels but not to point fingers and denigrate one struggle over another.