Asexual oppression and all that
«“Oh yeah, asexuals are just invisible, we don’t experience real oppression/legalised discrimination/violent oppression/other things go here as well.”
Usually used contrasting us to other queer groups, in order to explain why we’re so much better off than they are.
Let’s take this apart.
First of all, invisibility is a form of oppression. We’re all clear on that, yes? This isn’t exactly a new idea. It’s not a new idea to sexual queer folk either. In a comment on this post about anti-asexual attitudes by Stephanie Silberstein, Sciatrix writes:
Well, on the other hand–isn’t constant and (to a degree) enforced invisibility a form of oppression all on its own? Oppression doesn’t have to be violent or about legal discrimination to count. Or, well, if it does, I see plenty of other complaints about Glee in particular and media in general that are suddenly invalid: desexualized and perpetually single queer characters in contrast to straight characters who get to have romantic relationships; unequal time put on relationships of queer and straight characters, stereotyping of queer people in media, Magical Gays, bisexual erasure, and so forth. If all oppression has to come down to violent or legalized discrimination… well, we’ve just drastically restricted the breadth of what it means to be an oppressed group under a privileged hegemony.
There does not exist a quota of “you must have this high a risk of experiencing violence due to your orientation” before you’re allowed to say you’re oppressed, mmkay?»
Read the whole article here.