The Designated Hater

The original purpose of this blog was to respond to representations of asexuals in the media. As you've noticed, these are so few and far between that I've had to branch out to other topics. But with ABC's recent coverage of AVEN's DSM (that's the big book with the psychological disorders) project, I seem to have reached critical mass, mentally speaking. I feel like I can really start to identify trends in the way that we're presented. I'm about to lump a lot of things together, however, there are exceptions. The most notable ones to me are Bitch Magazine's article "Do Not Want", the KPFA radio story, and the Guardian's article from Paul's perspective.

First of all, in most media we're really presented as "other" and outside the mainstream. There's little done to help the readers identify with us. Harvey Milk was very wise when he declared that gay people were your family, friends, and neighbors. He knew that gay people would be "othered". Milk and his compatriots took to the streets to show solidarity, but also to demonstrate how many gay people there really were. And that's another thing about the articles-- they make it seem like we're an extremely small group, when in fact, 1% of the world's population is an enormous group. There's always mention of AVEN, but little thought is given to the power and implications of this community. And asexuals actually interacting off-line? That must really be an urban legend.

To me, the most annoying feature is that there is always, always at least one hater*. What they're saying doesn't even have to make sense, but it apparently has to be included anyway. So few people know about asexuality to begin with, so where did these haters come from? I would guess that they're not very informed about asexuality, if at all. Most people spend about zero time thinking about asexuality, so how much do these "experts" really know? They seem to be operating on rumor rather than fact. I know that dissenting views make a good story. But you don't look at the wedding announcements and then see quotes from people who claim the wedding didn't actually happen. Asexuality, like I've said before, isn't an issue with two sides because it isn't an issue. The way we're treated might be an issue, but our orientation itself is not.

Since I realized this issue with the haters, I've looked for haters in media about other groups. You'll find them often in stories about the gay community. A few months ago, I saw a documentary, made by a gay man, called Small Town Gay Bar. As you might imagine, it was about the patrons of gay bars in small towns. It was obvious that the film's subjects were risking their safety, perhaps even their lives, to congregate with people who they could relate to. So when Fred Phelps appeared to talk about how much he hated gay people, it didn't serve to educate me much further. Hearing the stories of the small town gay people themselves was much more edifying than random hating. However, maybe I just say this because I already know more than I want to know about Phelps. If you had no idea what gay folks have to contend with, Phelps' vitriol might show it to you. But the thing is, Phelps is so over-the-top and ridiculous that he's obviously there to illustrate how stupid hating makes you look. The asexuality haters are cloaked in professional or "expert" terms, and so people are more likely to give them the benefit of the doubt. Whose word would you believe, a self-professed sex expert or a random asexual? Would you believe a mild-mannered lesbian or a raving bigot? Maybe we can include haters after all, if they're batshit crazy enough.

But the three stories I mentioned above (Bitch Magazine, KPFA, and the Guardian) are proof that we don't need haters to produce a quality report. Those three pieces were the best so far, in my opinion, because they were the most informative, thoughtful, and fully-formed. I know that many aces, myself included, are very hesitant to appear in media, if we don't refuse alltogether. I think part of this apprehension is because we don't want to square off against haters. To me, arguing with someone you know is wrong is the most frustrating feeling in the world. That's why I have a blog so I can always be right. (Mwhahaha.) But I really do think our media options are beginning to improve. The hating on ABC was rather light, all things considered (I know, my expectations are so low). And at least it focused on something we were actually doing rather than the mere fact of our existance. Maybe one day we'll get more in-depth reporting than the 10 people in the world who are allergic to water and are always on TLC during the daytime.

*[Sidenote: Let me define exactly where in the ABC article hating takes place. An professor who doesn't seem to have any prior information on asexuality says: "Given that I believe our sexuality is a great emotional and physical asset, it is hard for me to think asexuality is appropriate to declassify [as a dysfunction]". But what she misses is the fact that asexuality isn't classified in the first place! Hypoactive sexual desire disorder is classified. Way to ignorantly mislead people and imply that we're emotionally and physically deficient. But! Cake for Lori Brotto!]