"Camp Victory, How Wonderful You Are"

You can consider this "Only the Good Die Young" Part II.

I didn't think I'd like Huge. It's about kids at fat camp, after all, and aired on ABC Family, which is not known for its realistic and nuanced depictions of teen life. But a glowing review by Lauren finally persuaded me to watch the show, a year after it originally aired.

People, this show is so good, it will just break your heart that it was killed after only ten episodes. It isn't perfect, but it's better than 99.9% of the teen dramas that have been brought back for multiple seasons. Although discussions of weight tend to quickly devolve into harsh and judgmental territory, this show actually manages to portray fat people without moralizing. Being fat may have brought these kids together, but their fat does not define them. There was a strange episode about an "authentic Native American spirit quest", where I couldn't tell if cultural appropriation was being satirized or just occurring thoughtlessly. It was a puzzling inclusion for a show that seemed to be trying its best to be sensitive about a wide range of topics.

For me, I know a show is good when my favorite character is ever-shifting. I was going, "Oh, Wil is totally my favorite...no, Becca...no, Trent...no, Alastair...". It means the characters are multi-dimensional and have emotional depth. Characters of all genders (and I can actually say that and have it make sense here, because Alastair may be genderqueer in some way) have inner lives that go beyond checking out hot people or trying to get laid.

And yes, there is an asexual, aromantic minor character, a camp counselor named Poppy. She's not a sociopath or a misanthrope! There is, however, one word that does describe her:


She's incredibly dorky, perhaps verging on derpy. But she means well, is very warm and friendly, and obviously cares a lot about her campers. And she plays ukulele!

ABC FAMILY, Y U NO SAVE POPPY?

Only the Good Die Young

Wow, who knew virginity was such a hot topic...what can I follow it with? Well, here's something that incites passion among us all (maybe): Wrongly canceled TV series!

There are different parts of us that are every age we've ever been. But I have to say that for me, a disproportionately large part has always been about 15. Maybe that's one reason why I liked My So-Called Life so much. While the show (which only lasted one season) became iconic after its original airing in the early 90s, I saw it for the first time this past month. While I couldn't really relate to the crushes and sexual anxiety of the characters, I thought that they seemed more human and realistic than most, giving me a more genuine window into the average teen experience than, say, Gossip Girl. In some way, we are all Angela Chase, whether at the end of a hard day we lie on our beds listening to the Cranberries, hip-hop or death metal. None of us are perfect, but we're all doing our best to make sense of a confusing world.

[Image: Rickie and Angela]

My favorite character was Rickie, who is sort of like the queer, shy, high-school version of Prince. Before "the gay friend" became a cliche, Rickie seemed a lot less stereotypical and his issues were handled with more subtlety than, say, Kurt's (from Glee). That occasional subtlety is what makes My So-Called Life seem artful at times, like a good movie, when it could have easily fallen into Degrassi-style after-school-special territory. I feel strangely wronged that it only lasted one season. There is so little on TV, past or present, that actually tells people something about their lives.

So, what series do you think died too young? (Everyone always mentions Freaks and Geeks--even so, Judd Apatow has managed to do okay for himself-- and I was also miffed that Huge was canceled right after a character came out as asexual, even though I never got around to watching the show.)

Have Sex, Become Annoying

That's not a value judgment, but a small piece of character development from the show Lost. When it originally aired, I got up to season 2. Now I'm re-watching it (although I'm close to giving up), I've reached season 4 (spoilers for seasons 1-3 are to follow), and somehow I'm finding it much harder to suspend my disbelief. This post from Shakesville comes to mind:

Although I love Lost with the fiery passion of ten thousand suns, that not a single one of the female characters on the Island has ever, in all her interactions with people who all started out as total strangers, faced even the faintest threat of sexual assault is an absurd omission. The only reference to sexual assault that I even recall on the show is when one female character refers as the "rape caves" to an area where another female character is abducted (though she is not sexually assaulted). The female characters routinely find themselves isolated with unknown men, many of whom are violent and unethical, but never is there a suggestion that the women would be in any particular physical danger separate from their male allies.

(It's a short post, so I recommend reading the rest.) While Lost is full of plot confusions, the characters' personal hygiene habits are even more baffling to me. Although the women aren't trekking around in makeup-caked faces, where do they get hair products? How do they shave their legs? And of course, why would anyone have consensual sex on a "deserted" island where there is no birth control and the one doctor is constantly in danger of being killed? Sure, people do crazy things in moments of passion, but I doubt many women would welcome the possibility of pregnancy on the island. Also, anyone willing to have sex with Sawyer without a condom is a damn fool, as he himself might say.

So how does Lost deal with these inconsistencies? Why, by killing many of the women who do have sex. It's that old horror-movie adage moved to the South Pacific. Here is a hopefully-accurate catalogue of people who've had sex in seasons 1-3, and their fates so far:

Sayid & Shannon: Shannon is killed in an accident, Sayid is still alive.

Sawyer & Ana Lucia: Ana Lucia is killed, Sawyer is still alive.

Sawyer & Kate: They're both still alive, but after she has sex with Sawyer, Kate becomes noticeably more annoying.

Hurley & Libby: Okay, they didn't have sex, but apparently, the sheer prospect was viewed as too disturbing (desexualization of fat characters?), so Libby was killed before they were about to depart on a romantic picnic.

Sun & Jin: They're both still alive, BUT Sun becomes pregnant. And she's told that all pregnant women who conceive on the island are doomed to death. I'll see how that one pans out.

Bonus: In a flash-forward that takes place in Berlin (early in season 4), Sayid and a woman have sex, they shoot each other, and only Sayid lives. He's like the Typhoid Mary of sex.

Note-- You can kiss on the island without anything bad happening to you. Thank goodness. (Also, pleeeze don't tell me how the show ends...although honestly, I doubt it's going to make much sense anyway.)

Quick Notes on "Glee"

Anyone out there

a) bisexual and
b) a watcher of Glee?

Did you find tonight's show to be...troublesome? I did. Of course, non-bisexual viewers are welcome to share their thoughts, too. (Spoilers --->) In this episode, Blaine, who was portrayed as gay up until this point, kisses Rachael, a straight girl, while playing drunk spin-the-bottle. Sparks fly, leading Blaine to wonder if he might actually be bi. Kurt, a gay boy who's in love with Blaine, tells him that bisexuality isn't real. Blaine, understandably, gets offended. Later, Blaine kisses Rachael while sober, and decides that he's definitely gay. While Blaine emphatically states that he wants to explore his sexuality, all his questioning seems to take place over the course of a day or two.

(To those unaware, asexuals and bisexuals get similar negative responses. Had Blaine said that he thought he might be asexual, the exact same conversation could have transpired.)

While Blaine defends bisexuality to Kurt, in the end it's confirmed that being bi is just a state of momentary confusion. I can understand why Kurt holds his views, especially given his feelings for Blaine. His prejudice might make sense within the story, but that doesn't mean that bisexuality should begin and end in a 45-minute period. Glee sees itself as a "progressive" show, and it covered Kurt's experience as an out gay student over the arc of many episodes. But bisexuality gets brushed off, even though there are other potentially bi characters, like Brittany and Santana. It pains me when a show gets close to doing something long-overdue, like actually having a bisexual character, and then pulls back.

Married to Work: BBC's Sherlock

And who is more asocial than the man himself, Sherlock Holmes? Yes, I finally stumbled out of my cave and watched the BBC's Sherlock. (Lia wants me to say that I watched it with her, a Sherlock Holmes purist.) I'm still working my way through the three episodes (come on, they're very action-packed), and enjoying them so far, but we came here to talk about asexuality, didn't we?

I know that a lot of aces find Sherlock's asexuality to be personally or culturally relevant. I can understand and respect that, but I don't feel the same way. I've met a lot of asexuals, and we all seem to share some similar concerns about living in a sexual world, concerns that don't seem to cross Sherlock's mind. To me, he's not relatable on an asexual level, and he's not the kind of character I'd want to be friends with. I don't know if many people would want to be Sherlock, but still, he seems to have what everyone wants. And it's not "the girl" (or "the guy"), which might be somewhat unique. It's to be recognized for doing what you love and what you do best (and wearing a snazzy coat). While BBC's Sherlock describes himself as a "high-functioning sociopath", he seems more like an autistic savant to me. (How else could he memorize the traffic pattern of every London street?) Sherlock thrives in his own story, but if he were dropped into the real world, I wouldn't count on his success.

Conan Doyle probably never intended this reading, but it does speak to me as a workaholic with no work. I find watching Sherlock oddly poignant for this reason. My mind turns to the fact that our society doesn't tend to do well at utilizing people's special, perhaps Sherlock-like abilities. I start thinking of this quote I'd read a while ago: "I am somehow less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein’s brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops." So when I look at Sherlock, I don't see his asexuality first, but his "marriage to his work". And that's a hard thing to hold onto these days. I can finally admit that I don't want "the guy", at least not in a Hollywood way. But I still want the work, elusive as it may be.

And forgive my towering expectations, but I would like it if actors playing asexuals would make some kind of educational statement about asexuality. Straight actors playing gay characters do it all the time. On the other hand, Benedict Cumberbatch, the star of Sherlock, "suggests that Holmes is asexual, perhaps the result of being burned in the past by women..."and that's it, as far as I can find. I don't expect actors to take up our cause, but just mentioning the "correct" definition of asexuality would be a small thing for him and a big deal to some of us.

(Also, is it terrible that whenever a show has rapid-fire wordplay, I'm always going, "Ugh, why is this so Gilmore Girls?")

"Hung"

I keep forgetting this blog is supposed to be about pop culture...my bad. So am I the only person in the world who watched Hung (crappy title for a few reasons) on HBO or what? The second season ended recently. In an art class once, I painted a beautiful watercolor of a kangaroo, and my professor called it a "bizarre choice of subject matter". I guess the same could be said of Hung. It's about a divorced father, teacher, and baseball coach in Detroit, basically a regular guy facing financial problems. His house burns down and he loses custody of his kids. So to get some extra income, he turns to prostitution.

Bizarre show for an asexual to enjoy? Eh, I don't think so. I really liked the first season for the humor and the great acting of the two main characters: Ray, the prostitute, and Tanya, a poet by day, his pimp by night. They're very likable. Most of the characters on the show experience some kind of growth, and not just the major characters. The second season, while it had good moments, became increasingly odd and disjointed. Considering that, I'm actually kind of surprised that it got picked up for a third season.

As you might imagine, Hung contained a fair amount of sex. But it was usually depicted in a humorous way that didn't bother me. What tends to bother me about depictions of sex is a total irrelevance to the plot, and that definitely can't be said of Hung. Also, as someone who doesn't connect love and sex, casual sex (as long as it isn't abusive) is no more distasteful to me than sex in a relationship. Since Ray has veto power over his clients, there isn't really any coercion involved. But like Sex and the City, the main focus of the show isn't actually sex. It's more about the non-sexual tribulations of setting up this business, and its ramifications on the rest of Ray's life.

Two interesting things from the second season: Ray had a client who saw him because sex was always boring to her. And in the end...she was still bored. So, hey. Also, at the end of the second season (s p o i l e r !), when Ray and his ex-wife, Jessica, are realizing they still love each other, Jessica says that rather than just going from man to man, she wants to take some time for herself to figure out her own needs. I thought that was cool, and an extremely rare outcome for film/TV. I also like how Ray's daughter is shown as being into the Fat Acceptance movement, although it's randomly thrown in and not explored. Maybe next season?

If you like any other comedies from HBO, you'll probably like Hung as well...the first season is out on DVD, if anyone wants to check it out.

The Real L Word

In which I see it so you don't have to!

A few weeks ago, I had a cold (yeah, I know you're all dying to know what my sinuses are up to), which meant that I watched a lot more TV than usual. This included quite a few different shows that I probably wouldn't have otherwise seen. The most relevant one to this blog was probably The Real L-Word, on Showtime, which I believe is from the same people who brought us The Fictional L-Word. To my considerable shame, I kept watching the show after my cold got better. (Even though one of the characters was so annoying to me that I fast-forwarded through all her scenes...) I kept hoping that the show would display some potential, but the overall product was trashy and exploitative*, often very boring, and rarely insightful. I found these recaps much more amusing than the actual show. So I wouldn't be surprised if a second season never materialized.

If you haven't figured it out by now, the premise of The Real L-Word is that The L-Word is re-created...but this time, with real people. And it's sort of amazing how closely they've gotten the reality show to adhere to the fictional show. But I ask...what's the point of that? Even The Real World gets to go to a different city every season, but it looks like lesbians are stuck in West Hollywood for the time being. (However, whenever I watch shows set in LA, I always have an urge to dress better, which I suppose is not an awful thing.)

(Let me tell you that in Northern California, we don't get our own anatomically correct palm trees. Dude, I'm outta here.)

Was there anything positive about the show? Well, I can identify one thing. I find that in the media, there is usually a stereotype that lesbian and gay people are not accepted by their families, especially those who aren't white or from American cultural backgrounds. So it was good to see that most of the characters' families did accept them, and were welcoming to their romantic partners.

*(Doin' an asterisk to say that the "scandalous" thing about the show was that people have sex in it, and they are "real people". However, it was pretty PG in comparison to the fictional L-Word. I think there was only one visible sex scene in the whole season, so anyone watching the show for the sex would have been very disappointed. But what was sketchy about it was that the women who did have sex were totally drunk. I don't know how consent on reality shows would work, but I just felt bad for them, like once they sobered up they would have really regretted keeping the lights on. Reading the comments of some non-asexual viewers, I found this idea being echoed.)

It All Connects Like Crazy

Cruising Netflix for something to watch on "Instant" view, I came across a TV series called Cashmere Mafia. Lasting only 7 episodes, it looked like some decently mindless entertainment. Watching the first episode, the show was so silly that I almost felt embarrassed, even though I was by myself. However, I got hooked and watched the whole series. Anyway, the show is very similar to Sex and the City, but it focuses much more on the protagonists' careers (they all went to business school together) and their struggles to balance high-powered careers and family. As silly as the show appears, I think it does verge on making some interesting statements about gender roles and women who are more successful at work than the men in their lives. If we can take a moment to admire one of the many awesome outfits of Lucy Liu:


(Her character, oddly, is named "Mia Mason", even though we see her parents in the show and they're both Chinese. She does have a short conversation with an Asian guy though, about why neither of them tend to date other Asians. Seemed topical.)

The show got me thinking (sounds like an oxymoron, but true) about how jobs are portrayed on TV. I realized that TV careers are not about the work, but almost totally about relationships. Even in shows like The Wire where the intricacies of police work are examined, office politics get just as much screen time as the work itself. It's also worth noting that virtually no one on TV is bad at their job, and job performance itself is never what causes problems. Everyone, it seems, would be able to do their job perfectly if it wasn't for issues of relationships getting in the way. This is all unbelievably relevant to The Lonely Crowd's description of an "other-directed" workplace. And for once, I think that TV might actually be reporting a real trend and concern in people's lives.

At least, it's a real trend (and major concern) in my own life. In the area where I live, most people seem overqualified for their jobs, which means that almost everyone can do the actual work required of them (and probably much more). I've never had a problem with the actual work in any job I've had, unless it was that the work was too boring and repetitive. What I did have a problem with was negotiating the constantly shifting relationships of the workplace. The characters in Cashmere Mafia seem to enjoy the challenge; I break down under it. One major reason my previous job tanked was my constant stress over office politics. That stress became so great that over time, I became unable to properly do my job. There is, theoretically, an upside-- increased recognition of your work, camaraderie, mentorship. But these seem to be in short supply, whereas the capacity for needless office drama seems to be endless.

So it's only natural that people would decide to make TV shows about it. I'm realizing that just like an aromantic or perpetually single person needs to figure out how to find the relationships they do want in a structure that doesn't cater to their needs, I need to find a career where my work will be rewarded, not, as David Riesman calls it, my "glad hand". Both of those things are extremely difficult in our culture as we know it. We know they exist, somewhere, but it's getting to them that's the hard part. Romantic relationships get a lot of play, but they're not the ones we might spend forty hours a week working on. Good lord, how it all connects like crazy...

(I'll be computerless for the next two weeks or so-- comment moderation will be pretty slow, but please don't let that stop you.)

The Conundrum of Asexual Characters

There are a lot of fictional characters who, with a few small tweaks, could have been realistically portrayed as asexual. One example is Trey, one of the men of "Sex and the City". I recently re-watched the episode where Trey and Charlotte, his wife, are given homework by a sex therapist. Trey refuses to tell Charlotte about his sexual fantasies and huffs about not being "a sexual person". When Charlotte tells him that she is, indeed, sexual, he makes no move to agree that he is as well. (Most people consider it a big insult to be told they're not sexual-- if Trey saw himself as sexual, it would have made sense for him to protest Charlotte's statement.) But despite all this, he is obviously intended to be a sexual person, just an uptight one with issues.

But even if a character is intended to be asexual, how would anyone ever know? Wouldn't they be read as an uptight sexual with issues, even if their asexuality is intended? I can understand why writers would not want to use a still-unusual word like "asexual", and I know this from personal experience. I once took a writing class in which I presented a play I'd written about a woman with Asperger's syndrome. There was intense debate in the class over whether I should actually use the word "Asperger's" in the play or not. And once the word "Asperger's" was brought up, it was all anyone was willing to talk about. Other writers got to talk about character development, plot, arc, and all that other stuff-- but I only got to talk about Asperger's. It was extremely frustrating. So I can imagine why writers might not want to go through all that. Not everyone can have a platform to not only present their work, but to explain the unspoken neurologies or sexualities of their characters.

The best explanation of asexuality without using the word "asexual" appears in, of course, The Bone People. Keri Hulme writes this dialogue for her asexual protagonist, Kerewin:

I spent a considerable amount of time when I was, o, adolescent, wondering why I was different, whether there were other people like me. Why, when everyone else was fascinated by their developing nature, I couldn't give a damn. I've never been attracted to men. Or women. Or anything else. It's difficult to explain, and nobody has ever believed me when I have tried to explain, but while I have an apparently normal female body, I don't have any sexual urge or appetite. I think I am a neuter. (266)

The Bone People is a classic book, read by many people. I wonder what a sexual reader, unacquainted with asexuality, might assume about Kerewin. Of course, Kerewin lived in isolation in a remote area. It would be completely realistic for her to not have ever met anyone else like herself. While The Bone People was written in the 1980s, it's still realistic for an asexual person to have never met another ace, and to not know that there is a word describing their sexuality that is in use for other people. If writers want to be realistic, the unnamed asexual is much closer to the truth than the "out" asexual.

However, we're short on even unnamed asexuals like Kerewin. I think it's unlikely that a sexual author would write about asexuals. Most people haven't even knowingly met an asexual, so why would they write about one? But if "Shortland Street" can do it...why can't anyone else?

The Lonely American...Psych!

I really wanted to blog about this book The Lonely American. It would have been totally perfect and brought up a lot of interesting points, but since I actually haven't read it, just flipped through it...that's not going to happen, exactly. I was also thinking about a TV show I enjoy a lot, HBO's Entourage, and suddenly, in some random alchemy of a liberal arts education, these two things, Entourage and lonely Americans, connected in my mind.

Psychologists, sociologists, and other -ologists have been telling us we're lonely for quite some time, at least since The Lonely Crowd was published in 1965. Since '65, the number of confidants we have and the frequency of visits we make to friends has been steadily dropping. While I haven't read The Lonely American, I have read Bowling Alone which I'm sure makes a lot of the same points-- on the whole, Americans are pretty lonely, getting lonlier, and as you might imagine, it's not a great thing for us. However, in our culture of "rugged individualism", it can often be seen as shameful or a weakness to talk about loneliness. Obviously, if we're facing any social problem, not talking about it just worsens it. But, between not wanting to appear vulnerable and thinking we might be the only ones with the problem, not a lot of discussion gets made about how lonely Americans really are.


And here's where Entourage (main characters shown above) comes in. The show is about a movie star and his 3 best friends. The guys are never, ever alone. And in the other shows I watch, the same thing appears to be true to varying extents. Even shows that occur in workplaces show the characters either collaborating closely together on the job or spending time talking over drinks after work, things that don't happen in many of our real workplaces. Watching Entourage, I found myself thinking, "I wish I had an entourage". There are a lot of things in the show to wish for: A huge house, Porsches and Maseratis, expensive clothes, fame, adoring fans, seeing your face on a movie screen. But I think that for most of us, the most valuable thing shown is actually the entourage itself. Yes, it's realistic for famous people to be surrounded by others all the time. But for the rest of us, it's wish fulfillment: extreme edition. Wish fulfillment has its place, but I think the fact that loneliness is hardly ever portrayed in pop culture only encourages the (incorrect) idea that everyone is surrounded by friends except us.

Maybe we'll find a portrayal of loneliness in a literary novel or rare independent film. However, it is something that is largely absent. True, there are films where overcoming loneliness is a theme. However, the problem is usually solved in magical ways that we couldn't duplicate in our own lives. That, or the extent of loneliness is a short montage to "One is the Lonliest Number" or "All By Myself". Anything beyond that would be so far removed from an audience's expectations that I believe they would be very uncomfortable. Common tropes around loneliness, such as Bridget Jones sitting by herself with a bottle of vodka, obscure the fact that loneliness can happen anytime, anywhere, and with any beverage.

So at the risk of sounding like the brooding Russian playwright that I am, I say More! More loneliness in movies and on TV! Maybe it sounds a little twisted, but nothing gets people talking like TV and movies do. If we saw loneliness portrayed in pop culture, then we could more easily discuss the concept. No, I don't have any solutions, but the first step is, after all, admitting that there is a problem.

Cougars and Gift Sex

Carolyn will be disappointed if I don't write about cougars, and I do try to give the people what they want. It would also be a shame to have watched the show "Cougartown" for nothing. If you haven't heard of "cougars", I'd be a bit surprised because they've been getting a lot of press lately. Cougars are simply older women who are dating younger men. Since the opposite (older men, younger women) has been going on since time immemorial, I really have no idea why we are suddenly so fascinated with cougars. Now that women can make as much money as men, and don't necessarily have to marry for financial reasons, why shouldn't we pursue men of whatever age we want? Of course, it's telling that when women date younger men, it gets a name and is pegged as a social phenomenon, unlike the reverse situation with older men.

[Above: Courtney Cox (Jules) and Busy Phillips have hijinks on "Cougartown"]

The cougar phenomenon even got its own TV show on ABC called "Cougartown". I've been watching this show because I was convinced it would give me something to blog about; it did, but as you'll see, the meat (or tofu) of this post won't be about cougars at all. Anyway, the show is about a 40-something divorced woman (Courtney Cox) trying to "get back out there". Contrary to popular belief about cougars, she isn't having a ton of random sex. I guess that would be more HBO than ABC. In fact, there is only one younger man that she dates in the show, and he receives relatively little screen time. It's been a while since I've watched a half-hour show with commercials, and it's remarkable how little actually happens. For example, one episode concentrates on the efforts of the main character, Jules, to get her cranky neighbor to play a game of golf with her ex-husband. Although the cougar concept might sound titillating, "Cougartown" is actually pretty mundane.

I was sure I'd find something about "Cougartown" disturbing, and I did, but it had nothing to do with cougars. In the show, Jules' best friend is a married woman with a baby who lives next door. In one episode, this woman gives her husband a few cards that say "SEX"; he can use them for sex whenever he wants and she "can't say no", an arrangement she doesn't seem very happy about. Ah yes, the phenomenon of "gift sex". It's been discussed on AVEN before, where people generally seemed to think it was a bad idea. There are times for all of us when we just don't feel like having sex-- the difference is only that for asexuals, it's usually all of the time. I think using sex as a currency is just asking for problems-- isn't it likely that you'll resent unwanted sex, even if you're agreeing to it? For me, the concept hearkens back to the day when men would "expect something" from women if they took us out to dinner, bought us gifts, etc. Even if you're highly sexual and you've had sex with your partner 10,000 times, you should still be able to say "no" to sex whenever you want to, something that gift sex makes a lot harder and more awkward to do.

[Above: Zach Galifianakis (Ray) and Jason Schwartzman in "Bored to Death"]

Anyway, gift sex is something that is commonly explored in pop culture, usually for laughs. For example, in the current HBO show "Bored to Death", the best friend of the main character is dating a woman who rarely has sex with him, something he complains about in every episode. The only time they'll have sex is if the guy, Ray, agrees to jump through some sort of hoop, such as going to therapy or getting a colonic. All this couple seems to do is argue about and negotiate the frequency of sex. They aren't married, and they don't have kids-- since they both seem so unhappy, why are they even together? It really isn't clear. One might think it would be beneficial to asexuals that so many couples with disparate sex drives are portrayed in pop culture, since many of us contend with this issue. However, the story is always the same and doesn't offer very many alternatives. It's most often the man who wants sex, and he either nags until the women gives in, or they go through gift sex-related rituals. How the woman feels about all this is usually never explained. Maybe it's funny that a man would endure a colonic for the promise of sex with a chronically annoying woman, but if so, it's a joke I just don't get.

Good Intentions, Still Annoying

Warning: Spoilers ahead for The L-Word's final season, if you're like me and wait for things to come out on DVD...

So, I was watching some episodes of The L-Word's final season. My favorite character on the show, Max, is a female-to-male transsexual who recently found out he was 4 months pregnant (yeah...the show has gotten extremely soapy). When he goes to meet his friends at their usual hangout, Jenny says that he should be proud to be a mother and that he looks beautiful. Max storms away crying. If this had come from anyone besides Jenny, who seems to only be concerned with herself lately, this would be a classic example of good intentions gone awry. We know our friend is upset about his accidental pregnancy, so we try to make him feel better...and end up only making him feel worse. In other episodes, people keep referring to Max with female pronouns or even reduce him to an inanimate object. I thought that some sort of list was definitely needed, like "cool and uncool things to say to transpeople" (they would not be very different from cool and uncool things to say to anyone else). This got me thinking...we talk a lot about the uncool things people have said about our asexuality, but what are some cool things that they could be replaced with?

Once I started on this train of thought, I realized that a large proportion of the unwanted things people say when we come out are actually attempts to make us feel better. Maybe this is obvious, but since I tend to assume everyone knows the same things I know, it took me awhile to figure out. Being told "You're just a late bloomer" is supposed to give us hope, as is "You just haven't found the right person yet." If the other person can convince us that asexuality doesn't exist, we're supposed to find that a huge relief. Uh...no. Someone with little understanding of asexuality might think it's a negative thing, and assume that we want to be talked down off the edge of identifying as such.

What to say to asexuals is nothing that's going to "make us feel better". I think the perfect response to someone who comes out is "Okay, thanks for telling me". We don't want to be complimented, unless it's on our moxie for telling you. When I was told emphatically "But! Straight men would want to date you!", I was exasperated. But it was the same as Jenny telling Max that he was a beautiful mother. The person was trying to make me feel desirable, but it didn't work. By the time most people come out, they're pretty positive that they're asexual. And any protest to the contrary just hits the wall of our identities, new as they may be.

Back in January, Rainbow Amoeba wrote a post about her experiences coming out as asexual, and she also found that the people she told in her first go-round were attempting to make her feel better. However, this didn't achieve its intended effect. In a comment, I wrote: "What you said about your mom trying to console you by saying asexuality didn’t exist is perceptive and well-said. I, of course, wanted people to tell me it DOES exist, but I know now that the world isn’t ready (although there have been a few exceptions)." I know it's weird to quote yourself, but I think what happened to me and Rainbow Amoeba happens to a lot of us. What people thought I wanted was totally different from what I actually wanted. It makes me feel better to know that people might mean well, even if they don't express it in a way that's actually helpful. These sorts of effective communication skills are something most of us are never taught.

Recently, I went to a work-related training on "Building Partnerships and Collaborations". There was a long section on active listening that was actually pretty interesting. Apparently, we're constantly trying to make everything all about us. It's natural, and there's nothing inherently wrong with it, but we need to realize that it takes effort to really listen to another person without bringing the conversation back to you. I'm as guilty of this as anyone else, although I'm going to try to be more aware of it now. When you come out to someone and they try to swoop in like the savior of modern sexuality, they're making it about them. They're so caught up in being the one to "solve" your "problem" that they don't actually listen to what you're saying. The cool thing to say to anyone coming out, in my opinion, is actually very little.

BBC Program(me) Features Asexuals

Ahh, some pop culture to write about. On March 19th, a group of asexuals (most or all of them AVEN members, I believe) were featured on a BBC 3 show called Natalie Cassidy's Real Britain. Apparently, the theme of the show was "sexual taboos" (in our case, not having it) and also featured (in a separate storyline) a man with Down's Syndrome seeking a romantic partner (what is taboo about this, I don't know). An AVENite was nice enough to post the ace-related segments on Youtube for us folks outside the UK. Here's part one of the program, part two, and part three.

And of course, my comments:

All in all, I liked this program. I was surprised at the complexity of some of the topics it discussed, such as asexuals with different levels of libido. Most media spots don't go too far beyond "they (might) exist", and I was glad that this one seemed to go a bit further. One really interesting thing about this piece was its use of haters. "Haters" might be too strong a word for the disbelieving people that appeared. They were all people that the asexuals knew in real life, such as friends and co-workers. We'd see the asexual in question convincing these people that yes, they were content without sex. I liked this, because while we got the disbelievers that we apparently need to show, they weren't speaking from any "expertise", and it was a realistic portrayal of what an out asexual sometimes deals with. Another good thing was that they showed aces being happy and having fun. That really doesn't happen enough, and it can only happen when we're away from "DO YOU MASTURBATE?!?!?!" -style interrogations. (Those were mecifully absent here.)

I didn't like two things the narrator said. Why not split a few hairs? First of all, "They all believe they're asexual" is not a good way to put it; we don't "believe" we're gay or straight. It also didn't fit into the tone of the piece, where asexuality as a reality didn't seem to be questioned by the filmmakers. I also didn't like "For most of us, asexuality is an alien concept". I just said to myself, "Well...if you put it that way..."

Of course, I have to applaud the four aces involved. Always, whether a piece is good or bad, any asexuals being filmed work it as best they can. This one was no exception, and the people involved were eloquent and informative. Way to go, folks.

Married...With Towers

Thanks to an AVENite, I found a program called “Married to the Eiffel Tower”. It's about two women, Amy and Erika, who identify as objectum sexuals (OS). Instead of being sexually attracted to men, women, or no one, they're sexually attracted to objects. Funny, I just remembered this blog's tagline: "Of course, there's always something to fall in love with." In the case of OS people, that's literal. When Amy and Erika visit New York City, they're overwhelmed by the number of really sexy buildings. You can see the video for free, in two installments, on Google Videos. The first part is here.

I’m not going to talk about OS in general, because I already did that at some length here. But, I do want to talk about how this particular media outlet (I believe it's the BBC) dealt with a sexuality that is much rarer than our own. You do expect the worst—that it is sensationalized (Batboy lives!) and that the people involved are dehumanized. You expect a bunch of “experts” trying to get to the root of the “problem” and telling the OS people how messed up they are. But I was actually pleasantly surprised. While the narrator would occasionally say things like, “But WHY are they this way?”, that question was never really answered. Experts, doctors, or psychologists were never seen. What we do see is Amy reading aloud from her own evaluation that she received at a psychiatric hospital. We also see Erika’s discharge papers from the Air Force, which were on psychological grounds. Amy has Asperger’s and Erika suffers from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder. But these diagnoses aren’t used to discount the womens’ experiences. Instead, it’s shown how their love of objects actually has helped them cope with difficult lives. For example, we're shown how Erika's love for a bow enabled her to become a world-class archer.

A friend of Erika's, and Amy’s mother were also shown in the film. While they expressed some initial confusion, they said that they cared for the OS people and were open to learning more about them. Viewers may have been shocked, but no one in the program really was. Another thing was that the women profiled in the program were very…exposed. When we saw Amy on the ground, caressing her beloved object (a carnival ride called 1001 Nacht), I felt that it was too intimate; that I shouldn’t be watching. But it seems like these women would rather be seen, in the hopes of being better understood. That exposure may have been a small price to pay for the chance to tell their stories in their own words. “Let them watch!” they seem to be saying. “Our love is for real.”

Conclusion: People who aren’t attracted to anyone can’t seem to get a word in edgewise without being barraged by naysayers, but a woman who has sex with the Eiffel Tower on camera gets to present her whole story without question? Clearly, we need to raise our expectations here. I also realized one big hurdle in terms of asexuals in media: We have nothing in the physical world to show we're ace. OS people have the opposite of this problem. If asexuals appear with a partner, then we're seen as gay or straight, and if we appear alone, we're just waiting to meet the right person. If you were trying to educate someone who had never heard of bisexuality, you would encounter a similar problem. So if we want better media coverage, we can't just be, my rosebuds, we must act. I think the future for asexual media will be, hopefully, the cool things we do as a community.

On My List

Recently, a loyal reader suggested that I make a page of every cultural thing I reference, with descriptions of what they are. This was more than I wanted to take on right now, so I said, "How about I just make a list of required reading/viewing?" And that seemed to be okay with him. So I thought about it. I've talked about a lot of movies, tv, music, books, and articles here. But when it came to those that I thought were truly essential-- that I thought you had to read or watch, few were left standing. For example, even though I like to write about music, that's so open to taste and interpretation that I can't think of anything (besides Fabuloid's one hit, that is) that you absolutely must hear. And there were very few things you must watch. For once, in order of importance, they are:

1) Shortland Street, a soap opera from New Zealand, which you can watch parts of here. Gerald is the first (and only) out asexual character in film or TV.
2) Withnail and I, a British cult classic film from the '80s, is, if I had to choose, the film where asexuality is the most implied.
3) Season One of Dexter, a series on Showtime. This is just because it seems to garner a lot of discussion among asexuals. Dexter may be a serial killer, but he is also not interested in sex in the first season. He is also a character that you greatly sympathize with. However, if you don't like to see blood and guts, don't watch this.

Links are to posts where I previously wrote about the item.
And here's what you have to read, not really in order:

1) The New Single Woman. Let's face it, whether it's intentional or not, most asexual people will probably be single. And finally, here's a book that actually treats singlehood as a viable life choice.
2) Surpassing the Love of Men, because I think it's important for aces to know about the history of different sorts of relationships. If we want to try new things, it's good to know what came before.
3) On Chesil Beach, a very short novel with very asexual subject matter.
4) Bitch Magazine's article "Do Not Want". A model for media.
5) "Asexual and Autoerotic Women", from a compliation called The Sexually Opressed. If you'll pardon me quoting myself: "Well, I have a 30-year-old article in my life, and it has finally given me ancestors of experience. Knowing that people like me were previously identified, albeit briefly, feels like I've gotten a message of encouragement. And that gives me strength."
6) That's Revolting: Queer Strategies for Resisting Assimilation. Yes, this is a very sexual book, but I have to keep up my "radical asexual blogger" reputation, ha ha. I think that as asexuals, the sooner we reject "normal" and "being like everyone else", the better. Unfortunately, the current mainstream gay movement isn't a very good role model for this. But the people in That's Revolting are.

Bonus: The Bone People. This book has an ace main character and author! I reccommend it, but the subject matter isn't directly asexual.

Hopefully I'll find a way to link to this post on the side somewhere, and update it as I discover more things that you must read and watch. Feel free to debate away! And remind me of anything I've missed.

Ahoy Matey!

"I like the word 'soul'. I like the word 'mate'. Beyond that, you got me."
--Big, Sex and the City

"For some women, at certain stages in their lives, the search for a soul mate-- and refusing to settle for less--provides a rationale for their current singleness. But such a justification does not help them envision or find support for the long-term single life."
--The New Single Woman (4)

I hope this New Single Woman-themed series has been relatively painless...at any rate, Trimberger has some interesting things to say about soulmates, which is always a juicy topic. I was thinking about the concept most recently while watching the really quite bad show Valentine, which airs on the CW. In it, Aphrodite is transported to the modern-day world in which she runs a matchmaking service with various other gods. At one point, one of the characters looks into an oracle at the future of a woman who married a man who wasn't her designated soulmate. She's so miserable that she kills herself.
Yeah. Seriously.

In Valentine, Aphrodite laments internet dating, saying that she preferred the old ways, in which people would marry whoever in their village "had the fewest pox". In this picture, I doubt that being soulmates entered into it. Apparently, even the gods changed their ways based on popular opinion. And indeed, "soulmates" is a fairly modern concept-- Trimberger claimed that it really gained momentum around the time of women's liberation. One utility of the soulmate idea was that it freed women to be single under the guise of "waiting for a soulmate". The pressure to marry literally whoever was available diminished. Even self-help books coming from a totally different direction agree. In Love Will Find You: 9 Magnets to Bring You and Your Soulmate Together, Kathryn Alice writes, "I believe that we are entering the era of the soulmate. Why? Because as we progress as a society, there is no reason for people to pair up and be together other than that they are soulmates" (1).

But Trimberger isn't sure how positive our facination with soulmates really is. In a note to her text, she writes: "Robert Wuthnow writes that the loose connections in modern society lead people to seek the more intense relationship of soul mates (1998, 52-53). I go even further: Focusing on a soul mate, I believe, undermines these connections. British social theorist Mary Evans also stresses that romantic love is based on and promotes individualism (Evans 2003)". While friendship networks build valuable community, says Trimberger, the search for a soulmate diminishes it. And furthermore, may leave us with few resources for life on our own. In Kathryn Alice's book, quoted above (thanks Amazon!), she talks about a man who moved across the country to be with his soulmate. But after reading Trimberger, I wonder what happened to his community, if he had one. Sure, he gained a soulmate, but he lost his friends, family, and pastimes. He went from having a network, presumably, to relying on one person for all his emotional support. Sure, it's a good story, but how healthy is it?

Asexuality lends an interesting twist to the soulmate concept: When sex isn't necessary for you to have a satisfying relationship, why couldn't your soulmate be a friend, family member, or mentor? Indeed, it's pretty corny to call someone your "soulmate" unless you're taking marriage vows. Like "virgin", though, "soulmate" is a fine word that is overtaken by implications: Your one chance at happiness, your other half, etc. Kinda scary! Hopefully, one of asexuality's legacies to the wider world will be to take some of the pressure off-- the pressure to date, have sex, and find your soulmate. Of course, asexuals still face many pressures that depend on the person, but I think it would be nice to at least have some options as to which pressures we undertake.

Personally, I think soulmates are like affordable apartments in San Francisco. I know they're out there, and I even know a few people who have found one. But, while I maintain some hope of finding one for myself, I remain open to other options, and try not to let the search consume my life (although it can be tempting to obsess over it). If you do find your soulmate, remember to keep maintaining all the support systems you were hopefully developing before you met them. And invite us all over for a party at your incredibly cheap apartment.

Okay, So I'm Responding

I know, I haven't forgotten that the main goal of this blog is a "response to pop culture". Although since I don't have cable and movie tickets are more than $10, I sometimes don't witness as much pop culture as I'd like to. However, I've found something to respond to right here on network TV:


I've been known to watch Gossip Girl on occasion. Unlike many other shows that require you to have the grasp of a complicated backstory, this is all you really need to know about Gossip Girl: Rich teens who act about 40 scheme A LOT and wear outlandish (okay, very cool) clothes. The show is based on a series of young-adult novels by the same name. Like many viewers, my favorite character on the show would have to be Chuck, pictured above. He's evil, wears pants embroidered with whales, and seems to suffer from some kind of nostril-flaring condition.

Although I haven't read the books, thanks to the wonders of the internet, I learned that while Chuck is heterosexual in the show, he is bisexual in the books. (Apparently, he's also much more evil in the books, which would definitely not be appropriate for young teens, but anway...)
Upon learning this, I just felt so cheated! The show's creators had a chance to take a bisexual character, make him less evil (apparently, a rare thing in film portrayals of bisexuals) and they blew it.

If queer adult characters are rare, queer teen characters are even rarer. I racked my brains trying to think of some-- the conversation in my head went something like this:

I could have sworn there was a gay person on Gilmore Girls...didn't Rory have a gay friend?

Uhh...no. The only queer teen character I could think of was Marco from Degrassi: The Next Generation. While it's a popular show among those that love it, it's on a specialty channel and can't be all that widely watched. While I can think of adult characters that seem asexual (Withnail, Dexter, Jessica Stein), I can't think of any teen characters. And how many shows involve teens, and how many teens are the ones watching these shows? I find that I can often relate quite closely with gay, bi, or trans characters, especially if they go through some sort of tribulations related to their sexualities. Like I said before, who we're attracted to is only one (minor?!) difference between us all. Maybe that's a little too kumbaya for you, but I think that an increase in queer characters of all stripes would be good for all of us minority sexualities.

Maybe Chuck will discover an attraction to men later in the show, but I won't be holding my breath. Until then...nice ascot.

My Face Hurts

Wow, being sick and being in weddings really takes up a lot of time! This weekend was my first time being "in" a wedding. Even though I was a little nervous about properly fulfilling my bridesmaids' duties, I have to say, I was most apprehensive about the bachelorette party. I was prepared to lie my way through "I Never" or something else equally embarrassing, but it was actually quite fun. Going out with a big group of girls is definitely something I don't do enough, and that I miss from college. Even though there were many penis-themed accessories in attendance, that's not nearly enough to make me uncomfortable. And really, at this point in my life, "What do you do?" is a much more terrifying question than "Do you have a boyfriend?" or whatever other love-life inquisitions people could cook up.

Also-- If you're like me and still can't figure out how to watch TV shows illegally online, you may want to know that the second season of Dexter is finally available on DVD. I've seen the first 3 episodes, and it's not giving much away to say that it's already obvious that sex is going to be introduced. Which is fine, but it doesn't seem like the most realistic set-up. Pardon my ignorance, but what are British people doing in Miami?

Touching You, Appropriately

Go here to watch the latest installment of Shortland Street. In it, Gerald tells us that he wasn't abused, he's happy being himself, and that it's tough noogies if you don't like it. Rage on, my man! He vehemently tells his parents something like, "I'm not the only one! There's hordes of us!", and that just made me smile. (It's so bizarre how something you know well yourself becomes revalotory when you hear someone else saying it.) What a great thing for the younguns to hear, right?

Also, I finally set up the August meetup. I feel bad that it's so late. I decided that because of the delay, I would try to get over the (self-imposed) pressure to create a novel activity, and just meet at the 3 Dollar Bill like we've done in the past a few times. They have the world's most amazing french toast, so really, how wrong could you go? It'll be August 16, Saturday, at 4pm. However, you get two meetups for the price of one; September's is going to be on the 6th (or 7th?) It will definitely be one of those.

New Zealand: Advanced Society

I'm not sure how far this news has penetrated the asexosphere, but this is major, so I'll talk about it:

A New Zealand soap opera called "Shortland Street" is currently featuring an asexual character. This is huge, because the character, Gerald, actually self-identifies as asexual. He looks it up on Wikipedia and everything! It's set in one of those television hospitals where no one ever does anything remotely medical. Apparently, Gerald is currently dating his first girlfriend and finding that he isn't interested in sex. A way-cool New Zealander has compiled relevant clips of the show on Youtube here. I have to say, these videos are among the most awkward things I've ever viewed in my life. I know that asexual awakening can be difficult, but I've never actually seen it occuring outside myself, if that makes sense. I doubt anyone who's not asexual outside of New Zealand will ever see this show, but I hope that it will be enlightening to at least a few folks over there.

Granted, there are plenty of inaccuracies (you don't get "diagnosed" as asexual), although I guess everyone who comes out is faced with some people that have...strange...ideas. However, there are many statements made in the show that are correct ("Most asexuals feel there's nothing wrong with them", etc).

Also, it's interesting that Gerald is so...well...*gay*. You can't really use accurate gaydar over television, and especially not cross-culturally. But if I saw Gerald walking around in San Francisco? TOTALLY GAY. I just hope he's actually asexual; I don't want those "BUT YOU MUST BE GAY" adherents to have any more fodder for their claims.

I also find it interesting that the first representation of television asexuality is male. I just can't avoid thinking about how gender plays into representations of sexuality. Sure, you could say that there was a 50/50 chance that the character would be male. But it's hard for me to imagine this character being female. And I think I know why, for once. We've progressed somewhat in terms of sexual equality between men and women. But when it comes to sex, I think men have an autonomy that women still lack. A man can identify as asexual because his sexuality is identified by himself alone and exists internally. However, a woman's sexuality is identified through her actions and relationships with others. Women are supposed to have a sexual "utility" that men don't need to have. Queen Christina wanted to "die a bachelor" instead of "an old maid" because being a bachelor implies an element of choice that being an old maid lacks. Old maids are seen as hopeless, but "confirmed bachelors" are an intriguing challenge. I'm not saying that asexual men have it easier; we all have our own issues to contend with. I just think that bringing up ideas of inequality anywhere they exist is the first step to true equality. And because theories without action items annoy me, here's what women can do: Start using/reclaiming all male or unisex sexual/relationship descriptors that imply choice. What are some other ones we can use? Is that a strange idea? I hope it makes sense.
And, watch the Shortland Street videos! (But don't say I didn't warn you about the awkwardness.)
Your confirmed (?) bachelor,
Ily