pop quiz

What does the statement “I do not believe in or support the split model attraction” mean when used by someone who also uses the term “cishet aro/aces” on the same page?


15 responses to “pop quiz

  • Sciatrix

    “Pffft those people are basically straight anyway, with their made up labels.”

    That’s what.

  • epochryphal

    ?????? that the word “cis” has become perma-attached to “het” when used to dismiss aros/aces??? god i hope this person is cis, otherwise wow depressing

    • Coyote

      I assume it’s because, like, “oh of course all trans people are LGBT, regardless of orientation” … so when we’re carving out which aces are irrelevant, specify cis and you’re golden.

      • epochryphal

        well yes. which is why the lumping in of -het is weird! what the hell! i guess it just sounds more damning?? (aside from yk, betraying their true opinions of ace/aro folks as defaultedly het)

  • luvtheheaven

    This all just makes me sad. And angry. :(

  • Klaaraa

    consider that the -het attached to the cis here is a way to avoid having to spell out “heterosexual OR heteroromantic OR grey-containing-some-het”, so they would A) actually conserve space and/or time, and B) convnietiently avoid having to acknowledge that those are actually different things.

  • Klaaraa

    sorry. I got distracted by how “cis got perma-attached to het”, and completely forgot the original question.
    I got nothing.
    Except, maybe: They don’t consider het an attraction in the sense of the split attraction model, but instead a generic dismissor/way to attach alleged oppressorship to someone.
    Or Else: they consider het an attraction, but they don’t consider a- an attraction, by way of the linguistic backflip that a lack of something is not the same as … something?

  • Hezekiah the (meta)pianycist

    I am a person who doesn’t find the split attraction model useful in my own life. For the people you are talking about, they usually mean het as in “exclusively into man/woman partnerships/sex” since that is not an attraction-based definition of het. They don’t strictly adhere to attraction-based definitions of sexual identities. I am a bi ace, and for me, neither of those identity labels have anything to do with “attraction” and are instead about how my partner-relationships happen (namely that I can partner with people of many genders, and that I don’t want to involve sexuality in the relationship).

    Sometimes the people you’re talking about use “het” to mean “not lgb or into same gender” and that is a definition I definitely bristle at, because it seems to be coming from a place of “you either are targeted by homophobia or you have het privilege,” which I do not find helpful at all in articulating how homophobia affects people.

    • Coyote

      Hm. That does seem like the likeliest yet. I had assumed, though, that objecting to “split attraction” was more about the “split” than the “attraction” (so het + ace would still be confusing).

WP account not required to comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: