Tag Archives: doubt

AA: ace or just a virgin

LTea wrote in:

Continue reading


Allonormativity, Self vs. Other, and the Delayed Realization

A post about the “I should have realized I was asexual” phenomenon.

There are several patterns in asexual narratives with regards to the part of life or period of time before a person began identifying as ace.  One of the worst of those patterns includes the pain of feeling broken, irrational, and subhuman — and we know, more or less, where that pain comes from.  Its roots are easy to trace.

The pattern that produces more confusion, upon reflection, is its opposite: when individual aces are slow to come to the realization that they’re asexual, even in the face of glaring evidence. Continue reading

Obligatory Post on Doubt

Every time I think about writing about asexuality and doubt, I want to find a gif of that scene from Toy Story where– Found it.

Continue reading

Why I Dislike the Term “People of Faith”

The context in which I first encountered this phrase was a 101-level Anthropology class, during a unit of the curriculum that focused on faith and religion.  I was not looking forward to that part of the course.  What springs to mind as soon as I say that, of course, is the presumption that any hesitance to hear an anthropology professor lecture on religion must no doubt stem from an unwillingness to see theology being examined under the lens of dispassionate logic and no, actually.  I do that all the time.  But now’s not the time get into that.

In an anthropology course, you’re not actually supposed to debate the merits of any given religion or evaluate it on a qualitative level in any way.  You’re just supposed to look at it as some abstract Thing and take notes about its role in culture.  The professor stressed to the class that, for anthropologists, it’s beside the point whether any given religion is “true” or not, and those issues are not what anthropology is meant to look at.  Fair enough.  Doesn’t make it less awkward, though.

Anyway, in her lectures, the professor referred to the category of people under study here as “people of faith”*, a term that earned my animosity at once.  Implicitly, this does not include atheists who consider themselves nonreligious, or so we were meant to infer.  Certainly a term for such a grouping could be useful.  But since I’m a theist who doesn’t really identify with the moniker on a gut-reaction kind of level (and as one who considers the merits of “faith” as a virtue dubious at best), I’ve put some further thought into this model’s failings.

Continue reading