Linkspam: June 5th, 2015

Every Friday, we will share links to news, blogs, and anything else we find interesting.  We can’t catch everything, so you are invited to self-promote in the comments!

The second issue of Rotten Zucchinis, a zine about queerplatonic violence, was released.  You can read some notes from the introduction here.

There’s a new academic article on the development of an Attitudes Toward Asexuals scale.

If you’re wondering what Dan Savage has been saying about asexuality lately, take a look.  (It’s positive.)

tristifere put together a list of books on asexuality and their availability in Dutch libraries.

There’s a new academic article on being an ally to the asexual community.

Flying While Falling Down wrote about being aromantic and being in romantic relationships.

USA Today ran an article about asexuals participating in Pride.

Flibanserin, a drug to increase sexual desire in women, was recommended for approval by an FDA panelNext Step: Cake put it in context, and Laura highlighted some twitter reactions.

About queenieofaces

QueenieOfAces is a graduate student in the U.S. studying Japanese religion. She is a queer asexual. She also blogs over at Concept Awesome and runs Resources for Ace Survivors. She is never quite sure what to write in these introduction things, but this one time she accidentally got a short story on asexuality published in an erotica magazine.
This entry was posted in Linkspam. Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to Linkspam: June 5th, 2015

  1. Writer Ace says:

    Did anyone else notice that the definition of aromantic in the academic article about allies seemed super problematic? It was basically that aro people don’t seek out emotional connections with others.

    • Sennkestra says:

      Oh wow that is some terrible wording. (They literally said ” Aromantics do not have a need to connect with other people on an emotional level”)

      They also had the perfectly reasonable definition “An individual who is aromantic is an individual who does not experience significant or any romantic attraction to anyone” right before it, so why didn’t they just stop with that?

      Also this whole bit: ” A heteroromantic person, commonly known as being heterosexual or straight, is someone who is romantically attracted to an individual of a sex or gender different than his or her own. Someone who is biromantic, commonly known as bisexual, is romantically attracted to two sexes or genders. A person who is panromantic, often referred to as pansexual, is someone who is romantically attracted to individuals of any sex or gender. Finally, an individual who is homoromantic, commonly known as gay, lesbian, or homosexual, is someone who is romantically attracted to members of the same sex or gender (AVENwiki, 2014).”

      ….that’s like the opposite of what the avenwiki says…

      I’ve only read two paragraphs of this and it’s already so wrong.

    • When I posted the link to this study on Tumblr, I commented on the section on romantic orientation, which really needs to be completely rewritten. The explanation of aromantic people is awful.

    • Grey Wanders says:

      I didn’t even make it down that far. I was busy getting stuck on this:
      “Advantages [of asexuality] include preventing usual troubles associated with relationships that are intimate, avoiding certain threats to physical well-being or unwanted/unexpected pregnancy, experiencing a decreased level of pressure from society to “settle down,” and having more time to oneself.” (Even though they just said aces can have sex/ have romantic relationships/ etc.)
      And this:
      “Disadvantages associated with asexuality include … being unable to experience the positive components of sexual relationships.”
      And this:
      “Romantic orientation, in contrast to sexual orientation as previously described, does not exist on a continuum. Once more, to be conceptualized on a continuum, a construct must have two distinct possibilities, whereas the things between them are variations of those possibilities (“Continuum,” 2014). The commonly referenced romantic orientations (i.e., aromantic, heteroromantic, homoromantic) are all distinct from one another. ” (Completely at odds with what they said about sexual orientations on a continuum.)

      This article is weird because it includes a bunch of really good stuff immediately followed by a bunch of really weirdly wrong stuff, in direct contradiction.

  2. Sennkestra says:

    I’m also currently putting together a primer of sorts on flibanserin, so if anyone has any questions they’d like to see answered I’d love to hear them:

    • queenieofaces says:

      If your primer goes up before next Friday, we’ll definitely feature it in the next linkspam!

  3. Siggy says:

    Oh no, we forgot to remind people about the live Q&A on Friday! It’s on youtube now.

Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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