Asexuals are the perfect trutrans. They can't be AGP or AAP, because for those things to happen...

they literally cannot decouple gender dysphoria from sexual attraction

NGMI

tells me to drop the pseudopsychology when i don't use it

barfs out a bunch of psych terms

^ this you, and ur dum

you WILL have sex and you WILL be happy

you're not asexual, you have tiktok brainrot. the schools didn't teach the kids gender ideology or bullshit like asexuality. the internet did. you retards fell for tumblr memes.

the reason qia+ is all made up bullshit is because it's straight hetero's trying to ride gay coattails as they got swept up in lgbt specified social media. it's just straight people that can't let gays have their own thing.

qia+ is the most real part of the acronym actually

Nobody is born gay or trans. Identity is fluid. Keep coping with that!

nta but I've been asexual as far back as in 2006 when I entered puberty, what's your dumbass argument to that? Millennial TikTok? School indoctrination? Chemical castration by CFC gasses in the atmosphere?

You can but certainly doesn’t ring “trutrans”. It sounds more like OCD

seeing how toxic orgs with lots of gay men are, i'd rather not coattail them lol, we need our own stuff, though i find the cisheteroromantic aces unbelievably annoying (they're almost "normal" so they are super normative about everything)

that's just christcucks trying promote abstinence by means of psyop.

What if I told you that a huge portion of our moral systems and political infightings are still derivatives of christianity that were only rooted out by recognizing false faith and incompatible antiquity, and not the universalist "all for thee" bullshit that still plagues our society to democratized hell? OP's hidden promotion of abstinence to refine definitions against all trannies is just one perspective of this whole domain. Gender just isn't possible with a unified definition, there can only be several alike or none at all; it always depends on what contexts you enunciate identity.

sweet wordsalad

I’m probably around the same age as you and acecoped for awhile to deal with being pozzed by sexual harassment propaganda PSAs that had me internalize fear of interaction with the opposite sex. tumblr was around in 2007 as well.

Holy regurgitation batman

nta but ask chatgpt to translate it into Ebonics brainrot, I myself found the post very easy to comprehend

Yeah except that shit didn't affect me because I was deeply right winged at the time, all I cared about was calling people slurs through online MMORPGs

asexuality is a christcuck psyop to promote abstinence outside of marriage.
notice they'll still engage in dating and romance?
celibacy isn't new.
asexuals are voluntarily celibates trying to distance themselve from involuntary celibates by redefining it to make it look cool or otherwise pallatable for young people.

it's just a christcuck psyopp. it's religious fundy types trying to invade lgbt spaces by claiming their celibacy is the same as a gay man's sexuality (a choice). it's the enemy trying to infiltrate lgbt to dismantle it from within.

A lot of asexuals are also aromantic, for your argument to work, these people need to conveniently not exist

Take your schizo pills Alice

You are a pseud, I see.

This thread truly reveals how retarded a lot of people here are, bravo

I didn’t say i agreed I just said it was comprehensible. You have zoombrain, I’m afraid. Hand me an ice pick.

aromantic asexuals are a transfinite-psyop by the reptilians of the omega^omega-nth parent universe which simulates a transfinite tower of universes down to our own
the goal is ensure the simulation runs smoothly, like the mice in H2G2, so as to efficiently compute infinite-dimensional VR porn for entities in the top-level universe

then i'd tell you that you were wrong. don't tell me that morals are rooted in christiniaty when there's a myriad of religions that influence social morality. you champion christianity as it's all you know, but we live in secular society. why? because when christian are the dominant governing party they engage in things like the crusades and the spanish inquisition.

christcucks are not inherently more moral. infact, they're often abhorrent, but try to hide behind their god. you're religion isn't just when you still fight with those that don't worship the same god as you.

society isn't founded in christian morality. it's founded in secular rationality.

Hello Pichu

This is the funniest reply I've read in a long while, thank you

walking contradictions

how is

not comfortable being one gender for a huge variety of cosmetic and social reasons

incompatible with asexuality?

Nice try pseud but it doesnt matter if you agree or disagree. You simply don't have what it takes to differentiate bullshit and substance.

woah now. i just got here. im just now reading this thread for the first time. it is a ride though, one hell of a thread

Because gender is the social and cultural expression of sexual selection and reproduction. Asexual nb would follow a more logical trajectory

nta but I'm an asexual enby who identifies as agender, but whenever I mention that people here absolutely lose their shit because they can't fathom it exists

So you have a model of what gender is, you get data that refutes the model, and instead of reshaping your hypothesis, you'd rather use circular reasoning to prove the data is wrong? Indeed, if you rely on your model to be certain that what people say must be wrong, and then use the "fact" that those persons are saying lies to support your model, it's circular and actually proves nothing, and is immunized against refutation (ie it's not knowledge).

Nobody is born gay or trans. Identity is fluid.

This is projection.

wordsalads to roundaboutly concede defeat

kneel. bark for me

ask chatgpt to explain it to you brainlet

more importantly it's just true whether it's projection or not has no bearing on the truth value of the statement

Yeah it's probably giving you ideas for future threads, huh?

projection of gender fluid if you know what i mean

Your critique presumes that any questioning of data in favor of preserving a theoretical model is necessarily circular reasoning, but that’s not always the case. In science and philosophy, models are tested against data, yes—but the interpretation of data is not neutral. Data doesn’t "speak for itself"; it's filtered through assumptions, definitions, and methods of measurement. If someone questions whether the data genuinely contradicts the model, that’s not automatically circular reasoning—it could be methodological skepticism.

Furthermore, not all data is equally reliable. If a model is well-established and supported by a large body of evidence, and a new piece of data appears to contradict it, it is rational to scrutinize the data first rather than immediately discard the model. That’s not immunization against refutation; it's a standard part of critical inquiry. Theories aren't overthrown every time an anomaly appears—they are tested for consistency, explanatory power, and coherence with other known facts.

So unless the model is being protected regardless of any and all evidence (which would be dogmatism), skepticism about particular claims or interpretations is not inherently circular(lol I just made u read AI slop)—it's part of rigorous reasoning

i stopped making threads about asexuality tbghijkl

It's not true though. You're deciding that your own experience is the same as everyone else's, despite plenty of people that say the opposite. You can disregard what people say and call it a lie, or you can recognize that people have different experiences.

how do you not identify why your sex assigned at birth?
you still have your genitals assigned at birth and you're ok with them? that makes you congruent in sex.
it's not: people can't phathom you exist. it's: you're just an asshole.

I easily recognized that it was AI slop from the first sentence, it's well-written but is an obvious explanation of the Duhem-Quine thesis, and is disconnected from the context of the thread and actual embodied logic
yep, statements aren't just pawns in a social game of domination, they can also be filled by actual experience of reality; to repress the latter is to cultivate an immense rift in your mind and inhibit your intelligence

You're deciding that your own experience is the same as everyone else

Now that is projection. You don't actually know my experience. It is just a fact that modern sexual identities didn't exist until recently, people change sexualities all the time and, because we live under an essentialistic assumption of stable identity, retroactively decide that their new identity was always somehow latently there. Just look at all the homos who go on to be straight or vice versa or men who have kids and family then troon out at age 49 etc.

many of those people were utterly CONVINCED in their identities just like you are, yet they still end up changing, because change is natural. It may even happen to you! lol

My actual experience of reality is that asexuals rarely are asexual. But my original contention wasn’t that asexuals can’t transition for nonsexual reasons, just that it is a contradiction. People can be contradictions.

if you come in with your idea about what is gender identity, you will systematically see what deviates from it as lies or false appearances, and what confirms it as just reality as it is;to actually learn and experience anything, you'd first have to suspend your belief in that overreaching model, and then see if it works out

Honestly I want my genitals nullified and my nipples removed entirely. My dream is to be fully neutrois, preferably with as many non-human parts to my body as possible

you probably have microplastics already

based as fuck omg

there is no true trans but the truest is hsts

There's plenty of other reasons that modern sexual identities could exist. A greater social value on individualism leading people to create increasingly niche descriptions. Widespread communication causing people to find others who match their experience more closely and create a subculture around it. There could be any number of things that caused this.

What's your explanation for those who's identities stay firm? Do you believe that they simply don't explore other parts of themselves? I tried forcing myself to date women after a history of sexual assault, but the spark wasn't there. I had a threesome with a cis girl and cis guy, but it's not something I'm interested in doing again. I've always liked men, despite trying hard to change that.
Some people may have a fluid identity, but saying that's everyone (or even more common than not) just feels ignorant.

let me just compare these various colors of apples with something that is the lack of being an apple

truly hilariously retarded

asexuality is not real

A greater social value on individualism leading people to create increasingly niche descriptions

so your identities are contingent on individualistic culture, not necessarily intrinsic and determined from birth. I don't dispute the existence of identity as such, obviously subculture exists. I just don't think people are born gay any more than they are born to be punk rockers or goths or MS13 gang members.

I don't really need to explain people with firm identities. They are #valid. An identity can be stable enough for the brief duration of a single lifetime and the less it is challenged by external influence the more likely it will not change. This sorta ties into your first point, people before the speed and access of modern societies simply didn't bother to define themselves in these ways, it would have been meaningless to them. And 20th century gays had less freedom to establish to be fluid, oushing them to form subcultures around firm identities that could act as a political force. This is less true today when people can just decide to change their entire identity and drift from one sect of online weirdos to the next. I could even say lesbians and gays of the 20th century are extinct like the dinosaurs as lesbians and gays today are actually qualitatively different groups under the same name.

You're not real

you can stop being a gang member by trying to leave the gang.
you can't stop being gay. you either get a boner when a guy with a nice bubble butts bends over, or you don't.

too many young people liken being gay to a choice.

Benji > Blanch
If you top men you're a loser type IV and ngmi