Asexual Visibility and Education Network. What a strange site! I really do strongly support these folks, because I think there is a lot of prejudice against asexuals. I am a lot more sympathetic to involuntary asexuals, of whom I assume there must be many millions. As a lifelong bachelor, it’s been feast or famine here anyway, and sometimes the famines went on for years, I’m sad to say. I don’t see why involuntary asexuals should be persecuted at all. They want to have sex, but they aren’t having any. As a sexual liberationist, to me this is a tragedy. It’s not a subject for ridicule at all. Why ridicule a guy who isn’t getting laid? Does anyone ridicule a woman who isn’t getting any? Course not. It’s only the guys. One thing about capitalism is it makes us adopt these competitive mindsets where we hate people who are if anything pitiful. That guy isn’t getting any. Ok. So I should…? Laugh at him? Hate him? Buy him a whore? C’mon man. Socialism tries to force us all to be each other’s brother, and I don’t mean Cain and Abel. That’s not really possible, but it’s a good try. As a liberationist, I actually think that males and females who aren’t getting any but wish to should join organizations the sole purpose of which is to get each other laid. Women usually want something more than getting laid, so this complicates things, and a lot of them won’t join. I guess that’s what a singles club is, but it’s not really stated as such, and many are too embarassed to join. I guess a singles bar is something like that too, but those places are pretty intimidating for a lot of introverts and even ordinary folks. There’s a great singles bar in my town, but it’s full of young people. I’m 51. I’ve been there, hot young women even checked me out and smiled in the first two minutes, but I felt like an idiot and left. Anyway, voluntary asexuals should surely be respected. That my fellow liberationists started persecuting these folks is most unfortunate. It’s also sad that involuntary asexuals get lumped in with the voluntaries. The assumption with a lot of involuntary asexuals, especially guys, is that they are religious, hung up, or hate or don’t care about sex. With many of them, this is surely not the case! Give them the opportunity, and they will set World Fucking Records. End all sexual discrimination! Sex for everyone who wants it! Not now, yesterday! I am a revolutionary!

Please follow and like us:
Tweet 20

11 thoughts on “AVEN”

  1. How about we promote a law where all the babes (i.e. 8-10s) must be allowed to have sex with at least 2 males ranked 0-5, as judged by a professional panel. If the babes do not wish to engage, they will not receive a weekly stipend of $100 from the U.S. government. Also, for women who are making over $40,000 a year (or others who make less), and simply decide that they will go without the stipend, they will receive periodic letters from the newly created Department of Sexual Justice. After the fourth letter, their wages will be garnished. After three years of unsuccessful garnishment, said female will be subject to a mandatory jail term of one week.

  2. Also, I would like to be head of the newly formed Department of Sexual Justice. I will take a reduced salary, the sum of $24,000 a year, but I must be allowed to share the night with one girl on her eighteenth birthday, assuming the government has that as the minimum wage. I reserve the right to combine weeks (for example give me two a night but just over a one week period) along with the right to split oak. These interns, as they shall be called, will receive grades that will stay in the governmental electronic database that will affect future employment.

  3. How about the old Mesopotamian system of temple prostitution, where every woman had to, at least once I think, remain in the temple available for sex until some man took up the offer – the feminists would all be there for good. Actually,
    that’s a bit unfair on the disfigured, deformed and ill; I wonder if they made some allowances for that, but I suspect they probably had a neo-Darwininian, Spartan attitude to those who didn’t come up to scratch. Anyway, they’d eventually get someone who was blind drunk at 3 in the morning or whatever and would be just as happy to put it into a sheep or whatever. I’m not sure I quite endorse the notion that women should have to pass muster in a beauty pageant before entering into civic life, but at present we seem to have an even worse option – it seems that to engage in politics ( especially ‘left’ politics) it is expected that a woman be a ‘feminist’ i.e. a charmless, joyless, undermining, ball-breaking crypto-lesbian, a cult which is loathed by virtually all women, even most real lesbians, as well as by men obviously. How did we come to this pass?
    Does this have a bearing on the question of asexuality? Sort of, but I think of asexuality as basically being uninterested in sex, and what you describe as involuntary asexual is a logical contradiction – I forget the proper word for that. Feminists are a fine example of the reasons for ‘going solo’ or ‘on manual’ or whatever; you might be very interested in sex, but not with them however long you had been without. I think most people have periods when they just don’t meet anyone they want sex with, and they don’t want sex with just anyone. And I suspect that actually most people, whether in a relationship, marriage or not, tick over most of the time on pretty low rations of sex. After the first flush of lust, relationships tend to settle into something else, or break up – writers over the centuries have remarked on this pretty consistently, though it might be hard to get anyone you know to actually admit to it. People will have a wide range of feelings about this, from anxiety to indifference, and the same person can have different feelings about it at different times. Sex is important, but not such an all-consuming obsession and defining part of identity as the consumerist propaganda persuasion machine makes out – you know, try and make you feel inadequate so you buy something, definitively put in its place by the Rolling Stones ‘Satisfaction’ – “…he can’t be a man ‘cos he doesn’t smoke the same cigarettes as me, I can’t get no…” This is a big part of ‘society’s’ attitude to men who ‘aren’t getting any’, apart from traditional male competitiveness. Feminists are actually worse than anyone when it comes to men who aren’t getting any; they see them as an easy target, and reveal that they are quite happy to use the worst sexist assumptions of our society when it empowers them, because ultimately all they are about is power – they’re just a female version of ‘same old shit’.

  4. Feminism today is just a term that means belittling males by any means necessary or available, just as diversity basically means “few or no white people.”

  5. “Socialism tries to force us all to be each other’s brother, and I don’t mean Cain and Abel. That’s not really possible, but it’s a good try.”
    Socialism IS possible amongst people who are “each other’s brothers” (and sisters, cousins, and distant blood relatives, etc), i.e. nations where the citizens are of the same ethnic/racial background and thus truly are related to each other.
    However, socialism will never work in a place like the USA or Brazil because those countries are just too ethnically/racially mixed and thus there will always be a lot of distrust and competition between various ethnic groups for resources and power, and the majority ethnic group will always resent socialistically giving resources away to a group who could use them to eventually eclipse them in numbers and power.
    However, in homogeneous nations socialism/semi-socialism is in fact very possible and has been successfully implemented many times before. It’s only in ethnically diverse nations where socialism will always be a failure.
    I also believe that socialism will never work in nations composed of a very mixed population, i.e. many of the South American countries. Widespread racial mixing seems to lower the character and quality of a group over time, and in very racially mixed countries relative chaos, anarchy, and ungovernability is the norm. The ones who benefit though are the ‘pure’ elites (whether Whites, Asians, Jews, or even Blacks who have remained ethnically pure) who rule over the mixed masses – this is where Brazil, Venezuela, Mexico, Peru, Colombia, and other nations currently stand…while the USA is headed in that direction.

  6. “Why ridicule a guy who isn’t getting laid?”
    This isn’t entirely the case. In high school, the religious guys that were socially adept, who girls had crushes on, were just poked at in a tongue in cheek way about that. The people knew that he could get laid if it wasn’t against his principles, so the people didn’t really mind.
    However, the awkward religious guys were made fun of, in a mean way.
    There is probably a lot of evolutionary psychology I could use to try and explain that. (Girls signaling to other chicks in advance not to waste their time with him, natural aversion to those with low personal abilities..yada yada yada)

  7. Oh, i didnt finish reading it before I commented, and you kinda dealt with that.Oh well
    On topic, what do you think about the growing capabilities of sex robots? There is a long way to go in all aspects of its design, buts its very had to predict how long it will take before there are attractive models, as predicting scientific progress is difficult to even the most capable scientists.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Enjoy this blog? Please spread the word :)