It's a good joke, what you just said. *wipes tear of mirth* Aha. Writer. Ha, yeah.
Me:
But... I do want to be a writer.
Them:
Don't be silly, you want to be a lawyer.
Me:
No, I don't.
Them:
Yes, you do. Everyone wants to be a lawyer.
Me:
Clearly not, since I don't.
Them:
But how do you know if you haven't tried being a lawyer?
Me:
I think most lawyers became lawyers because they were interested in it. I am not interested. I'm not going to sink tons of money and years of my life into doing something I don't want to do.
Them:
You'll want to when you get older. You just aren't mature enough to understand yet.
Me:
Uh, yeah, I think I'm old enough to know by now.
Them:
Well, maybe you just haven't found the right law school yet.
Me:
No, you don't understand, I'm not interested in law school at all, it's not a matter of finding the right-
Them:
You never know. A woman's hormones change over her lifetime.
Me:
????????????
Me:
What does that have to do with anything?
Them:
You never know.
Me:
Stop saying that! I don't want to be a lawyer, I want to write.
Them:
That's so unnatural. Law is a basic human need. I feel so sorry for you. Writers have terrible pay, you know. Being a lawyer is so much better. You'll change your mind. You'll be broke and miserable if you don't, you poor, pitiful being.
bruce wayne maintains a presence on all conspiracy theory boards with the screen name BruceWayneIsTheBatman and all his posts have titles like “BRUCE WAINE IS BAT-MAN INDISPUTABLE PROOF” and it’s just a picture of Bruce Wayne from the back next to a picture of Batman from behind and they both have the contours of their butt drawn on in a shitty MSPaint red line (note: Bruce is in a suit and Batman has a cape, neither of their butts are clearly discernible) and the quote “THE BUTTS MATCH!!! THE FACTS DON’T LIE!!!!!” and he makes at least three of these posts a day, and “Bruce Wayne is the Batman” becomes a meme a la “Ted Cruz is the Zodiac Killer” and he gets asked about it on a talk show and he laughs uproariously at the idea and Stephen Colbert just HAPPENS to have a batman mask under the desk and they do a bit together where Bruce Wayne puts on the mask and walks around saying things like “excuse me, bank robbers, can I perhaps offer you some money to stop you robbing this bank?” and “I say, cease and desist your criminal behavior or I’ll have my butler ask you to leave” and the audience is LOSING THEIR MINDS laughing at the idea of this pampered rich guy taking on the Joker on a bi-weekly basis and then anyone who suggests “Bruce Wayne is Batman” in earnest gets met with mocking “oh man do the butts match” comments
April is Autism Acceptance and Autism Awareness month. It’s also a month
that can be really hard for autistic people. So we’re hoping to making things a
little less hard by creating a fun new giveaway each day.
Most giveaways will be stim toys, jewelry and items made by autistic and
neurodivergent artists, but we’ve also got a few big days planned,
including iPad Airs, weighted vests, premium AAC apps, and noise
cancelling headphones. We’ll also be doing second-chance giveaways–one
more chance to win a giveaway you entered during the preceding week. That means
each giveaway you enter gives you two chances to win!
April 1st Giveaway - how to enter:
The first giveaway is easy to enter - just reblog this post to help spread the word!
We’ll draw 1 winner for every 100 reblogs and each winner will receive the chewable jewelry item of their choice.
Deadline to enter: 1 PM (EST) April 2nd
Executive Function tip:Bookmark the master post on Stimtastic.co and check back regularly for updates. We’ll post details
on each days’ giveaway, including how and where to enter, who won and
what’s coming up next.
Please check the general rules on the master post before submitting questions. Spoons are in short supply in April! :)
***A note about deadlines: Doing a giveaway every day is a lot of work so some drawings might not happen right at the announced time. Some drawings might happen later than announced, but we will never draw a winner before the stated deadline.
Hey asexual people! Ever get a comment like one of these?
“Asexuality doesn’t exist. If it did, evolution would have culled you all ages ago.”
“But humanity’s continued existence DEPENDS on people having babies! That’s why EVERYONE is born with a sex drive!”
“Biologically, we ARE all programmed to reproduce.Those flawed and damaged individuals who can’t or don’t reproduce don’t make it into the next generation–EVOLUTION, baby!”
“It’s DANGEROUS to encourage people to accept asexuality as real. If humanity accepted asexuality, we’d all die out!”
“If you don’t have children, you’re basically useless to the species. The only reason we’re here is to assure the existence of the next generation.”
Now, the folks who say these things clearly think they’re being reasonable. They probably even think they’re being scientific. And they have no idea how hilarious they are.
Next time you get a comment like one of these, try acting impressed, and tell them they sure seem to know a lot about how evolution and population stability/growth actually work in practice. Then ask them a question. Try one of these.
“So how DO sterile people get into the population?”
Because after all, if “evolution,” magical force that it is, has managed to successfully delete all people who cannot reproduce for some reason, why are sterile people still appearing in every generation?
“Since asexuality can’t exist because babies, where does that leave [cisgender] gay people?”
Because after all, if someone’s using the “but babies!” argument to invalidate asexuality, they surely believe a person’s sexual identity is directly tied to making babies at all costs. But if a cis gay person has sex with a cisgender member of their own sex, babies won’t come from that union either. Some people will have to admit this argument isn’t REALLY their reason they don’t accept asexuality if it means they’ll have to admit being “against” homosexuality too. (Sadly this doesn’t work as well when the person is anti-gay as well. And that happens a lot.)
“Can you tell me more about the current birth rate in your country and what percentage of people failing to reproduce would lead to humanity’s becoming an endangered species?”
Because after all, a person who’s panicking over asexual people’s drastic impact on population growth surely knows tons about what the numbers would look like in a population decline crisis. Asexual people are maybe from 1 to 4 percent of the population, and even if every single one of them failed to reproduce (which isn’t how it works), that impact on our population is actually negligible. Did you know that FAR more than 1–4% of the adult population CURRENTLY is childless, asexual or not? Census data from my country:
“According to 2004 U.S. Census Bureau data, the proportion of childless women 15 to 44 years old was 44.6 percent, up from 35 percent in 1976. The data showed that 20.6% of white women were childless, compared with 17.2% of black women, 15.9% of Asian women and 12.4% of Hispanic women.”
More recent data determined that about one fifth of women at age 45 have never had a child.
But we don’t actually seem to be having a population crisis due to failure to reproduce.
“Are you spreading your child-positive message to people who use birth control? Since reproduction is such a pressing concern for you, do you believe the proliferation of inexpensive, non-invasive contraception methods are a big threat to society?”
Because after all, surely refusing to make babies with the sex you’re already having is a lot worse than just not having any sex in the first place. You’re actively PREVENTING babies from being made if you use contraception, right? So anyone who uses the “but babies!” argument should logically also be against contraception.
“Do you believe asexual people are trying to stop you from having sex? Do you believe asexual people are campaigning against sex? Do you believe asexual people are defined by a desire to stamp out sex?”
Because after all, nearly all of those “but biology, but babies!” arguments are dependent on absolutely preposterous slippery slope scenarios. Yes, we’re aware that if NOBODY made babies, the species would go extinct. Luckily for the species, asexual people are not recruiting, and they do not want to stop other people from enjoying their sexuality or procreating. Even if every one of them abstained, it would be but a drop in the bucket.
“If an asexual person DOES have a desire to have biological children, and plans to or has already done so, do you still object to that person’s asexual identity?”
Because after all, married, sexually active asexual parents are STILL attacked over their orientation; wanting to have babies or actually having babies doesn’t stop detractors from continuing to call them unnatural or finding some other reason to raise objections. They often pretend it’s about the babies, but we all know it really isn’t. Pretty much ever.
“You really seem to have evolution and biology figured out. Can you explain to me how traits parents don’t have can still show up in their offspring? Can you outline the difference between an inherited trait and an acquired trait?”
Because after all, not all traits that people express in practice are genetically based, and not all phenotypes have an associated genotype. Even without taking psychological/“nurture” influences into account, there are a huge number of ways a person can be physically affected by the world–starting from the environment in the womb–without having a genetic condition. That means that it’s ludicrous to claim anyone who manifests an asexual identity necessarily must have inherited a gene that did it to them, and on top of that, even if there is a genetic base for asexuality in some cases, it does not mean they a) must have had an asexual ancestor or b) will make asexual babies. There’s really no nice way to say it: People who say asexuality can’t exist because it “would have been weeded out of the gene pool millennia ago” don’t understand how basic inheritance works, and they would probably fail tenth grade biology. Many genetic disorders that cause sterility are recessive traits that nevertheless appear in the offspring of fertile people in every generation. They are not “weeded out.” Even if asexuality were determined to be genetically determined, it wouldn’t disappear even if asexual people never had children.
“Do you believe the only meaningful contribution a person can make to society is through having children?”
Because after all, a huge number of the world’s artists, visionaries, scientists, inventors, teachers, religious leaders, and politicians have left huge marks on the world despite not contributing any genetic material to the next generation using their personal loins. Oddly enough (not really) I hear this argument levied at women a lot more than at men; women are more often considered “useless to the species” if they don’t have kids, while if men don’t, their high dreams and aspirations are considered a valid reason not to. (Women, on the other hand, are often deemed “selfish” or “unnatural” if they do not want kids.)
This argument that we are useless if we don’t have children is insulting to those who take a vow of celibacy for their religion or cannot have children because they are infertile due to surgical or congenital reasons, but even beyond that … why should we have to justify our existence whatsoever? We don’t have to prove to anyone that we have earned the right to be on the planet. We certainly don’t begin to deserve respect only when we procreate, and it’s also not like people procreate and then think “okay, I’m done, that’s my contribution.” Nobody has the right to stomp into our lives and lay down minimum standards for how much of what kinds of contributions we need to have made before we’re offered the basic respect and trust people are generally afforded to navigate their own relationships, describe and pursue their own desires, and pilot their own destinies.
tl;dr: If someone claims asexuality doesn’t/can’t exist because science/biology, try asking them an appropriately scientific or biological question. They might be surprised by how often they fail such tests, but we won’t be.
