coronavirus homophobia misogyny open thread transphobia twitter

OH NO A SNAKE TORNADO: Twitter takes 5/2/20

I thought I’d start up again with my little Twitter roundups. Consider these to be open threads.


107 replies on “OH NO A SNAKE TORNADO: Twitter takes 5/2/20”

As for asexuality and christianity, I don’t think it’s a sin (IANAT, so buyer beware). However, the bible is very clear that people are supposed to get into marriage and multiply, and that one of the duty of a christian is to create more people, within the limit of the reasonable.

(whether it’s reasonable for an asexual to force itself to have kid isn’t explicitely said in the bible)

The Bible clearly states that if you are in a marriage that doesn’t produce children, this is God’s doing and probably in retaliation for some sin of yours (but not if you’re a patriarch, then it’s just to make some kind of Godly point). It makes sense in the context: in Biblical times, unless your family was super wealthy, your retirement plan was to have children who could support you in your old age and carry on your name. Having no children meant that you would die destitute and alone, to be forgotten over time. This is still true in many parts of the world, and still true to some extent even in Western societies for the very poor. If you are very poor, but you have a familial support system, you’re less bad off than if you lack that system.

I’m not ace, but an affectionate, sexless marriage with no children sounds pretty awesome to me.


Not to worry, you’re totally fine! Your joke made me smile, in fact. It’s funny to think of some fundamentalist who thinks that not having sex constantly is some kind of sin. It’s the kind of joke I would make, if you hadn’t beat me to the punch.

(Honestly, I think it’s more likely that the person saying that asexuality isn’t a sin unless you act on it just didn’t know what asexuality was, and only heard [prefix-that-is not hetero]sexuality and went “oh hell no”. But that’s taking this claptrap seriously and that’s no fun.)


Thanks for clarifying.

Of course the ace person is much more likely to be blamed in that case because they’re not the presumed default, which wasn’t entirely unfair

I don’t know if I agree with this assessment. In general, yeah, if someone has preferences which are different from the accepted “norm”, then they kind of need to express those, because otherwise people will assume that they follow the norm.

However, given the way that Christianity (especially fundamental Christianity) intersects with sex, I’m not entirely sure that it’s unreasonable for sheltered aces to expect differently. After all, Paul kept writing about how it’s more righteous to forego sex and devote more focus onto God, and Christians tend to subscribe to some kind of exceptionalism or other, thinking that they aren’t like the ungodly. I can see how these messages could be interpreted by an ace person to mean “I will be helping my spouse by keeping us from wasting precious energy on sex, and this will bring us closer to God.”

It’s not a correct assumption to make without actually consulting your partner, of course, but I can see where the logic can come from.

Well, that, and I’ve heard a lot of anecdotes about how fundamentalism tends to tell people that before marriage even just thinking about sex is a sin, but that once they’re married, it’s their God-given duty to do a complete 180 and go at it like bunnies; which has a lot of failure modes like people not even realizing they’re asexual after the wedding, or people who are sexual, but have trouble undoing the guilt programming once they’re married and “supposed” to be having sex.

Yeah, I know that for me as a baby asexual I found the ‘abstinence before marriage’ deal to be extremely enticing. They told us about it and I was like “Hot dog, sign me up! I’ll tell everyone I’m waiting until marriage and then just never get married! It’s the perfect plan!” I didn’t identify as asexual then, I’m not sure if I’d even heard of the term, but my lack of desire was clear. (My church wasn’t super fundamentalist, and I eventually got exposed to more of the world and grew into my identity, but some people don’t get those opportunities.)

I can see how some aces might have also been drawn in via a similar thought process, but eventually been pressured into marriage because of established social norms within that environment.

Ultimately, I think it’s a failure of a system that doesn’t have space for people who fall outside of one particular set of ideals, that presses young people to rush into marriage without getting to know each other, and that heavily discourages questioning the system. Tragic and unhappy marriages result from it pretty frequently, even if both parties involved are cisgender and heterosexual.


(Honestly, I think it’s more likely that the person saying that asexuality isn’t a sin unless you act on it just didn’t know what asexuality was, and only heard [prefix-that-is not hetero]sexuality and went “oh hell no”. But that’s taking this claptrap seriously and that’s no fun.)

Fun or no, that’s what I thought had happened, with the extra twist of thinking you’re not sounding judgemental if you say “I don’t know what that means but I’m sure it’s not a sin as long as you don’t, like, do something.”

Also, considering that some aces have a sex-drive, and masturbation is a sin(?), I guess “acting on your asexuality” could mean taking care of stuff without the participation of another person, but other than that it’s just nonsensical. Here I am, not feeling sexual attraction to people, how wickedly evil of me. May I go to hell for all of the impure thoughts I’m not having about my crush.

Leave a Reply

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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.