Koinonia

At a church service last week, I learned a new word: koinonia. It's a Greek word; according to Wikipedia (I know, I know, my old professors are shaking their fingers at me), it means "communion by intimate participation... the essential meaning of the koinonia embraces concepts conveyed in the English terms community, communion, joint participation, sharing and intimacy...In the New American Standard Bible, it is translated "fellowship" twelve times, "sharing three times, and "participation" and "contribution" twice each."

Many asexuals find themselves trying to invent new forms of relationships from scratch, since sex is, in American culture, at the center of romantic relationships, and romantic relationships are privileged above all others except possibly, in certain circumstances, the parent-child bond (though only unidirectionally-- it's considered acceptable to value your child above your romantic partner, but if you value your parent above your romantic partner, people will think you're weird). This goes doubly for aromantics and greyromantics, since we have even more trouble with the dominant forms of relationships. (David Jay has some great essays about this concept at Love from the Asexual Underground.)

It occurred to me, as I listened to the sermon, that the church, at its best, can serve as a model for the type of supportive community/the type of nurturing relationships that some aces (of any romantic orientation) want. Community? Joint participating? Sharing and intimacy? All without necessitating romantic attachment or shared genetic material? Yes, yes please!

In Which Gendered Roles and Rape Culture Help Screw Over the Planet

I wanted to draw your attention to this article in Grist about why fewer women than men, in the US, use biking as a form of transportation. Some of the reasons listed include because employed women perform significantly more housework than their employed male counterparts, leaving less time for a commute that takes longer; women are responsible for more childcare and household errands than their male counterparts, and it's hard to run diverse errands and/or haul children and groceries on a bike; because poverty is feminized, and women are more likely to live in areas where it's not safe to commute; or because women don't think they can bike to work and still look professional when they get there (because it's not like there's a double standard, appearance-wise, or anything...)

Hmm, paging the kyriarchy, would you know anything about this? Most of the points are obvious as elaborated in the article, but I wanted to add that women's bodies are considered objects and even public property in a way that men's bodies never or rarely are; as a result, biking to work (or anywhere else) for a woman can be significantly more stressful than for a man. Not only do they have to deal with all the traffic hazards like men do, but they're more likely to be catcalled, harassed, or assaulted. Women are taught from a young age to be careful when we go out in public, because of all the rapists hiding in the bushes-- the corollary being that, if we are raped or assaulted, it's our own fault for being out in public at all. (The Dominant Kyriarchal Narrative, of course, ignores that most rapes and sexual assaults are perpetrated by someone known to the victim.)

To sum up, a safer world with less policing of gender roles, where women weren't considered objects or targets and men and women split domestic responsibilities more equally, would be a better world entirely in its own right. It would also allow more women to choose to bicycle to work or to run errands, if they wanted, and reduce our collective carbon footprint.

An Ace Analogy

Many people think that being asexual means you don't have sex, you don't enjoy sex, you don't have any interest in sex. This is not necessarily true. Celibacy and asexuality are not synonymous; one is a life choice, and one is a sexual orientation. Some asexuals don't want to have sex or think about sex; some don't care; some do want to have sex and do think about sex.

These last two categories tend to confuse people. Think about it like food. Asexuals never get hungry; they don't look at a plate of macaroni and cheese and immediately feel their stomach growl. In fact, some asexuals don't even like to think about food, but some don't mind it. The asexuals that don't mind thinking about food still don't get hungry, but they can still enjoy eating it, sometime. Just because it doesn't fulfill a need doesn't mean it doesn't taste good.