• zeroaesthetic
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 years ago

    No, there’s no structural oppression against asexuality, but there’s also no structural oppression against heterosexuality, and the latter is explicitly mentioned as a sexual orientation in the bill.

    • southerntofu
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 years ago

      Don’t you believe the addition of hetero and bi sexuality explicitly in the list was calculated to defuse progressive/reactionary opposition in advance? If heterosexuality wasn’t on there people on the right would have claimed “it’s a secret lgbt plot to criminalize heterosexuality”, or at least i believe so

      but i see your point thanks, not trying to nitpick :)

      • zeroaesthetic
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        4 years ago

        Uh, no, I think they were included in the list because it would be incorrect to say that sexual orientation just means homosexuality. (And why do you lump hetero- and bisexuality together? Bisexuality is still a form of queerness.)

      • pingveno
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 years ago

        Heterosexuality is listed because leaving it out would open the bill up to equal protections challenges.