Falling Skies, Season 1

So much for a series to fill the dirty black TV summer – I’m already through, and it took only 3 days. On one hand, that has to do with me having to wait for the workers that ensured my balcony (or what’s left of it) won’t fall off completely. On the other hand, it’s also a sign that the series does have potential to keep me interested.

I really appreciate the refreshing lack of sex scenes and romance interfering with the plot. Most recent series insist on being “darker, edgier and bolder” by having at least one sex scene per episode. Not even in Spartacus – where many, many sex scenes serve as plot device and have an actual purpose beyond fan service – they always fit in. And that gets a bit annoying, though most shows don’t push it as far as Stargate Universe with exclusively out-of-context, unneccessary sex and rushed, senseless romance. Falling Skies has two couples, kind of.

First, it’s Hal and Karen, then Karen gets taken by the aliens and Hal basically doesn’t care. No teenage angst, crying and long talks about feelings. That said, I was surprised to hear Hal is supposed to be 16 or 17. He has nothing of a typical teenager that age. The series is set a few months after the alien attack and such a short time under extreme conditions didn’t turn the other kids into responsible adults over night. 13 years old Jimmy, despite being a soldier now, still acts like a 13 years old boy, for example. Hal is the right age for a rebellious teenager, but instead, he’s on best-friend terms with his father. Coming from a perfectly functional family – his mother died recently in the alien attack – there’s nothing to explain why he (and none of the other kids) ‘grew up’ so fast. I’m absolutely not opposed to this trait, by the way. I’m glad he’s not an annyoing brat. Anyway, after not-really-dealing with the loss of Karen, Hal gets a new girl by his side; slightly older Margaret. There doesn’t seem to be romantic tension, they are more a battle couple that has each other’s back.

The second couple, and there is a lot more romantic tension, would be Hal’s father and our main hero, Tom and resident doctor Anne. Both appear to not quite mourn the loss of their families, or wife, in Tom’s case. It’s only been a few months since their loved ones died, but they already act like a long time married couple before it comes to the one and only kiss in season one. Which is also the closest to a sex scene the show gets – a semi-rushed kiss before Tom storms off to rescue his captain. Very, very refreshing, these non-mushy character relationships.

I have also decided that I like John Pope as character most, just as I expected. Naturally, being no typical world saving hero helps the case. But what I really appreciate is probably the Merle Dixon Factor. He’s controversial (to a much lesser degree than Merle, more around Daryl levels) and most of all, he has proven to be a total wild card. Which is the one thing I really miss in Daryl, and since Shane’s death, in Walking Dead as a whole. Pope is truly unpredictable and doesn’t always do the logical thing, and that’s what keeps things interesting. And, in a way, logical.

In post apocalyptic scenarios like an invasion by hostile aliens or a worldwide zombie epidemic, it makes a lot sense to me that people like Merle and Daryl Dixon – or John Pope – survive and do quite well on their own. Being sort of an asshole is helpful when society breaks down and outdated morals and ethics hold “better” people back from doing the neccessary things. Someone not exactly opposed to violence, weapons and crime stands a good chance to fight off whatever Big Bad a show throws at them. On the other hand, it is a mystery to me how all the whiny pacifists (and every survivor group will have at least one of them) that are terrified of the idea to kill anything, even children-enslaving tentacle aliens or hungry zombies, survive long enough to join any survivor groups. Same for the inevitable pregnant woman or single mother of at least two brats that draw the attention of the Big Bad at any given chance and endager the group for the sake of suspense.

Falling Skies has a bit more logic who survived than movies with a similar premise. Most of the military was wiped out during the initial attack; what’s left of the army makes up the fighters of the survivor camps; with the younger and less experienced adults as scouts and the older people staying in the camps and keeping things running. Or contributing otherwise, like Uncle Scott, who manufactures explosives for the soldiers. Main hero Tom isn’t even military, which is quite refreshing for a show about fighting alien invaders back and equally surprising considering it’s a Spielberg series. And as a former history teacher with theoretical knowledge of military tactics, it still makes sense to have him in the position he’s in.

The bad side is, I’m already through the season and have to wait for new brain food again. The good side, season 2 starts airing this month, in less than a week, so the waiting isn’t too long. And 6 days are a damn lot better (and easier to fill) than months.

Advertisement

WTFsapiolithromantic?!

I hereby wish to distance myself from asexuals on various online platforms who keep coming up with ridicolous new labels all the time.Let me explain why.

I am asexual. I am not attracted to people in a sexual way. I do not think of people as “hot”, “sexy” or “I’d hit that”. That’s easy enough to distinguish from the other sexual orientations out there. At least in my book, there are only:

• Heterosexual: Attracted to the opposite sex
• Homosexual: Attracted to the own sex
• Bisexual: Attracted to both opposite and own sex
• Pansexual: Attracted to people regardless of sex (including transsexual, intersex and other non-binary people)
• Asexual: Not attracted to anyone

Adding to the “who”-attractions, there are a couple of terms defining the “how”, such as demisexual (experiencing only secondary sexual attraction, i.e. only after having an emotional bond with someone, often friendship) and the grey area (low and/or rare sexual attraction, simplified); as well as mono- and poly- prefixes, stating if monogamy or polygamy applies. One can be heterosexual and demisexual; experiencing attraction to the opposite sex after forming emotional bonds. It’s simple enough as a system to label.

When it comes to romantic orientation, things get more difficult. Naturally, romantic attraction has the platonic counterparts to the sexual orientations and definers, which are still easy to understand. A sexual orientation states who you like to bang, a romantic orientation states who you fall in love with. The problem, however, is that for a vast majority of people, these two orientations match. Most heterosexuals are also heteroromantic, for example. Therefore, a vast majority of people is confused if the orientations do not match, i.e. an asexual person who has no desire for sex, but still wants a romantic relationship.

It is confusing enough as it is to people who are neither asexual nor aromantic. Why oh why make it even more confusing by making up new labels for every slight variation on the spectrum? Is it so hard to explain yourself in a few words that you need a label for everything? And that requires basically everyone you meet to read a dictionary – one in a constant state of change, no less – to understand what the hell you are talking about? “Sapiosexual”, for example, doesn’t mean that one is attracted to neanderthals or bipedal beings, it means “attracted to intelligence”. Seriously? I never met anyone who was turned on by stupidity. “Lithromantics” do explicitly not wish their romantic feelings to be returned, or even fear this might happen. Which doesn’t change the basic romantic attraction and is just a horribly specific way to say “doesn’t desire a romantic relationship”. And the latest trendy label is, in all seriousness, called “wtfromantic”, which no-one can explain better than “having weird crushes and being kinda aromantic”. Yes, that’s exactly what it sounds like.

If I would use all labels that somehow apply to me, I would end up with a list that fills a page. And after reading it, no-one would be one bit smarter than before and I would have to explain every single, specific term to define who I am attracted to in what way, to what degree and how I would like the person to react to it. Therefore, I stick with aromantic – I don’t “fall in love” and desire no romantic relationships. Simple enough, without having to define why exactly I feel that way, how I feel about people instead and whatnot.

When was the last time you met a heterosexual Ordinary Joe who gave you a book to read when asked what his orientation is? Who ever split “hetero” in “hetero with a strong preference for blondes, but only in long distance relationships (phone communication, weekly) and average school grades of x”? Right, no-one does that because it’s unneccessarily complicated. Maybe I just don’t get it because I don’t have the classic sexual or romantic attraction, and hence see no need to specify my preferences in every detail. But I do have social preferences; things I look for in a friend or someone I look up to. Know what? Either my criteria are met or they aren’t. No labeling myself as “roflcoptersocial” will change that – social interaction doesn’t work that way. Neither does romantic or sexual orientation. It’s a gamble every single time you meet a new person if you ‘click’ with them, have similar preferences for the possible relationship or not. Life isn’t a dating site where you meet everyone based on a checklist and a “looking for” essay.

Coming up with complicated and highly specific labels does nothing to help you. It’s not helping to be taken serious either. Identifying as lmaosexual demi-hollaifyouhearmeromantic just makes you look like a highschool hipster who desperately tries to be “mysterious, exotic and interesting”. And the only thing that label tells me is: I want nothing to do with you.

So there. I am an aromantic asexual. The strongest affectionate emotions I develop for people are friendship and admiration. That’s all I have to say, label-wise, and I really really don’t care what you new hip bumper sticker is supposed to tell me about your social interactions. It doesn’t.

 

(in a totally non-sexual way, of course)

If you happen to find yourself in a forum that discusses mainly the subjects of “watching porn”, “masturbation”, “kinks and fetishes”, “yaoi fanfiction”, “body fluids” and “jokes about sex”, what would you assume the forum’s topic was? Probably not that it is the “official” asexuality forum, right? Neither would I. But a majority of the self-proclaimed “asexuals” on AVEN seems to see it differently and happily posts away. Now, there are so many problems with that – and other things – on AVEN that I have a hard time to know where to begin. Mind you, saying any of these things on AVEN self will only result in warnings and bans, so it’s probably a pointless rant anyway.

Thing is, AVEN is supposed to be the first address for information about asexuality. It’s the Asexuality Visibility and Education Network, after all. Unlike other minorities – gay or transsexual people, for example – asexuals have to deal with far less open discrimination. The biggest issue is not being taken serious. If you tell people you’re not attracted to anyone, most will tell you that it’s “just a phase”, you haven’t met “the right person” yet and similar things. People simply don’t believe it’s really a thing. And I can see how it is confusing to them, if a majority of the world’s population has a need for sexual intimacy. It’s easier to relate to a homosexual person, who has other preferences than the hetero-majority, but still desires the same basic thing. Asexuals don’t and they are rare – estimations speak of 1 % of the world’s population – and therefore aren’t really “visible”. The worst kind of visibility is the kind that reinforces the “it’s just a phase”, “you haven’t met the right person” and “you’re just frigid/ill/depressed” thoughts. And that is exactly what the AVEN forum does.

I am asexual. And not even I can take it serious what’s going on there. I shake my head at nearly every posting made there. I should feel welcome, understood and among likeminded people there, but I don’t.

One reason may be that I’m not a teenage girl. Or a teenage boy, at least. Excuse my bluntness, but at age 15, you are not “totally certain” about anything. Not about who you are, what you want or what your sexual orientation is. At that age, you just hit puberty. Of course you are confused about many things, and of course a lot things are new and have to be figured out over time. Yet teenagers are by far the most outspoken and “visible” asexuals. With the ridicolous AVEN policy “use any label you see fit; sexuality is fluid, if it doesn’t feel right anymore in a few years, just take a different label”, that is the perfect breeding ground for “it’s just a phase”. How can people take asexuality serious as an orientation if the asexuals they see or know just drop the label at age 17 after “meeting the right person”? That confirms that it was “just a phase”. Are we such a minority that we have to hand out our label to everyone, if it applies or not, just to get “members” for our exclusive club? That seems to be the AVEN policy. I don’t see what would be wrong about telling people “yes, you are indeed too young to know; wait a few years until you figure things out”. I don’t see why people would need a label – any label – so bad.

This problem is closely related to “OMAI I’m so Aspie!” Every third AVEN poster claims to have Asperger’s Syndrome, a rare personality disorder (bipolar is quite popular this year) or both. Confused, moody teenagers running around and claiming various medical conditions for themselves; like trophies to brag with, results in people not taking the conditions serious anymore. And people who actually have them will be seen as “just another poser who wants attention” – instead of getting the help they need.

But dare to say that on AVEN. There’s a ultra super duper political correctness policy, too. You have to be tolerant about everything. I often wonder if these people are really that far gone and actually really tolerate these things, or if they just nod and think “what a freak” to themselves. Let me give you an example. This documentary deals with very, very confused people who believe that they have telepathic powers that enable them to communicate with dead objects, mostly buildings of various types. They have romantic and sexual relationships with these objects. (In their heads, anyway.) It includes people actually being married to the Eiffel Tower, the Berlin Wall and a rollercoaster. The average person, no matter if hetero-, homo- or bisexual will likely react with “what the fuck?” or “these poor, sick people”. Not AVEN. The AVEN reaction is “oh, interesting, I wonder if they could be considered asexual too, since they aren’t attracted to people”. Yup, let’s go ahead and hold our umbrella over every weirdo’s head, simply overlook that they have a shitload of mental issues and embrace them into our family. Seriously?

And it’s not limited to people who are sexually attracted to freaking buildings. According to AVEN, it is totally possible – hell, even fairly common – for asexuals to have kinks and fetishes. All while not feeling sexual attraction. That’s an oxymoron to me – if you’re not attracted to anything or anyone, how would you have a fetish? A fetish is something certain people require to achieve sexual satisfaction. They are attracted to whatever their fetish is. You can hardly have a foot fetish and not feel sexual attraction at the same time. Except on AVEN, where the senseless is the norm.

AVEN users can do a damn lot things that you would consider connected to sexual attraction “in a non-sexual way”. For example, discuss totally non-sexual BDSM fantasies about popular actors and fictional characters, who you are attracted to “in a non-sexual way”. Or read and write yaoi smut fanfiction about them “in a non-sexual way”. Talk about your compulsive, non-sexual masturbation habits. Brag with how you are, out of all your friends, the most perverted one – in a non-sexual way, of course. Find likeminded, non-sexual people who share your non-sexual furry guro fetish. Or share the non-sexual joy and reasons to watch non-sexual hardcore porn.

Doesn’t make sense to you? Same here. Whenever I visit AVEN, as an asexual person, I feel like I’m entering the seventh circle of kink hell; the part of purgatory where the most obsessively horny perverts are thrown. Reading all that, I can totally see how asexuality isn’t taken serious and looks like it’s a new trendy term invented by teenage girls that are horribly, horribly curious about sex, but not quite ready to explore it in person: “just a phase”.

It is also curious how all the “non-sexual” obsessions seem to evolve around the same actors and characters every other fangirl is obsessed with. Maybe it’s just a coincidence, but there is no difference between the fan art section of DeviantArt (aka Fangirl Hell), Fanfiction.net (aka 9th Circle of Hell) and AVEN – it’s full of teenagers lusting over the same people. Sherlock Holmes, Dr. House, Loki, “Sheldon from Big Bang Theory”, Dr. Who… just the AVEN population drools “in a non-sexual way”. Yes, they really add that a LOT.

And last but not least, there is the issue of the ever-returning “Am I asexual because x?” topics, that are heavily discussed whenever they pop up. “Am I asexual because I was abused as a child?” “Am I asexual because I have a hormone imbalance?” “Am I asexual because (whatever)?” What message does that send? That not even asexuals believe their orientation is a real orientation. That it is something “bad” or “wrong” that needs to be “fixed”. (Many of these topics come in the disguise of “How can I be fixed?”) People usually don’t question things that they are aware of, yet don’t see as “bad”. Who really spends time to ponder “Why am I red haired?” or “Why do I have blue eyes?” People acknowledge they are, but they aren’t trying to “fix” it, except maybe dyeing their hair or wear contacts, if they would rather be different. No-one loses sleep over the question “Why do I NOT have cancer?” or “Why did my house NOT burn down?” Permanently pondering what the hell is “wrong” and how it can be “fixed” just says that people do NOT think of their orientation as legitimate and really just that – an orientation like any other. To me, it’s just the way it is. I couldn’t change it if I tried or wanted anyway, just like I can’t magically make myself another ethnicity. And it’s a waste of time to try. I rather spend my time to think about things that are possible. And in the end, my sexual orientation – or lack of one, if you will – is a pretty small part of who I am. I see no need to poke around in this tiny fraction every waking moment, because there are simply things that are by far more important to me.

The interesting part is: I’m not alone with these views. I know other asexuals – romantics, aromantics, demi/gray spectrum, male, female, genderless – who are not on AVEN. They all have one thing in common with me: They feel like aliens on AVEN; puzzled why a forum for and about asexuals is full of sexual topics and horny teenagers. Maybe that is because we are no teenagers, yes. But I tend to think it’s more because we are asexual, and a vast majority of the AVEN users are confused kids that assume exotic labels to feel more special.