redbeardace:

Yeah, maybe I should’ve just left the back cover blank…  I don’t know, is that text horrible?

Pardon my ignorance, but can you direct me to where it’s called the fourth orientation? I’ve never seen it called that, (I’ve checked the main asexual sites but I may have missed it) and I don’t think that even makes sense, either, truthfully.  Heterosexuality, homosexuality, bisexuality, and pansexuality would already be four and pansexuality, while not always accepted, is actually far more well known than asexuality; I don’t think the potential erasure of pansexuality would be very welcomed or advisable.

I also might be nitpicking, but I see a fairly significant problem with the use of the word “the“in “the asexual point of view”. That “the” is definitive, even if unintentionally. No asexual is the same, and that “the” implies a universal opinion and that’s just not so. While I know it’s just a bit of vocabulary, I think word choices and the implications thereof are incredibly important when speaking in an authoritative manner on something so obscure as asexuality. So that is just something I’d urge you to consider.

I don’t mean to step on toes, I do believe the more asexual material the merrier, just I think these could be potential issues that could be a bit harmful, to be honest. Sorry if this criticism is unwelcome, I just am a bit concerned about it.

-Griff