Why can't aces be both? The "sexual" in sexual orientations has always referred to attraction. Sex repulsed aces are like victim-playing US Christians in most of the interactions I see. They bully and make fun of anyone who has sex and then play the victim when asked to not insult others.

You could be one whether it have sex people with never or often.

It's frustrating as hell.

Maybe a little relief might be... I'm sorry.

This is like saying "yes, gay men can still have sex with women, as long as they're not attracted to them. They're still gay! It's only a name!"

Well... That's correct, though. It might be a little easier to see if you consider the stereotype of male-on-male sex in prisons or militaries. Or, to keep closer to your example, a homosexual man having sex with a woman just to see what it's like. Or because he's closeted and trying to conform to social pressure. There are lots of reasons to have sex with someone, and having sex with people of a particular gender does not necessarily determine your sexuality, if sexual attraction is not one of them. I mean, sure, a gay man having sex with lots of women for apparently no other reason than that he likes it might be a little sus, but, like, you might just not know what's going on.

The amount of times I've been asked if I'm "one of those asexuals who have sex" is gross.

I agree that that's gross. But not because it implies that it's valid for asexuals to like sex. It's gross because that is a weirdly intimate detail to just ask casually about, regardless of your sexuality.

because it apparently includes everybody.

No. Only those who don't feel sexual attraction towards others. Regardless of whether they like having sex or not.

I am against not being able to use the label to distinguish clear what I identify as anymore

If the "not having sex" part is important to you, what's wrong with identifying as "sex-repulsed asexual" instead of just "asexual"? Sounds like that would already solve your problem

This is like saying “yes, gay men can still have sex with women, as long as they’re not attracted to them. They’re still gay! It’s only a name!”

But that's true. Straight men can and do have sex with men and that should be accepted as normal. Etc. Nothing wrong with that. What would be a problem is if people were to try to pressure people into having sex outside their sexual orientation. Because its wrong to pressure people into having sex. Doesn't matter their orientation. But you seem to be suggestion that its okay, as long as aces get left out.

It’s an awful precedent. The amount of times I’ve been asked if I’m “one of those asexuals who have sex” is gross.

Some people don't have boundaries and don't know basic sexual etiquette. Acknowledging diversity exist no more justifies asking aces you barely know than it justifies asking trans people about their genitals. And yet, somehow people seem to somehow just forget basic etiquette when they meet queer people. As if our existence is either inherently sexual, so simply existing means we started the sexual conversation in their mind (even when we're aces somehow) or we're subhuman and don't desire basic courtesy/privacy. That said, some guys are really just that direct with each other and think its normal.

But there’s no such thing as “grey asexual”. That’s greysexual. It’s a separate thing.

Asexuality is used both a specific label and an umbrella term that includes both.

“Asexual” becoming “inclusive” to almost everything muddies the waters. I am against not being able to use the label to distinguish clear what I identify as anymore. It’s frustrating as hell.

Sounds about as valid as transmeds/truscum being upset that NBies and people who want something slightly different than them are under the same umbrella of "trans" and that they would need to use "binary" to qualify more specifically what they want to communicate.

No sex in a relationship kills the relationship.