In asexuality studies, I have found a tendency to place radical critiques of compulsory sexuality before the identities of asexual people. Although largely unintentional, these scholars reduce asexuality down to a logical kernel of itself that is then used to posit these criticisms. Therefore, the identities that asexual people can embody become removed from the critiques put forth. To combat this tendency, I argue not for the disavowal of radical critique, but rather I advocate for a postcritical approach to critical argumentation surrounding asexuality so that identity is a part of the conversation. My aim is to expand the methods of evaluation without abandoning asexual identity. Ultimately, I suggest that one can still use radical critique so long as these identities are honored. Lastly, I contend the only way to accomplish this goal is to supplement radical critique with other forms of argumentation (e.g., arguments based on negotiation, not exposure).