Sexual Orientation

[Obscure_Trash]

-snip-

Gray-asexual is really an umbrella term for people more in the gray area between asexual and sexual or some combination thereof. It's a catchall for people who don't strictly fit in as "sexual".

 

Asexuality and sexuality are not black and white; some people identify in the gray (spelled "grey" in some countries) area between them. People who identify as gray-A can include, but are not limited to those who:

 

do not normally experience sexual attraction, but do experience it sometimes

 

experience sexual attraction, but a low sex drive

 

experience sexual attraction and drive, but not strongly enough to want to act on them

 

people who can enjoy and desire sex, but only under very limited and specific circumstances

 

So yes, that sounds like gray-a to me, if you wish to identify as such. =3

Edited June 17, 2015 by SockPuppet Strangler

[RWyvern]

I don't feel quite comfortable talking this over with my parents, but I'm having doubts about my sexuality?? Reading socky's post I realised that I experience the first three of those things listed in the quote strongly... but I've always identified myself as straight. Still a bit unsure if i'm equally attracted to both men and women, though i can say with certainty i would settle down with either if i found the right person. So I guess that doesn't make me straight...? I dunno, there are many terms that still confuse me.

 

And I'm scared of deciding I'm anything unusual in case people assume that I'm just trying to be some special snowflake. Especially since I'm almost 18 and only just thinking about this /v\ same thing goes for how I prefer an androgynous appearance/feel that way sometimes but Im pretty sure that's for another thread

 

Edit: doing a bit of further reading pansexual sounds pretty close?

Edited June 17, 2015 by rampaging wyvern

[Odeen]

I am asexual and, at 25 years old, I still have people (including my immediate family) telling me my opinion will change. My sister, the professional psychologist, assures me that my orientation is a condition resulting from a tragedy that befell our family at the beginning of my puberty and if I would just go get therapy I would be making like a bunny in no time. My dad is a bit more understanding and says I should marry a gay man because all he'd want to do is cuddle.

 

Sigh.

[hydrargyrum]

Gray-asexual is really an umbrella term for people more in the gray area between asexual and sexual or some combination thereof. It's a catchall for people who don't strictly fit in as "sexual".

 

So yes, that sounds like gray-a to me, if you wish to identify as such. =3

Thanks Sock! The more I think about it, the more comfortable I get with the label, and realize that it does fit me. Now for the more complicated part of figuring out the allosexual part of my orientation . (I'm somewhere between heteroflexible and pansexual, but figuring out where is not very clear).

[Obscure_Trash]

I don't feel quite comfortable talking this over with my parents, but I'm having doubts about my sexuality?? Reading socky's post I realised that I experience the first three of those things listed in the quote strongly... but I've always identified myself as straight. Still a bit unsure if i'm equally attracted to both men and women, though i can say with certainty i would settle down with either if i found the right person. So I guess that doesn't make me straight...? I dunno, there are many terms that still confuse me.

 

And I'm scared of deciding I'm anything unusual in case people assume that I'm just trying to be some special snowflake. Especially since I'm almost 18 and only just thinking about this /v\ same thing goes for how I prefer an androgynous appearance/feel that way sometimes but Im pretty sure that's for another thread

 

Edit: doing a bit of further reading pansexual sounds pretty close?

Nobody who seriously uses the term "special snowflake" deserves any place in your life. You are who you are. You are allowed to experiment. You are allowed to experiment with terms. You are allowed to change what labels you use. You are allowed to be you!

[KingSpinosaurus]

I'm in a kind of weird situation.I might be a gray-bisexual.I mean a mixture of those.

When I was 6,I fell in love with a girl and she was already in highschool by that time,so nope.. Later on,I fell in love with a guy. After those 2,there was nothing. I made people mad because they were trying to get to me and I was simply telling them they couldn't and they thought I was playing hard to get,but I wasn't. And now,there's a car that I've literally fell in love with and it feel wrong and good at the same time Now I have a friend who's really jealous of that car and hates it,but even when I distance myself from it,I'm still not attracted to anything.

Also,I've always felt more like a male than a female.

Edited June 18, 2015 by KingSpinosaurus

[kitsune93]

Is anyone else really bothered by the fact that some people will look at pics of a hot model and talk about how they'd "go gay" for her?

Like, I've been seeing this stuff a lot lately and it really just bothers me.

 

[Shienvien]

Is anyone else really bothered by the fact that some people will look at pics of a hot model and talk about how they'd "go gay" for her?

I am, somewhat. Way to trivialize things.

[Evangeline]

Hmm. I wouldn't really judge them unless they're being homophobic or intentionally disrespectful about it. If people think that a famous person is extremely attractive – even though it is a rather shallow thing to base solely upon looks – it's not really a problem. That's just their way of expressing their appreciation for this individual.

 

There are celebrities that I would "go lesbian" for. (Personally, I don't judge solely on looks... But that's a different story.)

 

There are far worse issues that I worry about, to be perfectly honest. I wouldn't worry too much unless they have a mocking of condescending tone.

[AnanoKimi]

Is anyone else really bothered by the fact that some people will look at pics of a hot model and talk about how they'd "go gay" for her?

Like, I've been seeing this stuff a lot lately and it really just bothers me.

I don't see the problem with that. There are some times that me and my gay friend will see a hot girl and he says, "If I was straight I'd tap that." While I simply just nod and say "I'd tap that regardless." So personally no. If a straight girl feels the hots for a hot lezbian model then let her, let her express how she would gladly conform her sexuality to please this person sexually. I see nothing wrong with that. Its like someone saying they'd like to be more of a cat person for the sake of owning a certain breed they like. Is it wrong for them to fancy owning a cute kitty simply because they favor dogs a bit more over cats?

 

being straight or gay should not limit you to only liking or being attracted to the defined gender of your sexuality. If a gay person finds an attractive woman sexually arousing then let them be aroused and let them express it so long as its not crude or insulting.

[pony459]

I fear many people are confusing sexual attraction with aesthetic attraction at times. They are completely different. You can appreciate someone's looks without wanting to "tap that" and if they are sexually attracted to someone and "would go gay for them" then perhaps they should re-evaluate their sexual orientation if they discover new sexual attractions.

[AnanoKimi]

So then gay/lesbians can't want to go straight for someone of the opposite gender due to looks?

 

Sex/Sexual attraction should have nothing to do with sexual orientation. Feeling sexually attracted to something and wanting to feel pleasure/please it/them should not be limited by a label such as homosexual, bisexual, heterosexual, etc. I can be lebsian and find the occasional man sexually attractive enough to sleep with once or twice maybe. Does that make me any less lesbian? I still would rather sleep with women or have relationships with a woman, but I might consider a one night stand with a sexually attractive man should I be in the mood for it on an off chance.

 

I feel that its why bisexuality and pansexuality has such a negative stigma even in the LGBT community. Because bis/panexuals don't settle for just an opposite gender, they can switch back and forth or have multiple attractions without a limiter. We just go with what we feel attracted to at the moment. We can have multiple relationships with many genders, and as such I feel there shouldn't be a limit on what heterosexual people should find sexually attractive or for that matter what homosexual people should find attractive. If they want to momentarily break out of their sexuality label to enjoy some sex with someone they feel the hots for why stop them or stigmatize them?

 

Thats like someone who has stated to only like cats not being allowed to fancy wanting a pomeranian as a pet if x condition could be met. So limiting what someone is sexually attracted to or what someone is willing to do sexually for someone else due to a label of sexual orientation personally doesnt feel right.

 

Edited to add in additional info.

Edited June 26, 2015 by AnanoKimi

[Sundew]

Sex/Sexual attraction should have nothing to do with sexual orientation. Feeling sexually attracted to something and wanting to feel pleasure/please it/them should not be limited by a label such as homosexual, bisexual, heterosexual, etc.

I'm in agreement with AnanoKimi here. You can feel sexual attraction to someone/something without changing your sexual orientation.

 

I know a lot of people use given orientations as umbrellas for their actual tastes. A person who identifies as straight might find .5% of people of the same sex as them sexually attractive. They're still the sexuality they say they are. Maybe some hot model is the .5%. Doesn't mean it's practical to call yourself bisexual when you'd realistically only date someone of the opposite sex. Sure, if you're in a relationship with someone, it's more sensible to identify with an orientation that includes your partner, but it doesn't really matter if it's just a passing thought.

[Shienvien]

Does that make me any less lesbian?

They say very few people are purely heterosexual or homosexual. In that sense - yes, it is an indicator that you're not completely and fully and exceptionlessly 100% lesbian (or other). I, however, agree with the above poster: if you're overwhelmingly one sexuality, it often makes one sense to just go with the overwhelming part instead of taking time to explain that "I am [X] 99.5% percent of time, but there was this one person of [other sex-type] I saw a couple of years ago who really made me think "woah, they're hot", and I kinda-sorta liked this [other sex-type] supermodel aesthetically of when I was a child." Why'd admitting that 80% of people aren't 100% single-sexual be worthy of stigmatization?

 

As for me, I honestly don't know what a "hot" woman is. In the lack of my brain having any kind of opinion on the matter, I just resort to "seems healthy" as basis and use other people's opinions and descriptions if I have to otherwise.

 

I've also met the odd individual who insists that making out with a (in their opinion hot) woman should - if not must - be perfectly fine for a heterosexual woman and absolutely *refuse* to believe that there are individuals to whom it couldn't be anything but physical violation. Including yes, female women individuals.

Edited June 26, 2015 by Shienvien

[pony459]

Isn't sexual orientation, by definition, how/who you are sexually attracted to, though? Therefore sexual attraction has a lot to do with sexual orientation. Regardless, a lesbian can find a male sexually attractive but they wouldn't "turn straight for them" they might have sexual encounters with them, but they wouldn't change their whole sexual orientation based on one person. It just doesn't make much sense to me. But i'm also asexual so sexual attraction is a mystery to me anyways.

[Sundew]

Regardless, a lesbian can find a male sexually attractive but they wouldn't "turn straight for them" they might have sexual encounters with them, but they wouldn't change their whole sexual orientation based on one person.

I'm sorry, I don't understand what you're trying to say here. I mean, the analogy makes sense to me, but I don't understand what point you're trying to make with it. :3

[hydrargyrum]

Is anyone else really bothered by the fact that some people will look at pics of a hot model and talk about how they'd "go gay" for her?

Like, I've been seeing this stuff a lot lately and it really just bothers me.

It bothers me a little, too.

 

On the one hand, I think it's totally fine to identify as straight even if you do experience occasional attraction to the same gender. Experiencing attraction to multiple genders does not mean you have to identify as bi or pan, if it's not what feels right to you.

 

However, you wouldn't "go gay". You'd "go bi", or something similar. Even if you met one of your exceptions, it doesn't negate your previous attractions. The way it's phrased... kind of reminds me of how people tell self-identified bi people that they're straight if they're in a relationship with someone of the other gender, or gay if they're the same gender, rather than acknowledging that they're bi all the time.

 

Basically, the assumption that you can still be straight with such an experience is fine, but the notion that you'd make the full leap all the way across the spectrum to gay is ridiculous. It seems like bi-erasure, since it only acknowledges straight and gay as options.

[AnanoKimi]

It bothers me a little, too.

 

On the one hand, I think it's totally fine to identify as straight even if you do experience occasional attraction to the same gender. Experiencing attraction to multiple genders does not mean you have to identify as bi or pan, if it's not what feels right to you.

 

However, you wouldn't "go gay". You'd "go bi", or something similar. Even if you met one of your exceptions, it doesn't negate your previous attractions. The way it's phrased... kind of reminds me of how people tell self-identified bi people that they're straight if they're in a relationship with someone of the other gender, or gay if they're the same gender, rather than acknowledging that they're bi all the time.

 

Basically, the assumption that you can still be straight with such an experience is fine, but the notion that you'd make the full leap all the way across the spectrum to gay is ridiculous. It seems like bi-erasure, since it only acknowledges straight and gay as options.

Hey no one really knows if the person could like something so much they'd switch their sexual orientation from that one experience. Its possible :3 maybe they were homosexual/bisexual all along or that person was simply that good that they turned that person from one orientation to the other. We will never know ;3 Also I just realized I seperatly repeated your point about bisexuality and such :3 nice to see some support in there about being in a relationship with one gender doesnt mean your sexually attracted to only that gender. <3

 

 

 

A sexual orientation kind of says "Hey this is what I am attracted to sexually/romanically/etc." but just because you label yourself as being attracted to/liking X thing doesnt mean you can't fancy the occasional y thing and have a little fun here and there. Forcing someone to only like a specific thing based on their label is not how it works.

 

For example, I'm bisexual. I like boys and girls and I absolutely love playing with them too. I've had my fair share of experiences with both but despite my attraction to both genders I find that I kind of have more of a preference for boys over girls. Thats not to say I only like boys. I'm still bu because I really do enjoy the company of the right girl either romantically or sexually but at the end of the day my boyfriend gets the most attention. I don't feel that my slight preference of guys makes me any less bisexual since I wouldnt say no to playing with an attractive girl should I fancy her and vice versa.

 

I don't see how a hetero wanting to be a little homo for a super attractive person is a bad thing. I wouldnt label them as bisexual because at the end of they day that attraction is mostly just for that person specifically and not for their gender. Same with a gay/lesbian wanting to go straight for someone of the opposite gender, I wouldnt label them as bisexual or tell them to re-evaluate their sexual choices beause that sensation is only for that one specific person and not the opposite gender as a whole. Being sexually attracted to one specific person out of your sexual orientation doesnt make you bi or confused, it just mean that person is really hot and well you want at it no matter what because dayum.

Edited June 26, 2015 by AnanoKimi

[Shienvien]

I don't see how a hetero wanting to be a little homo for a super attractive person is a bad thing.

Wouldn't it be precisely "going slightly bi" (as hydrargium pointed out)? Going homo would strongly imply this person somehow made you apathetic towards doing anything with the opposite sex anymore.

[AnanoKimi]

Depends, does that personlike both genders as a whole at that moment or Just that person of that gender at that moment?

 

Homosexuality is having the sexual attraction for the same sex/gender

 

Bisexuality is liking both sexes/genders at the same time (not equally but at the same time)

 

I still think its more a homosexual thing than a bisexual thing even if its momentary or just for that one particular person.

[hydrargyrum]

Depends, does that personlike both genders as a whole at that moment or Just that person of that gender at that moment?

 

Homosexuality is having the sexual attraction for the same sex/gender

 

Bisexuality is liking both sexes/genders at the same time (not equally but at the same time)

 

I still think its more a homosexual thing than a bisexual thing even if its momentary or just for that one particular person.

To me, gay or homosexual very strongly implies (if not outright states) no (or very little) attraction to the other gender. If a straight person says they'd "go gay" for someone, does that mean they would lose attraction to 99% of the people they found attractive before?

 

If a person who mostly finds people of the other gender attractive then finds one person of the same gender attractive, I would say that, at least in that moment, they find people of both genders attractive. You don't have to be literally staring at two people of different genders at the same time and finding them both attractive to be bisexual. The idea that one attractive person of the same gender would make you completely forget about being attracted to the other gender is a little ridiculous.

 

Also, I should point out, I don't necessarily think that it's wrong for an individual who is at least occasionally attracted to more than one gender to call themselves gay or straight depending on who they're with or currently attracted to. My problem is more with the cultural assumption that you have to be one or the other, which the common acceptance of the phrase "go gay for someone" kind of implies.

[Gsea]

I fear many people are confusing sexual attraction with aesthetic attraction at times. They are completely different. You can appreciate someone's looks without wanting to "tap that" and if they are sexually attracted to someone and "would go gay for them" then perhaps they should re-evaluate their sexual orientation if they discover new sexual attractions.

I just want to say that this ^ is actually a really good point, and I definitely feel like aesthetic attraction is not brought up enough.

 

For years, I've thought that I was experiencing physical/sexual attraction (I use these words synonymously) because I could identify when someone was attractive. But very recently, I realized that it's been aesthetic attraction all along. I can recognize when someone is cute, hot, pretty, sexy, beautiful, etc etc.. I find myself looking at beautiful girls as often as you'd expect any other lesbian to do so, but I am not physically/sexually attracted to them. I'm really not interested in sex, and actually the stronger my romantic feelings are, the more opposed I am to the idea of sex with someone I care so much about. But I am all for aesthetic attraction. I like proportionate figures, I like the curves and soft lines traditionally associated with the female body. I can recognize and enjoy the appearance of what I consider an attractive person. But for me, the physical attraction is never more than wanting to kiss or hug them, really.

 

The conversation atm seems to be focused around sexual attraction, and in the end, it's a personal, individual choice of whether you want to change your label depending on rare instances of sexual attraction to people outside the scope of your current label. I'll use myself as an example: I identify outwardly as a lesbian because 98% of the time, I find myself interested in girls and I ideally want a relationship with one, but I have had some very strong feelings for a boy before. I didn't decide then to change my label to bi/pansexual, because I still really only want to be with girls and feel 100% part of the lesbian community, even though I once was crazy for this boy. Could I fall in love with a man in the future? It's possible. But in my vision of my future, I date girls. I marry a girl. Girls are what I'm interested in, not boys, even though it's entirely possible that there will be someone male who is perfect for me in every way.

 

edit:

The phrase "I'd go gay for her" is offensive to me because in my experience, girls kind of use this as a phrase to sound "edgy" or to otherwise tie themselves in with the gay community. It's kind of prodding at the confines of the word "straight ally" imo.. But I know that sometimes the people saying that are genuinely questioning their sexuality, which is fine, though I'd like to urge straight people to avoid saying "I'd go gay" unless they truly mean they are abandoning the "straight" label, no longer feel heterosexual attraction, and have realized that they are entirely gay. But most of the time, "going gay" for one celebrity is a borderline offensive way to say "I'm straight but I recognize that this person, who is the same gender as me, is attractive"

Edited June 26, 2015 by glamoursea2

[High Lord November]

The phrase "I'd go gay for her" is offensive to me because in my experience, girls kind of use this as a phrase to sound "edgy" or to otherwise tie themselves in with the gay community. It's kind of prodding at the confines of the word "straight ally" imo.. But I know that sometimes the people saying that are genuinely questioning their sexuality, which is fine, though I'd like to urge straight people to avoid saying "I'd go gay" unless they truly mean they are abandoning the "straight" label, no longer feel heterosexual attraction, and have realized that they are entirely gay. But most of the time, "going gay" for one celebrity is a borderline offensive way to say "I'm straight but I recognize that this person, who is the same gender as me, is attractive"

 

I see it just more as a fast but inaccurate descriptor. Like "this is against what I normally feel but this is someone attractive (etc.) enough that I'd go against my orientation just for them." Then again I haven't had much experience with people saying that, that's just the thing that makes the most sense as to why people would use it if they didn't have that intent.

[AnanoKimi]

To me, gay or homosexual very strongly implies (if not outright states) no (or very little) attraction to the other gender. If a straight person says they'd "go gay" for someone, does that mean they would lose attraction to 99% of the people they found attractive before?

 

If a person who mostly finds people of the other gender attractive then finds one person of the same gender attractive, I would say that, at least in that moment, they find people of both genders attractive. You don't have to be literally staring at two people of different genders at the same time and finding them both attractive to be bisexual. The idea that one attractive person of the same gender would make you completely forget about being attracted to the other gender is a little ridiculous.

 

Also, I should point out, I don't necessarily think that it's wrong for an individual who is at least occasionally attracted to more than one gender to call themselves gay or straight depending on who they're with or currently attracted to. My problem is more with the cultural assumption that you have to be one or the other, which the common acceptance of the phrase "go gay for someone" kind of implies.

It is als very possible that your scenario could be a thing though. Ridiculous as it may sound but it is still a big possibility that it could very well be the case :3

 

Well its not that they have to be its just they don't feel both at the same time. I often feel that bisexuality is this middle ground between homosexuality and heterosexuality because you like the opposite gender, you like the same gender, you want them both with you in some way shape or form. Its just some people don't fully identify that way because sometimes the "homosexual feelings" they might feel for someone attractive at some particular point in time does not suddenly mean they suddenly like that whole gender/sex along side their normal attraction to the intial gender/sex of their choice.

 

I see it just more as a fast but inaccurate descriptor. Like "this is against what I normally feel but this is someone attractive (etc.) enough that I'd go against my orientation just for them." Then again I haven't had much experience with people saying that, that's just the thing that makes the most sense as to why people would use it if they didn't have that intent.

Also this :3

[hydrargyrum]

I think I figured out more of why "go gay for someone" bothers me. It's really not about the phrase itself, but more that it's a symptom of a larger problem (bi-erasure).

 

Basically, we have a culture that thinks like this:

Everyone's straight. Unless you're gay. Oh yeah, I guess there are a couple other options, but I don't remember what they are.

 

To me, the phrase "go gay" kind of sounds like they think gay is the only other option besides straight. So it's not a terrible phrase, nor is it doing specific harm itself. But it's just one tiny, subtle way that we remind people that straight and gay are the primary options, and bi and pan are just occasional afterthoughts.