Sexual Orientation

[Indigo_Dragon]

CottonKatt maybe you're aromantic and asexual and all you really need are close friends and family who will snug you up whenever you want snuggles and hugs?

Edited October 12, 2015 by Sapphira_Majoram

[Obscure_Trash]

You may also be lithromantic, which is on the aro spectrum. It means someone who doesn't want romantic attraction to be reciprocated or your romantic feelings may disappear or stop being enjoyable once in a relationship or if attraction is returned.

 

Or you may go through periods of romance-repulsion (or aromanticism in general).

 

It sounds like you're also either interested just in platonic relationships or even a queerplatonic relationship. =)

[Ælex]

I sometimes come back to this thread to learn a new term or two.

[Jortaani]

I'm just a boring ordinary heterosexual. I don't know why, but people with the same gender just don't attract me in that way.

[Cottoncat]

CottonKatt maybe you're aromantic and asexual and all you really need are close friends and family who will snug you up whenever you want snuggles and hugs?

That sounds a lot better to me than having a romantic relationship, in fact. So I guess it's not impossible! (◕ヮ◕)

 

You may also be lithromantic, which is on the aro spectrum. It means someone who doesn't want romantic attraction to be reciprocated or your romantic feelings may disappear or stop being enjoyable once in a relationship or if attraction is returned.

 

Or you may go through periods of romance-repulsion (or aromanticism in general).

 

It sounds like you're also either interested just in platonic relationships or even a queerplatonic relationship. =)

I really can see myself in that romantic feelings disappearing thing, as sometimes I feel a little romantic but then it starts to feel wrong and all the good feelings disappear. I've experienced that kind of things before, maybe three times during the last two years.

Romance-repulsion wouldn't be an impossibility either, especially when my friend said that also age can effect the feelings - I'm still experiencing, so I can't be completely sure about my sexuality yet. Anyways, platonic relationships sound more like my thing in general. n v n

 

[Obscure_Trash]

Happy Asexual Awareness Week. =)

[Ahimsa]

Entirely too gay for my own good

Edited October 23, 2015 by Ahimsa

[ForeverFlygon]

Happy Asexual Awareness Week. =)

Be aware of the asexuals

 

They are always watching

 

( asexual aromantic here, by the way)

[sans]

Bisexual, i really just fall in love too easily with people i like. Ill probably be willing to have sex with most people, gender or orentation doesnt matter to me as long as you arent an annoying loon.

[Yandere_Blood18]

I'm Bi, but I might be Pansexual.

 

I mean, I'm attracted to any person despite their gender....but I think it might be more than that. I don't know yet. Guess I'll have to see.

[auroshen]

Happy Asexual Awareness Week. =)

THEY'RE ONTO US, GUYS! HIDE! HIDE!

 

(Grey-ace here, still undecided as to the specifics :>)

[KuukiKiller]

Pansexual and probably aromantic, still figuring that out

[Trope]

I'm an aromantic asexual. On the one hand, it makes me sad I'll never experience what it's like to fall head over heels for someone. On the other hand, since I've come to terms with myself life has been so much easier. Whatever I (don't) feel, I'm me, and that's just fine.

 

Now I just need to explain this to my family members who are all still convinced I'm going through a phase...

[Cottoncat]

On the one hand, it makes me sad I'll never experience what it's like to fall head over heels for someone.

Sometimes I feel like that too.

But then I remember how I've already done that once and it didn't end well. It hasn't happened ever since, but I'm actually glad it hasn't. All I do is get 'lighter' crushes every now and then, but not in a romantic way; more like something along the lines "Damn, I'd totally want to hang out with them!". >u>

[Trope]

Sometimes I feel like that too.

But then I remember how I've already done that once and it didn't end well. It hasn't happened ever since, but I'm actually glad it hasn't. All I do is get 'lighter' crushes every now and then, but not in a romantic way; more like something along the lines "Damn, I'd totally want to hang out with them!". >u>

I suppose that's the good part: can't get your heart broken. ;p

 

I don't even get crushes. The most I get is a general "Hey, I'd like to get to know this person better!" feeling in a purely platonic way.

[hundefrau]

I am demisexual (I also don't think the definition of it in the first post is all too correct)

[Niomedes]

Aromantic asexual.

[atheistcanuck]

I'm autochorisexual. I think.

[Natayah]

I really dislike how over the years more and more words have been added to make things more specific .... I mean, I get if you are going through something and are trying to find out which community you fit into for whatever, but there seems to be a growing trend to have a laundry lists of everything in a person's bio. I guess I'm just from a time where you are who you are, and I don't like to be pigeonholed or defined. I am who I am, I love who I love, and I don't really think I need to define that. Especially since I'm not entirely sure its a "choice" for me. I think it has more to do with pheremones and chemical reactions which have some genetic and other reasons that go a bit beyond my comprehension and I really don't care. And instead of freaking out over my attraction to someone I just understand it is what it is and don't feel a need to chastise or freak out over it. It's about being able to love someone and have a healthy relationship. Maybe if I were actively looking for someone it might be different if I were in a need to set up a dating profile.

 

I tend to notice a lot of people who would use the term bi-sexual are really what people would want to call these days I guess.. Pan-sexual... which is not a term I like because it makes it sound like my sexuality is open to a lot more sexual forms or practices. Which it is not. But when it comes to people... I either am or am not attracted to them, its something decided by reactions on a chemical level, and I'm not hung up what "kind" of person it might be or what "category" they might fall into. I thought the idea was to see people as people, and not be hung up on terms. I just see this as more of a regression than a progression. You can celebrate whatever you like about yourself. But I just want to people to be people and not a laundry list of definitions. You are more than that. If its a "fight" against society for "defining" us, then why would we continue to further "define" ourselves? Aren't we just doing the same thing? Maybe that's a generational thing. I feel that I am apathetic to hating terms that "define" people and feel it robs them of their humanity by trying to force label them and thus point out how different we are instead of accepting while others see it as a "celebration" of what makes them unique. Maybe its just a Gen X thing or a me personally thing.

Edited December 30, 2015 by natayah

[AppleMango]

I really dislike how over the years more and more words have been added to make things more specific .... I mean, I get if you are going through something and are trying to find out which community you fit into for whatever, but there seems to be a growing trend to have a laundry lists of everything in a person's bio. I guess I'm just from a time where you are who you are, and I don't like to be pigeonholed or defined. I am who I am, I love who I love, and I don't really think I need to define that. Especially since I'm not entirely sure its a "choice" for me. I think it has more to do with pheremones and chemical reactions which have some genetic and other reasons that go a bit beyond my comprehension and I really don't care. And instead of freaking out over my attraction to someone I just understand it is what it is and don't feel a need to chastise or freak out over it. It's about being able to love someone and have a healthy relationship. Maybe if I were actively looking for someone it might be different if I were in a need to set up a dating profile.

 

I tend to notice a lot of people who would use the term bi-sexual are really what people would want to call these days I guess.. Pan-sexual... which is not a term I like because it makes it sound like my sexuality is open to a lot more sexual forms or practices. Which it is not. But when it comes to people... I either am or am not attracted to them, its something decided by reactions on a chemical level, and I'm not hung up what "kind" of person it might be or what "category" they might fall into. I thought the idea was to see people as people, and not be hung up on terms. I just see this as more of a regression than a progression. You can celebrate whatever you like about yourself. But I just want to people to be people and not a laundry list of definitions. You are more than that. If its a "fight" against society for "defining" us, then why would we continue to further "define" ourselves? Aren't we just doing the same thing? Maybe that's a generational thing. I feel that I am apathetic to hating terms that "define" people and feel it robs them of their humanity by trying to force label them and thus point out how different we are instead of accepting while others see it as a "celebration" of what makes them unique. Maybe its just a Gen X thing or a me personally thing.

I think maybe some people like the labels because it lets them know that others feel the same as them, and it's just reassuring that it's normal, I guess? I don't really understand the difference between bisexual and pansexual tbh, except maybe that bi people might have a slight gender preference? Is that it?

(I don't think there are sexualities that are weird, I admit I can often not understand people that are different from myself, but I do understand that it's not weird and not my decision)

Edited December 30, 2015 by AppleMango

[atheistcanuck]

I think pansexuality/panromanticism is supposed to include non-binary folks where bisexuality might not.

Edited December 30, 2015 by Andygal

[Switch]

modern definition is generally that pansexuality is attraction to people of any gender, and bisexuality is attraction to two or more genders. the idea that bi people are only attracted to binary individuals is a common misconception. lots of people in the bi community have written about why this isnt the case. most dictionary definitions of bisexuality tends to be unfortunately incorrect/outdated so the confusion is understandable.

 

there's nothing wrong with not wanting to apply labels to yourself, but there's nothing necessarily wrong with wanting to, either. some people find comfort in labels and a sense of understanding of who they are as well as a sense of community with other people who share it. it's just down to individual preference.

Edited December 30, 2015 by Switch

[Omega Entity]

I really dislike how over the years more and more words have been added to make things more specific .... I mean, I get if you are going through something and are trying to find out which community you fit into for whatever, but there seems to be a growing trend to have a laundry lists of everything in a person's bio. I guess I'm just from a time where you are who you are, and I don't like to be pigeonholed or defined. I am who I am, I love who I love, and I don't really think I need to define that. Especially since I'm not entirely sure its a "choice" for me. I think it has more to do with pheremones and chemical reactions which have some genetic and other reasons that go a bit beyond my comprehension and I really don't care. And instead of freaking out over my attraction to someone I just understand it is what it is and don't feel a need to chastise or freak out over it. It's about being able to love someone and have a healthy relationship. Maybe if I were actively looking for someone it might be different if I were in a need to set up a dating profile.

 

I tend to notice a lot of people who would use the term bi-sexual are really what people would want to call these days I guess.. Pan-sexual... which is not a term I like because it makes it sound like my sexuality is open to a lot more sexual forms or practices. Which it is not. But when it comes to people... I either am or am not attracted to them, its something decided by reactions on a chemical level, and I'm not hung up what "kind" of person it might be or what "category" they might fall into. I thought the idea was to see people as people, and not be hung up on terms. I just see this as more of a regression than a progression. You can celebrate whatever you like about yourself. But I just want to people to be people and not a laundry list of definitions. You are more than that. If its a "fight" against society for "defining" us, then why would we continue to further "define" ourselves? Aren't we just doing the same thing? Maybe that's a generational thing. I feel that I am apathetic to hating terms that "define" people and feel it robs them of their humanity by trying to force label them and thus point out how different we are instead of accepting while others see it as a "celebration" of what makes them unique. Maybe its just a Gen X thing or a me personally thing.

I definitely commiserate, nataya - especially since it seems that even among the myriad of existing and newly-coined terms, no one can seem to agree on the definitions of those terms. What's the point in having all these terms if their meanings can differ from one person to the next? Perhaps that's why there's so damned many nowadays, though the constant and countless subcategorizations make the entire practice seem kind of pointless.

Edited December 30, 2015 by Omega Entity

[Stromboli]

It's a personal choice, figuring out how (or whether) you want to identify your sexuality. But I can't fault people for wanting ways to define themselves. Having words for things helps us to understand and discuss those things. Have you ever played that game where you're given some item, and you have to get someone else to guess item, but you're not allowed to say that word? So you have to go through this awkward, roundabout way of describing it, which can get really difficult.

Like, try telling someone you want a peanut butter and jelly sandwich without using any of the words "peanut," "butter," "jelly," or "sandwich." Except instead of asking for a peanut butter and jelly sandwich, you're trying to express something about yourself that you might find very important. Having a simple term for that would be nice.

 

As for the lack of agreement on definitions? Words change. Heck, "bisexual" is a word from the 1820s that was first meant to describe someone "having both sexes in one being," what we'd today call intersex. The definition of "attraction to both sexes" arose in the early 1900s. And it's shifting again here in the early 2000s, as we acknowledge that there are not just two sexes or genders. We're always looking for better ways to codify and express our experiences, and trying to lock down language to a set-in-stone group of words and definitions doesn't help that.

[Omega Entity]

Then what, exactly, is the difference between bisexual and pansexual?

 

The definition of bisexual when I was growing up referred to being attracted to male and female, thus the bi- portion of that equation, which in itself has its root in Greek and Latin, meaning two. That prefix has never stopped meaning 'two' in the other words it's used in, so why is bisexual different? Doesn't pansexual cover what bisexual doesn't? Are they now two terms that mean the same thing?

 

And what of people that are only attracted to both male and female? What is the new term for them?