I don't have words to title this

[LassieBee]

I'm on a website called Empty Closets that is for anyone who is LGBT+ or for friends and family of LGBT+ people. Somebody posted a thread about possibly being asexual and/or aromantic. An administrator (male, gay) replied with this:

"You don't say how old you are. That plays a big role here. As far as asexuality, if we're using the credible, widely accepted definition, it is very rare, and is a hardwired, unchangeable lack of any sexual attraction/arousal whatsoever.

Far more common is for people to have a lack of attraction/arousal secondary to some other issue that's going on (anxiety, depression, concurrent treatment with various medications, various other things.) For this group, it is the secondary issue that is suppressing sexual attraction, and once that is addressed, normal attraction/arousal emerges.

Additionally, there are plenty of people who enter puberty late and have absolutely no interest in relationships or any connection to sexual attraction until that happens. And sometimes that can be late teens, or in a few cases, early 20s.

I don't think your parents and aunt are intentionally trying to be difficult, but they may not understand the normal progression that goes on and these other factors.

Now... all of this said, I'm not saying it isn't possible you're asexual, only that it is far more likely that one of the above scenarios is what's going on.

As for aromanticism... there's little to no evidence of a separation between romantic and sexual orientation, and pretty much almost nobody credible sees that as a viable and likely possibility. It's a concept promoted by a tiny fringe group that unfortunately has gotten some exposure even though there's no evidence to support it, which makes it difficult for those who are genuinely trying to figure out who they are."

Somebody else (female, lesbian) then chipped in about getting to know people before being attracted to them, pretty harmless. I then agreed with age being a factor and pointed them towards here saying that there was nothing wrong with being aro/ace or thinking you're aro/ace then realising you're not, and that it was reassuring to know that there's more aces than you first thought. A different admin (also make and gay) then replied with:

"We need to be careful in saying that there are more aces than you first thought, because that's probably not true. There is no denying that asexuality is real and does exist, but it's not nearly as prevalent as some may claim and the actual definition of asexuality is becoming ridiculously stretched in some quarters, to the extent that it's damaging and harmful."

I said I knew more aces than anyone else LGBT+ and that all I meant was that you're not alone. The first admin then said:

"asexuality.org is one of the sites using unrecognized, unverified, and difficult-to-pin-down definitions of asexuality. I wouldn't count on it for factual information, as most of the people there are likely experiencing something other than hardwired asexuality.

Nothing wrong with labeling oneself whatever one wants to, as long as one realizes that these unrecognized definitions don't accurately reflect the basic components of a sexual orientation (that it is hardwired and unchangeable).

Many of the people who inaccurately label themselves as asexual end up later acknowledging that there was another issue (depression, anxiety, sexual abuse, family-of-origin issues, late puberty, etc) and regret the time lost believing they had no chance at having an emotionally and sexually healthy relationship."

My main problem with this whole exchange was that I was the only ace person there who has experience with here and knows many ace people yet I'm the one who apparently doesn't realise how damaging the asexual community is and how terrible people having romantic orientations is for people figuring themself out, not to mention how a sexuality is nearly always caused by depression, anxiety, sexual abuse, family-of-origin issues, late puberty or something else.

To finish off I'd just like to say that I prefer the community here over EC, although EC is better for trans issues. Also, the ace community are some of the nicest people I've come across and love people joining them, even if it's not permanent.

[ItWasNiceKnowingYou]

What the heck did I just read?! Did the admin not understand that asexuality and romanticism have a SPECTRUM and that SPECTRUM has many different possibilities?

If they don't know what they're talking about then they shouldn't have opened their mouths. Now is there a possibility that that person in particular decides later on that asexuality isn't them, then fine!!! Sexuality is just as fluid as anything else!! It's more fluid for some more than others. But no one should be that flat out disrespectful about it either.

Is there a way on EC to PM that person or send them the link here? Because I think it'd be better for them to hear from people who are in the same place as they are rather than from person who don't really understand

[LassieBee]

What the heck did I just read?! Did the admin not understand that asexuality and romanticism have a SPECTRUM and that SPECTRUM has many different possibilities?

If they don't know what they're talking about then they shouldn't have opened their mouths. Now is there a possibility that that person in particular decides later on that asexuality isn't them, then fine!!! Sexuality is just as fluid as anything else!! It's more fluid for some more than others. But no one should be that flat out disrespectful about it either.

Is there a way on EC to PM that person or send them the link here? Because I think it'd be better for them to hear from people who are in the same place as they are rather than from person who don't really understand

I have to be a full member to send PMs to people but I did say how great the community here was. This exchange happened ages ago but I only just saw the last reply and the whole thread had me fuming!

[ItWasNiceKnowingYou]

What the heck did I just read?! Did the admin not understand that asexuality and romanticism have a SPECTRUM and that SPECTRUM has many different possibilities?

If they don't know what they're talking about then they shouldn't have opened their mouths. Now is there a possibility that that person in particular decides later on that asexuality isn't them, then fine!!! Sexuality is just as fluid as anything else!! It's more fluid for some more than others. But no one should be that flat out disrespectful about it either.

Is there a way on EC to PM that person or send them the link here? Because I think it'd be better for them to hear from people who are in the same place as they are rather than from person who don't really understand

I have to be a full member to send PMs to people but I did say how great the community here was. This exchange happened ages ago but I only just saw the last reply and the whole thread had me fuming!

IT HAS ME FUMING TOO!!! LIKE UGH COME ON!!! JE ME SUIS TROP FÂCHÉE!!!!!! LES ÊTRES HUMAINS N'ONT PAS L'HUMANITÉ!!!!!!! ILS SONT BÊTES!!! PEOPLE (/=_=\)

Edit: I just realized I started typing in French mid-sentence. Sorry

[Tarfeather]

That person seems sane. Time to pack my things and move over there. :D

PS: No, really. I think AVEN's very vague definition of asexuality is a problem, and it indeed does lead people who are plain old sexual, to identify as asexual.

[Andiamo]

I would reply, but I'm not fully awake and don't have the words to be coherently angry yet. As it is, I'm sitting here very mad at those ignorant people.

[Tarfeather]

My main problem with this whole exchange was that I was the only ace person there who has experience with here and knows many ace people yet I'm the one who apparently doesn't realise how damaging the asexual community is and how terrible people having romantic orientations is for people figuring themself out, not to mention how a sexuality is nearly always caused by depression, anxiety, sexual abuse, family-of-origin issues, late puberty or something else.

Look, that's just the thing. If you're asexual, of course AVEN will seem like a nice place to you, because there's a heavy bias in this community toward identifying as asexual. You'll face less resistance here to it than elsewhere. However, if you're not actually asexual, that's actually a negative thing, as you'll be tempted to identify as something that you're not.

[binary suns]

Believe it or not, AVEN coddles its members.

[WinterWanderer]

My main problem with this whole exchange was that I was the only ace person there who has experience with here and knows many ace people yet I'm the one who apparently doesn't realise how damaging the asexual community is and how terrible people having romantic orientations is for people figuring themself out, not to mention how a sexuality is nearly always caused by depression, anxiety, sexual abuse, family-of-origin issues, late puberty or something else.

Look, that's just the thing. If you're asexual, of course AVEN will seem like a nice place to you, because there's a heavy bias in this community toward identifying as asexual. You'll face less resistance here to it than elsewhere. However, if you're not actually asexual, that's actually a negative thing, as you'll be tempted to identify as something that you're not.

I'm going to have to agree with Tar (and SwankyPants) on this.

I love AVEN, and I like that we talk here about spectrums of sexuality/romanticism (because it is helpful to find labels that you can identify with if you don't feel that just heterosexual, homosexual, or asexual fit your identity).... And I think it is a good thing that we discuss the different possible definitions of asexuality....

But because people here have many different interpretations of what asexual means, I see many people who come here who think they are ace, but who could just as easily qualify as sexual. (i.e., not feeling sexual attraction to random hot strangers they see in the supermarket - many sexuals don't even feel that). I'm not saying this to disqualify anyone's asexuality, but I think sometimes people are misled here, because as Tar said, it is a community where asexuality is predominant, and people feel the tug of a positive community like that and want to be a part of it.

[aussiekirkland]

Wow... Just... Wow. This is why I'm too paranoid to branch out into general LGBT communities. I don't have any reason to "disqualify" me from being asexual but God knows people will try to find one.

[dissolved]

Yeah, I agree with everything those admins said.

[ItWasNiceKnowingYou]

My main problem with this whole exchange was that I was the only ace person there who has experience with here and knows many ace people yet I'm the one who apparently doesn't realise how damaging the asexual community is and how terrible people having romantic orientations is for people figuring themself out, not to mention how a sexuality is nearly always caused by depression, anxiety, sexual abuse, family-of-origin issues, late puberty or something else.

Look, that's just the thing. If you're asexual, of course AVEN will seem like a nice place to you, because there's a heavy bias in this community toward identifying as asexual. You'll face less resistance here to it than elsewhere. However, if you're not actually asexual, that's actually a negative thing, as you'll be tempted to identify as something that you're not.

I'm going to have to agree with Tar (and SwankyPants) on this.

I love AVEN, and I like that we talk here about spectrums of sexuality/romanticism (because it is helpful to find labels that you can identify with if you don't feel that just heterosexual, homosexual, or asexual fit your identity).... And I think it is a good thing that we discuss the different possible definitions of asexuality....

But because people here have many different interpretations of what asexual means, I see many people who come here who think they are ace, but who could just as easily qualify as sexual. (i.e., not feeling sexual attraction to random hot strangers they see in the supermarket - many sexuals don't even feel that). I'm not saying this to disqualify anyone's asexuality, but I think sometimes people are misled here, because as Tar said, it is a community where asexuality is predominant, and people feel the tug of a positive community like that and want to be a part of it.

Yes people can be misled and want to belong somewhere, but that doesn't mean Aven can't be a start for some people. There have been plenty of people on Aven who've figured out they're not ace,but it was better to talk it out in a community like Aven. I'm not saying it's not possible, I just don't like the way the admin handled it.

[R_1]

Nothing wrong with labeling oneself whatever one wants to, as long as one realizes that these unrecognized definitions don't accurately reflect the basic components of a sexual orientation (that it is hardwired and unchangeable).

Sexual orientation isn't one of those things that is solved, and much less agreed on what definition one should rely on. Furthermore, there's always things like brain changes having potentials to alter one's orientation unless you're willing to deny that sexuality has something to do with neurology. Other than that, people who find themselves questioning if they're ace should be here simply because they'll gather more perspectives on just sexual attraction alone since asexuals tends to have more or less diverse opinion on sexuality and many of us are already aware of the issues with words and so on.

[chimaera]

.

[touching-not-so-much]

I think there may be merit in what they're saying, to some extent, but then again, what top level university LGBT course did they WRITE that makes them an expert? But forgetting all that for the moment, the absolute base idea is actually, amusingly, the same concept the intolerant straight people use no LGBT. "It's not natural, you choose to be gay" - and people can argue that, but at the end of the day, it's irrelevant. if someone IS gay, it doesn't matter HOW they got that way, to them at least.

I've always had chronic depression and anxiety, I'm overweight, diabetic and I have high blood pressure and right now I'm not on ANY meds, so you could argue I could be "cured" of my asexuality with a healthy diet, exercise and physical and psyche meds. Maybe. But maybe not, as I look back over my life, I've had a couple crushes but that's it. I've never been interested in sex, only had two dates, etc. Again, my point is, it doesn't MATTER what is causing it or how, in the immediate frame of things - only that that's the present apparent condition I find myself in. You can tell me I just need to lose 50 lbs, but that doesn't do anything for me right NOW - it doesn't make me want sex.

To me it's sort of like a Bigfoot show I saw once. The "hunter" was talking about a "Bigfoot tooth" he wore around his neck, and the camera guy says "But... how can you know its from a Bigfoot? How do *I* know that?" And the guy said "Well, *I* know that's what it's from. It's not my job to convince you or prove anything to you - I don't care if you think it is or not. I just told you my story about it and so you have my opinion." And I respect that and understand that, except this whole show is cheesier than a Wisconsin job fair. Still, the point stands - there are going to be people who want to invalidate you or a claim, and it's possible they may even be right, technically, but the only IMPORTANT thing is what YOU are experiencing right NOW and what you can use as tools to help you address things.

[LassieBee]

I think there may be merit in what they're saying, to some extent, but then again, what top level university LGBT course did they WRITE that makes them an expert? But forgetting all that for the moment, the absolute base idea is actually, amusingly, the same concept the intolerant straight people use no LGBT. "It's not natural, you choose to be gay" - and people can argue that, but at the end of the day, it's irrelevant. if someone IS gay, it doesn't matter HOW they got that way, to them at least.

I've always had chronic depression and anxiety, I'm overweight, diabetic and I have high blood pressure and right now I'm not on ANY meds, so you could argue I could be "cured" of my asexuality with a healthy diet, exercise and physical and psyche meds. Maybe. But maybe not, as I look back over my life, I've had a couple crushes but that's it. I've never been interested in sex, only had two dates, etc. Again, my point is, it doesn't MATTER what is causing it or how, in the immediate frame of things - only that that's the present apparent condition I find myself in. You can tell me I just need to lose 50 lbs, but that doesn't do anything for me right NOW - it doesn't make me want sex.

To me it's sort of like a Bigfoot show I saw once. The "hunter" was talking about a "Bigfoot tooth" he wore around his neck, and the camera guy says "But... how can you know its from a Bigfoot? How do *I* know that?" And the guy said "Well, *I* know that's what it's from. It's not my job to convince you or prove anything to you - I don't care if you think it is or not. I just told you my story about it and so you have my opinion." And I respect that and understand that, except this whole show is cheesier than a Wisconsin job fair. Still, the point stands - there are going to be people who want to invalidate you or a claim, and it's possible they may even be right, technically, but the only IMPORTANT thing is what YOU are experiencing right NOW and what you can use as tools to help you address things.

I agree completely with what you're saying.

What the admin said about romantic orientations was the part that I disagreed with the most, the rest I could ignore but not that. I had to say something about that because inside I know that pan fits me and I've know that since I heard of pansexual but the only problem was the 'sexual' part. My romantic orientation is a big part of how I feel inside and to have him say it didn't exist angered me.

[Snao Cone]

Yeah, I agree with everything those admins said.

Do you agree that there is zero arousal experienced by all asexual people? Do you agree that a/romanticism and a/sexuality are not different things, and nobody can be asexual and romantic or vice versa? These are a couple things with what the admins said (though I agree with many of their other points) that I have issue with. Romantic and sexual orientations are going to be the same for the majority of people, no question; but when it's not, this statement implies that there is something objectively wrong with that person and that person's sexuality.

And as a person who gets aroused but never wants to get sexual with another person because of it...well, I guess that makes me severely damaged in spite of being generally happy with it. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[a minor triad]

What the admin said about romantic orientations was the part that I disagreed with the most, the rest I could ignore but not that. I had to say something about that because inside I know that pan fits me and I've know that since I heard of pansexual but the only problem was the 'sexual' part. My romantic orientation is a big part of how I feel inside and to have him say it didn't exist angered me.

I have to agree with you here. Everything else they wrote was at least relatively valid and relevant, but I had to disagree with the criticism on romantic orientations. For awhile, I couldn't bring myself to identify as asexual because I thought being asexual meant being aromantic. And that caused some cognitive dissonance. I'll admit that it took some time to understand that sexual orientation does not equal romantic orientation, and when I finally understood that, everything just made more sense. I think it was unfair to say there is little evidence to support romantic orientations when there hasn't been much research on the subject...of course there would be little evidence!

[Guest]

I also agree with everything the admin said.

[Rising Sun]

I agree with what the admins said too. Globally anyway.

I just disagree with the first admin about no separation between romantic and sexual feelings, because even among the most "normal" sexual persons, I've seen so much evidence of romantic nonsexual feelings and sexual non-romantic feelings that I'm a bit surprised that it seems to hard for the first admin to see. If the feelings weren't separate, one night stands wouldn't even exist.

But all the rest is quite reasonable and I agree with it.

[Guest]

Do you agree that there is zero arousal experienced by all asexual people? Do you agree that a/romanticism and a/sexuality are not different things, and nobody can be asexual and romantic or vice versa? These are a couple things with what the admins said (though I agree with many of their other points) that I have issue with. Romantic and sexual orientations are going to be the same for the majority of people, no question; but when it's not, this statement implies that there is something objectively wrong with that person and that person's sexuality.

Wait though... why does that have to mean there's something objectively wrong? Can't it simply mean that attraction is attraction, and separating them isn't accurate the way they're being separated? That if you're attracted to someone, you're attracted to them, and what you ultimately desire (sex, relationship, friendship, etc) is based on other factors? Why would that mean someone is broken?

It's the way it's conceptualized on AVEN that's problematic. Which, it is. If you look around, you'll see that people are told that unless you literally want to fuck a stranger upon sight, everything else is "romantic attraction". Which is just pure bullshit.

[Rising Sun]

If you look around, you'll see that people are told that unless you literally want to fuck a stranger upon sight, everything else is "romantic attraction". Which is just pure bullshit.

[Snao Cone]

The admin said "romantic and sexual orientation" and not "romantic and sexual attraction". Of course I agree that attraction is attraction. What I interpreted from their statements is that nobody can desire a romantic relationship and be genuinely asexual, as the lack of sexual desire must come from depression/anxiety/medical side effects/etc. Or perhaps that's where the romantic desires come from instead. In any case, while I agree that most people will never need to separate their romantic and sexual orientations because they're essentially the same thing working together towards the same goal, the statements from these admins seem to imply that it is impossible to be romantic but also asexual.

[Guest]

Ohhhh... I don't think that's what they meant (?) but maybe!

[Snao Cone]

Oh, and another thing about separating romantic and sexual orientations: there are probably a lot more people who have slight differences in these, but there is just really no point in distinguishing them unless you have to explain why you still want a relationship without wanting sex. If someone is bisexual but homoromantic, they can call themselves gay and that's that. Or they can call themselves bi and only ever pair up with people of the same gender, because who cares? It's completely irrelevant in most cases, because sexual people aren't questioned on it, nor should they be. There is virtually no reason for sexual people to make that distinction, and there is absolutely no responsibility for people to start doing so just because asexual people can be different in that regard. Asexual people still have to explain themselves this way, though, sometimes.

[Tarfeather]

That if you're attracted to someone, you're attracted to them, and what you ultimately desire (sex, relationship, friendship, etc) is based on other factors?

Truth.

It's just not.. like a "pull" or something like that. It's so much more than that. It involves your whole identity. What are labels, if not a very rough abstraction? And what is romantic orientation, if not proof that our whole understanding of sexual orientation is inaccurate to begin with? Introducing more categories won't fix it, the same way defining weird corkscrew orbits didn't save the geocentric view.

[butterflydreams]

It's the way it's conceptualized on AVEN that's problematic. Which, it is. If you look around, you'll see that people are told that unless you literally want to fuck a stranger upon sight, everything else is "romantic attraction". Which is just pure bullshit.

I think this is kind of a "get out of jail free" card. Just verbally relegating everything into "romantic attraction" to keep your "sexual attraction" scoreboard clear. Is it because people fear a loss of community? I can't understand why someone would twist themselves into a box in which they clearly do not fit. Wouldn't they be happier discovering who they really are? Maybe that's just me.

Look around, I'm clearly not ashamed to admit I'd embrace a newly revealed sexuality if that's where transition leads me. Would people here like me any less for that? I wouldn't think so.

I spent a lot (nearly all) of my life denying who I was. Playing a part to keep the peace, keep friends, keep others happy. Trust me, kids, that's no way to live. Sexualities are beautiful things. Just because I'm not, doesn't mean I can't appreciate the beauty of heterosexuality, or homosexuality, or bisexuality or whatever. It's all amazing to me, how people are able to form those bonds with each other, and none of them are things to be ashamed of.

Search your heart, listen to who you truly are, and embrace whatever you find with love and curiosity. To do anything less is a huge disservice to yourself.

[misswinchester]

Oh, and another thing about separating romantic and sexual orientations: there are probably a lot more people who have slight differences in these, but there is just really no point in distinguishing them unless you have to explain why you still want a relationship without wanting sex. If someone is bisexual but homoromantic, they can call themselves gay and that's that. Or they can call themselves bi and only ever pair up with people of the same gender, because who cares? It's completely irrelevant in most cases, because sexual people aren't questioned on it, nor should they be. There is virtually no reason for sexual people to make that distinction, and there is absolutely no responsibility for people to start doing so just because asexual people can be different in that regard. Asexual people still have to explain themselves this way, though, sometimes.

I don't think I quite agree with you there... My best friend calls herself a lesbian, but still kisses men on occasion and there are a few men she'd go straight for - sexually, that is. She just doesn't have that connection with men. Which I don't either but for me it's the feminine gender I'm attracted to (romantically) regardless the sex of said person. She was having kind of a break down a couple of weeks ago because she just had sex with a guy she didn't have feelings for, while she usually doesn't even sleep with women she doesn't have (strong) feelings for. And the guy wanted a relationship. Fucked up situation, isn't it?

It took me ages to figure out the difference between my "lesbianism" and hers. I mean we both like women except I'm bi, wtf? So I did a lot of research on that, all of which I did online and mostly here. I finally shared that with her and because I could explain to her the difference between romantic and sexual attraction and demisexuality she actually understood a lot more about herself and she fixed the situation with the guy because she now had the discourse to explain it.

Of course you can call yourself whatever the fuck you want, but that doesn't mean you're not giving people the wrong impression. Wouldn't you care if you were that guy?

[Snao Cone]

I can see why that guy would want a better explanation of your friend's sexual and romantic orientations. This is one case of where it's relevant to make a distinction. I still maintain that it's reasonable for your friend to identify as a lesbian if her intention is to be recognized as one because of her inclination towards women in general. The complicated details are relevant to partners or hookups, but not the general population.

[misswinchester]

I'm on a website called Empty Closets that is for anyone who is LGBT+ or for friends and family of LGBT+ people. Somebody posted a thread about possibly being asexual and/or aromantic. An administrator (male, gay) replied with this:

"You don't say how old you are. That plays a big role here. As far as asexuality, if we're using the credible, widely accepted definition, it is very rare, and is a hardwired, unchangeable lack of any sexual attraction/arousal whatsoever.

Far more common is for people to have a lack of attraction/arousal secondary to some other issue that's going on (anxiety, depression, concurrent treatment with various medications, various other things.) For this group, it is the secondary issue that is suppressing sexual attraction, and once that is addressed, normal attraction/arousal emerges.

Additionally, there are plenty of people who enter puberty late and have absolutely no interest in relationships or any connection to sexual attraction until that happens. And sometimes that can be late teens, or in a few cases, early 20s.

I don't think your parents and aunt are intentionally trying to be difficult, but they may not understand the normal progression that goes on and these other factors.

Now... all of this said, I'm not saying it isn't possible you're asexual, only that it is far more likely that one of the above scenarios is what's going on.

As for aromanticism... there's little to no evidence of a separation between romantic and sexual orientation, and pretty much almost nobody credible sees that as a viable and likely possibility. It's a concept promoted by a tiny fringe group that unfortunately has gotten some exposure even though there's no evidence to support it, which makes it difficult for those who are genuinely trying to figure out who they are."

Somebody else (female, lesbian) then chipped in about getting to know people before being attracted to them, pretty harmless. I then agreed with age being a factor and pointed them towards here saying that there was nothing wrong with being aro/ace or thinking you're aro/ace then realising you're not, and that it was reassuring to know that there's more aces than you first thought. A different admin (also make and gay) then replied with:

"We need to be careful in saying that there are more aces than you first thought, because that's probably not true. There is no denying that asexuality is real and does exist, but it's not nearly as prevalent as some may claim and the actual definition of asexuality is becoming ridiculously stretched in some quarters, to the extent that it's damaging and harmful."

I said I knew more aces than anyone else LGBT+ and that all I meant was that you're not alone. The first admin then said:

"asexuality.org is one of the sites using unrecognized, unverified, and difficult-to-pin-down definitions of asexuality. I wouldn't count on it for factual information, as most of the people there are likely experiencing something other than hardwired asexuality.

Nothing wrong with labeling oneself whatever one wants to, as long as one realizes that these unrecognized definitions don't accurately reflect the basic components of a sexual orientation (that it is hardwired and unchangeable).

Many of the people who inaccurately label themselves as asexual end up later acknowledging that there was another issue (depression, anxiety, sexual abuse, family-of-origin issues, late puberty, etc) and regret the time lost believing they had no chance at having an emotionally and sexually healthy relationship."

My main problem with this whole exchange was that I was the only ace person there who has experience with here and knows many ace people yet I'm the one who apparently doesn't realise how damaging the asexual community is and how terrible people having romantic orientations is for people figuring themself out, not to mention how a sexuality is nearly always caused by depression, anxiety, sexual abuse, family-of-origin issues, late puberty or something else.

To finish off I'd just like to say that I prefer the community here over EC, although EC is better for trans issues. Also, the ace community are some of the nicest people I've come across and love people joining them, even if it's not permanent.

I'm rather surprised nobody has mentioned this since I think the ace community more that anyone should know that this whole nurture/nature debate is as fucked up as it gets. You have gay people who so firmly believe they are born this way that they freak out when they suddenly like someone who isn't of the same sex.

My first boyfriend, I was 16, was bi. During that time there was a lot of gossip in school that I was just obviously a lesbian. Probably lesbianing with my best friend. Everybody believed it and I just... didn't fancy women. And what do you do if your mum keeps trying to get you out of the closet?

At one point he said, darling, if you're still straight when you're 80 and on your deathbed, then I'll believe you. He wasn't being mean or anything, he just meant that you can't know who you're going to fall in love with before you do.

Like, ok, examples. You're a woman destined (or it's in your nature, whatever) to fall in love with 10 people in your life (mostly to make this example easier lol) and you marry the last one never to divorce or whatever.

All 10 are male. Easy enough right, she's straight.

First 9 are male, last female. Uhhhh, she would have always thought she was straight but suddenly became gay? bi?

1 male, 1 female, 8 male. Bi? Straight with exception? Straight with a mistake? Bi?

10 males with a feminine personality. How the hell do you call someone like that straight as in not even gyneromantic or whatever?

10 females with a male personality is just a lesbian who likes butches for some reason.

You can literally do hundreds of these and come to a different conclusion every time. All you do is just... change the order in most cases. And that's not even counting in the asexual/queerplatonic relationships.

To even try to put a label on things is so completely ridiculous if you think about it. They tried to do it in Freud's time and just after that. It helped a lot of men (not women) figure out their sexuality and what they wanted and stuff. On the other hand they were all people who read about this psychiatrist (I use this term losely) who was doing research to homosexuality in men and sent in biographical letters. This led to the public opinion of it being an illness that could be cured... We're now, over a 100 years later, just trying to fix that but it's now gotten so far that anything other than a fixed sexuality (straight, gay, sexual, asexual, cis, trans) is a wrong/non-existent/deviant one. This, as can be seen through the - that in my opinion ludicrous - conversation above is something that's visible in the LGBT community as well as the straight one.

(p.s. if anyone has a solution to this please let me know. I suggest a culture where everything's a shade of grey but that's in my own interest LOL).