• Announcements

    • Kelly

      New Team members Needed--Moderator, Project Team, and Declass Team: Voting   12/10/13

      See:   http://www.asexuality.org/en/topic/164659-new-declass-team-member-needed-voting/   http://www.asexuality.org/en/topic/164657-new-moderator-member-needed-qa-co-mod-and-world-watch-mod-voting/   http://www.asexuality.org/en/topic/164656-new-project-team-member-needed-resources-and-education-director-voting/  
    • Kelly

      AVENues Holiday Special Edition is now live   08/17/17

      The new edition of AVENues is done!   See:        
    • Lady Girl

      Ace Community Census   11/06/17

      It’s time for the 2017 Ace Community Census!   see:   http://www.asexuality.org/en/topic/162675-announcing-the-2017-ace-community-census/  
    • Heart

      Help fund AVEN's servers!   11/06/17

      AVEN is doing its annual fundraiser to raise donations for server costs! See http://www.asexuality.org/en/topic/163251-aven-server-fundraiser/ for more details.  
float on

please let us establish a strong definition for greysexuality.

Recommended Posts

float on

sorry for the long post:

 

TLDR: the common defintions, examples, and explanations of greysexuality I find unsatisfactory because:

  • they rely on the listener knowing about asexuality, which makes coming out as grey VERY difficult
  • they tend to appropriate on normal sexuality, as most sexual folk are NOT hypersexual, and in fact many sexual folk could often be described as "feeling sexual attraction infrequently, not very strongly, or only under certain circumstances" but are clearly sexual and yet there are grey folk who are clearly grey
  • they rely on example to explain it, which is problematic because they will completely miss other ways of being grey. the common examples in fact miss me, because basically for some reasons I appear normally sexual, but for other reasons I appear completely ace. I don't want to add more examples to the list of examples either because, that's just lengthly and frustrating. A list of examples could be useful of course, but not when it's literally the definition.

 

 

 

So, is there anyone else interested in hashing out a definition for "greysexuality" which:

 

  1. does not rely on the person understanding asexuality at all
  2. does not rely on examples to explain it
  3. clearly explains what greysexuality is, as an umbrella term
  4. does not imply that sexuals are horny animals

 

and don't come in thinking you're some hero who will solve this issue, this is an open conversation, and your personal idea (and my personal ideas) are not going to be sufficient to cover all greysexuals, without appropriating or ace-ness or sexuality in general. We need to work together to find an answer to this issue!

 

 

 

also, I incite any and all greysexual folk to give a brief post explaining why they identify as grey. For these such posts, let's remember not to directly quote them, nor to try to police their decision to be grey.

 

 

this is not about prescribing what is greysexuality, this is about understanding what greysexuality is and finding a simplified definition to introduce the concept. the definion will not be perfect, but it will be clear in helping anyone unfamiliar with greysexuality, to accept it as a valid thing.

 

 

 

here is a direct message I recently sent to a person explaining greysexuality since they were enquiring about it:

 

 

 

Quote

 

er,,, so, I'm not comfortable defining the orientation clearly yet, it's IMO not well-explained by any definition I've found. 

 

Generally I'd say, that an asexual person doesn't feel sexual attraction and so doesn't want sex in their life, and a greysexual might not quite feel asexual enough to label as asexual, but at the same time feels clearly not sexual enough either that they feel a loss for not having a label like asexuality. 

 

The one troubling thing however, controversy, is that some people say that greysexuality implies that sexual folk want sex all the time, which especially is a implication pushed by the common definition to say, "a greysexual person feels weak or infrequent sexual attraction, or sexual attraction only under some circumstances" because many sexual folk in fact, would say just that. so that definition is actually not sufficient to identify greysexuality as different from sexuality. 

 

 

here are some excerts from articles: 

 

https://www.bitchmedia.org/article/what-is-graysexual

  Quote

 

Graysexual” is a term that covers the fluid area between people who are sexual and people who aren’t. While graysexuality is usually under the asexuality umbrella, a huge term that includes a lot of different identities, it’s a bit of a misnomer to include graysexual people in the same category as people who never experience sexual attraction or sexual desire in any circumstances.

According to the Asexual Visibility and Education Network, people who are graysexual (or gray-A or gray-ace) might not normally experience sexual attraction, but do sometimes. They might also experience sexual attraction, but a low sex drive. Or they could experience sexual attraction and drive, but not strongly enough to want to act on them. They could also be people who can enjoy and desire sex, but only under very limited and specific circumstances. There are a lot of options there. Altogether, the term graysexual helps to describe people who really don’t want sex very often, but who do sometimes experience sexual attraction or sexual desire—those who experience fluidity or don’t fit cleanly into the asexual or sexual camps.

 

 

 

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/graysexual

 

  Quote

 

graysexual 

  1. (neologism) Intermediate between sexual and asexual; sometimes, but not usually, experiencing sexual attraction and desire. 

 

 

 

 

 

ultimately, it ends up being the individual.

 

some folk who aren't sure if they should be ace or grey, ID as ace, and others as Grey, and their identification one way or the other is really the only clear reason for it.

 

similarly, some folk who typical greysexuality definitions describe are sexual, while others are grey, and it is only really their identification one way or the other that clearly gives reason to differentiate between the two. Some grey-identifying people are more sexually inclined than some sexual-identifying folk.

 

 

 

for myself, the main reasons why I identify as grey are because: 

-when it ultimately boils down to it, while the idea of sex can make me feel kinda hot generally speaking, at times, I never want to have sex. I've even had sex and, it didn't feel right for my body, not because of disgust or disphoria or anything, but just because something was not wanted and forcing it felt fake. 

- but, while that points to asexuality,  I definitely feel attraction to people, attraction which has sexual aspects to how I experience it. Long story short, if I entertain a certain type of attraction I experience enough, I become aroused, and even occasionalyl become excited for shared eroticism with the person of interest, but never sex itself, at most that "eroticism" is kissing and cuddling in a way that arousal is involved. 

- someone who I'm sexually attracted to, the idea of kissing them is exciting, but otherwise when I'm not attracted to a person, kissing them weirds me out. 

- I also like the idea of playing with another woman's breasts or her with mine, but this isn't that complicated. it's fun, and can lead to arousal, but doesn't always. mostly I just really like breasts. 

- with someone I'm sexually or romantically attracted to, being pysically near them, smelling them, kissing them, and cuddlign with them stimulates my attraction to them

- lastly, I want to enjoy sexual fantasy, such as a story or sexting, but I have a hard time doing it because of finding certain sex imagery when too-closely implicative of my involvement to be a serious turn-off. sex is not something I'd do, and that's the way I am. 

 

and so because of these all, I don't feel comfortable identifying as asexual, because I'm clearly sexual for a few reasons but- I am also clearly ace for other reasons. I am a mix of the two orientations. 

 

 

 

 

 

oh, the typical grey definition I don't like to use is as follows: 

 

Gray-asexual (gray-a) or gray-sexual: Someone who identifies with the area between asexuality and sexuality, for example because they experience sexual attraction very rarely, only under specific circumstances, or of an intensity so low that it's ignorable.

 

Gray-asexual - A person whose sexuality is somewhere in between sexual and asexual, can have many different definitions

 

 

 

the reason I dislike using these definitions is because they don't really clearly define what it is, being that they are usuless when a person doesn't know very much about asexuality.  and the examples commonly presented describing grey sexuality: 

  • low levels of attraction, perhaps of an intensity so low that it's ignorable
  • attraction that is rare, infreuent, or under certain conditions
  • their attraction, they may act on it or they may not

and other examples similar, many of them imply that sexual people are sex-crazy which just is not true on average. some are, especially during puberty when sexual attraction is newly strong for a lot of folk, but most lead lives independant of sex as well as enjoy a sexual relationship in private solo as they wait for a partner or date, or pursuing dates, or etc, that, it's not a constant part of their life, and these definitions prettymuch erase that fact of sexuality. 

further, the examples are actually overly specific, for example for myself - I do not feel "weak" sexual attraction. as far as I am aware, when ignoring how my desire for sex is, my sexual attraction is within normal ranges. it is not rare or under certain circumstances either. so the examples don't cover me. according to the normal definitions, I should define myself as sexual, but I am very clearly not because of my lack of sexual desire. 

 

 

 

 

27

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
float on

this post is going to be used to list examples of being grey. it will also be the hub which contains the currently on-the-table definitions.

 

 

 

 

on-the-table-definitions:
 

Quote

 

  • an umbrella term to cover any individual who is not quite asexual, but not quite sexual
  • A person whose sexuality is somewhere in between sexual and asexual, can have many different definitions
  • a person who isn't fully asexual, but whose experience is closer to that of an asexual than that of a sexual person.

 

 

 

examples of greysexuality:

Quote

 

  • a person who feels low levels of sexual attraction relative to the norm
  • a person who only feels sexual attraction under certain circumstances
  • a person who feels sexual attraction infrequently
  • a person who is clearly ace by some reasoning, but clearly sexual by other reasoning, and obviously those can't both be true
  • someone who is fluid between asexuality and greysexuality to a disruptive level if not embraced as part of who they are.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jackanope

i'm gray but I usually just tell people i'm ace, because most people won't know what to do if I tossed a label like "gray asexual" at them. I feel like that'll just give them more of a reason to erase me. Plus my attractions are VERY limited and specific, to the point where I look at them as more fetish related than actual sexual attraction. That's what they feel like to me, anyway. In general, coming out as asexual is hard enough. I dont think there's a proper way to come out as gray-a.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Laurann

I'm not greysexual so I can't contribute too much, but the definition for greysexuality that's made most sense to me is : a person who isn't fully asexual, but whose experience is closer to that of an asexual than that of a sexual person. And with experience I mean their experience of their own sexuality. And that they face the same kinds of problems aces face.

 

The wording of that definition could be a lot better, and I'm sorry that it still relies on people knowing what asexuality is, but I felt that this was clearer than just "a sexuality that's between asexuality and (allo)sexuality", because that one relies on what people think 'normal sexuality' is, and if people think hypersexuality is normal, then almost everyone could be greysexual.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
swirl_of_blue

This is a good conversation to have! I feel the gray-a label is (at least for the moment) the one that fits me the best, but I too have described greysexuality just comparing it to asexuality. Concerning myself I feel that I'm not ace enough to "qualify" as an asexual, but not sexual enough that I could have a "normal" sexual relationship with a "normal" sexual with everyone being happy and fulfilled and without a lot of compromising. Generally I'm starting to take a stance where I measure a person's "asexualness" with how big a challenge a "conventional" romantic-sexual relationship with an average person would be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
float on
1 hour ago, Laurann said:

I'm not greysexual so I can't contribute too much, but the definition for greysexuality that made most sense to me is : a person who isn't fully asexual, but whose experience is closer to that of an asexual than that of a sexual person. And with experience I mean their experience of their own sexuality. And that they face the same kinds of problems aces face.

 

The wording of that definition could be a lot better, and I'm sorry that it still relies on people knowing what asexuality is, but I felt that this was clearer than just "a sexuality that's between asexuality and (allo)sexuality", because that one relies on what people think 'normal sexuality' is, and if people think hypersexuality is normal, then almost everyone could be greysexual.

yes I agree with this so much! it's very hard to properly define greysexuality. it's easy to explain it, but the easy explanation leaves ample space for people to criticize and doubt it. . .

 

but ironically that only highlights the need for it more ^_^ wha'ts a grey area without being a controversial, difficult to place area? haha...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
float on
1 hour ago, swirl_of_blue said:

Concerning myself I feel that I'm not ace enough to "qualify" as an asexual, but not sexual enough that I could have a "normal" sexual relationship with a "normal" sexual with everyone being happy and fulfilled and without a lot of compromising.

yes, this so much!! :):unsure: but it's not gonna quite be a good thing to define it as "not good enough for sexuals" lol because that's sorta... we ARE good enough to be in a relationship, it's just, it's more of a result of how being grey isn't talked about so we can't identify our attraction properly to our partners, dates, etc... :(

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alejandrogynous

 

2 hours ago, float on said:

a person who isn't fully asexual, but whose experience is closer to that of an asexual than that of a sexual person.

I'm not greysexual so I can't offer too much insight, but this is the definition that makes the most sense to me. It focuses on the experience rather than label technicalities, and I think gets to the heart of why the grey label needs to exist in the first place. 

 

I don't know if there's any way to define greysexuality without using asexuality, though. If the whole purpose of Thing1 is to express being close to Thing2, we need to know what that Thing2 is, otherwise it's going to be very confusing for everyone, haha.

 

But again, I'm not grey so you can take my thoughts with a grain of salt. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Star Bit

I agree and actually had a similar thread. What ended up being said on it was:

Gray-asexual: a sexual person who is effectively asexual (not by choice)

Gray-sexual: a sexual person who desires sex at an unusual point in time

(*Sexual person: someone who has sexual desires/impulses toward others)

 

Though, slightly off topic, I think Gray-sexual wise we should ditch the suffixes and keep the prefixes because these simplifications cause people to think it's actually a sexuality on it's own when it's just an additive. That there should just be a prefix list. Or actually alter the listing of the term to include how it's supposed to fully look; e.g. Gray-(hetero/homo/bi)sexual. Elaboration will probably be requested, so I ask why do you think Demisexual (or other such terms) are commonly rejected by others?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FictoVore.

I think the best definition for grey is ''somewhere in the foggy area between asexual and sexual; not sexual enough to have a regular sexual relationship with the vast majority of the population, not asexual enough for a fully asexual relationship''.

 

A lot of people in the ace community get confused about what constitutes normal, regular sexuality, so assume that if they don't want to have sex with every attractive person they see (as one example) they must be grey. Whereas no, it's very common to not want to have sex with someone just because they're attractive, or even not care about looks and care more about establishing a deep bond with someone before you can even consider sex with them, etc. Some people (by choice) only have like 3 sex partners in their life, not because they can't get a partner but because it takes a long time, and it only happens rarely, that they like someone enough to want sex with them.. etc etc. S

 

I think that what's more important than a 'proper' definition of grey is establishing an ACCURATE understanding of normal, regular, everyday sexuality. If AVEN could have a page that explained what it's like to actually be sexual, which includes input from multiple 'different' kinds of sexuals, that would go a looooooooooong way in helping this community develop a better understanding of what it means to be asexual, and a better understanding of the 'grey' area. It might also help people feel less alienated and confused if they can see that actually, there are plenty of sexual people just like them out there even if that's still a minority among sexuals. I am an extreme minority among sexuals and can interact on AVEN more openly than pretty much anywhere else online, and have a higher chance of being accepted and understood here than in many other places. I also didn't discover that I WAS sexual until I had been on AVEN for a few years identifying as asexual. So yeah, what I'm saying is that just because one might discover that what they're experiencing is still sexual, not asexual or 'grey', it's still very possible to have more in common with asexuals than most sexuals, in which case you can still have a lot of valuable input into this community and feel welcome and supported by the members here :) 

 

I feel grey is more a label that helps explain that your sexuality or asexuality is 'foggy', so, for a random example: 'I'm kind of asexual but it's pretty foggy because I do get aroused from massaging feet and want to masturbate over a potential partner's feet if I had a partner.. I just don't want to have any other kind of sexual interaction in any way and get really turned off by literally anything else, i just have no desire to be stimulated sexually by another person, or to stimulate them sexually.. So yeah, it's definitely not exactly asexual, but it's not sexual enough to really be sexual either and I certainly couldn't have a 'regular' sexual relationship with the vast majority of sexual people. My sexual orientation is more my fetish than any desire to actually interact sexually with other people.. hence why I identify as 'grey', to try to emphasize that I'm in a foggy area somewhere in between''

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LadyFie

I would define being grey-ace as "something on the spectrum between completely ace and normally sexual (that is probably closer to asexual)", so of course people have to know about asexuality first to understand it. I don't think this problem really can be solved. But in my opinion it's not that complicated to explain asexuality to someone and then telling them "so I am similar to asexual, but not quite there, because ..... "

 

I identify as grey because I'm clearly not a "normal" sexual, but probably neither completely asexual.

- I find it difficult to distinguish different kinds of attraction, so I can't really tell if I'm able to feel sexual attraction. I'm sure that I am romantic, though.

- I don't like human genitals (of both sexes) and therefore I don't find naked people attractive and I don't want to be involved with their private parts. I just find them strange, ugly and disgusting.

- I do have sexual fantasies quite often. I like the idea of trust, love, loyalty, compassion, being "wanted" and being (romantically) close to someone and I know that many people like to express those feelings through sex. That's the reason I kind of like the idea of someone wanting to have sex with me, I see it as them showing their affection and love (and I can't understand how anyone would want to have sex with someone they don't love).

- But when it comes to actual real life sexual acts, I don't really enjoy any of the things I tried. I never wish for it. Still, sometimes I am happy to satisfy my boyfriend sexually because I know he likes it, but usually I don't want to go any further than innocent kissing and get really angry when he tries to touch me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Star Bit

@FictoVore. (in response to your given definition) But then that relies on people's judgement of their (and other's) relationships. Many many women feel they are broken/abnormal because they don't desire sex the way many men do and it causes problems. The female body is also far more sexually complicated. So they can judge a normal issue and call it abnormal and thus call themselves Gray. I saw a video where young adults talk to their parents about sex and one of the girls was complaining that no man innately knows her body but she doesn't wanna tell them what she wants kuz it's a buz kill, and thus her whole sex life has been dissatisfying. Her father ignorantly says she needs an assertive guy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FictoVore.
33 minutes ago, Star Bit said:

@FictoVore. (in response to your given definition) But then that relies on people's judgement of their (and other's) relationships. Many many women feel they are broken/abnormal because they don't desire sex the way many men do and it causes problems. The female body is also far more sexually complicated. So they can judge a normal issue and call it abnormal and thus call themselves Gray. I saw a video where young adults talk to their parents about sex and one of the girls was complaining that no man innately knows her body but she doesn't wanna tell them what she wants kuz it's a buz kill, and thus her whole sex life has been dissatisfying. Her father ignorantly says she needs an assertive guy.

That's why I very clearly and specifically stated that a thorough understanding of normal, regular sexuality is required. (edit: and yes, she needs a more assertive partner and better communication skills. An assertive partner will actually ask if this is what she wants, or if she prefers that, and will watch her reactions, pay close attention to the state of her clitoral arousal, vaginal lubrication etc, to try to develop an innate understanding of what it is that gets her off. Her father was half right at least.)

 

1 hour ago, Star Bit said:

I agree and actually had a similar thread. What ended up being said on it was

Gray-asexual: a sexual person who is effectively asexual (not by choice)

Gray-sexual: a sexual person who desires sex at an unusual point in time

(Sexual person: someone who has sexual desires/impulses toward others)

 

Though I think Gray-sexual wise we should ditch the suffixes and keep the prefixes because these simplifications cause people to think it's actually a sexuality on it's own when it's just an additive. That there should just be a prefix list. That or actually alter the listing of the term to include how it's supposed to fully look; e.g. Gray-(hetero/homo/bi)sexual.

And literally the EXACT same issue applies to your stated definitions, and every other definition of Grey (as well as every definition of asexual). That's WHY I am so vocal about people (especially people in the ace community) needing a better understanding of normal, regular sexuality before they can even begin to understand asexuality, let alone the grey area.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
banoffeepie

Seems like there's so many, very sensible people here who have clear and logical definitions so I've nothing to add, except that I haven't bothered even caring whether I should have some grey tint added to my own label because its too complicated to explain the nuances. If I felt sexual attraction extremely rarely under very limited circumstances 20 years ago ... well there isn't a word for that and I don't care for there to be as, for me it's giving too much information for my taste.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
roland.o
5 hours ago, swirl_of_blue said:

Generally I'm starting to take a stance where I measure a person's "asexualness" with how big a challenge a "conventional" romantic-sexual relationship with an average person would be.

 

1 hour ago, FictoVore. said:

not sexual enough to have a regular sexual relationship with the vast majority of the population

I totally agree with this direction. The thing about graysexuality, I guess, is that one feels too detached from the majority of the population to have a conventional/regular sexual relationship. It's that detachment, the feeling of being different because of their sexual orientation, that sets both grays and aces apart from sexuals. The border between sexual and gray will probably be harder to grasp than that between gray and ace though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
roland.o

I identify as demisexual and/or dark gray because in my 47 years, I only experienced sexual attraction to one person. Or maybe even just to my idea of her, as we were out of contact for two years already at the time. And now that I'm seeing her once in a while, it is suddenly so much more important that my presence makes her feel good, than whether this will turn into a relationship. I'm not asexual, because I desire a romantic-sexual relationship. Yet I've been lacking the drive to pursue that kind of relationship for almost all of my life. Something that makes sexual people meet eachother, seek eachother out, and enter into relationships, is almost completely absent in me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Graceful
2 minutes ago, New display name said:

Personally I don’t think gray should be treated as a sexuality because it is the state of being between two sexualities rather than something specific in its own right.

I sort of agree with this. I want to put a full disclaimer before anyone hits the report button: I myself fit the description of greysexual, have identified as such in the past, and am not telling anyone they can't identify as whatever they feel is best for them.

 

I don't personally believe greysexuality is a sexuality in its own right. I feel that you're either sexual or asexual. Some people are sexual but less sexual than the average person. They might be in a grey area if you're measuring with a scale. But I would still think that if they're sexual at all, they're not asexual and don't really need to label the fact that they're in this grey area. I don't think we need a Kinsey scale for sexual levels. I don't think the label greysexual is necessary at all as its own orientation because they still fall either as asexual or sexual and (_prefix_)romantic or aromantic. Therefore, I don't think you can really come up with a clear definition. Asexual has been hard enough - not everyone agrees on that definition. I think you'd first need to define asexuality clearly before moving on to greysexuality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
roland.o
7 minutes ago, New display name said:

Much easier to say ‘I find the attraction initiates once X occurs’ than use yet another term most people are going to have to Google.

Well, I did google that term when I stumbled across it, and found the results quite helpful for myself. Maybe I am between two sexualities, but that doesn't mean I was aware of that for most of my life. I just felt... different. Not in-between. And it was a relief to learn that so many people felt that way that a label was created to describe it :-) :cake:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pramana

An issue with delineating the gray area is that what constitutes "normal" sexuality changes as cultural norms change. Western culture is far more sexually liberal now than it was a century ago, so some things that might have been considered normal sexuality at one time (such as not desiring sex before marriage) might now be experienced as contrary to social/relationship norms. And even within the same social context, personal contexts will influence what labels people find useful. For example, some AVEN members report that while they fall within definitions of gray or demi sexuality, they prefer to identify as sexual.

Regarding information, I think it may be preferable to say "average" rather than "normal", but in any case getting a picture of average/normal (a)sexual experiences requires gathering evidence in a systematic way from large samples of people. I find that on AVEN too often there's a tendency to rely on evidence of the form "I identify as (a)sexual, therefore this is what normal/average (a)sexuality is like", but of course any one person can only speak to their own experiences in that regard.

Regarding the gray-area, there are people similar to myself who have little to no interest in real life partnered sex, and there are other people whose eventual preference may be for a sexual relationship (although perhaps with less sex than what an "average" sexual person might want). I have also found a fair amount of variance among the reported experiences of sex-averse people, some of which I can relate to more than others. This is all to make the point that – much like the definition of asexuality – definitions of gray/demi-sexuality should remain abstract, allowing people to work out for themselves whether their experiences fit within it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FictoVore.
4 hours ago, Pramana said:

For example, some AVEN members report that while they fall within definitions of gray or demi sexuality, they prefer to identify as sexual.

Well it's called demisexuality, not demi-asexuality. Demisexuals are only asexual-seeming outside of an emotional bond, but once that bond has formed, they're just as sexual as anyone else (which of course varies from person to person). This isn't that uncommon, and it's not actually asexuality... Or else asexuals would never be unhappy with their sexual partners due to the whole 'sex' issue (and vice versa). And that's regardless of whether one adheres to the sexual attraction or lack of innate desire definition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
float on
20 hours ago, Star Bit said:

I agree and actually had a similar thread. What ended up being said on it was:

Gray-asexual: a sexual person who is effectively asexual (not by choice)

Gray-sexual: a sexual person who desires sex at an unusual point in time

(*Sexual person: someone who has sexual desires/impulses toward others)

 

Though, slightly off topic, I think Gray-sexual wise we should ditch the suffixes and keep the prefixes because these simplifications cause people to think it's actually a sexuality on it's own when it's just an additive. That there should just be a prefix list. Or actually alter the listing of the term to include how it's supposed to fully look; e.g. Gray-(hetero/homo/bi)sexual. Elaboration will probably be requested, so I ask why do you think Demisexual (or other such terms) are commonly rejected by others?

A curious perspective, but I'm not sure I agree. while I clearly have elements of sexuality to me, I also clearly have elements of asexuality to me. it neither completely makes sense to call me asexual NOR to call me sexual; I am both but neither. I feel as if this is forgetting the reality that between straight and grey there is ace and bi folk, and between male and female there are agender, androgynous, and bigender folk. androgynous is sometimes called greygender.

I feel the same is true of the ace/sexual spectrum as well.


However, I would greatly appreciate if you were willing to explain your perspective some more, so that I could understand it better :) I've been really excited you might join this discussion in fact :D

 

 

19 hours ago, FictoVore. said:

I think the best definition for grey is ''somewhere in the foggy area between asexual and sexual; not sexual enough to have a regular sexual relationship with the vast majority of the population, not asexual enough for a fully asexual relationship''.

 

A lot of people in the ace community get confused about what constitutes normal, regular sexuality, so assume that if they don't want to have sex with every attractive person they see (as one example) they must be grey. Whereas no, ......

 

I think that what's more important than a 'proper' definition of grey is establishing an ACCURATE understanding of normal, regular, everyday sexuality. If AVEN could have a page that explained what it's like to actually be sexual, which includes input from multiple 'different' kinds of sexuals, that would go a looooooooooong way in helping this community develop a better understanding of what it means to be asexual, and a better understanding of the 'grey' area.

 

I think that a clear understanding of sexuality and asexuality are great things to have and certainly very important to helping people to find who they really are; however, I feel this does not negate the importance in having an accessible and meaningful definition, especially one which doesn't rely on people putting in the hard work to explain everything to have a hint of who they might be.

 

We can't force people who are perfectly happy with their lives as a sexual person and with zero interest to understand sexuality for anyone else to take the effort to learn what is normal for all humans; But we can find a definition which gives them enough information to realistically consider accepting that a greysexual person is real and valid.

 

I am wondering if you have any ideas on stating your definition in a way that says the same thing while removing references to sexuality and asexuality? if asexuality defines itself independently, so could greysexuality, even if it is just a less efficient definition, it is a start in the right direction, or at the least an alternative some folks could use who wish too.

 

17 hours ago, roland.o said:

 

I totally agree with this direction. The thing about graysexuality, I guess, is that one feels too detached from the majority of the population to have a conventional/regular sexual relationship. It's that detachment, the feeling of being different because of their sexual orientation, that sets both grays and aces apart from sexuals.

 

if there's some way to capture X without stating it, that would be phenomenal. also a thought that is meaningful to what others were saying too. It is very much the case that many greysexual people feel detached, or not good enough, or broken, and so having awareness of these difficulties is a great way to empathize with each other and to have visibility about the importance of visibility itself. To help outsiders realize what matters to a sexual minority.

 

however, including these statements in a definition is not very good - it directly would insinuate that greysuals are ill, broken, etc. We are not - even tho lacking connection with a partner intimately causes emotional difficulties, this is only a result of who we are - so let's remember to identify who we are first and foremost :)

 

 

 

 

 

in general thanks to all who have participated so far! hopefully many of you can feel welcome to keep offering your thoughts and speak for yourself in this discussion.

 

One thing on my mind as a possible definition, but it is only loosely formed - is to capture how we might feel sexual attraction and/or desire, but that involving it in our personal life faces challenges. I don't know the right words to capture that to reach the goals I have of being clear, efficient, and avoiding the unfortunate implication of calling ourselves "broken" in some way :unsure:

 

I was also thinking recently - Maybe nodding towards the diversity is a real key thing; instead of focusing on finding one unifying meaning, taking a page from real dictionaries and having multiple definitions which unify different sections of the myriad of possible sub-labels would be good. as @banoffeepie and some others have mentioned, sometimes it's just a matter of wanting a simplified look at our own personal sexuality experience that is "pg" and "general" enough to get the main message across without detailing anything further - we might want and like sex, we might not. no promises either way.

 

I was also realizing that - whereas being too inclusive for the asexuality definition is a very real limiter to our freedom of what we can do there, it is much less of a demand for greysexuality. To a certain extent, what does it matter if some people who LOOK sexual decide to ID as grey? or some people who LOOK ace decide to ID as grey? They actually would not be appropriating upon those two sexualities just for identifying as grey; tho some statements any human could make could misrepresent others. 

 

Under these ideas I was considering the following three labels:

1) someone who feels sexual attraction strong enough to matter to them in their pursuit of close companionship, but who desires no sex despite this;

2) someone who does desire sex but whose experience of sexual attraction does not help guide their partner selection

3) someone who feels sexual attraction and/or desire infrequently or too situationally, or otherwise too weak of a pull, to ....... [er help me out here on this last one, do you follow where I'm going for this]

 

 

 

Sorry if my rough draft looks hideous but does anyone feel like this idea of these three approximate definitions appropriately covers the greysexuality realm without stealing aces and sexuals away too greedily? heh :redface:

 

I'm up to anyone's thoughts and suggestions in any way ^_^ no need to erase your thoughts or self-censor just because someone might feel insulted please. as long as we're able to avoid any direct personal attacks or any scary threatening statements against a group of people, it'll be ok to say it. I have faith that we're all mature enough not to get riled up over this - we all know we are a diverse pool of individuals with sometimes clashing needs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
float on

ps. you know, generally identifying to ourselves that we don't have an immediate need for a sexual relationship but someday might be in one is all that really matters for the label, isn't it? anyone disagree heh :redface:

 

 

pps. also oh, I forgot to account for the folk who are romantic and willing or even interested in sex as part of that despite any otherwise interest in sex. that should be accounted for in some way in those three, it could fit in two of em I believe, not sure if as I've suggested it appropriately shows that tho?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
banoffeepie
1 hour ago, float on said:

 

Wow, you would scare me if you were my boss. You've dealt with this so objectively and professionally if you were my boss you'd quickly realise how badly I do my job .:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pramana

In the first iteration of AVEN, David Jay established an additional dimension to sexual orientation based on degree of sexual intensity. The top line of the AVEN logo represents the Kinsey Scale, and the two bottom lines represent declining levels of intensity of sexual attraction until a point is reached where one experiences sexual attraction to an insufficient degree to have one or another of the sexual orientations represented on the top line. This explanation is provided here: https://web.archive.org/web/20030225190958/http://www.asexuality.org:80/Theory/asexuality.htm

 

David Jay also presented a picture of asexuality as a continuum, writing that asexuals can vary in the degree to which they are asexual. In addition, concepts reflecting gray-asexuality and demisexuality are discussed in AVEN's Big FAQ from the early 2000s. At that time, there were no separate words for these phenomena, so "asexual" was also used as an umbrella term to refer to all of them. Once specific terms were coined, people started to use phrases like "asexual spectrum" or "ace umbrella" to refer to the grouping of asexuality, gray-asexuality, and demisexuality. Community resources commonly describe gray-asexuality and demisexuality as either part of the asexual spectrum, or as part of the gray spectrum in-between asexuality and sexuality.

 

These terms have since been picked up by academics, particularly those academics who have been personally involved in asexual communities and who for theoretical reasons favour continual rather than categorial interpretations of sexual orientations. Perhaps the best argument for a continual interpretation of sexual orientation concerns the indistinguishability of variables:

No sexual attraction, very rare/weak sexual attraction, occasional/highly circumstantial sexual attraction .............. infrequent sexual attraction, frequent sexual attraction, very frequent sexual attraction.

Where, objectively, should the lines between categories be drawn? The same issue occurs for where to the draw the lines between heterosexuality and homosexuality compared to bisexuality. In practice, cultural norms likely play a role with respect to where a line is drawn at any one time.

 

Going by both community history and leading academics theories, there are rationales for saying either that gray-area people are in-between sexuality and asexuality, that gray-area experiences reflect fluidity between sexuality and asexuality, or that gray-area people have a more circumstance-dependent sexuality compared to other sexual people. Perhaps all three of those explanations are true, respectively, of different groups of people falling within the gray-area. And there may well be other explanations that I haven't thought of. Personally, I kind of feel like I'm in-between asexuality and sexuality, although I think that has a lot to do with the importance of sex-aversion to my experience.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Snao Cone

A greysexual is someone who wants to fuck the colour grey.

 

 

 

On 10/10/2017 at 9:53 AM, float on said:

and don't come in thinking you're some hero who will solve this issue

<3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sally
5 hours ago, Snaocula said:

A greysexual is someone who wants to fuck the colour grey.

 

 

Or someone who is old enough to have grey hair.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alejandrogynous
6 hours ago, Snaocula said:

A greysexual is someone who wants to fuck the colour grey.

aHR0cDovL3d3dy5zcGFjZS5jb20vaW1hZ2VzL2kv


Oh baby. <3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Deus Ex Infinity
On 10.10.2017 at 5:08 PM, jackanope said:

i'm gray but I usually just tell people i'm ace, because most people won't know what to do if I tossed a label like "gray asexual" at them. I feel like that'll just give them more of a reason to erase me. Plus my attractions are VERY limited and specific, to the point where I look at them as more fetish related than actual sexual attraction. That's what they feel like to me, anyway. In general, coming out as asexual is hard enough. I dont think there's a proper way to come out as gray-a.

While I could certainly come out as demigray-A and might even do so eventually some day, I ike to keep things as easy and simple as possible. It's hard and complex enough as @jackanope just said before. I also don't think that you can set up a solid definition of the term and must not do so because it's supposed to be experienced quite differently to each one of us. It's ok to have some sort of basic definitions to work and understand but should still be kept open and flexible at the same time to not exclude any people who might eventually find themselfs somewhere on this spectrum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nowhere Girl
On 10.10.2017 at 9:25 PM, FictoVore. said:

I think the best definition for grey is ''somewhere in the foggy area between asexual and sexual; not sexual enough to have a regular sexual relationship with the vast majority of the population, not asexual enough for a fully asexual relationship''.

Why the stereotype that all not-fully-asexual people are open to having sex?

But there seems to be such a stereotype indeed and that's why I identify as asexual and not anything in between (except perhaps "functionally asexual"): to emphasize that I'm not willing to have sex under any circumstances. I just won't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now