Jump to content

All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Past hour
  2. Just Dani

    stop being so sad everyone

    👏👏👏 I wouldn't say that I'm feeling sad about my sexual orientation. Sure, I used to feel down, angry too, but I've learnt to accept it. It is what it is. And it might not seem like it at times (I have my bad days like everyone else does), but I'm actually a very positive person. I'm surprisingly good at bringing other people up! I agree with not wasting your breath on certain people. Some people just don't want to hear anything that challenges their narrow view of the world.
  3. Dreamsexual

    Should only innate asexuals use the label?

    I'm trying ... it's so hard! What captures in a short X-sexual format the idea that you are romantically/sexually attracted only to non-human, immaterial, non-fictional persons (though you might enact that sex via concretised object or concept forms, like dolls or dreams)?
  4. ben8884

    Eurovision Song Contest thread!

    I kinda thought Israel did a poor job of hosting this year and honestly not a lot of great songs. I did like Denmark as well as Germany. I am glad the Netherlands won as its been a long time for them, I didn't think the UK was that great but it also didn't deserve last place. The whole thing was waaaay too long though with too many skits and such.
  5. Dreamsexual

    Should only innate asexuals use the label?

    Pretty much sums up my thinking at present - I say I'm ace(ish) because I don't really know what else to say, lol
  6. CustardCream

    Should only innate asexuals use the label?

    That is a complex one... Perhaps coining your own term might not be a bad idea, as neither existing term fits.
  7. Dreamsexual

    Should only innate asexuals use the label?

    So self-controlled ... I can barely go an hour or two ...
  8. wyrdwyrm

    Should only innate asexuals use the label?

    I tend to think that if you're defining yourself as "sexually attracted to X", you'd be "X-sexual", regardless of whether X is a human, object, or fictional construct - and to reduce it to a binary question, no I would not consider it asexuality at that point. However, when you get to non-standard attractions to robots, cars, programs, etc, you often end up effectively asexual, with some commonality with asexual issues, so there is benefit to sharing the label and using the forums until something more appropriate for your needs comes along. Short answer - if telling someone else that you're asexual communicates what you need in that conversation, go ahead and use it. If it doesn't seem to fit quite right, then it's not the right label for you. To me, it seems like we have several fringe labels all meeting under the asexual umbrella for convenience - which is where the confusion in definitions is coming from - and given time the groups who need a different label will eventually migrate elsewhere.
  9. @CBC I'm sure it is. I expected it'd be that or something like it. I was just being silly.
  10. CustardCream

    Should only innate asexuals use the label?

    Yeah, that's how I see it too. I would certainly not wish to sleep with my character if they came to life, which is the key reason I class myself as fictoromantic rather than fictosexual. To be honest, I can go a long time without thinking about them at all, so I guess I'm not exactly besotted!
  11. Star Lion

    Thoughts on the grey-ace flag

    I’m preferring the second one as well. It gives the sense of “incomplete” which is what graysexuality pretty much represents
  12. Huh? Isn't all sport played in a sportsballpark? Oh well.
  13. I'm so glad that a kiss on the cheek doesn't condemn me to... reproduction.
  14. Bunny_

    Counselling!

    So i think i need it so contacted the local LGBT people who were actually really nice. Part of the response below: I can’t 100% promise they will accept the referral, as I’ve not sent them an asexual before, but I think they will probably be fine to accept your referral. They cover anything to do with sexual health and relationships. Thanks for the mention of the AVEN forums which I don’t think I had heard of previously. But this has just reignited my fears that im not going to be accepted...silly i know!
  15. Dreamsexual

    Should only innate asexuals use the label?

    Right, so that is where the confusion lies. In one sense, I agree ... But I also see both ficto and objectum not really being appropriate, since an immaterial person (like a ghost or god or the soul of a tree, say) is not fictional nor is it an object, it is a person. So we have a situation where someone has a sexual relationship with a spirit, and doesn't seem to fit common definitions of objectum nor ficto, nor sexual nor asexual. Do they need their own term?
  16. InquisitivePhilosopher

    Anyone know of any digisexual pride flags?

    This isn't a flag, but apparently, someone made symbols for digisexuality.
  17. Wouldn’t that hinge in what you meant by abstract? If it exists only within your mind, it would be ficto. If you believe it exists in the physical world in some way, it would be objectum.
  18. By “the same with” I meant the distinction between -romantic and -sexual, not the “incarnate or not” part. I personally consider fictosexuals and OS in the sexual part of the spectrum and fictoromantics/objectum romantics (who are also asexual “everywhere else”) asexual... but I’m not the universal arbiter of such things.
  19. Dreamsexual

    Should only innate asexuals use the label?

    That seems a pretty bad use of the term, though - especially if the person in question holds that their lover, with whom they have a relationship, is a person with objective existence (like humans). Almost like the term is built to offend.
  20. Anthracite_Impreza

    Should only innate asexuals use the label?

    Well I have crushes on fictional cars too so
  21. CBC

    CBC

    Has anyone ever figured out what it is that Meat Loaf won't do for love?

    1. Show previous comments  4 more
    2. CBC

      CBC

      @InquisitivePhilosopher Oh thank you! Silly me. I google pretty much everything that crosses my mind but was busy making coffee and having a conversation when I heard it on the radio, so I didn't bother. 

       

      @ben8884 Very true. Also I love your usage of "loaf". 😂

    3. ben8884

      ben8884

      @CBC thanks! I was thinking of South Park when one of the kids addressed him as "Mr Loaf"

    4. ByeYall!

      ByeYall!

      Go on a diet? ( yes, its fat shaming, but I look like meat loaf, the food, so shoot me). 

  22. Personally I would still consider that ficto (-romantic, or -sexual, depending on the type of feelings/desire experienced). I’ve not seen ficto limited to would-be-human characters.
  1. Load more activity
×
×
  • Create New...