Gray-sexual and Gray-asexual need to be two different terms?

[Star Bit]

Gray-sexual: desiring sex IRL but under unusual conditions (e.g. Demisexual, Fraysexual, rarely desires sex, etc.)

Gray-asexual: mentally desiring sex but not IRL (e.g. Lithsexual, Autosexual, Fictosexual, etc.)

(imagine a color spectrum going from red to yellow) Basically with the current separation of the terms (i.e. whichever side you feel you fall more toward) it puts bits of yellow and red on the corresponding sides which makes it difficult to convey what color you're referring to when saying the words yellow or red. With this alteration it makes the line a clear fade from yellow to red.

Gray-asexual: effectively asexual or an asexual with a fetish that's too close to being sexual but not desired for sexual reasons

(e.g. Lithsexual, Autosexual, Fictosexual, breast fetish for emotional pleasure)

Gray-sexual: can sustain a reciprocated sexual relationship under certain circumstances; i.e. when someone desires sex at an unusual point in time

(e.g. sex indifferent sexual, Demisexual, Burstsexual, Ensenisexual, Recipsexual, Requisexual)

Gray-aromantic: effectively aromantic

(e.g. Lithromantic, Autoromantic, Fictoromantic, intentional flirting)

Gray-romantic: can sustain a reciprocated romantic relationship under certain circumstances; i.e. when someone desires romance at an unusual point in time

(e.g. romance indifferent romantic, Demiromantic, Burstromantic, Cupioromantic, Enseniromantic, Recipromantic, Requiromantic)

Aceflexible/Aroflexible: rarely desires sex/romance, which can be paired with an orientation (e.g. Homo-aroflexible)

Quasisexual: (dictionary definition being "somewhat or seemingly sexual") as an orientation it would refer to desiring secondary sex/assisted masturbation, which can be paired with an orientation (e.g. Quasi-homosexual)

(e.g. desiring phone sex, cyber sex, sexual roleplay, partner enacted fetishes for sexual pleasure, sensual contact/massaging with intent of sexual arousal, foreplay or so they can masturbate during it, simultaneous masturbation, sexting, partnered arousal)

 

There is a bit of a complexity because there are a few types of Liths, Autos, Fictos, and Cupios (i.e. some Liths can keep attraction if a partner indifferently unreciprocates, some Autos are also allosexual, some Fictos can desire sex/romance if a partner is roleplaying or cosplaying the character they're attracted to, and some Cupios mentally desire sex/romance but will never enter a relationship because there's not attraction), but i am not talking of those in the above section. Above i am using the more common meanings; Lith to only be losing immediate interest upon reciprocation, Auto to only be attracted to one self, Ficto to only be attracted to fictional characters, and cupio to mean pursuing romantic/sexual relationships despite no attraction. In the aforementioned parentheses Lith and Ficto would be Gray-sexual/romantic, Cupio would be Gray-aro/ace, and Auto would just be an allosexual. But honestly, I'm not sure where to put Fraysexual/Frayromantic/Liths who are unable to keep sexual/romantic desire toward a partner/have it fade away over time in a relationship at typically the same point; it's right in the middle because they can momentarily reciprocate but later cannot. However, this term also has a variation; if they cannot keep the attraction upon simply forming a platonic bond because closeness turns them off, then that would fall under Gray-aromantic.

 

I originally put an aromantic wanting to make out under Gray-aromantic, but it seems to be a thing that other orientations do too (i.e. desire to make out outside their orientation), so Philemaphile would do (i.e. kissing fetish). That's not the "official" fetish title, but it does have a phobia and the two normally reflect eachother. I guess the prefix could even be used to denote someone who isn't into making out (i.e. aphilema)-- but personally that seems hard to pronounce, maybe aphil would do.

[Ace of Amethysts]

Thanks for clearing it up, that always confused me.

[Philip027]

In my mind they were already two different terms, just specifying which side of the fence one felt like they were closer to.

The conditions you listed I feel would fall under potential reasons (but not 100% encompassing reasons; it is a grey area, after all) why someone might consider themselves grey ace/sexual.

[Salted Karamel]

What would be the intended purpose of separating those terms?

[Snao Cone]

Sure, why not.

[.,.]

In my mind they were already two different terms, just specifying which side of the fence one felt like they were closer to.

The conditions you listed I feel would fall under potential reasons (but not 100% encompassing reasons; it is a grey area, after all) why someone might consider themselves grey ace/sexual.

You can't really be close to asexual though. Either you are or you aren't.

[.,.]

What would be the intended purpose of separating those terms?

One is asexual, the other is (allo)sexual.

[Star Bit]

In my mind they were already two different terms, just specifying which side of the fence one felt like they were closer to.

Yah, but that would put rarely desiring sex on the Gray-ace side. And depending on the demisexual or fraysexual they may fall more on the asexual side as well. That's why the correction is that one is IRL and the other is not.

In my mind they were already two different terms, just specifying which side of the fence one felt like they were closer to.

The conditions you listed I feel would fall under potential reasons (but not 100% encompassing reasons; it is a grey area, after all) why someone might consider themselves grey ace/sexual.

You can't really be close to asexual though. Either you are or you aren't.

Yes and no. While i agree someone is either asexual or not, Gray-ace isn't saying the person IS asexual, it is saying that the persin is close to being/virtually is asexual. (e.g. someone who has sexual attraction but never desires to have sex with anyone/Lithsexual wouldn't be able to have a normal sexual relationship and would have the exact same problems as a non-compromising asexual because they don't want sex IRL) Gray-As are never asexual, they mentally desire sex. (though some people with fetishes prefer to go by Gray-A so that would be the only exception)

[Rising Sun]

Things are already complicated enough. And grey is used to reflect that complexity. In all types of grey, some people are more sexual than others.

Grey is already complicated, what type of grey even more, no need to make it even more complicated than it is.

[Salted Karamel]

What would be the intended purpose of separating those terms?

One is asexual, the other is (allo)sexual.

Well no, they're all gray. Hence the gray part.

[Snao Cone]

Part of the problem is that many people (myself included) have a central tendency bias and might not call themselves asexual because of sexual thoughts and feelings that really have nothing to do with a personal desire for sexual activity. Some people may be like this and say "I'm 100% asexual because I personally do not desire partnered sex" and another person may be like this and say "I'm a teeny bit grey because I can relate to sexual tension and chemistry in fiction, even though I'm not at all interested in having sex myself." So if the latter person is more comfortable with grey-a than asexual or grey-sexual, that at least highlights just how close to the end point of fully asexual they are.

[Star Bit]

But that's completely normal asexual behavior. The only requirement for asexuality is not desiring sex with anyone. Anything else is completely irrelevant.

"I'm a teeny bit grey because I can relate to sexual tension and chemistry in fiction, even though I'm not at all interested in having sex myself."

That is not an indication of sexuality. That is a completely normal asexual and people just need to be educated (on what's normal for both asexuals and sexuals; i.e. asexuals being confused with masturbation and wrong concepts on what makes a person sexual).

[Snao Cone]

Yes, it meets the criteria for asexuality, but if someone isn't comfortable identifying as a full-on nothin'-but-aceness asexual, why can't they clarify that with acknowledging a grey dimension to them as well?

[Star Bit]

Because that's not Gray; that has never been Gray's definition. Gray is anything between desiring sex and not (and romantic equivalent).

[Rising Sun]

There's no official definition of grey.

[Guest]

Star im on my phone, could you please quote my post regarding this topic from the "spectrum" topic? So people can read here? Thank you if you can

[.,.]

Yes and no. While i agree someone is either asexual or not, Gray-ace isn't saying the person IS asexual, it is saying that the persin is close to being/virtually is asexual. (e.g. someone who has sexual attraction but never desires to have sex with anyone/Lithsexual wouldn't be able to have a normal sexual relationship and would have the exact same problems as a non-compromising asexual because they don't want sex IRL) Gray-As are never asexual, they mentally desire sex. (though some people with fetishes prefer to go by Gray-A so that would be the only exception)

I would say gray-ace definitely are asexual. Meaning they don't actually have a desire for sex. As I have understood it this mental desire for sex is something a lot more fleeting than these 4 seemingly straight forward words would imply. I'm suggesting that these might entirely be the wrong words to use about it. Once again: In my understanding, it is not so much mental sexual desire as arousal connected to a certain set of imagery or fantasies. These might be entirely coincidental. It might also be understood as the mental desire for the intimacy of sex. Whatever it is it will either relate to the physical pleasure, the intimacy, or both.

As long as there is no desire to act upon then there is no true mental desire is what I propose, because you can't have physical or mental desire completely without the other. They are controlled by one another and fueled by one another. I notice I'm having trouble being very articulate about this. But I do believe that the mental desire for sex a gray-ace would experience is not the same mental desire for sex that an allosexual (gray-sexual circumstantially included) would experience. I believe a true mental desire would lead you to a sex drive.

[bluedragonwings]

i can definitely see where the distinction could be based on IRL, but I'm not sure is such a split would be useful to all. I mean it would allow for more nuanced discussion, but by the time you need that nuance you are speaking personal and not group identity, in my opinion. I also wonder at its usefulness because anyone who does not know who they are or what they feel would just have more confusion added on.

This is compounded by the whole sexual spectrum vs using the term asexual spectrum. I like a good etymology argument but even I'm personally getting annoyed with that one and I don't even know what I am so don't have a stake in it.

Best way around it would to have a complete tear down of the lexicon and build back up. But good luck getting all the cats to agree. :-)

[Star Bit]

Just to add a bit to some of the earlier answers (which I totally agree with), I don't think that asexuality has a spectrum specifically because asexuality (for me) is a part of the sexual spectrum. Say sexuality goes from A------------------------Z (or 0-11), asexuality would just be on one end of that spectrum. From supersexual or pansexual to asexual.

A lot of people say this stuff is on a 1d or 2d spectrum (1 d is a line whereas 2d in a graph). I would argue it's 3d, with part of it being romantic attraction too. For example, one can be both pansexual and still have a really low sex drive whereas someone could be demi sexual and have a really high sex drive and someone could be asexual and have a really high libido and so on.

Regarding the spectrum, everyone defines that part differently. I don't think I've seen a definition of the ''spectrum'' that everyone unanimously agrees on. I personally look at like this:

There are two spectrums: Sexuality, which comes in many varying shapes and forms, but the one thing all sexual people have in common is that at certain times (varies per individual) and to varying degrees, they all innately desire partnered sex for sexual and/or emotional pleasure.

Then there is asexuality, in which there is no desire for partnered sexual contact with others, ever, but there is still a ''spectrum'' in a sense of masturbation, libido, fantasies, attractions, fetishes, repulsions etc.. there are still different ''kinds'' of asexuals, but the one thing they all have in common is that they never innately desire partnered sex with anyone for sexual and/or emotional pleasure, ever.

I am getting super disappointed with the grey area however. The way I am always seeing it described now, is pretty much anyone who is sexual but in a way that they think is different from the norm, ie demisexual, cupiosexual, etc.. but I don't see the point in defining those as ''grey'' when they are both normal aspects of sexuality (controversial statement I know but, yeah).. they are on the ''sexual'' spectrum. I always assumed grey meant someone who does have sexual desires in the same way many sexual people do, who seems ''sexual'' in their feelings and much of their behavior or whatever (ie maybe they enjoy being intimate with someone they are attracted to, in a way that both causes them to become aroused, and they both enjoy that arousal) but still has no desire to engage in sex, and if given the opportunity would pass it down, even if they do desire that person sexually and are aroused etc, they just aren't interested in actually having sex and would rather game or read a book or whatever, still not capable of having a ''normal'' sexual relationship with a sexual person (ie, where they both desire and enjoy the sex) .. That's what I thought grey was. Someone too sexy to identify as fully ace, but way too asexy to identify as sexual.

I mean, say if you're a grey a who enjoys being intimate with someone in a way that causes you both arousal, but you don't want any form of sex with that person, ever, then a relationship like that would be fine with another grey.. But with a sexual person, I am pretty sure it wouldn't be long before they are driven insane by the constant arousing actions with no release, no sex ever (maybe I should ask some sexual people here about that though, just to clarify, oh and by sexual release I mean partnered genital stimulation for sexual and/or emotional pleasure).. it would be pretty awful I would think for a sexual person to be stuck in that situation?. So that person who desires that definitely isn't fully asexual, but they also aren't sexual in that they just don't want sex and won't have it. It's not celibate, because they aren't denying themselves something they desire, they just don't desire it. I always thought the grey area was for people who fall in that sort of category.

I saw a sexual person say here recently that if you're grey, that's fine, because they can have a normal sexual relationship with you under the right circumstances, but if you're ace, no way, because a relationship isn't possible due to sexual disparity. This frustrated me (not frustrated at the person, but at the generally accepted definition of grey) because even though I understand where that person was coming from given how grey seems to be defined around here, it's messed up that you can have one grey 100% capable of a normal sexual relationship under the right circumstances, and another grey utterly incapable of have a normal sexual relationship, no matter what.

I guess the only way to resolve this is for the grey area to be a spectrum in between sexuality and asexuality, but for there to be grey-sexual (''cupios'', demis, etc) and grey-asexual (people who desire others sexually but still have no desire to have sex with them and don't enjoy sex etc etc) ..But, this is getting so snowflaky T_T

[nanogretchen4]

Personally I find demisexual to be a useful label. The thing is, before I had heard of the label, I would periodically worry that there was something wrong with me because I was so rarely attracted to anyone and just could not manage to date like a normal person. I didn't want anyone to know how many years would go by without any form of a love life whatsoever, because I didn't want them to think I was a weirdo or feel sorry for me. I was actually hoping everyone would just assume I was gay and closeted. I'm glad to realize that other people are in the same boat, and that it's widespread enough that there's a word for it. It's certainly helped me to think about what's going on with me and feel less embarrassed and isolated.

That said, I absolutely don't think I'm asexual and I really don't identify as gray. If someone wanted to say that asexuality and demisexuality are two totally unrelated phenomena, it wouldn't bother me. True, I've gone through periods of quite a few years when it would be hard to tell me apart from an asexual person, but I've also gone through periods when I couldn't easily be distinguished from a heterosexual woman or from a lesbian, depending on who I was in love with at the time. I really couldn't care less if demisexuality is on a spectrum or not as long as we let people know that demisexuality exists.

[Rainbow~Sprinkles]

I agree and think we need two separate terms.

Because there are people who probably relate to and lean more to asexuals and others who are more sexual and lean more to normal sexual people. It would help with dating for instance to explain to a potential partners which side your closer to. And to find people compatible with you.

In my opinion, For someone to identify as gray-sexual they would still be able to have a sexual relationship under certain circumstances.

Whereas a gray-asexual would not be able to have a normal sexual relationship with a majority of the population and therefore be better off sitting closer to asexual.

I think this is really important so everybody knows where they stand. But the reasons for why people identify a certain way should be open to the individual and how they understand themselves. I don't think it's possible to develop a criteria for every possible person and their sexuality preferences.

[Philip027]

You can't really be close to asexual though. Either you are or you aren't.

1. Asexual Visibility and Education Network
2. → Identities
3. → The Gray Area, Sex and Related Discussions

You do realize what forum you're posting in, right?

[warrigan]

i agree that personally, i think the difference between the two is where one feels personally more aligned (sexual or ace). buuuut i don't think it's useful to rigorously try to define this, since sexuality is inherently pretty messy. just let everyone be, yo! if they want to use certain terms for themselves based on xyz, then more power to them! if you want to, more power to you! i just don't think there's the need to tell other people how to use the terms they use, or even which terms they use.

as for this

You can't really be close to asexual though. Either you are or you aren't.

i......don't even know how to respond to that.

[Ficulnean]

I like panficto's reply which, if I'm reading it correctly, would accept the term gray-asexual but not gray-sexual, as written by Star at the top.

[Éadweard]

I like the word graysexual because of the ambiguity it implies. Not really straight or gay, but maybe sometimes. Mostly asexual but not really. Could be attracted to anyone, but mostly not attracted to anyone. I see it kind of similar to people who are Questioning, but with graysexuality there is never really an answer in the end. Really belonging nowhere at all but able to fit into any group if they want to try but really just remaining on the fringes at all times.

[Motoko]

Yeah I am new to this site and I came because I am confused about my sexuality.Every relationship I've had seemed to fail because I have an extremely low sex drive to the point that the other person would accuse me of not being attracted to them and accuse me of cheating on them(since appently if you're not having sex with them you're getting it somewhere else right). At first I thought I was asexual but after reading I could be this grey in between group. I've never had sex with random people at clubs and declined sex with my partners almost all the time. What do you guys think?

[Snao Cone]

Motoko, that really depends on the reason you declined. If you were not up for it at the time, you might just have a low libido, or you might need very specific circumstances to work up the mood - which might qualify as grey, in my opinion, if it doesn't seem like a disorder of any kind but just how you are.

[Star Bit]

@Mokoto

Some people put low sex-drive under the Gray-sexual umbrella, some don't and say it's a normal sexual person with just a low sex-drive (as most people have differing sex-drives and sex problems in that regard are extremely common). Also, some sexual people just need to learn what their sexual "buttons" are (i.e. learn what triggers their desire for sex/what triggers sexual arousal) so they can have "a normal sex life". A majority of sexual women and a minority of sexual men actually have to find that out.

[Motoko]

Thanks , hm I'd identify more as a grey asexual rather than a sexual because I've dated sexual people and it never works out because I'm not sexual or want to have sex. So they feel like I'm denying them of pleasure that they could get if they dated somebody else

[Rainbow~Sprinkles]

Thanks , hm I'd identify more as a grey asexual rather than a sexual because I've dated sexual people and it never works out because I'm not sexual or want to have sex. So they feel like I'm denying them of pleasure that they could get if they dated somebody else

I'm in a similar boat to you Motoko. I've just realised I'm more likely a low libido sex averse sexual. But I struggle to identify as a sexual because my exes and friends think that I'm very different from them because I'm not interested in sex as often or have different ideas about it to them.

I feel like I'm in the middle, I'm not ace enough to be ace but not sexual enough to be understood by other sexuals. So I'd rather identify as somewhere on the grey spectrum to help others understand.