What do you think about fraysexuality?

[Flump222]

I've heard differing things about this, so I just wanted to get your opinions on fraysexuality. I've heard some people say that it isn't a real thing, or that it doesn't belong under the asexual umbrella. What do you think about it? What would you define it as?

[RK800]

Under the ace umbrella for sure, to me it's just another orientation.

[SkyWorld]

When I first heard of it, I honestly thought of the band called The Fray.

 

Unpopular opinion... Although I do think it's real, I just don't consider it an orientation. I consider it as more of how someone experiences attraction vs. who someone is attracted to (which is what I personally define sexual and/or romantic orientation). I think it may help some people communicate with others how they experience attraction compared to some people who would experience it differently.

 

Although I don't consider it an orientation, I'd still respect someone who identifies as such. I'd still have that opinion, but it just really does not affect me and it's not that big of a deal to me if someone identifies as such.

[Baam]

I don't think that's an unpopular opinion, @SkyWorld, I agree. It's no more an orientation than grey-sexual is. Words like fray, grey, and demi describe how you're attracted to people, and aren't the same as orientation labels describing who you're attracted to. I would say that grey-gay is an orientation, so is gay, but just grey-sexual by itself doesn't really say much. The same with fray.

 

I totally believe it's a real thing, in response to the OP. Fray is a label that has often described my platonic attractions very well, so I can completely understand people who say it describes their romantic or sexual attraction. But being fray-sexual doesn't make you asexual, neither does being grey-sexual. They would fall somewhere on the sexuality spectrum between sexual and asexual, they're separate from both ends.

[timewarp]

It's one of those words I've always been too lazy to look up. But I've started giving these terms at least one chance - the Google Scholar test. If Google Scholar finds it, there is at least one scientific publication the authors of which have heard the word. And lo and behold, fraysexual has a couple of results. Remarkably, the main article that has it is about AVEN itself.

[Éadweard]

Nothing honestly. I don’t see the point of creating a bunch of subcategories to describe little differences between absolutely every person in the community. 

[TickTalk]

I experience something very similar. There's a large misconception that attraction to the person is involved at all. I personally identify with Gray-A because I could be fine never having sex for the rest of my life but do experience sexual attraction at the beginning of relationships. Once I feel like the connection is solid and established all my romantic attraction to them remains but any desire to share a sexual experience is gone. Once I feel secure in the connection there is still very much romantic attraction to them and no waning of enjoyment or excitement but the sexual element seems to disappear. I don't seek new connections for the purpose of feeling sexually attracted to someone or having sex. Sex really isn't important or a priority for me in general it's just kind of a thing that happens. I noticed a trend that it tends to fade and isn't always present either. New connections don't automatically mean I'll experience sexual attraction.

So I think it gets kind of confused. I think many sexual people experience a sexual lull after forming a bond. But any long term connection I have I don't feel sexual attraction to them but lot's of romantic and non sexual physical attraction (Cuddling/Kissing etc.) I just wouldn't consider myself sexual because sex isn't a priority or a focus for me in pretty much any strong relationship. I almost view my sexual attraction as a thing I experience when I want to establish a bond with someone and once I feel like that bond has formed it doesn't happen anymore. Again, I don't then seek new bonds to form or feel any need to. It's just "If it happens I usually feel sexually attracted and then after that it's gone."

[Peter VRooden]

I identify as Fray. And I love having a label that validates my sexuality. I think it's good to have (sub) category's where people find their truth. so many truths so many labels.  I felt for a long time, although I would identify as Ace, I didn't belong in the Ace community because I had sexual attraction. The sexual attraction is gone the moment a bond is forming. And for me that not only when I speak to someone. The attraction can be gone the moment I see the person reading a book I like or is fan of a band I like. Learning about Fray sexuality made me realise that's what it is. It was a relieve to have seen my feelings spelt out for me.

[MoraDollie]

It's the "opposite" of Demisexual, it's real, it's valid, it's just another identity when it comes to human sexuality. 

[Peter VRooden]

26 minutes ago, Kumoku said:

It's the "opposite" of Demisexual, it's real, it's valid, it's just another identity when it comes to human sexuality. 

Yep. When I read that explanation it all clicked. I already figured something like that but didn't had the words for it!

[bare_trees]

Wow, I'd never heard of this until I clicked on the thread.  So, is it like you feel sexual attraction at first sight, but it fades as you get to know the person?  Or it fades as you've been in a relationship with the person long-term?  Or it's different for everyone?

[Peter VRooden]

3 hours ago, bare_trees said:

Wow, I'd never heard of this until I clicked on the thread.  So, is it like you feel sexual attraction at first sight, but it fades as you get to know the person?  Or it fades as you've been in a relationship with the person long-term?  Or it's different for everyone?

I think it will be different for everyone. For me, and I think the most, the sexual attraction is fading away when a bond is (getting) formed. If the sexual attraction is fading away long after the bond is formed I think it's something different.

[bare_trees]

So, do fraysexuals want to be in long-term relationships?  If so, are they often poly because they aren't attracted to their partners but would be more interested in sleeping with acquaintances?  I'm just curious.

[Peter VRooden]

I only can talk for myself. I think I'm on the aromantic spectrum too. I'm not looking for a long time romantic relation. And with me the seksual attraction mostly is gone when the bond is forming. Most acquaintances I have a bond with. And I don't wanna have seks with a complete stranger.

[Ceebs]

Makes me think of the Madonna-whore complex, tbh.

[Peter VRooden]

2 minutes ago, CBC said:

Makes me think of the Madonna-whore complex, tbh.

If you don't mind me asking. What is the Madonna-whore complex?

[Ceebs]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madonna–whore_complex

[Peter VRooden]

3 minutes ago, CBC said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madonna–whore_complex

Nope. I.m not into seksual contact with someone who is seen as degraded. And I don't have mother complex.

[Ceebs]

Yeah I'm not saying it's the same thing. I'm saying it reminds me of that type of issue where people of any gender have ingrained negativity surrounding sex, perhaps due to being raised with concepts of purity and such, and thus have trouble viewing sexual relationships as anything but sinful, shameful, etc.

 

It also reminds me of idealising someone prior to knowing them and then simply losing that intrigue and attraction once they become closer. Which is incredibly common.

[Peter VRooden]

Grew up in The Netherlands. A very open minded view on seks here. I don't see seks as something sinful or shameful. I'm seks positive. I don't mind hearing about it, reading it or seeing it. I just don't feel seksual attraction towards someone I'm (going to be) have a bond with.

 

[Guest]

3 hours ago, CBC said:

It also reminds me simply of idealising someone prior to knowing them and then simply losing that intrigue and attraction once they become closer. Which is incredibly common.

Yep that's pretty much what fraysexuality is, as far as I'm concerned. It's something many people experience from time to time, some experience it persistently.

[Alejandrogynous]

It also sounds to me like a case of just not knowing what you want. When I still thought I was sexual, I might have connected to fraysexuality (if the label had existed to me back then) because I consistently 'wanted' something, only to get it and realize I didn't want it anymore. But it wasn't that my feelings actually changed, it was that I didn't understand what I was feeling and so I kept going after something I didn't truly want.

 

Not saying this applies to everyone who IDs as fray, just my experience.

[bare_trees]

10 hours ago, FictoVore. said:

Yep that's pretty much what fraysexuality is, as far as I'm concerned. It's something many people experience from time to time, some experience it persistently.

I think a lot of what falls on the ace spectrum in general reflects a phenomenon that many people experience at some point in their lives, but it isn't so consistent that it's part of their identity.  I've know more people who went through periods of not wanting or having an interest in sexual activity than those who identify as asexual throughout their lives, just for example.  

[Guest]

9 hours ago, bare_trees said:

I think a lot of what falls on the ace spectrum in general reflects a phenomenon that many people experience at some point in their lives, but it isn't so consistent that it's part of their identity.  I've know more people who went through periods of not wanting or having an interest in sexual activity than those who identify as asexual throughout their lives, just for example.  

If sexual attraction is involved though then it's not technically part of the ace spectrum, because asexual means 'without sexual attraction'. Sexual people experience sexual attraction in all sorts of different ways, to all sorts of different extents, for all sorts of different reasons. For some that's rare and fleeting, for some it's an all-out daily thing that controls their lives (which is actually quite rare) and there are all kinds of variations in between. So if someone experiences sexual attraction for other people, even if it's only fleeting or rare or random or whatever..that's still not technically 'ace spectrum'. It's a variation of the sexual side of the spectrum which is extremely, extremely vast and multi-fasceted.

 

(Disclaimer: I'm not saying someone can't identify as ace if they want to though, regardless of whether or not they experience sexual attraction/desire. I'm talking about definitions, not the way individuals personally identify with those definitions).

[bare_trees]

1 hour ago, FictoVore. said:

If sexual attraction is involved though then it's not technically part of the ace spectrum, because asexual means 'without sexual attraction'. Sexual people experience sexual attraction in all sorts of different ways, to all sorts of different extents, for all sorts of different reasons. For some that's rare and fleeting, for some it's an all-out daily thing that controls their lives (which is actually quite rare) and there are all kinds of variations in between. So if someone experiences sexual attraction for other people, even if it's only fleeting or rare or random or whatever..that's still not technically 'ace spectrum'. It's a variation of the sexual side of the spectrum which is extremely, extremely vast and multi-fasceted.

 

(Disclaimer: I'm not saying someone can't identify as ace if they want to though, regardless of whether or not they experience sexual attraction/desire. I'm talking about definitions, not the way individuals personally identify with those definitions).

Not sure what that has to do with my post (?)  I'm just saying that while there are aspects of asexuality and the ace spectrum that many people can relate to at different times of their lives for different reasons, that doesn't make them asexual, or fraysexual, or what have you, and that doesn't invalidate the existence of those identities.  It sounded like you were saying that because it's not uncommon for sexual attraction to fade over time, then fraysexuality isn't a real thing, or an orientation.  I'm attempting to distinguish between those who experience those feelings sometimes, and those who experience them as a rule.  To put it a different way, just because lots of straight women seem to think Ruby Rose is attractive doesn't mean lesbianism isn't a thing just because female same-sex attraction is more widespread than some think.  Idk; maybe I'm not understanding.

[Dawn Sharp]

I'm glad I finally found the word for it. Extremly glad. I've been confused for a long time, believe me.

I think I identify as Fraysexual, because I can see me having sex with a guy I've met for a week and I think is hot, but I can't see me having sex with someone I would talk to everyday and knows me well. 

And I'm saying it because it happened to me. I had this kind-of-boyfriend with whom we try to understand better sexual stuff, but I would feel more and more awkward as the time went by, instead of more comfortable.

In simple words: How can I do sexual stuff with someone that I will have to face everyday, talk to, go places with... It feels like a big pressure the uncertainty of "will we have sex again? when? where? who will say it first? What if I don't want to ever again, but I still love my boyfriend, and he wants?" there are a lot of logistics to it that freezes me.

The boyfriend I had was celibate, we dated for three months and I never felt a sexual attraction (even kisses grosses me a little, tbh).

 

So I would say, to explain it a little bit better: 

*I don't feel sexual attraction towards everyone I meet.

*There are too kind of people I would kiss: the ones I would fuck, and the ones I would date. Hardly in between.

*That doesn't mean I would fuck &/or date anyone that falls into said categories.

*Boyfriends are more of a hyper-best-friend I would kiss.

*I don't feel uncomfortable with having sex with someone I won't talk to again.

*But I do feel uncomfortable with having sex with someone I will talk to all the time.

*So sex and romanticism don't match up.

*Maybe I'm more comfortable with the idea of having sex with someone and then get to know them, as friends.

*But not the other way around.

*Given that I would have sex under certain, specific circumstances, I would identify Fraysexuality (not so sure about frayromaticism) under the Grey-A umbrella.

 

Do I make sense?

 

[Guest]

17 hours ago, Dawn Sharp said:

Do I make sense?

As long as you're placing this fraysexuality on the sexual end of the spectrum, not the asexual, you make perfect sense

 

17 hours ago, Dawn Sharp said:

Given that I would have sex under certain, specific circumstances

Every sexual person alive only wants sex under certain, specific circumstances - it's really important in these discussions that everyone keep this fact firmly in mind or we can start sounding very antisexual. The criteria for 'regular sexual person' isn't "wants to fuck every hot person under every circumstance and everyone else is some kind of ace or grey ace'' - that's taking a very negative view of sexuality.

 

I personally only want to fuck fictional characters and people I could never actually meet in person so I've been celibate for many, many years and am very happy that way. I'd very happily never have sex again in my life. But I'm not asexual, because the active desire to fuck someone else (even if they don't actually exist, or if they do exist I'll never be able to meet them) is still there. I'm on the sexual end of the spectrum, not on the ace end.

[Guest]

17 hours ago, Dawn Sharp said:

I don't feel sexual attraction towards everyone I meet.

Just to clarify, no one feels sexual attraction to everyone they meet: That's impossible.

 

17 hours ago, Dawn Sharp said:

I can see me having sex with a guy I've met for a week and I think is hot

That is sexual attraction, just to clarify, and a rather normal experience of it. There are many people who prefer casual sex (sex with people you don't know that well) to having sex with those they have a close connection to. Some people (long-term bachelors for example) go their whole lives having very short term relationships because they just lose interest in their partners so quickly and need to move on to the next person. I don't mind if people want to call it freysexuality, we just need to remember that by definition it's very sexual, not asexual.

[ryn2]

On 5/19/2018 at 9:27 PM, TickTalk said:

I experience something very similar. There's a large misconception that attraction to the person is involved at all. I personally identify with Gray-A because I could be fine never having sex for the rest of my life but do experience sexual attraction at the beginning of relationships. Once I feel like the connection is solid and established all my romantic attraction to them remains but any desire to share a sexual experience is gone. Once I feel secure in the connection there is still very much romantic attraction to them and no waning of enjoyment or excitement but the sexual element seems to disappear. I don't seek new connections for the purpose of feeling sexually attracted to someone or having sex. Sex really isn't important or a priority for me in general it's just kind of a thing that happens. I noticed a trend that it tends to fade and isn't always present either. New connections don't automatically mean I'll experience sexual attraction.

So I think it gets kind of confused. I think many sexual people experience a sexual lull after forming a bond. But any long term connection I have I don't feel sexual attraction to them but lot's of romantic and non sexual physical attraction (Cuddling/Kissing etc.) I just wouldn't consider myself sexual because sex isn't a priority or a focus for me in pretty much any strong relationship. I almost view my sexual attraction as a thing I experience when I want to establish a bond with someone and once I feel like that bond has formed it doesn't happen anymore. Again, I don't then seek new bonds to form or feel any need to. It's just "If it happens I usually feel sexually attracted and then after that it's gone."

This is pretty similar to my experience but I can’t decide if that makes me frey or ace-but-sensitive-to-new-relationship-energy....

[bare_trees]

14 hours ago, FictoVore. said:

I don't mind if people want to call it freysexuality, we just need to remember that by definition it's very sexual, not asexual.

Glad we have your permission.  I've read a lot of arrogant posts that you've written, and I keep trying to be polite and second-guess my judgement of them, but that's getting to be more and more difficult.  I don't understand why you feel the need to tell people how to think about feel about something, and why it's necessary to point out the accepted definition of something versus how the person defines it when it seems that all of this is up for interpretation at this point, anyway.  The way you talk to people on here is disrespectful and inappropriate, IMO.  But, as my grandfather said, "it takes all kinds."