"Demisexuality" and Misunderstanding Sexual Attraction

[Homer]

17 hours ago, Whatsis said:

Arguably mistakingly identifying as demi or somewhere on the asexual spectrum?

The mistake here is putting demisexuality on an "asexual spectrum".

[Skycaptain]

Problem is that with one exception we're not dealing with absolutes. If an individual can state that they have never felt sexually attracted to any other person ever, that's the absolute. Anything else is a variable, open to interpretation, hence the number of debates. What one person would describe as grey and or demi, others would describe as regular sexual attraction. Likewise one person's regular sexual attraction is another's hypersexual 

[Telecaster68]

That's why experiences > labels.

[ryn2]

I think a lot of the debate stems from “[sexuality] in essence” - a person’s true orientation, if you will - versus “[sexuality] in practice.”

 

To those who define asexuality as a lifelong, complete and total absence of both sexual desire and sexual attraction, a person who has experienced either/both  even one time is not asexual; they are grey.  Whether or not they are demi would depend on the circumstances surrounding that one time.

 

To someone “out in the world” who is only casually aware of/interested in less common sexual orientations, the person who only experienced sexual desire/attraction once is 1) sexual if that experience is with their current partner or 2) ace if that experience is with a past partner.  That’s because most people out in the world are more interested in how others (strangers, acquaintances) will behave than they are in the nuances of why.

 

I’m not sure it’s fair to say that someone who experiences sexual attraction rarely/under narrow circumstances is experiencing a lesser or different sort of sexual attraction than others do.  How do any of us know?  All descriptions of emotions/feelings require some degree of self-interpretation.  How do I know my anger feels like your anger?  How do you know my love doesn’t feel like your love?

 

 

[Lucinda]

The impression I get from demisexuals is that they:

1. cannot tell if another person is sexually attractive upon first meeting
2. do not have a general desire for sex
3. cannot determine if there is potential -- may be able to determine if there is no potential

It seems to me that the confusion in this thread is coming from conflating "sexually attractive" with "sexual attraction".  I agree with CBC that finding someone sexually attractive is a manifestation of one's sexual orientation.  It has to do with their femaleness, maleness, or NBness ... in other words, their sex/gender presentation.  It is beyond just looks, though, and can include what one initially perceives about their personality.  

 

Sexual attraction, as it is being described by some on this thread, has to do with doing sex with another person.  Being attracted to the act with them.

 

Lucinda

[Snao Cone]

In practical terms it comes down to whether the differences in level/frequency/circumstances of sexual attraction/desire are significant enough to make people feel disconnected from the diverse range of sexual people. Some folks who identify as demisexual are told by people who identify as sexual - people like Graceful and CBC and Ficto and Telecaster - that what the demi person is describing is just like what they or people they know experience, and it blows up into a "You can't tell me how to identify!!!" argument. 

 

Some people here identify as demi because they had one meaningful relationship that included sex that is now over, but since then they've had no desire to pursue sexual relationships and don't feel attracted to people - and they're happy that way. People like that feel a greater sense of belonging in ace communities, which is great. But if the pursuit of an ideal life involves finding a relationship with a sexually compatible partner, you're going to find you have more in common with other sexual people. That shouldn't be that much of a sensitive issue, but things always seem to explode when it's suggested. 

[Grumpy Alien]

@Kayze Literally no one here has said all sexuals are what you describe as demisexual. We’re only saying it’s a common experience.

 

Like Snao said, this always blows up. No one is trying to invalidate anyone, to my knowledge. When I try to explain what it means to be sexual with the ace community, I’m using AVEN for one of its main purposes: Education. Just like when I thought I was asexual and had to use it to find out what asexuality even was.

 

And I don’t know why you think we’re smug? Ficto’s hetero/homosexual example is pretty accurate. I’m certainly not smug, I’m confused as to why you think I know nothing about my own orientation and you, who identifies differently, know better.

[Guest]

9 hours ago, Kayze said:

Ok, and I've said that not all sexual people experience sexual attraction with everyone they meet. The debate has been about what is or isn't common and what sexual attraction is, not what accounts for EVERY person. No one can claim to be everyone's voice.

I said plenty do. Not EVERYONE does. There are those who require a bond and those who don't. And those who have differing requirements from one encounter to the next (either a bond, or no bond) depending on a number of factors. 

 

Sexual attraction is the type of attraction that draws you to desire partnered sexual intimacy with someone else. What's most fundamentally important though is that desire for partnered sexual contact as a preference to masturbation, at least sometimes, with specific people: It's that desire for partnered sexual contact (for sexual and/or emotional pleasure) which makes someone a sexual person, regardless of how often that is or what it is that causes that desire.

 

9 hours ago, Kayze said:

So, because I'm gray-asexual, I don't experience an authentic sexual attraction?

No, I didn't say that. And I wasn't trying to define sexual attraction. I was trying to explain the way a 'regular' sexual person experiences it (as in the frequency, strength, etc). I was trying to clarify that it differs so drastically from person to person, and the driving factor behind how one chooses a partner is so different from person to person, that you can't just lump them all into one box and say 'If you experience sexual attraction like that then you're sexual. But if you experience it any other way you're some kind of ace'. It just doesn't work like that.

 

9 hours ago, Kayze said:

and telling me that I'm defining sexual attraction wrong.

No, you're defining the way that sexual people experience sexual attraction (the frequency, strength, etc) the wrong way. Sure some experience it the way you are claiming they do, but many don't. That's the point I'm trying to make.

 

9 hours ago, Kayze said:

"people who can enjoy and desire sex, but only under very limited and specific circumstances" is what relates to me

You're free to define that as gray-asexual if that's what you want. That's what I experience though and I'm most definitely not grey (or demi). To me it's like saying 'I'm a man who only desires sex with men sometimes, very rarely.. But most of the time I desire sex with women so I'm not gay or bi, I'm straight'. As far as I'm concerned, one either wants it or they don't. Every sexual person alive has a criteria for when and who they'll have partnered sex with, and under what circumstances. Some people's preferences are more limited than others (think of all the people who have only had a few sexual partners in their entire life) but at the end of the day, they still all desire and enjoy sexual intimacy with other people to some extent or another, under a specific set of circumstances. *shrug*. Hence why I'm not any kind of asexual even though I've been physically celibate for 7 years and would happily never have sex again. I just know that under the right circumstances I can potentially desire and enjoy some forms of sexual intimacy.

 

9 hours ago, Kayze said:

it's countering claims of what sexual attraction is

Again, none of us were actually trying to explain what sexual attraction is, we were trying to explain how sexual people experience it (the frequency, strength, etc). You were saying we experience in a very different way than what our own experience would dictate.

 

9 hours ago, Kayze said:

How is it comparable?

Because it's someone who claims to be one orientation telling people of a different orientation how they should experience their own orientation. Then when they try to say 'no it's not really like that for us', the one trying to dictate their experiences to them starts arguing with them.You're saying 'this is how sexual people feel' and every sexual person in this thread has said 'no, it doesn't really feel like that for us at all, it's more like this...'

 

Yet for some reason you're refusing to take our word for how we (and other sexual people) feel. *shrug*

 

9 hours ago, Kayze said:

Except the points given is that anyone that's asexual doesn't understand sexual attraction at all and therefore sexual people are 100% right.

No the point is that we understand how sexual attraction works for us, as sexual people. We are obviously 100% right about our own experiences. because we are the ones who are sexual. Yet the asexual is trying to tell us how sexual attraction should feel and work for us and we are trying to say it just doesn't work that way for many sexual people. Not all, but many.

 

Just like if the gay guy was trying to explain his own homosexual feelings to a straight guy and the straight guy kept insisting that no, that's not how gay people feel at all. 

 

9 hours ago, Kayze said:

but not why it's wrong.

What you're wrong about isn't the attraction itself (I'm not sure how you're specifically defining it), but what you are wrong about is how it's experienced by sexual people. Sure some of us experience it the way you're describing it (being able to desire sex with someone without forming some kind of emotional connection first) but there are many of us who do require some kind of emotional connection before we can desire sexual intimacy with someone, and that may sometimes be only under very limited circumstances and happen very rarely. Just because it's less in your face in the media doesn't make it less valid or relevant.

 

9 hours ago, Kayze said:

Ace labels are merely one's rate or condition of experiencing sexual attraction (from never to rarely),

Technically, ace means 'without sexual attraction' (the 'a' in asexual literally means 'without'). It doesn't mean 'sometimes has sexual attraction in this or that way'. That whole 'rarely, under certain circumstances' thing came from a misunderstanding of how regular sexual people experience their sexuality. It was made under the assumption that all sexual people can want sex very easily, with someone based merely on the fact that they're physically attractive, and that this happens very often a sexual person. That assumption led certain young asexuals to believe that if you experience sexual attraction more rarely, or it's not based on appearance, or it doesn't last that long, you must not be a sexual person. That's the issue. It's the assumption that all sexuals experience their sexuality in only one specific way throughout their whole lives that caused the confusion.

 

9 hours ago, Kayze said:

 I may not experience sexual attraction as often or triggered by exactly the same things, but the sensation is still the same.

Same. Hence why I'm not asexual because I do experience it even if it's not triggered by the same things as it is for some other people, and not as often as some other people. And I don't place much importance on sex and wouldn't care personally if I didn't have it again. But I'm still not ace, because ace means 'without sexual attraction'. I am not without sexual attraction, even if I don't experience it the way a cheap chick-flick or erotic novel may portray it.

 

9 hours ago, Kayze said:

I fail to see how attacking someone's label, claiming inexperience (e.g. "16 year old asexuals", "youth asexuals"), assuming labels/experience of another, etc is at all points of the actual argument.

No one is attacking anyone's label though? We even all said that demisexuality exists (regardless of whether we think it's on the ace spectrum or not). It most certainly is asexuals (especially young ones) who throw around inaccurate definitions of what it feels like to be a regular sexual person. That's not a criticism or anything, it's just a fact. These same people then go on to write blogs on Tumblr and long posts on AVEN etc telling other young questioning people what it feels like to be sexual and saying that if you don't experience that then you're ace. Which leads to a vast amount of people identifying as asexual based on a misunderstanding of how 'regular' sexual people think and feel about sex. It's not a criticism though, it's just a fact. And these are points of an 'actual argument' because these facts have led to a massive misunderstanding (in the ace community) of both demisexuality and how sexual attraction works for many sexual people (which ties directly back in to your OP and even the title of this thread).

 

Hopefully that's cleared things up a bit.

 

Disclaimer: I am of course not saying that an individual cannot identify themselves personally however they want. I am debating overall definitions themselves and the ways in which they have been misunderstood, not an individual's right to identify however they want which they are of course free to do so.

 

[Cobie]

On 11/5/2018 at 6:52 PM, Telecaster68 said:

I blame the asexual 16 year olds. They need to do a better job of explaining it to us.

🤣

[Philip027]

All I have to say here is that the people here suggesting that people who cannot tell if / find that strangers are attractive (basically, demi- people) are "common"...

 

They sure aren't/weren't common for me.

 

I was shunned and ostracized from many social encounters growing up because I couldn't do this.  It's *normal and expected* to be able to and you are treated as a weirdo if you can't.  If people try to ask you who you like or have the hots for and you say nobody, you aren't believed.  Celebrity crushes and other such fantastical things like that are extremely commonplace, and you're also not believed if you say you don't have them / can't experience them.  If experiencing things this way was as common as many of you are making it out to be, this wouldn't be the immediate near-universal reaction.

 

I do think there are a lot of people who are demi, but technically "1%" of people being ace still means a lot of people too.  I absolutely do not believe they are as common as this thread is making them out to be.  And they are still wildly different from a typical sexual/romantic person who CAN experience all this stuff without the personal connection, thus making the distinction necessary, in my opinion.  People who are demi (in any sense) who spend any amount of time out in society are still going to catch on quick to the fact there's still a vast difference between them and their sexual/romantic peers, even if they still aren't quite ace/aro.  It's the reason why demi often gets roped into the ace "spectrum" (massive air quotes around that word), because their experiences with sexual/romantic folks can be remarkably similar to those that aces go through.

[Sally]

13 hours ago, Kayze said:

You keep referring to me as an asexual that has no idea what sexual attraction is while unable to actually backup any of your counter statements of what sexual attraction is. So yes, I can agree this thread is getting out of hand but not for the reason you stated.

I am an asexual.  I know how important sex can be to  sexuals, because I've had two very long-term relationships (including sex, to please them) with sexuals.   However, I have no idea "what" (i.e., the actual experience of) sexual feelings mean.  If you're  an asexual, you don't either.  But you expect sexuals to "backup [sic]" their statements of what it feels like.  WTF?   It seems you're simply unwilling or unable to take in information on an issue about which you have no knowledge.  

[Sally]

N/M

 

[Cobie]

On 11/5/2018 at 8:36 AM, Telecaster68 said:

I'm always happy and grateful when an asexual explains to me how sexual attraction works. 

🤣

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Philip027 said:

All I have to say here is that the people here suggesting that people who cannot tell if / find that strangers are attractive (basically, demi- people) are "common"...

You have interpreted our argument incorrectly.

 

No one is saying that that it's common to not find strangers attractive to look at. Anyone (even many asexuals) can tell if someone is attractive or not  (based on their own person standards of beauty) unless they're someone who lacks aesthetic attraction or very rarely experiences it. However, that's not what we are talking about. We are talking about being drawn to actually want sexual intimacy with another person without really knowing them (which not everyone is capable of), not about merely being able to look at someone and judge whether or not they have an attractive appearance (which even many asexuals are capable of).

[Philip027]

I know what you're talking about and I've interpreted nothing incorrectly.  It's still the common, expected behavior for people to be able to experience it.

[Guest]

@Philip027

 

I personally think you have some kind of demi-aesthetic attraction thing going on (not that it needs a label), as you have always seemed to have trouble understanding how others draw the line between basic aesthetic attraction and actual sexual attraction (wanting to actually have sex with that person). We have had this convo many times before if you remember?

 

I  myself am completely unable to tell if men are attractive to look at (they actually look quite gross to me for the most part) unless I develop an emotional appreciation for who they are internally, then I can begin to see them as beautiful, angelic-looking even. But when see lists of 'most attractive men in the world' (as one example) I find myself actually shuddering looking at them all because they're just not attractive to me without that connection.

 

 Whereas I can find almost any woman attractive to look at without even needing to know her, it just doesn't go as deep as what I feel for the men I develop that appreciation for.

 

HOWEVER, that's all completely separate from my desire for sexual intimacy/actual sexual attraction, which only happens once certain emotional feelings have developed.

 

@asshole said something along these lines before in this thread too. She can find someone very attractive to look at but would be weirded out if that person offered her sex, unless she had some kind of emotional connection with them. This really is extremely common and many sexual people experience it. We can find certain people attractive to look at, sure. But actually wanting to have sex with them is often a whole different 'ball'game because a lot more is required than them just looking good to us, for many sexuals.

 

Its worth noting also there are sexual people who couldn't care less about appearance. Some truly just don't care and don't find anyone more attractive than anyone else. You seem a bit like this to me when it comes to how you experience aesthetic attraction to other people.

 

As a side-note, I've never been shunned or judged for not being able to find men attractive at a glance. People just assume I have high standards. But maybe people reacted differently to you for feeling that way because you're a male? (which isn't fair, but people are weird like that).

 

That was slightly off topic, but I was just trying to further clarify the difference between sexual and aesthetic attraction. It's very easy to find someone attractive to look at but not actually want to have sex with them. Like I said, even many aces experience that.

[Philip027]

Quote

I personally think you have some kind of demi-aesthetic attraction thing going on (not that it needs a label), as you have always seemed to have trouble understanding how others draw the line between basic aesthetic attraction and actual sexual attraction (wanting to actually have sex with that person). We have had this convo many times before if you remember?

I don't think there is anything ambiguous about people saying they would "do" or "bone down" with X person that they have never interacted with / is only attainable in their fantasies, and that is something I have heard many, many people talking about.  Again, it is the normal and expected behavior.  You are considered *weird* if you cannot do this or otherwise insisting that you have no X person in your mind that you find personally desirable (and not just "generally attractive").

 

If demi people were really as common as being insinuated here, I would think they'd be a little better known and that this sort of reaction wouldn't be as prevalent.

 

Quote

As a side-note, I've never been shunned or judged for not being able to find men attractive at a glance. People just assume I have high standards. But maybe people reacted differently to you for feeling that way because you're a male? (which isn't fair, but people are weird like that).

It could play into that, yes.  I know for a fact it's a big part of what had me generally feeling alienated from my own sex starting from around intermediate school.

[Guest]

20 minutes ago, Philip027 said:

 It's still the common, expected behavior for people to be able to experience it.

We weren't talking about aesthetic attraction. Of course it's common for people to be able to experience aesthetic attraction, even aces do. We are talking about actually desiring sex with other people without knowing them. 

 

Being demisexual or not (or asexual, or sexual) has nothing to do with being able to find people attractive to look at. It's about who you desire to connect sexually with and under what circumstances. Your examples were of AESTHETIC attraction, which is common. We are talking about wanting to have sex with people we don't know, which is certainly something some sexual people experience and some don't.

 

Most people with any sort of maturity won't freak out if you say 'I can't want to have sex with someone unless I have a kind of emotional connection to them'. They'll most likely shrug and say they feel that way too, or at least say they understand why you feel that way. It's a very, very common sexual experience.. outside of high school I guess?

 

Society in general actually judges women especially who have sex with strangers very, very negatively for the most part. We all know that. We've all words like 'sl^t' 'h*e' 'sl@g' to refer to women who 'sleep around'. So I find it odd that some people seem to think it's the commonly expected thing and that society in general accepts and celebrates it. I'm assuming it just comes down to who you hang out with?

 

Oh, your other response just came through while I was typing  

 

10 minutes ago, Philip027 said:

I don't think there is anything ambiguous about people saying they would "do" or "bone down" with X person that they have never interacted with / is only attainable in their fantasies, and that is something I have heard many, many people talking about.  Again, it is the normal and expected behavior.  You are considered *weird* if you cannot do this or otherwise insisting that you have no X person in your mind that you find personally desirable (and not just "generally attractive").  If demi people were really as common as being insinuated here, this sort of reaction wouldn't be as prevalent.

 

I guess my response to this is pretty much covered by what I've just said anyway, but as a female I've never been considered weird or anything for being who I am sexually (except when I thought I was ace). On OKCupid now I'm extremely open about not being able to want sex with a guy until I've gotten to know him really well and developed feelings for him, and not one man has messaged and said I'm weird. They say things like 'I totally understand how you feel and am willing to take as long as you need to get to know you, even if it means we'll only ever be friends'. One would think if this negative attitude towards 'demisexuality' was so prevalent, I'd get abusive messages and mean comments all the time?

 

On the contrary, people would be more likely to hate on me (and treat me poorly) if I said something like 'Just message me and if you're good-looking I'll screw you'.. Most people would lose all respect for me immediately (and the same would apply to a man in that situation too). People in general just judge that kind of attitude very negatively for the most part.

 

I'm not saying people won't react negatively if you say 'naaah I just don't really find anyone attractive, so I don't want sex with anyone' but that's not what myself (or others) are talking about. We are talking about needing an emotional connection before you can desire sex. That is relatively common and considered preferable by many people, especially on dating sites as it turns out if you're actually seeking a mature long-term relationship.

 

[Philip027]

Quote

We weren't talking about aesthetic attraction. Of course it's common for people to be able to experience aesthetic attraction, even aces do. We are talking about actually desiring sex with other people without knowing them. 

I know that.  Why do you keep bringing up aesthetic attraction?  I never said that.

[Guest]

12 minutes ago, Philip027 said:

Why do you keep bringing up aesthetic attraction?

To differentiate between a general 'he's so cute/hot/giggly crush' reaction and 'I actually want to have sex with that person even though I just met them and don't know them' reaction. I went on to explain myself quite thoroughly I thought.

 

Almost any mature person will be very accepting and understanding if you say 'I don't can't actually desire sexual intimacy unless I've developed an emotional bond with someone' because that's pretty common. If you say 'I don't find anyone at all attractive so I don't want sex with anyone' you will get a slightly more negative reaction because that's further out of the norm but doesn't really have much to do with what we are discussing. We are discussing wanting/not wanting to have sex with people you don't know, not the things that you outlined in your comment about attraction.

 

[Philip027]

Quote

To differentiate between a general 'he's so cute/hot/giggly crush' reaction and 'I actually want to have sex with that person even though I just met them and don't know them' reaction. I went on to explain myself quite thoroughly I thought.

It was irrelevant to what I was saying though.  I was talking about the latter, not the former.

 

Quote

We are discussing wanting/not wanting to have sex with people you don't know,

That's what I'm talking about too.  Why do you think I'm talking about something else?

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Philip027 said:

It was irrelevant to what I was saying though.  I was talking about the latter, not the former.

 

That's what I'm talking about too.  Why do you think I'm talking about something else?

If you talked to any mature sexually experienced person and said 'I'm really not interested in having sex with someone unless I've developed an emotional connection with them first', I'm almost certain they are not only not going to mock you and instead be quite understanding, even say that yes, they know plenty of people like that. What you were talking about before was different though. Here's what you said:

 

4 hours ago, Philip027 said:

All I have to say here is that the people here suggesting that people who cannot tell if / find that strangers are attractive (basically, demi- people) are "common"...

(demisexuality is nothing to do with being able to find strangers attractive. Finding someone attractive is not synonymous with wanting to have sex with them). And:

 

4 hours ago, Philip027 said:

If people try to ask you who you like or have the hots for and you say nobody, you aren't believed.  Celebrity crushes and other such fantastical things like that are extremely commonplace, and you're also not believed if you say you don't have them / can't experience them.  If experiencing things this way was as common as many of you are making it out to be, this wouldn't be the immediate near-universal reaction.

'I don't get the hots for anyone' 'I don't/can't get celebrity crushes' are both very different than just saying 'I don't really desire sexual intimacy unless I've formed a bond with someone'. No sane, mature person is going to ridicule you for saying the latter because that's relatively common. The first two statements though (which relate to something different than desiring intimacy only when a connection has developed) may get a funny look or mean comment from people (because people can be jerks). But they're not demisexuality, those things you outlined are just aspects of some people's personality and some people experience those things and some don't (regardless of whether they're sexual or ace).

[Guest]

One thing to note also is... games like marry, bang or kill are games. People who say things like Id hit that dont really mean they would, if the person asked, have sex with them. It means they find the person hot. 

 

My ex boyfriend from when I was 15 says stuff like that. But, he only actually desires people he knows well, to the point he is celibate by choice for years between partners. He occasionally sleeps with a friend or coworker if they really get along. He has no interest in the others like that, even if he enjoys looking at them and expresses it in typical macho sexual language. He has to connect to actually desire. 

 

And I know this cause he will tell me about his girl troubles. And ask for advice. And all that fun stuff. I dated him so he knows I can tell him when hes being an idiot. 

 

But, I know what Phil is talking about. Girls at work would stand around gossiping about the hot boys and how they would like to take them home. And when asked what I thought, it would be regarded as odd if I had no one on my take home list. However... thats not a real i want sex list.. its a hes hot list. Sure, some of them desired the guys. But, not all. Its just a fun game of fantasy... like an ace that likes looking at porn but doesnt actually desire the person. 

[FlyingFree]

On 11/5/2018 at 10:59 AM, FictoCannibal. said:

You could highlight it by selecting it before you read it, which will make it black on blue? I type like this because I have an eye condition that means I have a lot of trouble with black text on whiteish colours. 

 

Thank you for explaining. Funny how a similar problem can need opposite fixes, huh? The purple is better, thank you! I'm sure you know on computers there is a way to change the background color of websites. The closest thing I know of for that on phones is Twilight. I keep my red tint night dimmer on all the time and it helps me a lot but I'm guessing isn't strong enough of a gray for you. Good idea highlighting the text, that does help, thanks! How do you change font color on these boards? I don't see an option for that. I'm happy to make mine purple. Do you use HTML? Or bb...Forget the message board code name, ugh.

On 11/5/2018 at 10:42 AM, asshole said:

But this place worms its way into your consciousness such that you start feeling gross and creepy for being normal....

 

What's wrong with sex, guys? 

I'm so sorry you're feeling that way, asshole. I think sex must be a beautiful, wonderful thing in the right situation.

 

 

I can't figure out how to get a cursor before the first quote box so I can lead with a comment. Oh well.

 

I haven't had the mental and eye strength to read all the new comments, just skimmed many of them, sorry I can't fully join in. Sorry if I'm repeating things already answered. (I have ME/CFS, an energy metabolism disorder.)

 

I have a question for the sexuals. What does finding someone hot mean? I've never actually used the term (now I know why--understanding my asexuality is new to me. Not even sure if I'm gray or ace since people argue about what that means. I don't feel any sexual attraction even to my fiancé but am interested in trying sex with him someday in the right situation.)

 

I had guessed that for a sexual saying someone was hot meant a minor sexual attraction but not usually anything they would want to act on. But after reading this I guess I have no idea what the average sexual feels so I don't know what the term means! Lol

 

Someone in this thread, now I forget who, described being tongue-tied around a pretty girl but that being turned on wasn't part of the experience. I wonder if sexual attraction is about way more than being turned on? I've never felt that kind of flitterpated, giddy, tongue-tied experience even though I've had what I would call a crush. I will maybe get a little nervous and embarrassed if I really want to impress someone, which I guess is a similar thing? Likewise I love my fiancé but I haven't experienced anything that seems to be what other people call being "in love". Is all that just my personality or part of being ace?

[Ceebs]

16 minutes ago, FlyingFree said:

I'm so sorry you're feeling that way, asshole. I think sex must be a beautiful, wonderful thing in the right situation.

Hahaha I won't lie, seeing my current (likely temporary) display name used in the context of a sentence like that cracks me up every time. I kinda love it.

 

It's ok, I'm ok, but yeah... it does have a bit of an effect. Having come from a place of once believing I was possibly asexual, to realising I did actually desire sexual experiences but then having them repeatedly with someone of the opposite sex and having to deal with a whole lot of negativity and repulsion from that, to figuring out that I'm actually gay and sexual and that that's a completely different ballgame for me has been somewhat of an experience, to say the least. It took me a handful of years of distance from engaging in any type of sexual activity at all and a strong and very positive connection with someone of the same sex for me to reframe any of it. I've been there with the negativity myself, whether prior to having any sexual experiences at all or after sex with a guy. I understand why many asexuals don't feel positively about it for sure. Sex is really bleh when you're not into it. But yeah, some of the negative stuff round here... the way some people have a need to cling to asexuality when they clearly are not asexual but rather uncomfortable in some way... it's not all that healthy to be around. Like I say, I've had this dumb conflict in my head at times about the more recent connection I've had, and felt a need for reassurance that it isn't shallow to want someone in that way. On a gut level it really does not feel shallow whatsoever and I feel very positively about my sexuality... I finally understand the connection between love and sex... but there are occasional thoughts of how it shouldn't be important or whatever. But it is, and logically I know that's not wrong.

 

It does seem like a beautiful thing when it's right, yeah. And thanks.  Really, I'm alright with it all. 

[FlyingFree]

5 hours ago, Philip027 said:

I don't think there is anything ambiguous about people saying they would "do" or "bone down" with X person that they have never interacted with / is only attainable in their fantasies, and that is something I have heard many, many people talking about.

Okay, so I thought that the majority of people who say something like that "oh I'd totally do her right now!" are feeling sexual attraction but for most people who say that it's still a thing they would never follow through on. Is that right? They would make a comment like that but if the person heard and was like "sure!" they would be weired out.

 

I thought that would be the difference between sexuals who don't desire sex without a connection vs demisexuals. The sexuals feel attraction but have absolutely no desire to actually follow through to have sex with a stranger? That is, I thought there was a big difference between feeling turned on vs wanting to have sex with someone. Of course the first will usually happen for sexuals if they do want sex, but being turned on doesn't necessarily mean you want to have sex right now, right?

[FlyingFree]

18 minutes ago, asshole said:

Hahaha I won't lie, seeing my current (likely temporary) display name used in the context of a sentence like that cracks me up every time. I kinda love it.

 

It's ok, I'm ok, but yeah... it does have a bit of an effect.

Yeah I think that might be the first time I've ever typed out that word! I tried "ah" first but decided it wasn't clear enough. Haha

 

And yes, I can imagine how confusing that all is. That's a lot to go through. I just last week discovered this forum and all the nuances of ace and gray, so it's confusing and new to me even though I'm well into my 30s. Of course I knew I was different than the norm especially after I got in a serious relationship a few years ago. He and I have talked about what I wasn't feeling, but I didn't have labels/terms or really a full understanding of any of what I do and don't feel. Despite the confusion I am now feeling more confidence and clarity about who I am because of AVEN and I appreciate that!

[Grumpy Alien]

20 minutes ago, FlyingFree said:

I have a question for the sexuals. What does finding someone hot mean? I've never actually used the term (now I know why--understanding my asexuality is new to me. Not even sure if I'm gray or ace since people argue about what that means. I don't feel any sexual attraction even to my fiancé but am interested in trying sex with him someday in the right situation.)

For me, it just means very physically attractive. It’s not really a word I would use (sounds insincere to me) but to me, it doesn’t necessarily imply sexual attraction. To be honest, it doesn’t even mean I-am-attracted-to-you. e.g. If I post a good selfie on Instagram, my friend might comment that I look hot. She’s not attracted to me, she is just acknowledging I look good. It can be an objective thing too that way.

 

And as @asshole mentioned, just because I think someone is gorgeous doesn’t mean I actually want to sleep with them or would even entertain the idea. I love Tom Hardy. I find him incredibly attractive. I would go as far as to say Tom Hardy is sexy. I can’t even imagine sex with him. I don’t know him. If we met and he hit on me (just suspend your disbelief for this example) I would be creeped out. A stranger making a pass? I would want to get away from him. I don’t know him and no amount of attractiveness is going to make up for that.

 

20 minutes ago, FlyingFree said:

Someone in this thread, now I forget who, described being tongue-tied around a pretty girl but that being turned on wasn't part of the experience. I wonder if sexual attraction is about way more than being turned on? I've never felt that kind of flitterpated, giddy, tongue-tied experience even though I've had what I would call a crush. I will maybe get a little nervous and embarrassed if I really want to impress someone, which I guess is a similar thing? Likewise I love my fiancé but I haven't experienced anything that seems to be what other people call being "in love". Is all that just my personality or part of being ace?

I’m not constantly turned on by someone I’m sexually attracted to. I’m pretty sure that’s considered a medical condition. Imagine having a constantly erect penis because you’re attracted to your spouse. That is very alarming and a medical emergency. No, I’m actually only turned on by triggers, such as intimate physical touch or nudity or conversation. That sort of thing. The sexual attraction is still there. I’m just not suffering from nymphomania where I always want sex. Ain’t nobody got time (or energy) for that! In the beginning stages of interest and/or dating, nerves are common because you want to impress them and you’re scared of embarrassing yourself or making a bad impression. That’s what causes the butterflies in the stomach and heart flutters. The giddiness is kind of an awe and joy of being around them and thinking of them. They make you happy and this is all new. It makes you look like an idiot and it’s simultaneously both the best and worst feeling but it’s just excitement and nervousness. People describe being in love in various ways.

 

To me, love is comfort and safety. My fiancé is like another part of my own being that I love more than myself. I don’t need to hide anything from him - he’s taken care of me when I’m barely clothed and dry heaving in the bathroom and I’ve taken care of him. There are no secrets and that doesn’t feel weird. Being in the house with him is like being home alone but never lonely. I feel safe. How I knew that was love was because I can’t fathom it ending and I don’t want it to. I don’t think love is different for people based on orientation, I think it’s based on what you need as a person from others and what your partner provides.

[Ceebs]

9 minutes ago, Graceful said:

I’m not constantly turned on by someone I’m sexually attracted to. I’m pretty sure that’s considered a medical condition. Imagine having a constantly erect penis because you’re attracted to your spouse. That is very alarming and a medical emergency. No, I’m actually only turned on by triggers, such as intimate physical touch or nudity or conversation. That sort of thing. The sexual attraction is still there. I’m just not suffering from nymphomania where I always want sex.

I laughed aloud at this paragraph.  Hahaha yeahhh... no, being into someone definitely does not mean being 24/7 turned on. Yikes! I've experienced... hrmm, significant portions of days here and there where I've thought about sexual stuff a lot and interaction will further those thoughts and my body is... well, let's say more responsive than average... but that's honestly fairly rare, I've gotta be in a very specific headspace for that. I spend exponentially more time with sex being pretty far from my mind.

 

I remember when I was younger though, like my early teens perhaps, wondering if being in love with someone meant that you felt exactly like you did when you had a new crush, 24/7.  

[Kayze]

*sigh*

 

9 hours ago, FictoCannibal. said:

I said plenty do. Not EVERYONE does. There are those who require a bond and those who don't. And those who have differing requirements from one encounter to the next (either a bond, or no bond) depending on a number of factors. 

 

Sexual attraction is the type of attraction that draws you to desire partnered sexual intimacy with someone else. What's most fundamentally important though is that desire for partnered sexual contact as a preference to masturbation, at least sometimes, with specific people: It's that desire for partnered sexual contact (for sexual and/or emotional pleasure) which makes someone a sexual person, regardless of how often that is or what it is that causes that desire.

The argument many have made in this thread is that most sexual people require an emotional bond. Sexual attraction is defined as "an attraction on the basis of sexual desire or the quality of arousing such interest." That's the definition given by multiple sources (in a slightly different wording). It's a feeling and doesn't need to result in an act. So if it's experienced differently, how is it sexual attraction?

 

Finding someone sexually attractive doesn't mean someone will sleep with them, and this is seen A LOT. People find someone hot or sexy, it causes an arousal even if not "physically". But there can be other factors before one's attraction is strong enough to motivate sexual desire. Aesthetic attraction is an appreciation/admiration in beautify but doesn't have an arousal component and doesn't necessary result in wanting to know them.

 

9 hours ago, FictoCannibal. said:

No, I didn't say that. And I wasn't trying to define sexual attraction. I was trying to explain the way a 'regular' sexual person experiences it (as in the frequency, strength, etc). I was trying to clarify that it differs so drastically from person to person, and the driving factor behind how one chooses a partner is so different from person to person, that you can't just lump them all into one box and say 'If you experience sexual attraction like that then you're sexual. But if you experience it any other way you're some kind of ace'. It just doesn't work like that.

 

No, you're defining the way that sexual people experience sexual attraction (the frequency, strength, etc) the wrong way. Sure some experience it the way you are claiming they do, but many don't. That's the point I'm trying to make.

Funny, cause again, you are saying it's different. Frequency sure, but strength? Etc? It's frequency and circumstances, nothing about strength or legitimacy. While yes there can be a strength component with others, you're using that to say I can't understand sexuals. Which I'm telling you I don't experience sexual attraction any different except for frequency and circumstance. That's it.

 

Well, sexual attraction is defined that way. So if sexual people don't have sexual attraction to others, then I don't know what to say. I've given examples of how they have it before an emotional bond and numbers/studies. You might not be one of them but your own experience is irrelevant to the argument that this is about. That is, the claim that it's common.

 

9 hours ago, FictoCannibal. said:

You're free to define that as gray-asexual if that's what you want. That's what I experience though and I'm most definitely not grey (or demi). To me it's like saying 'I'm a man who only desires sex with men sometimes, very rarely.. But most of the time I desire sex with women so I'm not gay or bi, I'm straight'. As far as I'm concerned, one either wants it or they don't. Every sexual person alive has a criteria for when and who they'll have partnered sex with, and under what circumstances. 

Cool. You're really selling the "don't tell people what they experience" by invalidating a label because it doesn't make sense to you. But I guess you know better, as you keep saying and using poorly relatable examples for a confirmation bias.

 

9 hours ago, FictoCannibal. said:

Again, none of us were actually trying to explain what sexual attraction is, we were trying to explain how sexual people experience it (the frequency, strength, etc). You were saying we experience in a very different way than what our own experience would dictate.

Except you constantly are. I give a definition and reasons why the definition doesn't need additional conditions for someone to feel it and yet multiple people in here keep saying it's wrong cause it's not how they feel.

 

9 hours ago, FictoCannibal. said:

Because it's someone who claims to be one orientation telling people of a different orientation how they should experience their own orientation. Then when they try to say 'no it's not really like that for us', the one trying to dictate their experiences to them starts arguing with them.You're saying 'this is how sexual people feel' and every sexual person in this thread has said 'no, it doesn't really feel like that for us at all, it's more like this...'

 

Yet for some reason you're refusing to take our word for how we (and other sexual people) feel. *shrug*

 

Ah, so someone who has opposite sex attractions is somehow the same as someone who experience sexual attraction at a different frequency? So, your sexual attraction IS different? Having an attraction to the opposite sex is different than having an attraction to the same sex. Having regular sexual attraction is only different in frequency to someone who often does not. It might be a different orientation but frequency and conditions is the only difference.

 

As for constantly accusing me of telling you what your or any individual sexual person's personal experience is, don't you have more "gray-asexuality doesn't actually exist" commentary to give?

 

9 hours ago, FictoCannibal. said:

Technically, ace means 'without sexual attraction' (the 'a' in asexual literally means 'without'). It doesn't mean 'sometimes has sexual attraction in this or that way'. That whole 'rarely, under certain circumstances' thing came from a misunderstanding of how regular sexual people experience their sexuality. It was made under the assumption that all sexual people can want sex very easily, with someone based merely on the fact that they're physically attractive, and that this happens very often a sexual person. That assumption led certain young asexuals to believe that if you experience sexual attraction more rarely, or it's not based on appearance, or it doesn't last that long, you must not be a sexual person. That's the issue. It's the assumption that all sexuals experience their sexuality in only one specific way throughout their whole lives that caused the confusion.

Yeah, and there's ace in "gray-asexuality" and I've stated multiple times that I do not experience sexual attraction except maybe if a specific, limited circumstance happens (hence the "gray-" part). I wouldn't use "ace" if I was sexual of any actual measurable capacity. But here you are again saying what is valid and not when I NEVER DID THAT towards sexuals. Questioning sexual attraction ISN'T questioning sexuals themselves. I'm never said if you don't desire sex before emotional feels that you have to be demisexual nor that you can't be sexual. Yet here you are doing just that.

 

But hey, since you're not ace and don't experience what gray-asexuals claim to, shouldn't you take your own advice here?

 

9 hours ago, FictoCannibal. said:

No the point is that we understand how sexual attraction works for us, as sexual people. We are obviously 100% right about our own experiences. because we are the ones who are sexual. Yet the asexual is trying to tell us how sexual attraction should feel and work for us and we are trying to say it just doesn't work that way for many sexual people. Not all, but many.

 

Just like if the gay guy was trying to explain his own homosexual feelings to a straight guy and the straight guy kept insisting that no, that's not how gay people feel at all. 

So, you claim it's how you personally feel, then how all regular sexuals feel, then not all sexuals, then say that you're 100% right in how you feel because you're sexual yet gray-asexuality isn't a thing because it doesn't make sense to you. And I'm somehow a pure asexual again? This is quite a rollercoaster.

 

And again, it's nothing like your terrible choice of orientation comparison, which I mentioned above.

 

9 hours ago, FictoCannibal. said:

What you're wrong about isn't the attraction itself (I'm not sure how you're specifically defining it), but what you are wrong about is how it's experienced by sexual people. Sure some of us experience it the way you're describing it (being able to desire sex with someone without forming some kind of emotional connection first) but there are many of us who do require some kind of emotional connection before we can desire sexual intimacy with someone, and that may sometimes be only under very limited circumstances and happen very rarely. Just because it's less in your face in the media doesn't make it less valid or relevant.

I've LINKED to many of my definitions, that I've given multiple times. And again, sexual attraction doesn't mean you desire to sleep with the person but that a sexual arousal (not always physical) feel happens due to their looks, personality, demeanor, smell, etc. Even with that said, sexual people aren't attracted to everyone they encounter. Labels that claim no sexual attraction isn't exactly on an individual basis.

 

9 hours ago, FictoCannibal. said:

Same. Hence why I'm not asexual because I do experience it even if it's not triggered by the same things as it is for some other people, and not as often as some other people. And I don't place much importance on sex and wouldn't care personally if I didn't have it again. But I'm still not ace, because ace means 'without sexual attraction'. I am not without sexual attraction, even if I don't experience it the way a cheap chick-flick or erotic novel may portray it.

Great, and I didn't claim to be asexual either. I'm gray-asexual for that reason. Essentially asexual but there has been a finicky occurrence otherwise. I can't claim to be sexual, cause I do not relate to majority of sexuals I've personally experienced. And I don't mean small quirks, I mean that is causes huge stress and strain on relationships or a big disconnect (like being a gay guy at a gathering of heterosexuals boasting about their attractions or vice versa).If I was sexual but just abstinent or little libido, I would claim to be sexual. But I know enough about myself to say that isn't the case, just as you should know enough about yourself to say you're sexual.

 

9 hours ago, FictoCannibal. said:

No one is attacking anyone's label though? We even all said that demisexuality exists (regardless of whether we think it's on the ace spectrum or not). It most certainly is asexuals (especially young ones) who throw around inaccurate definitions of what it feels like to be a regular sexual person. That's not a criticism or anything, it's just a fact. These same people then go on to write blogs on Tumblr and long posts on AVEN etc telling other young questioning people what it feels like to be sexual and saying that if you don't experience that then you're ace. Which leads to a vast amount of people identifying as asexual based on a misunderstanding of how 'regular' sexual people think and feel about sex. It's not a criticism though, it's just a fact. And these are points of an 'actual argument' because these facts have led to a massive misunderstanding (in the ace community) of both demisexuality and how sexual attraction works for many sexual people (which ties directly back in to your OP and even the title of this thread).

Except your posts, for example, have claimed gray-asexuality doesn't exist and ironically to one of your main points, using your own experience to defend that claim against a label you do not have. I won't deny that misinformation happens and I'd extend it to say it's not just asexuals claiming to understand sexuals. TOO MANY sexuals claim that asexuality doesn't exist. Too many on both sexual and asexual sides want to claim "gray" isn't a thing, but I don't know what they expect people who cannot relate to sexuals or asexuals are suppose to feel.

 

These points are tangents, ad hominems, and assumptions to deflect from actually understanding sexual attraction and demisexuality. It's a lot of claiming of what is while not attempting to back them up with infallible examples. You don't have to prove how you feel, but once you start talking about how others or most or all of a certain label feels, it should be backed up with something and the counters from those that disagree should be on that support.

 

9 hours ago, FictoCannibal. said:

Hopefully that's cleared things up a bit.

Unfortunately, just like the multiple previous posts where I've had to repeat points, I don't believe it has or ever will.

 

7 hours ago, Sally said:

I am an asexual.  I know how important sex can be to  sexuals, because I've had two very long-term relationships (including sex, to please them) with sexuals.   However, I have no idea "what" (i.e., the actual experience of) sexual feelings mean.  If you're  an asexual, you don't either.  But you expect sexuals to "backup [sic]" their statements of what it feels like.  WTF?   It seems you're simply unwilling or unable to take in information on an issue about which you have no knowledge.  

I never said all asexuals 100% understand the sensation of sexual attraction but merely saying that cause someone is not a pure sexual that they cannot fathom how sexuals feel is A FALLACY. And yet here you judging my ability to understand what you admitted to not understanding yourself. Congrats?