Jump to content

Graysexuality and LGBTQ+


letusdeleteouraccounts

Recommended Posts

@CBC, before we get back on topic, yes deep fried catfish is a popular dish in some parts of the USA 

 

 Back on topic as you can be greysexual plus LGBT+  I don't see any issues with such people being in the community 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
letusdeleteouraccounts
22 minutes ago, Skycaptain said:

Back on topic as you can be greysexual plus LGBT+  I don't see any issues with such people being in the community

With the topic discussion, I’m only referencing the cis heterosexual heteromantic grays

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Star Lion said:

With the topic discussion, I’m only referencing the cis heterosexual heteromantic grays

I think that cis grey-heterosexual heteromantics are LGBTQ+. Same with cis grey-heteromantic heterosexuals and cis grey-heterosexual grey-heteromantics.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Custard Cream
2 minutes ago, QuirkyGeek said:

I think that cis grey-heterosexual heteromantics are LGBTQ+. Same with cis grey-heteromantic heterosexuals and cis grey-heterosexual grey-heteromantics.

Yes. My brain has exploded, but yes.

Link to post
Share on other sites
rainbowocollie

I think someone who is lithsexual is basically asexual, they can't function in a sexual relationship and they just fantasize about sex without the desire to act on it in reality. So it comes down to whether you consider aces LGBT in that case

Link to post
Share on other sites
Winged Whisperer
On 6/22/2019 at 1:47 AM, QuirkyGeek said:

Same with cis grey-heteromantic heterosexuals

Seriously how is that in any way queer? How is their experience different significantly from the norm of society?
 

 

On 6/21/2019 at 5:59 PM, CBC said:

It took me at least a minute to figure out what "bigrays" meant. My brain wants to read it as "big rays".

Oh shit, it took me a solid 5 minutes, was about to quote and ask what was meant until I thought "Ok if you read it as "big rays" and didn't make sense, lemme read it as one singular word and try again" that I got it lol.

Link to post
Share on other sites
rainbowocollie

I think the grey area is legit.... Basically ace and/or aro with a caveat, but in most cases still effectively ace/aro and couldn't function as allosexual or alloromantic in a relationship. I think the distinction can be made between dark grey and light grey--demi for example would be light grey since it's closer to allo: a Demi can function like an allosexual in a relationship, though it takes time for those feelings to develop.

 

But whatever. I'm not one to force my way in. I'm LGBT because I'm bi, not because I'm grey

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Fluffy Femme Guy
On 6/16/2019 at 1:15 PM, kelico said:

My thoughts on this...if they feel comfortable with the LGBTQ+ community, then they are a part of it.

Agreed.

Link to post
Share on other sites
QuirkyGeek
On 6/27/2019 at 9:20 AM, Winged Whisperer said:

Seriously how is that in any way queer? How is their experience different significantly from the norm of society?

Well, grey-heteromantics experience romantic attraction closer to that of an aromantic so even if they're heterosexual and cisgender, they still experience romantic attraction in a way that is different to society. Even with the second heteromantic identifier, they could experience it only once or twice in their lifetime unlike their romantic attraction, experience it to such a low degree it's hard to figure it out, or not know whether or not they are romantically attracted to people or if it's a different type of attraction. Greyromanticism is very confusing and I strongly believe it still makes a person part of the LGBTQ+ community, even if they use the heteromantic, heterosexual, and cisgender identifiers as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites
degenerate
On 6/18/2019 at 11:50 PM, disGraceful said:

If the desire for sex is so rare it only comes once a year or less, I would say that’s more fluid sexuality than a stagnant orientation. Since asexuality is an absence, any amount of attraction/desire/etc means there’s no absence, even if rare.

This is why I've finally decided that the spectrum concept of asexuality needs to be recognized by AVEN as valid. I've thought about it at length and concluded that denying the spectrum actually excludes many people who share significant life experiences and behaviors with each other that distinguishes them as a group, the cohesive identity of what asexuality really is, instead of protecting that identity. Denial of the spectrum seems to create a very counter intuitive effect, in that there are some who don't share the similar life experiences, and/or behaviors that identify as asexual, due to meeting what is a purely technical adherence to what asexuality is supposed to be. Acceptance of the spectrum will probably create a more cohesive asexual identity, built around the things that actually constitute identity, shared experience instead of adherence to a technical definition.

 

It is important to note, this is how the word asexual is being used already, just without official approval. This is because it makes sense. As @bare_trees mentioned, though grey asexuality indicates the capacity for sexual attraction and sexual desire, due to the low level of it, greys share much of the "pure" asexual experience, and their inclinations may be important to indicate to any potential romantic partner, giving the terms grey asexual, grey-A, etc, practical use. If a term has practical use, it is most certainly valid. And since it is valid in a way in which greys have many shared experiences with asexuals, this makes them part of a cohesive asexual community logically, as such communities exist to unite people of shared life experiences.

 

The concept of asexuality as it stands now occasional hinders the existence of a cohesive asexual community built around shared experience as it accepts the concept that there are asexuals that actively seek out sex on a regular basis. A practical community wouldn't do this. A practical community would accept people who very rarely seek out sexual activity instead, as they have honest shared experience with asexual concepts. This means a practical asexual community would abandon the technical definition for a definition based on shared experience.

 

As for LBGTQ +, I think anyone who experiences same-sex attraction of any kind belongs. But those who only experience hetero attraction of any kind, belong only as allies.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Everything that humans are is a spectrum or continuum. We defy being neatly labeled and categorized, not even for biological sex (if you don't believe me, ask my friend who is intersex, biologically a chimera). Is asexual a club whose strict rules you have to follow and adhere to, or is it a useful label that people can use to describe the way their experience of life is different than what other people seem to experience in their lives?

 

This isn't actually a choice we get to make. The way language works is that we use it for the latter, and there are always purists who complain that it should be used for the former. I try not to find myself among the purists, although sometimes usage takes my favorite words or phrases as it does everyone's.

Link to post
Share on other sites
bare_trees
8 hours ago, degenerate said:

As for LBGTQ +, I think anyone who experiences same-sex attraction of any kind belongs. But those who only experience hetero attraction of any kind, belong only as allies.

Great post, but I wanted to point out that I'd include heterosexual trans folks as LGBTQ+

Link to post
Share on other sites
degenerate
1 hour ago, bare_trees said:

but I wanted to point out that I'd include heterosexual trans folks as LGBTQ+

Good point. Trans is an interesting situation because how they are classified depends on whether you count their sex or their gender. It seems logical to me, either way, as sexuality is a very social concept, and I know that transpeople would prefer others to count their gender, so I do, and I think others should. And though this renders some of them straight, they still belong to LGBT due to shared experience, the same point I was making about Grey-A with the asexual community.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Trans folks have historically been in the same communities as LGB people because sexual orientation and gender identity were often conflated. That's the principal reason they're lumped together. It's based on community roots. 

 

One can say the same about grey folks and the ace community. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
letusdeleteouraccounts
On 7/3/2019 at 11:36 AM, QuirkyGeek said:

they could experience it only once or twice in their lifetime

That’s actually me on romantic attraction from an experience a decade ago even though I still question whether it even was romantic attraction. I identify as aromantic either way because I likely won’t ever experience romantic attraction again and labels are meant to be practical for social interactions. “Greyromantic” (or more specifically “grey-heteromantic”) was making things a lot more complicated rather than actually simplifying them in my circumstance which is why I believe greyromanticism is for people whose experiences are telling them that they likely will experience romantic attraction again eventually, just in an irregular fashion compared to the general population. Same to apply with greysexual

 

On 7/3/2019 at 1:04 PM, degenerate said:

A practical community would accept people who very rarely seek out sexual activity instead, as they have honest shared experience with asexual concepts

They do actually, greysexuals are still apart of the asexual community while not being considered asexual. Also the purpose of the greysexual label was so people who felt like they weren’t “fully sexual” but also not exactly asexual don’t have to identify as such. Trying to combine asexuality and greysexuality just leads to a confusing mess considering that the “a” is supposed to represent the opposite of sexuality. What would also create confusion are the greysexuals who are seeking out sexual relationships whenever their feelings occur while identifying as asexual. Probably not a narrative our small community wants to try and communicate to the heteronormal population who often question LGBTQ+ and who many think is already full of illogical idiots. Also reference to my response on this post to QuirkyGeek about what can be considered a major misconception surrounding asexuality and greysexuality

 

On 7/3/2019 at 10:01 PM, bare_trees said:

Great post, but I wanted to point out that I'd include heterosexual trans folks as LGBTQ+

 

On 7/3/2019 at 11:29 PM, degenerate said:

Good point. Trans is an interesting situation because how they are classified depends on whether you count their sex or their gender

Trans people are always considered LGBTQ+ no matter what their sexuality is because they literally have their letter included in the initials

Link to post
Share on other sites
aquariusabandoned

Hmm...as a biromantic grey-ace/grey-bisexual, I’d say I’m definitely a part of the community because I experience same-gender attraction/multi gender attraction. If I were hetero, no. (That includes hetero aces/grey-heteros, etc)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...