NO MORE CUBES: Depicting Attraction with a Radar Chart

[Hallucigenia]

Are you tired of looking for ways to pictorially depict all the different facets of orientation and ending up with a multitude of indecipherable variations on the theme of an N-dimensional hypercube? Well, look no further!

(Sorry, bit punchy. Bear with.)

My friends, there does exist an easy and widely accepted way of depicting many dimensions of data on a two-dimensional surface. Maybe you have heard of it in a statistics or business class. It is called a Radar Chart.

Here is a Radar Chart of interpersonal attraction (NOT just sexuality), built to depict eight different kinds of attraction in three different directions.

The mechanism is quite simple: A point further away from the centre of the graph indicates more intensity. Each "spoke" on the chart measures a different dimension. And you can put more than one point on each spoke, one for each category of object for your attraction. Instead of becoming a point in N-dimensional space, your patterns of attraction become a pretty multicolored silhouette that's comparatively easy to read.

Here is a sample Radar Chart for a hypothetical individual (who is bisexual rather than asexual, but you get the idea):

Note that the three spokes with green points on them are not necessarily referring to the same objects/events/fetishes. A person may have physical attraction to, say, a cat (wanting to cuddle and pet them) and fantasy attraction to, say, a pair of shoes, and both would be green. This sounds confusing, until you realize that it goes for the other colors of lines as well; a person who experiences both platonic and aesthetic attraction to women may not experience them both for the same woman.

Make your own! Make a different kind of chart on a similar principle! Draw squiggles and forks on it if you're not sure where to put your points! Scribble out a spoke if it violently repulses you! I don't even care what you do with it - go nuts! Just no more hypercubes, people! Seriously.

By the way, in case you are wondering, here are the working definitions I used for my eight spokes:

Fantasy - thinking of people in a sexual way, whether or not you have any desire whatsoever to act on those thoughts.

Primary Sexual - wanting to do something sexual because it'll feel good.

Secondary Sexual - wanting to do something sexual to express love or to enjoy the other person's sexual pleasure.

Primary Romantic - wanting to be in a romantic relationship with someone in particular, "falling in love".

Secondary Romantic - wanting to be in a romantic relationship in general, being open to options should someone pursue you romantically.

Aesthetic - wanting to feast your eyes on someone because they're pretty.

Platonic - wanting to communicate, share ideas, be friends. You don't have to experience platonic attraction to enjoy having friends; in this context it measures a directed desire to get to know a particular person.

Physical - wanting to touch, hug, cuddle and so on.

These categories and definitions are open to modification/debate; they aren't the point of this post, but they're here in case you are confused about the words on the sample chart.

P.S. A shout-out to Owl Saint goes here. These charts were directly inspired by your SquareScale, which is the only other comprehensive attempt to map all this stuff that I've seen that isn't a hypercube.

P.P.S. Please don't be offended by this post if you have used hypercubes in the past. I'm being hyperbolic on purpose. Hypercubes don't enrage me or anything, I just don't think they're practical.

P.P.P.S. If you don't know what a hypercube is, don't worry about it.

EDIT FROM A FEW DAYS LATER:

I forgot to credit Rabger for the distinction between primary and secondary sexual desire.

However, Rabger's model (properly used) also distinguishes between primary and secondary sexual desire and attraction, which this version of the radar chart doesn't. To see a 10-sided version of the radar chart that does include this distinction, please scroll to the bottom of the page.

I'd like to stress that NEITHER of these two kinds of radar charts is a definitive radar chart that places limits on the construction of further radar charts. If you believe there should be different categories in use, or some other modification, I encourage you by all means to make a different radar chart and post it. I won't be jealous, even if it turns out to be more popular than mine. Honest! The point isn't the chart itself, but the whole paradigm of radar-chart-ness that lets you display an arbitrary number of dimensions of data on a flat screen. (As opposed to hypercubes, where you can't display much of anything without using string theory.)

[OwlSaint]

Hooray I've inspired something!!! :D

I must say, this isn't a bad idea, and it's got a lot going for it.

Also I must say I simply <3 your idea for primary and secondary romantic attraction.

I've got some more thoughts on it, but I won't spam you with them just yet. Poke me here on on msn if you'd like to hear.

++ radar!!

(beep!.... beep!.....)

[The Evil Cashew]

interesting

~Cashew

[Cacille]

Wow, Hallu, I think you just hit on a wonderful way for people here to look at their sexuality scientifically, and help them work out what they really are. A lot of the Greys potentially could find this useful, and those confused about their sexuality in general. It works for everyone! I love it, and really encourage everyone to try this out. Save the image, open it in paint, and get to making pretty lines!

Now, a question or six for you Hallu. Take the "spiderweb" and divide it in half on the east/west (left right) axis. Would you say that someone who considers themselves to be asexual, would be someone who have VERY low numbers on the north half of the radar scale "spiderweb"? Therefore meaning someone with high numbers on that side would be considered extremely sexual, and someone with middle numbers to have average sexuality?

The bottom half of the radar scale seems to be more about feeling than physicality, so would you consider someone with low numbers to be aromantic, someone with higher numbers to be extremely romantic, and middle numbers to be normal romantic?

Forget the triangle, this could be our new logo, haha!

[Midwoka]

At least with the cubes they don't look like stats in a video-game. I'm not an Armored Core, damnit! :D

[Xombium]

I'd rather be mistaken for an armored core than have to add to already existing scales that didn't quite design to include asexuality.

Very cool indeed.

[Hallucigenia]

I've got some more thoughts on it, but I won't spam you with them just yet. Poke me here on on msn if you'd like to hear.

Duly noted. I'll poke you next time I see that you're available. If you're available and I don't notice, feel free to poke me, too.

Wow, Hallu, I think you just hit on a wonderful way for people here to look at their sexuality scientifically, and help them work out what they really are. A lot of the Greys potentially could find this useful, and those confused about their sexuality in general. It works for everyone!

Thanks. *beams* The pedant in me compels me to point out that the scale doesn't work for everyone, though. If someone is confused to the extent that they can't match themselves to the spoke definitions or pick numbers for themselves, then this scale will not work for them (but neither will any other). The radar chart will also not work for people who do not believe that romantic attraction exists (but neither will any other scale with romantic attraction on it).

At least with the cubes they don't look like stats in a video-game. I'm not an Armored Core, damnit!

Or a DDR song. XDD

Good to know that the video game designers also knew about this, though.

[OwlSaint]

At least with the cubes they don't look like stats in a video-game. I'm not an Armored Core, damnit!

Or a DDR song. XDD

Good to know that the video game designers also knew about this, though.

DDR? That wouldn't be a reference to my scale now would it?

[sonofzeal]

(edit2 - image down; see my post on the next page for my new one)

One major problem here - "Primary Sexual" here refers to "Desire" on Rabger's model, but we define asexuality (and grey-a, often) in terms of "Attraction" instead. I personally score much higher for Desire than Attraction. It's kind of a shame if this system still didn't accurately represent the definition of asexuality. Everything else looks great though, very readable.

[Kamtoad]

I gave it a go.

Err, I'm a little lop sided, by the looks of things. More than a little actually :?

[AndAPickle?]

[OwlSaint]

Wooo, I'll give it a shot too!

As mentioned to Hallu on msn, this scale is kind of hard to represent demisexuals with, but I tried for myself. In this case I just used green to represent someone I'm in love with. Because if you really think about it one could almost go to say that love is a fetish and I'm a vastly preferred and/or exclusive fetishist for romantic connection? =p it's a stretch, but it kinda works. *not getting off topic at all*

Anyhoo.

So anyways, some differences between the radar chart:

1) The radar chart is much more precise and analytic of a many interpersonal aspects of a person. The squarescale is less precise and analytic, and meant to be more expressive and/or artistic with a more narrow set of variables, all on the romantic/sexual scale.

2) The radar chart defines room for male, female, and other and fetishes, whereas squarescale does not by default (though people are free to make a version of the squarescale includes other things).

3) Radar chart separates primary and secondary romantic attraction (Very nice thought there, and kudos!). Squarescale sort of has this, but does not separate secondary between the genders.

4) Radar chart does not entirely separate attraction and desire (though to be fair they are not entirely separate). Squarescale does show attraction separate from desire, but does not separate primary and secondary sexual desire by default.

5) Radar chart stops at none or indifference and does not have uncertainty, squarescale also allows to express dislike or repulsion and does have a specific option for uncertainty

And other little things that I can't think of right now.

Also I have to say that The two compliment each other nicely....

"Hey this is my squarescale!"

"Oh hey pretty but I have no idea what it means."

"Well here's my radar chart!"

"Oh, I see!!!!"

Okay, done ranting for now, hope this was helpful.

[Midwoka]

5) Radar chart stops at none or indifference and does not have uncertainty, squarescale also allows to express dislike or repulsion and does have a specific option for uncertainty

To express dislike, repulsion, or uncertainty on the radar chart, just add three more points nearest to the center. The furthest new point from the center is 0 (replaces the center to show none/indifference), the middle one is -1 (some dislike), and the closest one is -2 (strongly repulsed); the center is now "uncertain".

Ta-da!

[Amcan]

Ooo very interesting.

[OwlSaint]

5) Radar chart stops at none or indifference and does not have uncertainty, squarescale also allows to express dislike or repulsion and does have a specific option for uncertainty

To express dislike, repulsion, or uncertainty on the radar chart, just add three more points nearest to the center. The furthest new point from the center is 0 (replaces the center to show none/indifference), the middle one is -1 (some dislike), and the closest one is -2 (strongly repulsed); the center is now "uncertain".

Ta-da!

actually had this discussion with hallu, who decided that for the purposes of the radar chart, repulsion and disgust were separate from what is being measured and/or displayed.

Anyways, these differences are not what one or the other is lacking, but creative differences between the two. A wrench isn't more or less useful than a screwdriver, they're just different purposes and different means ^^

[Rix]

Seems to be a bit lopsided but that's me.

[uilleann_pipes_girl]

[Lekzýs]

I'm going to update this, so it'll be added to the end of the topic at some point soon.

[Placebo]

Here is mine, less the objects thing. I can't distinguish between males and females, I am sort of open to various types of friendship depending on what the other person wants to explore, so I didn't understand. Plus I always get confused when the words "sex" or "romantic" are used anyway. I agree with sonofzeal's desire vs attraction distinguish problem.

[OwlSaint]

Love the artistic touch, Aleksi! Love it!!!

[The Evil Cashew]

i think its an interesting chart and works well IF you can answer all the questions.

Some poeple.. cant....

~Cashew

[Lorus]

:shock:

I think the categories on this thing just confuse me. Even if I understood them, I don't think I would really know where to place myself on the scale. I'm also not sure if I'd want to share this with other people.

Fantasy - k, got this

Primary Sexual - So is this how much my sex drive is derived from the pleasure of feeling good or how often I am solely motivated by this? Err...my question doesn't even make sense to me. I cannot explain my confusion.

Secondary Sexual - I think I might get this one, at least if the first one could be explained to me, but I don't think I could ever figure out what I am on this, since I enjoy expressing my romantic feelings sexually, but it is scarcely necessary for me.

Primary Romantic - just don't get it, don't see the difference between the two romantic categories

Secondary Romantic - see above

Aesthetic - understand this one

Platonic - I understand platonic love, but I just don't get this as a category. Does this measure how much I want to be in a platonic relationship? How much I want platonic relationships (which translates to me as how social I am in general)? Neither of which really make sense to me.

Physical - also get this one

I apologize, I am quite stupid.

[sonofzeal]

:shock:

I think the categories on this thing just confuse me. Even if I understood them, I don't think I would really know where to place myself on the scale. I'm also not sure if I'd want to share this with other people.

Fantasy - k, got this

Primary Sexual - So is this how much my sex drive is derived from the pleasure of feeling good or how often I am solely motivated by this? Err...my question doesn't even make sense to me. I cannot explain my confusion.

Secondary Sexual - I think I might get this one, at least if the first one could be explained to me, but I don't think I could ever figure out what I am on this, since I enjoy expressing my romantic feelings sexually, but it is scarcely necessary for me.

Primary Romantic - just don't get it, don't see the difference between the two romantic categories

Secondary Romantic - see above

Aesthetic - understand this one

Platonic - I understand platonic love, but I just don't get this as a category. Does this measure how much I want to be in a platonic relationship? How much I want platonic relationships (which translates to me as how social I am in general)? Neither of which really make sense to me.

Physical - also get this one

I apologize, I am quite stupid.

You're right, the difference between a lot of these is subtle.

Primary vs Secondary Sexual - the difference is whether you want it for yourself, or for some altruistic reason. If getting sexual release makes you happy, that's primary. If you enjoy making your partner happy sexually, that's secondary.

Primary vs Secondary Romance - subtle, I'll agree. You could see Primary as how often you fall in love, and how committed you are to relationships once you're in them. Secondary is how much you like the idea of relationships, and how much you miss them when you're not in one.

Platonic - how much you desire emotionally intimate friendships. The more easily you get lonely, or the more you desire and work towards a particular type of friendship, the higher you'll score. Personally, I like having friends, but I'm satisfied without a huge social life, and I tend to make female friends rather than male, so I gave myself a 5 for female and 4 for male. Does that help?

[Lorus]

Okay, I get it now. Still have no clue how to rate myself, though (which I don't mind, as I said before, I don't think I'd share anyways). :D

Very nice idea.

Edit: Yup, I tried to make my own for myself, but it just couldn't satisfy me. I suppose I wasn't meant for this sort of chart.

[DavidG]

This seems about right.

[Olivier]

Here's mine:

Straight sexual male, if you didn't guess :)

[KetchupKid]

Secondary Romantic - wanting to be in a romantic relationship in general, being open to options should someone pursue you romantically

This is a good category to have - I am (or was) a good example of someone who would score high on the secondary scale but low on the primary scale as I am essentially a fantasist, and real life just isn't up to it (this is as much about myself and circumstance not living up to my own ideal as anyone else however).

It has occured though that it would be better to relabel 'secondary romantic' as 'romantic drive', as this is more to the point and doesn't really need explaining.

That said, even this isn't straightforward for me as I just like the idea of being in love - actually being in a relationship is quite another matter, especially being a bit of a loner.

[Midwoka]

I'm not an Armored Core, damnit! :D

Here's my chart:

I thought I would've had a higher "HUG" rating...

[OwlSaint]

haha, nice :D

[Hallucigenia]

Here is a new version of the radar chart that distinguishes between attraction and desire a la Rabger's model:

And a sample:

I don't like it as much because, well, it's just not as pretty. Decagons are a lot harder to draw than octagons. With octagons you can just use the grid. <_<

Edit: Here are some new definitions for this version, paraphrased from Rabger's model. Thanks, Rabger!

Primary Sexual Attraction: Sexual attraction to someone based on information you get instantly, like their looks or smell.

Secondary Sexual Attraction: Sexual attraction to someone based on the relationship you have with them.

Primary Sexual Desire: Wanting to do something sexual because it'll feel good to you (physically or emotionally).

Secondary Sexual Desire: Wanting to do something sexual because of your partner's pleasure, or for some other motivation such as conceiving a child.