Guest Posted March 1, 2014 Share Posted March 1, 2014 What Serran said. "zee" (pronounced "zay") = Dutch for sea, ocean. Sorry for causing punny confusion. :redface: Link to post Share on other sites
5_♦♣ Posted March 2, 2014 Share Posted March 2, 2014 That makes sense now. I'm only fluent in English, so I wouldn't get a dutch pun. Link to post Share on other sites
MoraDollie Posted March 2, 2014 Share Posted March 2, 2014 Sexual is interchangable with allosexual, it means the same thing (at least that's the impression I was given) :l Link to post Share on other sites
Whispearl Posted March 2, 2014 Share Posted March 2, 2014 I feel the term allosexual is a bit unnecessary as sexual seems to get the point across just fine, but I do use allosexual because I've seen people get offended by just using sexual in the past. I may not agree that "sexual" over "allosexual" is very offensive but I'd never want to make anyone uncomfortable. Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted March 2, 2014 Share Posted March 2, 2014 I feel the term allosexual is a bit unnecessary as sexual seems to get the point across just fine, but I do use allosexual because I've seen people get offended by just using sexual in the past. I may not agree that "sexual" over "allosexual" is very offensive but I'd never want to make anyone uncomfortable. Some find it offensive the other way. If one gets offended by one or the other, I just try to remember what they want me to use when responding to them. Much like pronouns, which is preferred will depend on the person. Link to post Share on other sites
WhenSummersGone Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 I used to say sexual but after awhile on here, and reading other posts, I switch to allosexual. I'm wondering what's wrong with non-asexual? Link to post Share on other sites
Philip027 Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 I'm wondering what's wrong with non-asexual? It sounds double-negativish. Non-asexual would literally mean "not without sexual attraction" It's like calling a religious person non-atheist. Technically it's not WRONG, but it still sounds clunky to me... Link to post Share on other sites
5_♦♣ Posted March 8, 2014 Share Posted March 8, 2014 I used to say sexual but after awhile on here, and reading other posts, I switch to allosexual. I'm wondering what's wrong with non-asexual? One word: Grammar. Link to post Share on other sites
Girl Hypnotist Rei Posted March 9, 2014 Share Posted March 9, 2014 I'm surprised this hasn't come up yet, but I heard the main reason many people use allosexual as opposed to sexual is because of issues related to sexualization. I never really bothered to look into the details, but I could probably find some stuff on it. Though I've also heard problems with the term allosexual, so recently allisexual has been suggested too. Of course one could always just say monosexuals and polysexuals. Link to post Share on other sites
shockkkk Posted March 9, 2014 Share Posted March 9, 2014 I'm surprised this hasn't come up yet, but I heard the main reason many people use allosexual as opposed to sexual is because of issues related to sexualization. I never really bothered to look into the details, but I could probably find some stuff on it. Though I've also heard problems with the term allosexual, so recently allisexual has been suggested too. Of course one could always just say monosexuals and polysexuals. Dear god Can we just call them people who want to have sex? Link to post Share on other sites
Girl Hypnotist Rei Posted March 9, 2014 Share Posted March 9, 2014 I'm surprised this hasn't come up yet, but I heard the main reason many people use allosexual as opposed to sexual is because of issues related to sexualization. I never really bothered to look into the details, but I could probably find some stuff on it. Though I've also heard problems with the term allosexual, so recently allisexual has been suggested too. Of course one could always just say monosexuals and polysexuals. Dear god Can we just call them people who want to have sex? ...But some of them don't want sex. So... Yeah. Sorry for throwing a bunch of terms at you guys. It's just Monosexual and Polysexual is used by the bi/pansexual community and would actually work for us too, so it's probably what I'll be using. Link to post Share on other sites
5_♦♣ Posted March 9, 2014 Share Posted March 9, 2014 But monosexual=sexually attracted to one gender. Polysexual=sexually attracted to multiple but not all genders. Therefore, it'd get rather confusing to use those terms as umbrella terms for the various sexual orientations. Link to post Share on other sites
Girl Hypnotist Rei Posted March 9, 2014 Share Posted March 9, 2014 Using asexual as an umbrella term, when it's also a specific sexuality that's under the umbrella is already confusing. I don't find saying "mono and polysexuals" confusing at all. *shrugs* Link to post Share on other sites
5_♦♣ Posted March 9, 2014 Share Posted March 9, 2014 I don't know about anyone else, but I use Asexuality solely as a sexual orientation, not as an umbrella term. To me, that's what the term 'Asexual spectrum' is for. Link to post Share on other sites
BlackRose Posted March 10, 2014 Share Posted March 10, 2014 asexuals aren't monosexuals or polysexuals, because they're attracted to no genders! and there's nothing wrong or grammatically incorrect with non-asexual... it's just a very clumsy way of saying sexual. Link to post Share on other sites
~Rikki~ Posted March 10, 2014 Author Share Posted March 10, 2014 Asexuals can and sometimes are attracted to genders. Not all asexuals are aromantic. There's still romantic attraction and other attractions that aren't sexual attraction. Link to post Share on other sites
5_♦♣ Posted March 10, 2014 Share Posted March 10, 2014 and there's nothing wrong or grammatically incorrect with non-asexual... it's just a very clumsy way of saying sexual. It's a double negative. Double negatives are grammatically incorrect, which is why I can't stand it. Link to post Share on other sites
shockkkk Posted March 10, 2014 Share Posted March 10, 2014 So basically what I've learned from this thread is that whatever word you use someone will hate it for particularly petty reasons. I mean don't get me wrong I definitely prefer 'sexual' to the other alternatives mentioned here, I just don't think it matters very much in the end. Link to post Share on other sites
Sally Posted March 10, 2014 Share Posted March 10, 2014 shockkkk, on 09 Mar 2014 - 6:40 PM, said:So basically what I've learned from this thread is that whatever word you use someone will hate it for particularly petty reasons. Well, true. Except none of us think our own reasons are petty. :lol: Link to post Share on other sites
BlackRose Posted March 10, 2014 Share Posted March 10, 2014 Asexuals can and sometimes are attracted to genders. Not all asexuals are aromantic. There's still romantic attraction and other attractions that aren't sexual attraction. Yes, you're right, but we were talking about sexual attraction specifically (the terms are monosexual and polysexual). It would have been clearer to say: asexuals are not monosexual or polysexual because they're not sexually attracted to any genders. Link to post Share on other sites
BlackRose Posted March 10, 2014 Share Posted March 10, 2014 and there's nothing wrong or grammatically incorrect with non-asexual... it's just a very clumsy way of saying sexual. It's a double negative. Double negatives are grammatically incorrect, which is why I can't stand it. There is no way I'm not gonna disagree. Link to post Share on other sites
. . .but there are sounds Posted March 10, 2014 Share Posted March 10, 2014 and there's nothing wrong or grammatically incorrect with non-asexual... it's just a very clumsy way of saying sexual. It's a double negative. Double negatives are grammatically incorrect, which is why I can't stand it. Just to be technical, because this happens to step on one of my pet-peeves, a- is not a negation. It means without, as in outside of. To read it literally, asexual doesn't say "I am not sexual," it says "I have nothing to do with sexuality." That isn't necessarily how it is used, but, grammatically, there is nothing wrong with non-asexual. : P Link to post Share on other sites
5_♦♣ Posted March 11, 2014 Share Posted March 11, 2014 Huh. I always thought the a prefix meant 'not'. Link to post Share on other sites
. . .but there are sounds Posted March 11, 2014 Share Posted March 11, 2014 Functionally, it may as well mean not, but technically it doesn't. Not that it matters at all except on obscure points of grammar. Link to post Share on other sites
PiF Posted June 8, 2014 Share Posted June 8, 2014 STOP! Stop and a thousand times stop with the stuffin nonsense .... They are called sexual ... The end. I had seen allo and didn't think much of it believing the kiddies have been playing making up pretend names again ... Sure enough some have. When I typed allosexual into a search engine two things became obvious .... This stupid term when used seemed to be used primarily by some people from aven and the other description was "a made up name by the asexual community" Have we exhausted the supply of super sillious made up pretend names fir asexuals that we are now trying to infect sexuals with the stupid gene too ????? Let's not look more foolish than we already do on the label front... Leave them be.... They are called sexuals! Link to post Share on other sites
Sunsetsky Posted June 8, 2014 Share Posted June 8, 2014 I use the word allosexual to refer to anyone who feels sexual attraction Asexual = no sexual attraction Although when descibing yourself i would use sexually active asexual to clear up confusion Link to post Share on other sites
Diforto Posted June 9, 2014 Share Posted June 9, 2014 "allosexuel" is already used in french as "non-heterosexual". The generalized use of "allosexual" for "non-asexual" will give the french "allosexuel" two different meanings. Link to post Share on other sites
Lambda Corvus Posted June 9, 2014 Share Posted June 9, 2014 I've noticed a lot of people use the term sexual when what they really mean is allosexual. <...> I've noticed a lot of people presume to tell other people what they really mean. I say "sexual" and I mean "sexual" -- one who experiences sexual attraction. Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted June 9, 2014 Share Posted June 9, 2014 "allosexuel" is already used in french as "non-heterosexual". The generalized use of "allosexual" for "non-asexual" will give the french "allosexuel" two different meanings. Hehe. The French language does its best to bust our label choices like that, doesn't it? Just like with celibate vs. célibataire. :D Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.