[ SECRET POST #3226 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #3226 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.
[Animal Crossing]


__________________________________________________



03.
[Steven Universe]


__________________________________________________



04.
[Excess Baggage]


__________________________________________________



05.
[Sue Perkins]


__________________________________________________



06.
[Mobile Suit Gundam: Iron-Blooded Orphans]


__________________________________________________



07.
[Vin Diesel]


__________________________________________________



08.
[Hemlock Grove]









Notes:

Sorry about early, have stuff to do!

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 026 secrets from Secret Submission Post #461.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

It always really confuses me when people make it sound like a gay person can't also be asexual.

What? Homosexual and asexual are two different orientations. You can't be both. You can be sexually attracted to your own gender or you can be sexually attracted to no-one, but I don't think you can be both at the same time.

[gobbledigook]

I guess they mean homoromantic people are still gay even if they don't have sex.

[(Anonymous)]

Yes you can. Asexual isn't an orientation. There's biromantic, homoromantic, heteroromantic and panromantic. They go alongside other orientations, just without the sex.

What you're thinking about is someone who is acearo. Not interested in sex and likely not into dating either.

[(Anonymous)]

Asexuality is an orientation.

One way to look at it is this. There are gays and lesbians who feel somewhere from completely repulsed to eh about having sex with someone of the opposite sex. Asexuals feel repulsed to eh about all sex.

There are also asexuals and lgbp people who have little to no interest in romantic relations. Sex does not equal romantic affection and vise versa. They are just two things that frequently overlap.

[(Anonymous)]

Homo-SEXUAL.

You can't be homo-SEXUAL while being a-SEXUAL.

[(Anonymous)]

Sexual orientations: Asexual, heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual, pansexual. These are determined by who you are SEXUALLY attracted to. 'Gay' almost always refers to homosexual.

Aromantic, heteroromantic, homoromantic, biromantic, panromantic. These are who you want a ROMANTIC relationship with, and have no relation to sexual attraction. These AREN'T sexual orientations.

An asexual person can be homoromantic, as in want a romantic relationship with their own gender, but that is NOT the same as being gay, as they still aren't SEXUALLY attracted to their own gender. They are still asexual, meaning not sexually attracted to anyone.

The word you use at the end, acearo, means aSEXUAL and aROMANTIC, and stands for someone who is neither sexually nor romantically attracted to anyone. It still has both components. The first part refers to their sexual orientation and the latter to their romantic.

Asexual is the sexual orientation. You cannot be asexual and homosexual at the same time.

[beverlykatz]

Being gay means being exclusively attracted to the same sex/gender. The word "sexual" in homo/bisexual refers to who you're attracted to, not the extent to which you experience sexual attraction. That means people who aren't sexually attracted to others can still be gay or bi. Your definition is inaccurate, ahistorical, and, given the history of painting gay and bi people as hypersexed and unable to hold real relationships, bordering on homophobic.

[(Anonymous)]

The word "sexual" in homo/bisexual refers to who you're attracted to, not the extent to which you experience sexual attraction.

That's exactly what I said? That sexual orientation is determined by who you are sexually attracted to. I made no mention of the extent/frequency of sexual attraction. Saying that someone has a sexual attraction is nowhere near saying they're over/hypersexed.

That means people who aren't sexually attracted to others can still be gay or bi.

What? The definition of sexuality is who you are sexually attracted to. That's why they made 'sexual' part of the words. Homosexual: sexually attracted to the same gender. Heterosexual: sexually attracted to the opposite gender. Asexual: sexually attracted to no-one. Those are the definitions.

Are you someone who just doesn't believe asexuality exists?

[beverlykatz]

It's been a long day and I'm a little tired, so hopefully this is clear.

The word "sexual" in sexual orientation refers to the gender of the person you're attracted to, not to whether or not you experience sexual attraction. A gay woman, for example, is exclusively attracted to women. That identity doesn't tell you if she experiences sexual attraction or not. If she doesn't experience sexual attraction, she is perfectly able to identify as a gay asexual woman, or an asexual lesbian. She doesn't have to call herself a "homoromantic asexual".

The split attraction model - the concept of defining sexual and romantic orientations completely separately - is an extremely recent invention, and a lot of people (myself included) are uncomfortable with it.

[(Anonymous)]

NAYRT

See the problem here is the fact that you say that orientation is defined by 'the gender of the person you're attracted to'.

In what way do you define attraction? Because most people, and I'm assuming the anon above, interpret attraction as sexual attraction. If you open the interpretation to include simply aesthetic attraction then then surely a large majority of people would have to identify as bisexual because no matter what your preferences in a sexual partner most of us can appreciate an attractive man or woman aesthetically. If you are talking intellectual attraction then there are plenty of straight people who'd be gay because of their intellectual attraction to their close same-sex friends or gay people who'd be considered straight for their intellectual attraction to their opposite-sex friends.

Let's not be coy here when people identify themselves as a particular sexual orientation they are talking about the gender or genders they are most interested in having a sexual encounter with whether that is a one-off fuck or a committed sexual relationship.

[beverlykatz]

I don't even know what you're asking here. "Attraction" isn't exclusively sexual, and as a bisexual person I am really not down with defining my orientation as wanting "a one-off fuck or a committed sexual relationship" just because it includes the word sexual. I am attracted to multiple genders, and not just for sex. "Aesthetic" or "intellectual" attractions aren't relevant here and they're not really relevant to sexuality/sexual orientations in general.

The point I wanted to make initially is that asexual people can also be gay or bi, if we're defining asexual as lacking sexual attraction (as opposed to not being attracted to anyone).

[(Anonymous)]

Maybe it's because I am ace that I don't understand attraction properly in the sense you mean it. For me attraction is like looking at beautiful art in a museum, I may want to spend hours staring at it, I may even wish I could take it home so I could have it around whenever I wanted to look at it but that's it. The only difference between a friendship and romantic attraction to me is that I want the person I'm romantically attracted to to be my most important person and vice versa.

I'm in my 30s and until a year or so ago I identified as bi. I had sex with various men and women and afterwards I would lose all interest and would basically run every time. I told myself I was picky or a player and that I'd eventually find someone that wouldn't leave me feeling bored and repulsed during whatever we were doing. I found all these partners aesthetically attractive or intellectually stimulating or combination of the two but I couldn't care less about having sex with them, even making out was meh, but I did because I thought that's what's expected. When asexuality became something that was talked about it made sense to me. I didn't run because these people weren't enough to keep my interest it was because in my mind once we'd brought sex into a relationship it always on the table and your partner had a right to expect it. That was something I couldn't commit to. That's why it's so important to me at least to identify as asexual above all else because it let's people know if they are interested in starting a romantic relationship with me it will not be a conventional one.

I don't know what it's like where you are but around here being bisexual is still very often looked down on as playing around until you choose a side. Many gay women won't be with bi women because they feel like it's an experiment or that they'll be left behind when the bi woman decides that she wants to get married and have kids. If I still identified myself as simply bisexual and was heavily involved in the community, went to events and clubs etc and yet was never known to sleep with, date or even kiss another woman that would most likely be seen as even more suspicious and probably viewed as either a sad closet case or a straight attention seeker who likes the flirting but doesn't want to follow through with anything.

Teel Deer: Anyone can obviously identify as whatever they're comfortable with but there are reasons asexuals identify as asexual first and foremost.