[ SECRET POST #3519 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #3519 ⌋

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

01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 41 secrets from Secret Submission Post #503.
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)]

I have a problem with this because someone having one exception doesn't make anyone suddenly gay. A lesbian with an exception of one man doesn't make her not a lesbian.

[(Anonymous)]

I tried to go into more detail about this in the post above, but I totally agree. But I think that some fic writers did think in those terms, and tended to write problematic fic as a result of it.

[(Anonymous)]

I think I get what you meant to say? It's the same kind of homophobia that makes some slash fans insist characters are "too straight to bottom to another man because that's Really Gay"? That kind of thing is dumb for sure.

I just wanted to stress that having an exception doesn't make people really gay. I agree that how some fans used to insist or focus way too hard on how the character was straight otherwise was homophobic though.

[(Anonymous)]

I completely agree.

[(Anonymous)]

It kinda does though. They'd be bisexual.

Call yourself what you like, but going by definitions if you find yourself attracted to people of both sexes, no matter how low the number... it's bi.

[(Anonymous)]

Disagreed. Finding a deep enough emotional or romantic attraction to one member of the same or opposite gender despite their gender and having the gender be a stumbling block is not how I would define bisexual. It also doesn't mean you're open to any further relationships with someone of that gender, because you're still not attracted to that gender as a group and never were.

Signaling availability is part of sexuality, and if you're 100% straight or gay besides this one exception and 100% not available to anyone else of that gender, you're not bi in any sense I would agree with.

[darkmanifest]

Eh, I dunno. It's like saying someone isn't asexual just because they're not repulsed by sex with someone they really care about, they're not suddenly capable of sexual attraction in general just because they're not disgusted by sex with a very specific person. So it doesn't feel quite right to me to say someone who looks at virtually every member of a gender and their libido still goes "ew no thanks" is into that gender.

[(Anonymous)]

I'm guessing this is where "demisexual" comes from - giving a name to that particular exception to asexuality.

And yep, I agree on the bisexuality thing. There's a difference between a guy going "I love both men and women" (bisexual) or "I love you, I don't care if you're a man" (straight with an exception).

Given how fluid sexuality is though, I'd love to live in a world where labels aren't needed and you just love who you love. (But I also recognize that in our current world, labels are needed still.)

[darkmanifest]

There's a difference between a guy going "I love both men and women" (bisexual) or "I love you, I don't care if you're a man" (straight with an exception).

That's a nicely concise way to put it. And yeah, if one day people can just chill with or not chill with any consenting adult without being pushed to explain why, it'd be fantastic.