[ SECRET POST #1716 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #1716 ⌋


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


01.



__________________________________________________

02.


__________________________________________________

03. [repeat]


__________________________________________________

04.


__________________________________________________

05.


__________________________________________________

06.


__________________________________________________

07.


__________________________________________________

08.


__________________________________________________

09.


__________________________________________________

10. [repeat]


__________________________________________________

11.


__________________________________________________

12.


__________________________________________________

13.


__________________________________________________

14.


__________________________________________________

15.


__________________________________________________

16.


__________________________________________________

17.


__________________________________________________

18.


__________________________________________________

19.


__________________________________________________

20. [repeat]


__________________________________________________

21.


__________________________________________________

22. [repeat]


__________________________________________________

23.


__________________________________________________

24.


__________________________________________________

25.


__________________________________________________

26.


__________________________________________________

27.


__________________________________________________

28.


__________________________________________________

29.


__________________________________________________

30.


__________________________________________________

31.


__________________________________________________

32.


__________________________________________________

33.


__________________________________________________

34.


__________________________________________________

35.


__________________________________________________

36.


__________________________________________________

37.


__________________________________________________

38.


__________________________________________________

39.


__________________________________________________


40.



Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 05 pages, 134 secrets from Secret Submission Post #245.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 1 - broken links ], [ 1 2 - not!secrets ], [ 1 - not!fandom ], [ 1 - too big ], [ 0 - hit/ship/spiration ], [ 0 - omgiknowthem ], [ 0 - take it to comments ], [ 0 - repeats ]
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments and concerns should go here.

Comments

[loracarol.livejournal.com]

It's not saying that demisexuals are the ~only ones who love or have a 'connection' with their partner(s), it's that they have to have that in order to become physical.

Someone who isn't demisexual could theoretically find something online that would aid them in their masterbatory activities, simply because they find them attractive. This does not mean that they can't form attachments with anyone, it just means that, if something or someone get's them hot, it's all good.

Demisexuals can't do that. If they see a picture of someone who's attractive, that's all there is. Unless they personally know a famous actor, let's say, and had an emotional relationship with that actor, there's no sexual desire.

Say I'm not demisexual, and I see a picture of someone hot, or decide to watch/read porn. It get's me off.

Say I am demisexual, I see a picture of someone hot, or decide to watch/read porn. It doesn't do anything (unless, maybe the porn star's my S.O. and there's that connection).

Does that make sense? :)

[(Anonymous)]

Except there is a lot of grey area in between there, which is what people who ID as demisexual don't seem to get. The vast majority of porn doesn't get me off, even when I find the people in it attractive. Some of it does. I don't have sexual fantasies about actors. I do have have sexual fantasies about fictional characters with personalities. It's not this magic you either find everyone attractive and get off to them or you don't thing, which is why "demisexuality" as a whole is silly.

[loracarol.livejournal.com]

That's the difference, though. Some of it does.

And really "as a whole is silly." ?

I mean, I don't get why some guys are into guys, or girls are into girls (I'm not a guy, nor do I have any interest in women that I'm aware of), does that make homosexuality 'silly'? No. You don't get it, fine. But that doesn't make it "silly". :/

[(Anonymous)]

Demisexuality is NOT A SEXUAL ORIENTATION. It's taking "I don't like casual sex" AND EXPANDING THAT INTO YOUR LIFE'S ID.

And that IS silly.

[loracarol.livejournal.com]

?

But it's not just saying "I don't like casual sex".

It's saying "I cannot be physically aroused by anything (fic, porn, a person) without there being an emotional bond there first".

If it was just the casual sex bit, yeah I'd be side-eyeing it to, as as far as I know, casual sex isn't something that happens as much as people claim. But it's not just limited to that.

[kallanda-lee.livejournal.com]

I just don't get why this needs to be labeled into a whole now level of sexuality.

It's not the same as an orientation because it's not about who you're attracted to, but how you're attracted to them.

I.e.: you could be bi, gay, straight and still experience the kind of attraction that is described by "demisexuality". I'm not saying that it does not exist - I'm sure it does. My point is that, humans being the varied complex beings they are, experience attraction in very different ways. I can't be in love with a man if he's not also my good friend, for example. Do we really need to box it up and separate it from the grand scope of "regular" sexuality, instead of just going with the assumption that sexual dynamics and attractions just have a grand scope?

[loracarol.livejournal.com]

You're right, it's not the same as an orientation, I'm sorry if I never made that clear that I agree. (^_^);;

As for the other bit, why say that people are bisexual? Pansexual? Omnisexual? Why not call them just plain old 'sexual'? Why are women who like women 'lesbians' while men who like men are 'gay'? Why not scrap both words and just call everyone under that umbrella 'homosexual'?

Because people like labels, like demisexual. And if people want to use that to express who they are, why not let them?

i. i am so sorry but this is so personal for me and lksjdfd

[(Anonymous)]

Actually the sex itself doesn't have to mean anything, just the person you're with. You can be aroused without it particularly ending in a world shattering orgasm, or even actually having sex.

I don't think what I have is an orientation. Like you said, there are people who can't be aroused without being held down, or being in control, or their partner is a certain age. It *is* a psychological requirement to have the arousal requirements. It isn't a fetish, because emotionally connecting with someone is in the mind/heart, not a body part or the color of their skin or an object, but "kink" has connotations that what arouses a person is unusual, which tbh, gets twisted to "wrong" (which is why I hate the word because all sex should be seen as fun and healthy). "Demisexual" (it really needs to be called something else), is only half of an otherwise healthy picture.

Normal people have both "sides," which allows them to not only be attracted to people they know, but others they *don't know* yet, to form emotional attachments, but *not have it be the end all requirements* for arousal to take place. Likewise you can have an emotional attachment to someone, but *not* be aroused by them. It doesn't mean you can have sex with "whoever", but it does mean your body is healthy and reactive to a variety of stimuli.

I'm seen as "weird" because SOs need to be THERE with me, connecting right back at me. I *can* do it for just physical release. But I can't have silly drunk sex where I'm not able to readily have that connection, my body just wont. I wish I could be normal, because it would be easier for SO's. There have been times when I *wanted* sex (who doesn't love orgasms), the person was attractive by social standard, not skeevy, but my body and attraction would not stir.

Tbh it's really a subcategory of intimacy. "Normal" people can express their sexuality in a variety of ways, their body and mind in agreement. But it's like how my friend describes looking at gay porn, she guesses the women are pretty, but she could never get off it. I can't look at a perfectly normal person, and think, 'I'd hit it' or joke with my friends. But an emotional attachment? At times an instant "boner."

I'm probably doing a shitty, rambling job explaining this. It was horrible during my younger years, when I didn't understand and was so embarrassed I was attracted only to people I knew intimately when hormones set in, in this case old friends, and it ended horribly at points. I didn't know why I couldn't be attracted to people I met on outings in high school, or be willing to go on a date with a person in college. It was extremely difficult to be introduced to people who clearly had the intent to be set up with me, only for me to be terribly self-loathing that I wasn't attracted at all the first date. It's taken a few years and therapy to not only make new relationships (friendships), but to stop from being attracted immediately when an emotional attachment began to form.

I don't want to call it a disorder, because I *am* happy, I came from a good family and never was starved for love or felt particularly lonely or feeling people will leave me, which normally comes with borderline personality disorders. I don't even feel like I'm unsafe, or have fear if I don't have a connection. It's my body not getting anything out of it at all, no matter it would have made my life so much less emotionally draining (irony).

It is definitely nowhere near a sexuality the way being homosexual or heterosexual is, which is prominent, and therefore has a continuing dark history of oppression and violence. Bisexuality and asexuality are not as readily under fire because it can be easier to "hide" or not as obvious, but they are still ways the body responds.

I had to just explain to my mother that it was *like* putting asexuality and bisexuality together, to get her to understand a *little* when I was in therapy. It's not, but it was the closest I could think of.

different anon

[(Anonymous)]

Your explanation is a good one, but it doesn't negate the fact that demisexuality by definition is slut-shaming.

Re: different anon

[loracarol.livejournal.com]

How? It's not saying that demisexuals are the only ones who feel emotional bonds with people. Sex is a normal, healthy part of the human race. Some people just experience it differently, that's all.

Seriously, how is it slut shaming? If you're going by the fact that demi's need the emotional bonds to feel physically attracted... So what if they do? So what if other people don't need those bonds to be physucally attracted to someone. Why does it matter?

Re: different anon

[(Anonymous)]

Demisexuals draw a line between people who need an emotional attachment in order to be aroused, and people who don't. Or, in other words, people to whom sex has to mean something, and people who can just have sex with whomever. This is slut shaming. This is textbook slut shaming. Saying that you don't mean it that way doesn't change anything.

Additionally, demisexuality, like the other anon said, is just silly. You are taking a preference and making it an orientation. That's like saying that you're a Missionary, or a Lights On, or a KY-with-the-purple-dildo instead of a Glide-with-the-glass-one. People who only like blondes don't identify themselves as Blondies. People who fetishize Asians don't consider it an orientation. It's a preference, and that's all.

[(Anonymous)]

Someone who isn't demisexual could theoretically find something online that would aid them in their masterbatory activities, simply because they find them attractive.

Which is why every demisexual I've ever met constantly talks about fapping to the Doctor and Sherlock. Okay.

[bloodrivendream.livejournal.com]

Well, Doctor Who and Sherlock do have personalities.

[loracarol.livejournal.com]

Meh, I'm not every demisexual you've ever met, so I can't answer that. I can simply answer, to the best of my knowledge what I know. Maybe they feel like they've gotten an emotional connection with those characters, maybe they're not actually demisexual, or maybe they're lying so that other people don't think they're weird for not 'fapping' to anyone/thing.

Maybe it's none of your business. <3

[(Anonymous)]

They're only into their personalities. It's a coincidence that they're found to be hot by sexuals who are capable of being attracted to body alone, even without those hints at personality that come through in facial and body expression!

I think the term sets people off because it is so fuzzy and amorphous as to be useless. Genderqueer strikes me as the same.

[(Anonymous)]

+1 on genderqueer. I'm non-binary and I just can't bring myself to call myself genderqueer because most of the people I see using it are totally okay with being perceived as their assigned-at-birth gender and just want to show how kewl they are for smashing the binary. Meanwhile here I am dysphoric as fuck no matter how I get read =\

[baka-deshi.livejournal.com]

Bingo. I don't personally feel comfortable identifying as "genderqueer" because it feels too 'fuzzy' to actually explain my situation (though people try to slap me with it constantly) :P

[(Anonymous)]

The "-sexual" in hetero/homo/bi/pan/a-sexual refers to the gender one is attracted to. It has nothing to do with having or not having sex.

What gender does "demi" imply?

[vethica.livejournal.com]

To be fair, demisexuality also has nothing to do with having or not having sex. It has to do with sexual attraction.

[(Anonymous)]

To which gender? That's what the suffice "-sexuality" means.

[helenadax.livejournal.com]

Girls who are called "Demi"? XDD

are you going to answer this jw

[(Anonymous)]

The "-sexual" in hetero/homo/bi/pan/a-sexual refers to the gender one is attracted to. It has nothing to do with having or not having sex.

What gender does "demi" imply?

Re: are you going to answer this jw

[loracarol.livejournal.com]

"demi" is meant to imply that it's a midway point between sexual and asexual. It could have a better name, sure, but it's the one that exists for now, so it's the one I'm going to use when talking about it. When it get's a different name with a large enough following of people who use it, and thus a larger number of people who understand it, I'll switch to that. But for now, this is what there is.

Re: are you going to answer this jw

[(Anonymous)]

What gender does "omni" imply?

Re: are you going to answer this jw

[(Anonymous)]

"All". The same as "pan" does.