fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #1716 ]

⌈ 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.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

I've been following this thread with quite a lot of interest, and I think I'm getting a handle on demisexuality. I guess most people would seem to prefer an emotional connection with their sexual partners, but can still be aroused by someone they don't actually have that deep emotional bond with, right? Please note that I say "are aroused by" rather than saying "have sex with", because the two are not the same. If they were I'd be doing [fill in the name of your fictional character of choice] right now. ;)

Buuuuut for demisexuals, as I understand from this thread, it's not that they prefer to have sex with people they have some kind of bond with; it's that they are only physically aroused by those people. Like, appearance doesn't really come into it, or personality, or whatever; they can only be aroused by someone they know well. There's no "Wow he's hot/I'd totally hit that" or what. If they don't know that person pretty well already they can't find them attractive, in any degree. Is that correct?

If that is right, then I can understand how that would tend to limit the dating pool. Because, okay, sure, there's the option of going up to the cute girl/guy at the bar/bus stop/after class/whenever and asking them to accompany one in partaking the beverage of one's choice; but if that person doesn't even register as someone one might be interested in having a sexual relationship with until after one knows them fairly well already, then the people one would innately be attracted to would be limited, by definition, to one's immediate circle of acquaintances.

Which would kind of suck; but then, it's kind of like making friends in a way, isn't it (is it)? Because one can't just look at them and tell instantly that one has a lot in common with them, or that one would enjoy hanging out with them. One has to sort of fall into it gradually by discovering those shared interests. And the person who might be the best friend in the world to you, the one friendship that defines your life, could be the person who rides the bus ahead of you every day; but until one actually gets to know them one would never know that. So as I understand demisexuality from this thread, it's similar to that, but taken to a sexual degree.

(continued below because I ~~can'tshutup~~ am verbose lol)

So I can see where those who regard it as defining as "I need to have a strong emotional bond with the people I have sex with" would feel that such a definition, by definition, tended to imply "if you're not a demisexual then you could just be fucking whoever all over the place." But if the meaning of the term actually is "I can't feel aroused by someone unless I'm already mentally intimate with them," then I'd say that, first of all, that wouldn't actually be the "normal" state for most people. Sure, most of us (so far as I can tell) want some kind of connection with the people we have sex with, for the most part; but that doesn't stop us from being attracted to (or "aroused by" if you prefer that term) someone based purely on their physical appearance. Witness all the "I'd hit that" secrets of yore. So I can understand wanting a label to self-define with. If nothing else, as someone else said above, it helps to find others who are the same, which can be vital to one's emotional health if one feels in any way not part of the "norm" (let alone diametrically different from the "norm"). But (second of all), I don't see how saying "I can't be aroused by anyone unless I have an emotional connection to begin with" is "slut-shaming." Frankly, if anything, I'd say it's a position to be pitied (and I mean "pity" here as "someone to feel compassion for" not "someone to be looked down upon").

Frankly, I'm more bothered by the concept of "normal" meaning white/heterosexual/male/American/Christian. I can see where "demisexual" with the limited definition I am viewing it with would be a minority position. I can see where some people would think there wouldn't be a need for such a label. But you know what I think would be awesome? If we did keep coming up with labels for every little thing, picking away at the idea of "normal" (/white/male/etc/etc) until there was nothing left. No "normal, and everyone else," just "everyone else." Everyone. Just... people.

So that, I think, is the dual value in having a label for what is probably a pretty small segment of the population (going with the "I can't..." definition rather than the "I prefer..." one): It helps build a community of others in a similar position, so one isn't so alone or unusual; and it helps pry another little chunk out of "normal."

[ SECRET POST #1716 ]

TL;DR

TL;DR Continued