[ SECRET POST #2442 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2442 ⌋

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

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.


__________________________________________________
















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 045 secrets from Secret Submission Post #349.
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

[republicanism]

nah i think i get it. everybody has different experiences in terms of sexual attraction, but it becomes much more confusing (to me, anyway) when you consider that sexual attraction is also a concept sort of invented en masse, and people who study it extensively have only done so in terms of other categories--like the ones this op thinks of as legitimate, which are actually pretty restrictive considering the fact that sexual identity as a concept is relatively new. and some of the same people who cite the kinsey scale will be just as quick to defend how every category are absolutes exclusive of all the others! wacky.

when i think of it as attraction to looks, attraction to personality, and sexual attraction all being things that are separate but have some influence upon eachother then it makes more sense. i think i was getting hung up on the word 'attraction' in general.

so yeah, anecdotes have value. most of this shit started with anecdotes anyway.