[ SECRET POST #2474 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2474 ⌋

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

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.
[Once Upon a Time]


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



















[ ----- SPOILERY SECRETS AHEAD ----- ]























07. [SPOILERS for NCIS]



__________________________________________________



08. [SPOILERS for Breaking Bad]



__________________________________________________



09. [SPOILERS for Dangan Ronpa]



__________________________________________________



10. [SPOILERS for Breaking Bad]



















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 00 pages, 000 secrets from Secret Submission Post #353.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 1 - not!fandom ], [ 1 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

Re: Unpopular opinion thread

[(Anonymous)]

And this just goes back to what I was trying to say before: It's not about who I *want* to have sex with and under what circumstances. It's literally about who arouses me. Give me someone I just met? Not going to interest me sexually or romantically in any way, no matter how attractive he is or how great his personality appears to be, or how fun it might be. That same guy some time down the line? Yes, please.

Then the circumstances would be "maybe when I know him better"? I'm honestly not trying to be difficult but that just doesn't seem like something that really needs a separate label. Are you also into girls if you know them well enough? Because that's not obvious if you just use demisexual. I can definitely see how demisexual (and asexual) are useful labels as subcategories of the other orientations, it's just using them by themselves that doesn't make sense to me. Saying "I'm straight and demisexual" or "I'm gay and also asexual" if you're talking to someone who knows those terms (or "I'm bi but I'm only into people that I know well" to someone who doesn't know what demisexual means) makes total sense and is useful. It's just when someone uses them alone without any other descriptive label and considers them an entirely separate thing that it kind of confuses me.

And yes, I was calling asexuality the potential fourth sexuality. And the label matters because it fosters community. Deviating from the norm, whether you have any choice in it at all, can be difficult and lonely. But when there's something you can call it, there's a way to find people that don't make you feel so alone.

That I definitely get. It sucks when you're outside the mainstream in any way and finding other people like you can make you feel a lot less lonely. But considering demisexual to be your sexual orientation instead of a modifier of one of the others doesn't make sense. That's like if someone who doesn't know the word demisexual, when someone asks them what their orientation is, they say "well, I'm not into anyone unless I know them really well". Ok, and? That's not an orientation itself.

I have no objection to the labels when used in conjunction with other ones, I just don't see them as completely separate and independent of gay/straight/bi/etc.