Weird gender attraction question
Options
Replies
-
MeganMoroz89 wrote: »This thread just went all over the place, didn't it
If they go over 1 page, it's a guarantee; that it'll!0 -
BinaryPulsar wrote: »MeganMoroz89 wrote: »You might feel like you fall into one of these categories:
Pansexual = You can be sexually attracted to any gender, whether or not it is within the male/female binary
Demisexual = You are only sexually attracted to certain people with whom you have an emotional connectionBinaryPulsar wrote: »DeficitDuchess wrote: »What's self attraction's label?
I am not conceited but my self esteem, won't allow me; to be loveless!
I don't know. Maybe auto-sexual. I might have just made that word up. But, I have found that if you search anything sexual that it probably has people talking about it or proclaiming a fetish for it.
This is more of a meta comment....
I hate the current LGBTQ-academic movement to stick a label on every feckin mode of sexuality out there
It also seems quite "anti-queer" as the point of queer theory has been to break the confines of societally imposed labels and recognize things like sexuality as self-determined and sometimes fluid/uncategorizable
Anyway, carry on....
I understand and agree to a degree. I understand that people are wanting to understand their sex drive because it leads to less conflict in relationship when people understand and are up front about that. It's not an issue for me personally. I think it's more of an issue for people with low sex drive or asexual.
I personally just identify as bisexual. Like I always have. I don't really understand why pansexual had to come into existence. I guess people didn't like the term bi meaning two. But, I feel like pansexual is just unnecessarily singling people out based on their gender orientation. But, whatever. I don't care. People can do what they want. I don't want to make an issue out of it.
I think some people go overboard with too many labels. But, again, whatever, they can do what they want.
I just studied sexuality and learn a lot about it and certain things just stick in my mind.
Sexuality is definitely fluid and on a spectrum.
I have to agree that the labeling is getting ridiculous. I thought pansexual used to be the old term for bisexual and I think queer morphed from meaning homosexual to more about a persons view of their gender but the thing I object to the most is that gender is a social term and not a biological one. Gender is not the male/female binary (leaving out hermaphrodites here) but masculine and feminine as defined by ones culture. The signal to noise ratio is getting lower right now and starting to become meaningless due to political correctness. I'm just hoping we can get a handle on this sooner than later so we can have an open and honest dialogue about how to treat everyone with the same respect and decency without the gender politics.
0 -
GnothiSeauton23 wrote: »MeganMoroz89 wrote: »This thread just went all over the place, didn't it
we are just experimenting with different topics
LOL
0 -
saragreen012 wrote: »OP, you are the only one who gets to determine (and label) your sexuality. If you were to just reading through a list of sexualities, based only on what you've told us, demi-sexual may be the best fit.
Orrrr, OP, you could just not label it and just go with it.
Why is our society so obsessed with labels? It seems very odd to me that we desire to stick labels on very complex parts of who we are (everyone must have a sexuality label, a religious label, a political ideology label....blah)
Labeling/categorizing EVERYTHING is very anti-queer imo
It's just people that are trying to understand what they want and meet sexual partners that they are compatible with. Since there are so many relationships that are difficult because people didn't understand themselves and find compatible partners. Only for people that feel they need that. No one has to label anything. Only if they want to.2 -
BinaryPulsar wrote: »Wheelhouse15 wrote: »BinaryPulsar wrote: »Wheelhouse15 wrote: »BinaryPulsar wrote: »Motorsheen wrote: »Is it wrong to be attracted to a Green Chili Burrito?
.....I'm asking for a friend.
Objectum sexual
So fetishism has a new term?
No, it's not fetishism. It's a rare situation in which people do not have sexual attraction or romantic interest in people. They feel that they are in love with specific objects and the objects are also in love with them. I'm pretty sure it's classified as a mental illness (though they disagree). Everyone that has this condition has other disorders along with it such as a severe attachment disorder.
Interesting, I don't remember that from my Sexual Psych class but I guess it's probably been cleaved off from fetishism recently. I would doubt that it's considered a mental illness unless it's causing the person emotional distress. AFAIK almost all of the sexually related disorders were removed from such classifications unless they cause emotional distress because they were really just encoding morals into psychiatry e.g. homosexuality.
ETA just noticed I missed where you mentioned that there were associated personality disorders so it's probably a disorder by extension.
I just saw it in documentaries and stuff on tv at one point. It's very rare. Just a few people in the world. And among those people they have certain types of autism or attachment disorder from severe sexual abuse as a young child by a family member that they lived with. So, they are exploring if it's an orientation or something else. Especially since it's so rare. The people can fall in love with a banister at their church and suffer greatly when it gets replaced. So, it does seem to impact them. Or the main women that talks about it married the Eiffel tower.
I wonder if those who buy those expensive sex dolls and treat them like real women fall under this.1 -
Wheelhouse15 wrote: »BinaryPulsar wrote: »MeganMoroz89 wrote: »You might feel like you fall into one of these categories:
Pansexual = You can be sexually attracted to any gender, whether or not it is within the male/female binary
Demisexual = You are only sexually attracted to certain people with whom you have an emotional connectionBinaryPulsar wrote: »DeficitDuchess wrote: »What's self attraction's label?
I am not conceited but my self esteem, won't allow me; to be loveless!
I don't know. Maybe auto-sexual. I might have just made that word up. But, I have found that if you search anything sexual that it probably has people talking about it or proclaiming a fetish for it.
This is more of a meta comment....
I hate the current LGBTQ-academic movement to stick a label on every feckin mode of sexuality out there
It also seems quite "anti-queer" as the point of queer theory has been to break the confines of societally imposed labels and recognize things like sexuality as self-determined and sometimes fluid/uncategorizable
Anyway, carry on....
I understand and agree to a degree. I understand that people are wanting to understand their sex drive because it leads to less conflict in relationship when people understand and are up front about that. It's not an issue for me personally. I think it's more of an issue for people with low sex drive or asexual.
I personally just identify as bisexual. Like I always have. I don't really understand why pansexual had to come into existence. I guess people didn't like the term bi meaning two. But, I feel like pansexual is just unnecessarily singling people out based on their gender orientation. But, whatever. I don't care. People can do what they want. I don't want to make an issue out of it.
I think some people go overboard with too many labels. But, again, whatever, they can do what they want.
I just studied sexuality and learn a lot about it and certain things just stick in my mind.
Sexuality is definitely fluid and on a spectrum.
I have to agree that the labeling is getting ridiculous. I thought pansexual used to be the old term for bisexual and I think queer morphed from meaning homosexual to more about a persons view of their gender but the thing I object to the most is that gender is a social term and not a biological one. Gender is not the male/female binary (leaving out hermaphrodites here) but masculine and feminine as defined by ones culture. The signal to noise ratio is getting lower right now and starting to become meaningless due to political correctness. I'm just hoping we can get a handle on this sooner than later so we can have an open and honest dialogue about how to treat everyone with the same respect and decency without the gender politics.
I've thought something very similar, but not as well worded in my head.1 -
BinaryPulsar wrote: »MeganMoroz89 wrote: »You might feel like you fall into one of these categories:
Pansexual = You can be sexually attracted to any gender, whether or not it is within the male/female binary
Demisexual = You are only sexually attracted to certain people with whom you have an emotional connectionBinaryPulsar wrote: »DeficitDuchess wrote: »What's self attraction's label?
I am not conceited but my self esteem, won't allow me; to be loveless!
I don't know. Maybe auto-sexual. I might have just made that word up. But, I have found that if you search anything sexual that it probably has people talking about it or proclaiming a fetish for it.
This is more of a meta comment....
I hate the current LGBTQ-academic movement to stick a label on every feckin mode of sexuality out there
It also seems quite "anti-queer" as the point of queer theory has been to break the confines of societally imposed labels and recognize things like sexuality as self-determined and sometimes fluid/uncategorizable
Anyway, carry on....
I understand and agree to a degree. I understand that people are wanting to understand their sex drive because it leads to less conflict in relationship when people understand and are up front about that. It's not an issue for me personally. I think it's more of an issue for people with low sex drive or asexual.
I personally just identify as bisexual. Like I always have. I don't really understand why pansexual had to come into existence. I guess people didn't like the term bi meaning two. But, I feel like pansexual is just unnecessarily singling people out based on their gender orientation. But, whatever. I don't care. People can do what they want. I don't want to make an issue out of it.
I think some people go overboard with too many labels. But, again, whatever, they can do what they want.
I just studied sexuality and learn a lot about it and certain things just stick in my mind.
Sexuality is definitely fluid and on a spectrum.
Fair points. I get that "sexuality" labels are convenient ways to communicate your preferences and also important for validating a multiplicity of forms of sexuality
I think labeling things has historically been a weird subconscious way for humans to avoid dealing with the scary complexity of the world. The problem is, when everything has a label/category, things that fall outside that are then "othered" or labelled as "unnatural." Plus, it's a shame to simplify/categorize every aspect of what makes one human.....since humanity's beauty is in its complexity.
It's just seems so strange to me.... With all these labels it seems like the queer community itself is afraid of the gray O_o
I dunno though. To each their own. I guess if you want a label, then pull one out of the hat that applies to you.
0 -
BinaryPulsar wrote: »MeganMoroz89 wrote: »You might feel like you fall into one of these categories:
Pansexual = You can be sexually attracted to any gender, whether or not it is within the male/female binary
Demisexual = You are only sexually attracted to certain people with whom you have an emotional connectionBinaryPulsar wrote: »DeficitDuchess wrote: »What's self attraction's label?
I am not conceited but my self esteem, won't allow me; to be loveless!
I don't know. Maybe auto-sexual. I might have just made that word up. But, I have found that if you search anything sexual that it probably has people talking about it or proclaiming a fetish for it.
This is more of a meta comment....
I hate the current LGBTQ-academic movement to stick a label on every feckin mode of sexuality out there
It also seems quite "anti-queer" as the point of queer theory has been to break the confines of societally imposed labels and recognize things like sexuality as self-determined and sometimes fluid/uncategorizable
Anyway, carry on....
I understand and agree to a degree. I understand that people are wanting to understand their sex drive because it leads to less conflict in relationship when people understand and are up front about that. It's not an issue for me personally. I think it's more of an issue for people with low sex drive or asexual.
I personally just identify as bisexual. Like I always have. I don't really understand why pansexual had to come into existence. I guess people didn't like the term bi meaning two. But, I feel like pansexual is just unnecessarily singling people out based on their gender orientation. But, whatever. I don't care. People can do what they want. I don't want to make an issue out of it.
I think some people go overboard with too many labels. But, again, whatever, they can do what they want.
I just studied sexuality and learn a lot about it and certain things just stick in my mind.
Sexuality is definitely fluid and on a spectrum.
Fair points. I get that "sexuality" labels are convenient ways to communicate your preferences and also important for validating a multiplicity of forms of sexuality
I think labeling things has historically been a weird subconscious way for humans to avoid dealing with the scary complexity of the world. The problem is, when everything has a label/category, things that fall outside that are then "othered" or labelled as "unnatural." Plus, it's a shame to simplify/categorize every aspect of what makes one human.....since humanity's beauty is in its complexity.
It's just seems so strange to me.... With all these labels it's seems like the queer community itself is afraid of the gray O_o
I dunno though. To each their own. I guess if you want a label, then pull one out of the hat that applies to you.
Yeah. I definitely understand. I'm not personally into tons of labels or into labels being very specific. But, I do see how it's helpful to some people. So, I think it's just a personal choice. And I'm ok with people exploring that for themselves. Though I would hope they aim towards seeking being understood. And having a long list of labels just creates a bigger barrier of being misunderstood. So, I think people should try to find the right balance for themselves. But, whatever makes them happy. I'm not going to complain.1 -
MeganMoroz89 wrote: »You might feel like you fall into one of these categories:
Pansexual = You can be sexually attracted to any gender, whether or not it is within the male/female binary
Demisexual = You are only sexually attracted to certain people with whom you have an emotional connectionBinaryPulsar wrote: »DeficitDuchess wrote: »What's self attraction's label?
I am not conceited but my self esteem, won't allow me; to be loveless!
I don't know. Maybe auto-sexual. I might have just made that word up. But, I have found that if you search anything sexual that it probably has people talking about it or proclaiming a fetish for it.
This is more of a meta comment....
I hate the current LGBTQ-academic movement to stick a label on every feckin mode of sexuality out there
It also seems quite "anti-queer" as the point of queer theory has been to break the confines of societally imposed labels and recognize things like sexuality as self-determined and sometimes fluid/uncategorizable
Anyway, carry on....
I totally agree that you shouldnt have to label yourself. I generally would not label myself as any one thing, because I am many things, and I do not think that my sexuality is my defining trait. However, many people find it easier to to explain things with labels.
Usually when I discuss my relationship it's in very gender neutral terms because in my experience if I outright mention their gender I am attacked with "why do you always have to talk about your sexuality?" even if the entire conversation was involving relationships and whatever I wrote was on topic and completely non-sexual. So generally it's societies need to label us, and then DEFINE us by that label, not the other way around. I avoid that as much as possible by being vague, but I still know what label would fit me best, and sometimes I'd rather define myself than let someone else do it. Perhaps that is what the OP is looking for as well.3 -
Wheelhouse15 wrote: »BinaryPulsar wrote: »MeganMoroz89 wrote: »You might feel like you fall into one of these categories:
Pansexual = You can be sexually attracted to any gender, whether or not it is within the male/female binary
Demisexual = You are only sexually attracted to certain people with whom you have an emotional connectionBinaryPulsar wrote: »DeficitDuchess wrote: »What's self attraction's label?
I am not conceited but my self esteem, won't allow me; to be loveless!
I don't know. Maybe auto-sexual. I might have just made that word up. But, I have found that if you search anything sexual that it probably has people talking about it or proclaiming a fetish for it.
This is more of a meta comment....
I hate the current LGBTQ-academic movement to stick a label on every feckin mode of sexuality out there
It also seems quite "anti-queer" as the point of queer theory has been to break the confines of societally imposed labels and recognize things like sexuality as self-determined and sometimes fluid/uncategorizable
Anyway, carry on....
I understand and agree to a degree. I understand that people are wanting to understand their sex drive because it leads to less conflict in relationship when people understand and are up front about that. It's not an issue for me personally. I think it's more of an issue for people with low sex drive or asexual.
I personally just identify as bisexual. Like I always have. I don't really understand why pansexual had to come into existence. I guess people didn't like the term bi meaning two. But, I feel like pansexual is just unnecessarily singling people out based on their gender orientation. But, whatever. I don't care. People can do what they want. I don't want to make an issue out of it.
I think some people go overboard with too many labels. But, again, whatever, they can do what they want.
I just studied sexuality and learn a lot about it and certain things just stick in my mind.
Sexuality is definitely fluid and on a spectrum.
I have to agree that the labeling is getting ridiculous. I thought pansexual used to be the old term for bisexual and I think queer morphed from meaning homosexual to more about a persons view of their gender but the thing I object to the most is that gender is a social term and not a biological one. Gender is not the male/female binary (leaving out hermaphrodites here) but masculine and feminine as defined by ones culture. The signal to noise ratio is getting lower right now and starting to become meaningless due to political correctness. I'm just hoping we can get a handle on this sooner than later so we can have an open and honest dialogue about how to treat everyone with the same respect and decency without the gender politics.
Queer just means outside of normative or mainstream gender/sex/sexuality categories
And, actually, uncoupling gender identity (how you feel/present yourself/identify in relation to the world) from sex (what your genitals are determined to dictate you are) is the kind of "uncategorizing/unconstraining" that I appreciate. It makes useful sense of why some people don't fit into our societally determined categories for identity. It allows for the complexity that simply does exist in human experience.
We've made productive strives to reveal how the world and human experience does not fit into the bubbles we've put it in for thousands of years. It's a simple, yet scary thing to trust that people can feel and be something that you yourself don't understand.
I think "politically correct" is sometimes used by people to undermined big ideas that they can't quite grasp their head around (and thus, of course, must be b.s.)
Also, there is no "outside of gender politics." Regardless of what you think the gender politics are, we live inside them.2 -
devil_in_a_blue_dress wrote: »thisonetimeatthegym wrote: »I think you are just emotionally attracted - as in, you could really love them as a friend.
Our society has corrupted people's minds into thinking if you are connected to someone that connection must be sexual.
The Greeks had lost of names for love, which described many different kinds, and only one of them, eros, was sexual. There was brotherly love, friendship love (which you may be experiencing), paternal love and the general goodness/kindness for humanity, agape. There are more, but I can't remember them off hand.
You said your emotions are connected to your ability to be physically attracted. I would say that your physical attraction is a "fantom symptom" of your emotional connection, that if ignored, would go away, while the friendship aspect could flourish.
You should look up lesbian bed death. Even women who really are attracted to women don't stay physically attracted, and just stop having sex.
So why bother starting, and getting yourself confused about your identity over something that is not real?
Sources? Mind you Westboro Baptist isn't a credible one.
The LGBT foundation is not exactly Westboro, which is where you can find out more about lesbian bed death.
http://lgbt.foundation/lesbian-bed-death
"If you’re lucky enough to be unaware of the term, “lesbian bed death” is when lesbians in long-term relationships either stop having sex altogether or have it very infrequently. Coined by Pepper Schwartz in 1983, it has its own Wikipedia page debating whether it’s a lesbophobic myth or a genuine problem and there's even a rock band of the same name! The general consensus is that whilst there may be statistics to indicate “bed death” is more prevalent in lesbian relationships, couples of all orientations experience it.
So is there any reason that female same-sex couples may be more likely to stop having sex? Well, maybe. Combine two menstrual cycles and (eventually) two menopauses, or even one of each, and there’s a lot of fluctuating hormones that could lead to sex drives dropping off. "
May I ask, why is it that when a question is asked and an answer given, that the immediate reaction is to run to the extreme?
When I say it's a beautiful day outside, that should not bring out "so you think I'm an idiot because you think I can't see how nice it is outside?"3 -
thisonetimeatthegym wrote: »"The general consensus is that whilst there may be statistics to indicate “bed death” is more prevalent in lesbian relationships, couples of all orientations experience it."
Statistically you would find more married people horndoggin' around here complaining about lack of sex in their hetro marriages.
7 -
Wheelhouse15 wrote: »BinaryPulsar wrote: »MeganMoroz89 wrote: »You might feel like you fall into one of these categories:
Pansexual = You can be sexually attracted to any gender, whether or not it is within the male/female binary
Demisexual = You are only sexually attracted to certain people with whom you have an emotional connectionBinaryPulsar wrote: »DeficitDuchess wrote: »What's self attraction's label?
I am not conceited but my self esteem, won't allow me; to be loveless!
I don't know. Maybe auto-sexual. I might have just made that word up. But, I have found that if you search anything sexual that it probably has people talking about it or proclaiming a fetish for it.
This is more of a meta comment....
I hate the current LGBTQ-academic movement to stick a label on every feckin mode of sexuality out there
It also seems quite "anti-queer" as the point of queer theory has been to break the confines of societally imposed labels and recognize things like sexuality as self-determined and sometimes fluid/uncategorizable
Anyway, carry on....
I understand and agree to a degree. I understand that people are wanting to understand their sex drive because it leads to less conflict in relationship when people understand and are up front about that. It's not an issue for me personally. I think it's more of an issue for people with low sex drive or asexual.
I personally just identify as bisexual. Like I always have. I don't really understand why pansexual had to come into existence. I guess people didn't like the term bi meaning two. But, I feel like pansexual is just unnecessarily singling people out based on their gender orientation. But, whatever. I don't care. People can do what they want. I don't want to make an issue out of it.
I think some people go overboard with too many labels. But, again, whatever, they can do what they want.
I just studied sexuality and learn a lot about it and certain things just stick in my mind.
Sexuality is definitely fluid and on a spectrum.
I have to agree that the labeling is getting ridiculous. I thought pansexual used to be the old term for bisexual and I think queer morphed from meaning homosexual to more about a persons view of their gender but the thing I object to the most is that gender is a social term and not a biological one. Gender is not the male/female binary (leaving out hermaphrodites here) but masculine and feminine as defined by ones culture. The signal to noise ratio is getting lower right now and starting to become meaningless due to political correctness. I'm just hoping we can get a handle on this sooner than later so we can have an open and honest dialogue about how to treat everyone with the same respect and decency without the gender politics.
Queer just means outside of normative or mainstream gender/sex/sexuality categories
And, actually, uncoupling gender identity (how you feel/present yourself/identify with the world)from sex (what your genitals are determined to dictate you are) is the kind of "uncategorizing/unconstraining" that I appreciate. It makes useful sense of why some people don't fit into our societally determined categories for identity. It allows for the complexity that simply does exist in human experience.
We've made productive strives to reveal how the world and human experience does not fit into the bubbles we've put it in for thousands of years. It's a simple, yet scary thing to trust that people can feel and be something that you yourself don't understand.
I think "politically correct" is sometimes used by people to undermine big ideas that they can't quite grasp their head around (and thus, of course, must be b.s.)
Also, there is no "outside of gender politics." Regardless of what you think the gender politics are, we live inside them.
No, I'm not using those terms to disregard or undermine any ideas, I was helping the fight for LGBT rights long before it even became a term because I had a lot of good friends who were gay and lesbian and were being mistreated just because they choose partners of their own sex or didn't feel they were the correct sex. My issue is that political correctness and gender politics has become a cacophony of ever expanding terms that aren't really helping. And there are political agendas being pushed that I do not appreciate but that's for another place.
My argument here is that all people need to treat each other as people first and labels are often a barrier to proper treatment. Do we live within a world of gender politics? Yes, and although I very much agree with what LGBT community is doing I do not agree with many of the PC actives that try to stifle discussion with those who do not completely agree with them. I know this is not what you are trying to do here but there are many who do.
1 -
thisonetimeatthegym wrote: »May I ask, why is it that when a question is asked and an answer given, that the immediate reaction is to run to the extreme?
When I say it's a beautiful day outside, that should not bring out "so you think I'm an idiot because you think I can't see how nice it is outside?"
It's bc your answer was a bit extreme.... You seemed to have a lot of knowledge/experience (shockingly even more-so than the OP herself) about what the OP is feeling O_o
It seems, ironically, that you are the one who ran to the extreme (made a lot of assumptions) w/your response to the OP.1 -
thisonetimeatthegym wrote: »"The general consensus is that whilst there may be statistics to indicate “bed death” is more prevalent in lesbian relationships, couples of all orientations experience it."
Statistically you would find more married people horndoggin' around here complaining about lack of sex in their hetro marriages.
The stereotype is that men have higher sex drives than women. So, people conclude that gay men have the most sex and open relationships. And that lesbians eventually stop having sex and want immediate cohabitation. And that heterosexual couples stop having sex because of the women. These things might be true sometimes. But, also very much not true a lot of the time. And people buy into these stereotypes rather than work on whatever the real issues are.3 -
thisonetimeatthegym wrote: »devil_in_a_blue_dress wrote: »thisonetimeatthegym wrote: »I think you are just emotionally attracted - as in, you could really love them as a friend.
Our society has corrupted people's minds into thinking if you are connected to someone that connection must be sexual.
The Greeks had lost of names for love, which described many different kinds, and only one of them, eros, was sexual. There was brotherly love, friendship love (which you may be experiencing), paternal love and the general goodness/kindness for humanity, agape. There are more, but I can't remember them off hand.
You said your emotions are connected to your ability to be physically attracted. I would say that your physical attraction is a "fantom symptom" of your emotional connection, that if ignored, would go away, while the friendship aspect could flourish.
You should look up lesbian bed death. Even women who really are attracted to women don't stay physically attracted, and just stop having sex.
So why bother starting, and getting yourself confused about your identity over something that is not real?
Sources? Mind you Westboro Baptist isn't a credible one.
"If you’re lucky enough to be unaware of the term, “lesbian bed death” is when lesbians in long-term relationships either stop having sex altogether or have it very infrequently. Coined by Pepper Schwartz in 1983, it has its own Wikipedia page debating whether it’s a lesbophobic myth or a genuine problem and there's even a rock band of the same name! The general consensus is that whilst there may be statistics to indicate “bed death” is more prevalent in lesbian relationships, couples of all orientations experience it.
You mean a lot of married couples eventually stop having sex? Who would have thought that!
3 -
Wheelhouse15 wrote: »Wheelhouse15 wrote: »BinaryPulsar wrote: »MeganMoroz89 wrote: »You might feel like you fall into one of these categories:
Pansexual = You can be sexually attracted to any gender, whether or not it is within the male/female binary
Demisexual = You are only sexually attracted to certain people with whom you have an emotional connectionBinaryPulsar wrote: »DeficitDuchess wrote: »What's self attraction's label?
I am not conceited but my self esteem, won't allow me; to be loveless!
I don't know. Maybe auto-sexual. I might have just made that word up. But, I have found that if you search anything sexual that it probably has people talking about it or proclaiming a fetish for it.
This is more of a meta comment....
I hate the current LGBTQ-academic movement to stick a label on every feckin mode of sexuality out there
It also seems quite "anti-queer" as the point of queer theory has been to break the confines of societally imposed labels and recognize things like sexuality as self-determined and sometimes fluid/uncategorizable
Anyway, carry on....
I understand and agree to a degree. I understand that people are wanting to understand their sex drive because it leads to less conflict in relationship when people understand and are up front about that. It's not an issue for me personally. I think it's more of an issue for people with low sex drive or asexual.
I personally just identify as bisexual. Like I always have. I don't really understand why pansexual had to come into existence. I guess people didn't like the term bi meaning two. But, I feel like pansexual is just unnecessarily singling people out based on their gender orientation. But, whatever. I don't care. People can do what they want. I don't want to make an issue out of it.
I think some people go overboard with too many labels. But, again, whatever, they can do what they want.
I just studied sexuality and learn a lot about it and certain things just stick in my mind.
Sexuality is definitely fluid and on a spectrum.
I have to agree that the labeling is getting ridiculous. I thought pansexual used to be the old term for bisexual and I think queer morphed from meaning homosexual to more about a persons view of their gender but the thing I object to the most is that gender is a social term and not a biological one. Gender is not the male/female binary (leaving out hermaphrodites here) but masculine and feminine as defined by ones culture. The signal to noise ratio is getting lower right now and starting to become meaningless due to political correctness. I'm just hoping we can get a handle on this sooner than later so we can have an open and honest dialogue about how to treat everyone with the same respect and decency without the gender politics.
Queer just means outside of normative or mainstream gender/sex/sexuality categories
And, actually, uncoupling gender identity (how you feel/present yourself/identify with the world)from sex (what your genitals are determined to dictate you are) is the kind of "uncategorizing/unconstraining" that I appreciate. It makes useful sense of why some people don't fit into our societally determined categories for identity. It allows for the complexity that simply does exist in human experience.
We've made productive strives to reveal how the world and human experience does not fit into the bubbles we've put it in for thousands of years. It's a simple, yet scary thing to trust that people can feel and be something that you yourself don't understand.
I think "politically correct" is sometimes used by people to undermine big ideas that they can't quite grasp their head around (and thus, of course, must be b.s.)
Also, there is no "outside of gender politics." Regardless of what you think the gender politics are, we live inside them.
No, I'm not using those terms to disregard or undermine any ideas, I was helping the fight for LGBT rights long before it even became a term because I had a lot of good friends who were gay and lesbian and were being mistreated just because they choose partners of their own sex or didn't feel they were the correct sex. My issue is that political correctness and gender politics has become a cacophony of ever expanding terms that aren't really helping. And there are political agendas being pushed that I do not appreciate but that's for another place.
My argument here is that all people need to treat each other as people first and labels are often a barrier to proper treatment. Do we live within a world of gender politics? Yes, and although I very much agree with what LGBT community is doing I do not agree with many of the PC actives that try to stifle discussion with those who do not completely agree with them. I know this is not what you are trying to do here but there are many who do.
Fair enough
But, ironically, I think that "politically correct" is one of those terms that, as you put it, is a barrier to proper discussion of ideas.
People (not necessarily you) use that term to undermine ideas rather than thoughtfully engage/discuss what they don't like about the idea
But certainly, we are in agreement....more openness to discussion and understanding each other is what we need3 -
BinaryPulsar wrote: »thisonetimeatthegym wrote: »"The general consensus is that whilst there may be statistics to indicate “bed death” is more prevalent in lesbian relationships, couples of all orientations experience it."
Statistically you would find more married people horndoggin' around here complaining about lack of sex in their hetro marriages.
The stereotype is that men have higher sex drives than women. So, people conclude that gay men have the most sex and open relationships. And that lesbians eventually stop having sex and want immediate cohabitation. And that heterosexual couples stop having sex because of the women. These things might be true sometimes. But, also very much not true a lot of the time. And people buy into these stereotypes rather than work on whatever the real issues are.
It's interesting to note that in the 70's there was a study that indicated that homosexual men had the most sex partners but as same sex partnerships and marriage have become more accepted these rates have dropped to similar rates as heterosexual men. It's pretty much been realized that the high partnership rate was due to the instability of these relationships because they were not safe relationships to be caught in so they stayed away from longer term and committed relationships.
2
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 389 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.2K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 918 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions