Jump to content
ComedyMusicHistory

Sexual and Romantic Orientation(s)

Your Sexual and Romantic Orientation(s)  

26 members have voted

  1. 1. What best describes your sexual attractions?

    • Exclusively Heterosexual
      18
    • Heterosexual with Same Sex Kinks
      0
    • Mostly Heterosexual, but a Little Bisexual
      0
    • Bisexual/Pansexual
      2
    • Mostly Homosexual, but a Little Bisexual
      0
    • Homosexual with Opposite Sex Kinks
      1
    • Exclusively Homosexual
      1
    • Asexual
      4
  2. 2. What best describes your romantic attractions?

    • Exclusively Hetero-romantic
      16
    • So far only Hetero-romantic, but I think I have the ability to experience Bi-romantic attractions
      2
    • Mostly Hetero-romantic, but a little Bi-romantic
      2
    • Bi-romantic/Pan-romantic
      4
    • Mostly Homo-romantic, but a little Bi-romantic
      0
    • So far only Homo-romantic, but I think I have the ability to experience Bi-romantic attractions
      0
    • Exclusively Homo-romantic
      1
    • Aromantic
      1
  3. 3. What best describes the level of sexual desire you feel?

    • Hyper-sexual
      4
    • Moderate Sexual
      9
    • Mild Sexual
      6
    • Demisexual
      2
    • Graysexual
      2
    • Asexual
      3


Recommended Posts


"Mostly Homosexual, but a Little Homosexual"

 

wat

 

Fixed it.

 

-Asexual

-Mostly hetero-romantic, but a little bi-romantic

-Graysexual

 

Can you be both asexual and graysexual? I thought graysexual was people who occasionally or randomly experience limited amounts of sexual attraction.

Edited by ComedyMusicHistory

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fixed it.

Can you be both asexual and graysexual? I thought graysexual was people who occasionally or randomly experience limited amounts of sexual attraction.

My bad! I voted again, lol. I wasn't paying enough attention to the first poll, quite honestly. Edited by curryjacket

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems like in conservative evangelical Christian circles it's assumed everyone's a hetero-romantic, heterosexual with a moderate sex drive person. It's pretty bizarre that people with mild sex drives are seen as nonexistent or weird in evangelical circles. It's assumed everyone has a strong desire to get married and have sex. Or at least in conservative evangelical Christian circles the only people who are seen as being able to have a mild sex drive are (heterosexual) women. It seems like (heterosexual) men aren't seen as "real Christian men" if they don't have a higher sex drive, and struggle with lust. It's really weird. Men with mild sex drives are seen as nonexistent. It's mostly in the evangelical/Baptist/non-denominational circles, but it has trickled a little into younger LCMS Lutheran circles. With older Lutherans I don't think it's a big thing. Apparently some study found that Baptist couples have sex more often than Lutheran couples, and I can well believe it. 

 

My sister's getting married in a month. After sex months being engaged. After a year of dating (before being engaged). And after three months of knowing the guy. Just thought I'd put that out there. They're good, moral, Christians, but after two or three months of dating they'd practically make out (not long, kisses, but tons a short, loud smooches) in our foyer while I'm upstairs on the computer, and can hear everything. Of course she'd never do it when my parents where home, but when I was the only one home they'd find it perfectly  okay. So annoying. I was so glad when she bought her own house last summer. Just in case you wanted a life update.

 

And don't get me started on the whole "Sex Positive Movement", better titled the Promiscuity Positive Movement. I always it funny how the Sex Positive Movement's buzzwords for morally acceptable sex are "consensual and 'safe'". As though not using contraception and/or barrier methods for STDs is the same is not raping someone. It makes a married couple wanting or not minding a kid and having sex without contraception, or a married couple who don't have STDs so they don't need to use condoms sound like the same thing as rape. Though bizarrely those "Sex Positive" people tend to be very accepting of asexuality. People don't always make sense. Also just because a person has a moderate sex drive doesn't mean they don't have high morals. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And don't get me started on the whole "Sex Positive Movement", better titled the Promiscuity Positive Movement. I always it funny how the Sex Positive Movement's buzzwords for morally acceptable sex are "consensual and 'safe'". As though not using contraception and/or barrier methods for STDs is the same is not raping someone. It makes a married couple wanting or not minding a kid and having sex without contraception, or a married couple who don't have STDs so they don't need to use condoms sound like the same thing as rape. Though bizarrely those "Sex Positive" people tend to be very accepting of asexuality. People don't always make sense. Also just because a person has a moderate sex drive doesn't mean they don't have high morals. 

 

Just as a general comment, I don't think that's necessarily what people who argue for 'safe sex' are going for; I think it's more a case of "if you both have been tested for STIs/STDs, and contraception is used if that's what's appropriate to your situation (i.e. if you want to prevent pregnancy, you're taking some steps to do so)" then that's the right kind of sex. I don't think it's equating rape and not using a condom at all. At least, that's what I've always taken it as, I could be totally wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

-Asexual,not aromantic. Very very much romantic asexual. 

-So far heteromantic, but think I have the ability to experience bi-romantic attractions. Most likely wouldn't act on them though. I went to the gym, I've seen enough naked women, thanks.

-Demisexual. Would have sex if in the context of marriage (given my background, I cannot fathom doing it otherwise) also, there must be some kind of deep emotional bond happening for me to even CONSIDER it.  Otherwise, forget you, I'mma make brownies and build a blanket fort. 

My brain is just not a sexual place anymore. During my teen years, it was, but now? Yeah,couldn't care less. I prefer cuddles and massages to the idea of sexual activity.  People who try to talk about their sex lives with/near me(it's happened....) expect... Well, I dunno what the expect but I'm about as interested in that as I am about their poop.  I've no interest in the subject.  I know it happens, I feel it should be kept for certain conversations with certain people.

I do not understand sexuality, whether it be to sell a product (because some model's crotch is gonna make me want to buy those jeans, suuuurrrreeee) or in a hyper sexual human being who gushes about their sex life. I do not want to have children, I do not want to have sex. I'm just not wired that way anymore. Could that change in the future? Maybe. It changed once already.

I don't caaaaaaaaare.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just as a general comment, I don't think that's necessarily what people who argue for 'safe sex' are going for; I think it's more a case of "if you both have been tested for STIs/STDs, and contraception is used if that's what's appropriate to your situation (i.e. if you want to prevent pregnancy, you're taking some steps to do so)" then that's the right kind of sex. I don't think it's equating rape and not using a condom at all. At least, that's what I've always taken it as, I could be totally wrong.

 

I don't think anyone thinks that rape is the same as non-safe/"non-safe" sex. I guess I could have phrased it better.  But the the way they say it seems, shall we say, problematic

 

Back about two years my old friend, the pansexual SJW one who was at the time 16 or 17 years old and in 11th grade, posted on Facebook a post that said, "Go have sex. Just make sure it's consensual and with condoms". I had some knowledge of the Sex Positive Movement, but that was a historical, academic knowledge. It seemed like it was back in 2014 that it became big on the Internet, and that mantra always struck me as strange. At least that was when Laci Green became so popular. She's said things ridiculous that even people that have nothing to do with casual sex or sex at all. And other famous YouTubers who's main channel isn't about sex have promoted her. And there are a few other somewhat famous Sex Positive YouTubers who say the same sort of stuff. And the sort of mentality condoms are as essential to sex as consent that certain people seem to imply seriously bothers me. Of course if people are going to have casual sex it would be really stupid not to try to lower the risk of contracting STDs/STIs, but some of these sex positive people don't seem to believe that there are situations were a person might would want to have "unsafe" (without condoms) sex. It's more the attitude that there's something weird or even wrong about non-asexual/non-graysexual/non-demisexual people not having lots of sexual partners and casual sex. Maybe these are the less mature sex positive people, but there are a good portion of them out there. Most of these people are under 30 and many are early 20's or younger, but there are a few people who are way too old to have such immature attitudes about promiscuity and sex (cough, the people at The Young Turks). The sort of people who think that someone having sex with only one person during an entire lifetime, only saving sex once they're married, or even only have sex once they're engaged or in a long term relationship is inferior to someone having had lots (like 8-20) sexual partners over a lifetime, or having casual sex and hooking up with strangers. That's at least how the people at The Young Turks (that Regressive Rag) are. What bothers me is when you have kids, like in the 12-17 age range, believing this stuff. A couple years ago Laci Green's prime demographic fell from 18-24 year old girls to 13-17 year old girls. Which is disturbing when you consider how extremely sexual and explicit the content she puts out is. I don't even get why people find that appealing. Not wonder she gets such a young demographic because in her YouTube videos she literally sounds like she's talking kindergartners. It's creepy. 

 

I guess this is where watching random videos of different people on different topics gets you. And this is where watching lots of people responding to Laci Green on various topics, with only a minority of it having to do not having casual sex or being promiscuity, gets you. 

 

End rant about annoying people on YouTube.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

-Demisexual. Would have sex if in the context of marriage (given my background, I cannot fathom doing it otherwise) 

 

There are a few/some/plenty/lots of non-demisexuals who have higher sex drives who wouldn't have premarital sex for religious or other reasons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just kinda take things as they come.... Like, obviously from other posts I'm a little bit more all over the place in terms of romantic/sexual attraction and like I'm definitely not ace and also not hyper-sexual but like.... Otherwise I don't know. Things change/grow/evolve and as such I'm pretty darn hesitant to affix labels to myself. 

 

I'm Ashley, and I'm still figuring things out. *shrugs*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I...

This is all extremely specific....

And I haven't really examined that specific facet of myself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are a few/some/plenty/lots of non-demisexuals who have higher sex drives who wouldn't have premarital sex for religious or other reasons.

The rest of that sentence says "also, there must be some kind of deep emotional bond happening for me to even CONSIDER it. " It being "sex". You can be married to someone and lose the fire or whatever. It happens, doesn't strictly apply to the "pre" status. If I was married and we drifted apart emotionally, still wouldn't be feelin' it, no matter how much we'd engaged in it before. I feel weird when someone I know who I've drifted from wants to hug me, can't imagine the same thing with sex.    

I understand that. I can respect that, but I am not them.

Thing is, with me, there is no sex drive happening. There is no want to procreate and have babies. I may make silly comments about how hot Chris Hemsworth is, and I certainly like how he looks, but I don't want to get in his pants. Ever.  That drive is just not here.

According to Google: "A demisexual is a person who does not experience sexual attraction unless they form a strong emotional connection with someone." Sounds like me.  Haven't really found a better explanation out there.

 

Edited by Boogles

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How much of a hypocrite am I if I say that I'm a bisexual/biromantic/graysexual who denies his same sex attraction to fit his religious ideals?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's no metrosexual category! If it was there I'd click that. (Basically it's heterosexuals who care about what they look like a lot)

That has nothing to do sexual or romantic attraction. I'm metrosexual. I know gay men who are metro.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pardon my ignorance, but what on earth is the difference between greysexual and asexual?

Asexual is "I feel absolutely no sexual attraction ever."

Grasexual is "I very rarely feel sexual attraction but I do not feel repulsed or completely dissuaded from sex."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Asexual is "I feel absolutely no sexual attraction ever."

Grasexual is "I very rarely feel sexual attraction but I do not feel repulsed or completely dissuaded from sex."

 

Thank you! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The rest of that sentence says "also, there must be some kind of deep emotional bond happening for me to even CONSIDER it. " It being "sex". You can be married to someone and lose the fire or whatever. It happens, doesn't strictly apply to the "pre" status. If I was married and we drifted apart emotionally, still wouldn't be feelin' it, no matter how much we'd engaged in it before. I feel weird when someone I know who I've drifted from wants to hug me, can't imagine the same thing with sex.    

I understand that. I can respect that, but I am not them.

Thing is, with me, there is no sex drive happening. There is no want to procreate and have babies. I may make silly comments about how hot Chris Hemsworth is, and I certainly like how he looks, but I don't want to get in his pants. Ever.  That drive is just not here.

According to Google: "A demisexual is a person who does not experience sexual attraction unless they form a strong emotional connection with someone." Sounds like me.  Haven't really found a better explanation out there.

 

 

Oh, I didn't mean you weren't demisexual. I completely believe you are. I didn't mean to imply that demisexuality isn't real.

Edited by ComedyMusicHistory

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/10/2016 at 6:24 PM, Boogles said:

-Asexual,not aromantic. Very very much romantic asexual. 

-So far heteromantic, but think I have the ability to experience bi-romantic attractions. Most likely wouldn't act on them though. I went to the gym, I've seen enough naked women, thanks.

-Demisexual. Would have sex if in the context of marriage (given my background, I cannot fathom doing it otherwise) also, there must be some kind of deep emotional bond happening for me to even CONSIDER it.  Otherwise, forget you, I'mma make brownies and build a blanket fort. 

My brain is just not a sexual place anymore. During my teen years, it was, but now? Yeah,couldn't care less. I prefer cuddles and massages to the idea of sexual activity.  People who try to talk about their sex lives with/near me(it's happened....) expect... Well, I dunno what the expect but I'm about as interested in that as I am about their poop.  I've no interest in the subject.  I know it happens, I feel it should be kept for certain conversations with certain people.

I do not understand sexuality, whether it be to sell a product (because some model's crotch is gonna make me want to buy those jeans, suuuurrrreeee) or in a hyper sexual human being who gushes about their sex life. I do not want to have children, I do not want to have sex. I'm just not wired that way anymore. Could that change in the future? Maybe. It changed once already.

I don't caaaaaaaaare.

I changed. Alot. lol.
-Mostly hetero sexual
-Hetero-romantic. 
-Would be hyper sexual if given the chance. 

Song of Solomon 8:4 
"Daughters of Jerusalem, I charge you: Do not arouse or awaken love until it so desires."
Well, it's definitely awake now. What do I do? :P


 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×