Are we getting 'sexualities' confused with mindsets?

[Cloo]

I see a lot of sexualities being identified, as below, that seem to me to just be mindsets about how one approaches relationships (less so 'poly' and the last two, though):



I'm wondering if it's helpful to identify these as 'sexualities'? Might it be a bit limiting for people to say 'No, I only get attracted to people in this form?'

I came across this graphic from a tweet saying 'Look, it's harmless, let people have these words without saying "But were you murdered/oppressed for this identity" and I see that as well, but it still seems to be rather over-analysing and perhaps therefore unhea;thy to me to declare the way one approaches relationships as actually a sexuality or an identity. I mean, do I need a word 'I'm not attracted to many people, can do fine without lots of sex and am mostly attracted to men but also women a bit' , would that do me and the world any good ultimately?

 

[8ball]

People like making up words and compiling lists of categories.

 

[LDC]

Brilliant, I can be the first grumpy man to post that I think this is a complete load of over analytical modern day nonsense!

E2A: beaten to it.

 

[LDC]

What's with all the flags that go with them? I also can't help seeing Fray and thinking of steak and kidney pies, which is quite appropriate given it's description: attraction fades after initially tasting one.

 

[spanglechick]

I can’t get beyond agreeing with the “it’s harmless” thing. I strongly suspect that most people whose sexual compass point fits these classifications don’t feel any need for them, but I’m also sure that for others, finding an existing name/category that seems to match them, is valuable validation that gives them the confidence to move forward.

 

[spanglechick]

Oh and “heteroflexible” is a new word I can apply to myself (though almost certainly won’t), so thanks.

 

[LDC]

It's those young people again needing to feel special. I blame Harry Potter, nobody wants to be just a muggle anymore.

 

[Cid]

I can’t get beyond agreeing with the “it’s harmless” thing. I strongly suspect that most people whose sexual compass point fits these classifications don’t feel any need for them, but I’m also sure that for others, finding an existing name/category that seems to match them, is valuable validation that gives them the confidence to move forward.

Yeah, I had a long talk with a friend about aromanticism a while back... They're from a place where it's not really thought about, where marriage is expected etc. While I'm not 100% sure where they fit within the aromantic definition, or in it's ambit, it was really reassuring for them to know that there were other people going through similar problems.

 

[planetgeli]

Quoisexual - you can't label me. Oh look, you just have.

Good grief Charlie Brown.

 

[Cloo]

In all this, I'm wondering what totally, utterly, vanilla heterosexual would be then?

'I want all my relationships to be monogamous and with a member of the opposite sex, generally I like to get to know people before I sleep with them, but sometimes I do have sex with people I've just met'

 

[Steel Icarus]

People want to feel other people are the same as them, especially if they're feeling a bit weird about what they want or who they are.

 

[Steel Icarus]

In all this, I'm wondering what totally, utterly, vanilla heterosexual would be then?

'I want all my relationships to be monogamous and with a member of the opposite sex, generally I like to get to know people before I sleep with them, but sometimes I do have sex with people I've just met'

The majority?

 

[bimble]

My impulse is to say lol silly self absorbed twits but just popped into my head that all this means kids / young people are having conversations about their sexualitiy and feelings and that has to be better than when I was a teen, when you just didn’t, it was assumed you were all the same and if not you’d be teased mercilessly .

 

[Cloo]

'Demisexual' sounds like most people of any sexuality to me.

I mean, I went about relationships in an odd, roundabout, out of order way (no relationship or sex, or interest in either, in teens, sex in early 20s, first crush in early 20s, then first relationship....) but I don't think it affords me a specific sexuality.

You do make a good point, though, bimble - it is good if 'the kids' are talking about there being more than one way to conduct your relationships or feel attraction.

 

[bimble]

Yeah I saw someone saying the other day, ‘Demi’ just means you had a pretty healthy upbringing. There is resentment in some quarters at the appropriation of the whole language of being different by people who are just not.

 

[LDC]

Requies- is just being old.

 

[Puddy_Tat]

dunno really.

(btw, don't think that poly in this context is the same as polyamorous which is a different can of worms)

initial feeling is that some people have been over-thinking it all

having said that, there are people out there who don't fit the binary gay / straight 'choice' (there are still people out there who insist that bisexuality doesn't exist)

then there are people who feel that lesbian / gay / bi doesn't really include them (this often involves people who are, or are open to the idea of relationships with people who are somewhere in the direction of non-binary / trans, which is probably safer not to discuss further round here)

see

 

[Steel Icarus]

I see no harm in it; it's an attempt to find a port in the maelstromic confusion of the spectrum of sexuality and desire.

 

[maomao]

Surely all the poly-fray-sexuals will be pretending to be demi-gray-sexuals though.

 

[Santino]

I don't know if it's harmful (or rather, not harmless) but I do think it's interesting how much desire there is to name and reify behaviours. It feels to me that it is more than just a convenient label, it's a way of explaining things.

"I behave like this, because I am This." A subtle form of essentialism I suppose.

 

[ska invita]

Language is both simultaneously very useful so we can desctibe things, and limiting through its insistance on definitions. More words the better I think

 

[Shippou-Sensei]

I'd have thought that mindset on relationship was inexorably linked with sexuality and trying to split the two would only lead to in incomplete understanding of the dynamic?

 

[Shippou-Sensei]

And trying to label these things both gives some solace in finding kinship and excludes some as any definition will be an inaccurate reduction to fit a broad model of classification.

 

[Steel Icarus]

I don't know if it's harmful (or rather, not harmless) but I do think it's interesting how much desire there is to name and reify behaviours. It feels to me that it is more than just a convenient label, it's a way of explaining things.

"I behave like this, because I am This." A subtle form of essentialism I suppose.

Maybe, and perhaps the need to name and identify yourself is going down the road of funnelling people into perceived or imagined behaviours etc; in a better world nobody would need to though, you'd just be what you were or felt like whenever you felt like it.

 

[bimble]

I don't know if it's harmful (or rather, not harmless) but I do think it's interesting how much desire there is to name and reify behaviours. It feels to me that it is more than just a convenient label, it's a way of explaining things.

"I behave like this, because I am This." A subtle form of essentialism I suppose.

This is a really interesting thing yes. The fixity of labling yourself when our behaviours are so changeable through time. “I am the kind of person who .....” is always limiting doesn’t allow for change.

 

[freakydave]

'I tend to be monogamous for about 3 months, then I get bored and start cheating. I feel really unfairly discriminated against because of this'

 

[Steel Icarus]

'I tend to be monogamous for about 3 months, then I get bored and start cheating. I feel really unfairly discriminated against because of this'

That's a different thing though innit. If you're "cheating" on someone it means you're doing something different to what your understanding is, and broken the trust they have in you to stick to what you've agreed.

 

[freakydave]

That's a different thing though innit. If you're "cheating" on someone it means you're doing something different to what your understanding is, and broken the trust they have in you to stick to what you've agreed.

But it's definitely a thing to enjoy cheating on people. If watching porn and not wanting to have sex are sexualities, then wanting a stable relationship and an illicit side one definitely is

 

[Cid]

I don't know if it's harmful (or rather, not harmless) but I do think it's interesting how much desire there is to name and reify behaviours. It feels to me that it is more than just a convenient label, it's a way of explaining things.

"I behave like this, because I am This." A subtle form of essentialism I suppose.

I think there's a tendency among some elements (probably the elements currently doing an undergrad) of these communities to do that; to classify, to try and explain and add commonalities and dividing lines that aren't necessarily there... But that the communities themselves, through forums etc, often have a much more open discourse. I have a somewhat weird sexuality; pretty 'normal', but just never in a relationship of any kind. So it does interest me. And as I said I did a lot of reading up, both when I was talking to the friend I mentioned upthread and wrt a different friend... I found there was a lot of desire to help people who needed it, and try to find commonalities between those already in that community and the person looking for advice. Rather than simply making an identification and saying 'oh, that's what you are'. I think in the end most people are trying to deal with things that they know are outside the norm, and just want people to discuss that with... And those that have already found places to have those discussions are generally going to be really happy to pass on what they've learned themselves, even where they're not necessarily in some overly defined category.

I mean... to counter that a little, people do often 'find' the label that fits them, and maybe that isn't quite perfect... But in aro circles for example, you get greyromantic, which is basically 'I'm just confused and glad I've found some people at least somewhat like me'. And yeah, in the end this is just kids (and I guess some older people) who 20 years ago would have had very few people to turn to, and no real source of advice.

 

[Little Piranha]

But it's definitely a thing to enjoy cheating on people. If watching porn and not wanting to have sex are sexualities, then wanting a stable relationship and an illicit side one definitely is

If your sexuality involves deriving pleasure without others' consent then you should indeed recognise that and try to get some help to find a more healthy way to attain fulfillment.