Senate Polyamory Acceptance Thread

Polygamy isn't the same as polyamory though.

 

Ask if her husband was ever physically attractive.

 

Dude, "not feeling attracted to ____" is not an orientation, no matter how many upper middle class white people need it to be so they can have an lgbt adjacent term for themselves.

 

minor edit

 

It's amusing. I'm seeing that I typed that I prefer polyamory to monogamy. But I just typed that because I was dating someone back in April who was polyamorous. Lol. I'm ordinarily the monogamous partner who has no problem dating someone who is poly. And now I'm that again. What a concept. Lol. She almost made me change my personal position for myself.

 

assuming I’m reading what Rew is saying correctly, you seem to be deliberately misinterpreting it to back up your position. The average human being feels sexual attraction all the time for people they don’t know - from the cute girl on the subway, to movie stars or porn stars, to a random tinder profile you swipe right to. The entire marketing concept of ‘sex sells’ is based on this notion. To have no sexual attraction for people from the outset isn’t something a ‘large part of the planet’ experiences at all.

 

Thankfully, I'm demisexual, and so I need to know someone before I'm attracted to them.

 

On your own or with someone sexually?

 

I don't know about demisexual, because that description would apply to me and I would not ever presume to be part of the LGBT community. I don't need a label or to be special.

But being asexual absolutely is an orientation. I don't know whether it counts as LGBT, but it's certainly a real thing. And definitely rare. I don't think it's right to say not being attracted to anyone isn't an orientation.

 

hey, sorry it was a bit of an offhand, flippant comment. i'm sure our experiences are very different. i was in relationships almost my entire adult life, from like age 19 to age 40. i have two kids who are in college, so maybe a lot of what some people are ultimately looking for from relationships is stuff i've already done.

but anyway, i didn't really make a conscious choice four years ago. it was more like i had a really rough breakup, and then a failed sort of rebound thing, and at that point decided not to date for "a while". that's just sort of gradually turned into four years, and it really has been a good time for figuring things out about myself and getting more and more comfortable with being alone. at this point i'm not really ruling out dating, like i don't have a set rule for myself, but i'm also not looking for it or feeling any pressure to meet someone.

 

Tom confirmed mgtow

 

I don't think "not having an attraction to x" is an orientation.

 

lol i had to google that

 

I thought it was an abbreviation for "minigolf tomorrow."

 

How did you know that I had amnesia and I forgot who I was?

 

I suspect Vivec’s problem is with the essential used nature of the whole debate at present. While it’s unproblematic if we just discuss preferences, it seems to more easily strain credulity to claim there’s an inborn genetic difference between people who need to “get to know someone first” before feeling physically attracted and others.

To which. . .yes. But I think that’s probably arguable about sexual attraction overall. There has been good work on genetic correlates but I think the argument for genetic determinants is much weaker.

I also think it’s a weird place we’ve gone in debates about societal rights. Religion has no genetic/biological component at all, and no questions it’s status as a protected class.

 

So you just straight up don't believe in asexuality?

 

"Not being attracted to X" is exactly what an orientation is.

Example: I'm not sexually attracted to other men. This makes me "straight." That's my sexual orientation.

Another example: as mentioned above elsewhere, someone might not be sexually attracted to anyone. That person would be asexual. That would be their orientation. Being demisexual,then, lies on the spectrum between sexual and asexual.

 

It's real, hell I thought I was ace for a bit. But it's not LGBT or an orientation or an identity.. Not everything has to be an orientation for it to be real.

 

Actually no what makes you straight isn't that you're not attracted to men. After all, lesbian women aren't attracted to me and they aren't straight.

 

Er, speaking as an asexual myself, it is absolutely an orientation, and it's also a big part of my identity at any rate. And it falls at least within the margins of the LGBTQ+ umbrella (after all, one of the acronyms is LGBTQA, and that A doesn't stand for "ally").

Seriously though, what do you get out of discrediting people's identities like that? What's in it for you? Just let people identify however they need and go on your merry way.

 

I mean, I wonder if there's a question of what exactly "orientation" means or something. Because I understand saying that "asexuality" isn't a "sexual orientation." Because, technically, it's just not there at all . . . am I wrong about that? I'm not super informed about asexuality, I guess, but if you're asexual what exactly is that you're oriented toward? I guess that's my question. I mean, it's certainly real, certainly a state of being or existence, but maybe the question is about what "orientation" it refers to. My basic notion of asexuality is that it isn't oriented toward anything in a sexual way. Is that maybe the communication breakdown here?

I'd like to know if asexuals consider themselves still oriented in some way towards something, ie. you have a "preference" for not exploring sexuality or if its more just a sense of absence, of sexuality not being present. Or can you be asexual and still know that, if you were sexual, you'd be straight or gay? Or do asexuals just want to use "orientation" in the colloquial sense? Which is fine and all; if asexuals say it's an "orientation," I'm not going to say they're wrong.

 

I think the thing here is, some people get confused and say asexuality is a lack of sexual orientation. It's not, at least not necessarily. Asexuality is merely a lack of sexual attraction (for men, women, or otherwise). I tend to use the word "orientation" almost as "category," but to use your meaning, asexuality isn't so much an orientation toward anything but maybe orienting away from... does that make sense?

You can almost think of it like this: Heterosexuals are oriented toward the opposite sex but away from the same sex. Homosexuals are oriented toward the same sex but away from the opposite sex. Bisexuals and pansexuals are oriented toward both and not away from any, whereas asexuals are oriented away from all these and toward none.


I apologize, for I fear I have now hijacked a thread about polyamory and made it about the asexual spectrum.