don’t kill me SJ bloggers, I just don’t understand

equalseleventhirds:

greenchestnuts:

firefly-in-the-dark:

I don’t understand the concept of demisexuality = attraction only once emotional closeness happens.

Don’t many sexual people only feel attraction after they’re close to someone?

I sort of have always thought of it as more than that.

It’s like a trip to canada. I have no interest in ever going to canada. There’s nothing there I want to see. I hate the sensation of cold. But if my best friend wanted to go, I would, because I know I’d enjoy spending the time / doing something with her even if I wouldn’t enjoy canada on my own. Going to canada wouldn’t be the appeal, doing something with her and making her happy would be.

That’s also kinda how I see sex- it’s not something I get anything from but if someone I’m close to wants it, I’d do it, because it could be fun even if it isn’t arousing or whatever. Just like a hug from someone close feels good, but not in a sexual way, if that makes sense. It’d be like a game to figure out what they want from me, and to learn to get good at it, even if I don’t think it’s something I’d enjoy in the same way they would.

I suppose I sort of use demisexual as asexual (as in no desires for sex) but not repulsed by sex like most asexuals are. Just indifferent.

Am I just making up my own definition here? Is it a term just to define people who prefer to be emotionally attached to people they’re sexually attracted to instead of having a desire to hook up with strangers? Wouldn’t that cover the vast majority of the population?

(I know technically I can’t really class myself as any sort of asexual since eating disorders / low weight = loss of libido is a main and early symptom, but since I’ve been this way as long as I can remember… at least until/if I get better, that’s my outlook on sex.)

No one’s ever done a survey of demisexuals. Maybe they’re very common! The thing is, though, people don’t find the label demisexuality and decide “oh, I want to add a new label to my identity.” Usually, they notice that they are having a hard time relating to other people’s experiences andthenfind a label to describe what’s going on.

You talk about demisexuality as “attraction only once emotional closeness happens,” which sounds accurate, but you also talk about it as “prefer[ring] to be emotionally attached to people they’re sexually attracted to instead of having a desire to hook up with strangers,” which isn’t very accurate. It’s not a preference, it’s a necessary condition; demisexuals just don’t experience sexual attraction to anyone they don’t have a strong bond with. They don’t find strangers or celebrities or passing acquaintances hot or sexy or any of that. It’s not a choice for them, it’s just how it happens. It’s a description, not a prescription.

The definition of demisexuality that you’re going on is the simplified one. There’s actually a scientific thing about primary and secondary sexual attraction. Primary is sexual attraction based on outside things: appearance, voice, basic personality, etc. Secondary sexual attraction is based on emotional connections; you have to form an emotional bond with someone before experiencing this. Many people experience both, but demisexuals only experience secondary sexual attraction.

There’s also a difference you’re failing to understand: the difference between sexual attraction and having sex. You can have sex without being sexually attracted to your partner, and you can be sexually attracted to someone without having sex with them (see crushes, abstinent relationships, etc).

I suppose I sort of use demisexual as asexual (as in no desires for sex) but not repulsed by sex like most asexuals are. Just indifferent.

Actually, most asexuals are not repulsed by sex! That’s a very common misconception. Asexuals just don’t feel sexual attraction. They’re unable to look at anyone and go, “Oh, they’re hot.” Many asexuals are indifferent to sex or even enjoy sex, while others are, in fact, repulsed. This is true of every sexuality, actually; there are, for example, people who experience sexual attraction, but are disgusted by sex itself

That’s also kinda how I see sex- it’s not something I get anything from but if someone I’m close to wants it, I’d do it, because it could be fun even if it isn’t arousing or whatever.

That’s actually the viewpoint of a lot of asexuals who are not repulsed by sex. Some are aroused by being sexually stimulated, others are not, but many of both kinds are willing to have sex with someone they’re close to (often a romantic partner, but not always).

To use your Canada metaphor, someone not on the ace spectrum is interested in Canada. Maybe not all of it; maybe just British Columbia, or the bit up by Alaska. Maybe their interest ebbs and flows, depending on all sorts of factors. Maybe sometimes their interest is entirely gone, because nothing in Canada seems all that cool anymore. Maybe they go to visit it; maybe they don’t. But they’ve felt the interest, they know what it’s like, and it’s a normal part of life for them.

Conversely, an asexual is someone who is not particularly interested in going to Canada. They might do it at some point, might even enjoy it, but they do not feel any interest in it at all.

Now, a demisexual has been uninterested in Canada for their whole life. Everyone else seems to be interested just by looking at it or hearing about it, but they don’t experience that. One day, they learn about Quebec. They hear about life there, the language, the people, the cafe on a particular corner that serves the best almond coffee cake you’ll ever taste. They might even visit Quebec and experience this for themselves. At some point, they have learned something—maybe a lot of information, maybe just one salient fact—about Quebec that makes it special to them. It’s different from the rest of Canada, somehow. Maybe they’ve fallen in love with Quebec, or maybe they just feel close to it emotionally in a non-love way.

Now they are interested in Quebec. It’s not something they decided to do; it just happened, as they formed a connection with Quebec.

(Incidentally, the non-asexual person might experience the same thing as the demisexual at times. The difference is, however, that the former can also become interested by seeing part of Canada even without forming the connection first.)

…so that metaphor got long. Does it make sense, though?

via Tumblr http://knittingandsljivovica.tumblr.com/post/36890595934

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s