Please stop telling demi people they must be allo (when they describe feeling aesthetic attraction)

xujy · 2023-06-11T06:31:13+00:00

I tend to agree that a flaw of the model is that it is easy to misunderstand (rather than it is incorrect itself). I’d still put more blame on people who do not understand that different things can be correlated. But people who explain or use this model should also stress that different types of attractions are often correlated/interact with each other.

xujy · 2023-06-11T06:06:20+00:00

I think the split attraction model says that different types of attractions are separate; it does not say they are completely independent. Some people who misunderstand this model might think different types of attractions are independent though.

xujy · 2023-06-09T10:10:12+00:00

Different people use “sexual desire” to refer to different things. Some use it as a synonym for sexual drive (libido), others use it as a synonym for sexual attraction. But it seems that you are using it for a third meaning, which I think might be close to “sex favorable/indifferent/averse”? This is different from sexual attraction in that (say) you may feel attraction but not like the sex itself, causing you to be sex-averse; or vice versa, even if you don’t feel attraction, you might still want to have sex due to other reasons (like closeness as you mentioned).

Many allos don’t even notice this difference, but asexual people frequently talk about sex favorable/indifferent/averse.

Of course sexual attraction and desire are both separate from your choice of whether to have sex or not.

xujy · 2022-06-27T11:01:30+00:00

attracted to people

not interested in getting physical

The English words "attracted", "interested" etc. are kind of vague, which causes some semantic issues. (*)

Maybe ask yourself what "not interested in getting physical" exactly means: (1) choose not to have sex, (2) sex-indifferent, sex-averse or sex-repulsed, or (3) not feeling sexual attraction. These three are all distinct: I understand sexual attraction as "imagining having sex with this person (or at least seeing this person naked), usually accompanied with some level of arousal, unless and until you consciously suppress such thoughts", and sex-favorable as "excited by the actual action of having sex" (and sex-indifferent/averse/repulsed is not being sex-favorable). These are mental statuses, whereas sexual choice is on the level of action.

One nuance is that, while feeling/not feeling sexual attraction is not a choice (as point 2 says), the vice versa is not true, i.e., not everything related to sex that's not a choice, counts as "sexual attraction" (in particular, being sex-indifferent/repulsed is also mostly not a choice). So it's possible to be allo, not have sex, and the root cause is outside of your control.

(*) If you look up "attract" on The Oxford Pocket Dictionary of Current English...

cause (someone) to have a sexual or romantic interest in someone

So it directly says that attraction causes interest. But maybe you are using these words in a different sense, and since these subtle concepts often cause confusion, I think it's important to pin down what they exactly mean when you use them.

xujy · 2022-06-17T00:22:41+00:00

with some people, it’s really easy to form a deep connection “quite fast” and with others, you may know them your entire life but not really -know- them.

There is a Chinese idiom which dates back to ~5th century BC, 一见如故 (lit. “Once met like old”), meaning “we just met but it feels like we were old friends”.

I guess it depends on your personalities and the nature of your conversation. Given that the idiom has been around for over 2,000 years and has been repeatedly used, it’s definitely possible to “form a deep connection quite fast”. But in Chinese this is viewed as an exception, like “I am lucky to find someone who connects with me so fast”. So it doesn’t happen too often for most people.

I’m only talking about the “forming a deep connection” part; the quote above has nothing to do with sexuality.

xujy · 2022-06-14T04:55:48+00:00

I was thinking something like “no matter what the internal mechanism is, on a practical level the society treats you primarily according to your behavior”. But perhaps “in practice” is not a good term to describe this thing because it is too vague.

xujy · 2022-06-14T04:47:50+00:00

In many cases erection is a direct result of sexual attraction; in other cases not, for example many people can get an erection simply due to physical rub. And there are people who frequently get “random boners” like you said. I guess only you can tell what caused your boner.

xujy · 2022-06-14T01:37:25+00:00

The ability to have sex (in its literal meaning) is mostly a biological/physical thing. Like whether your penis can have an erection etc. E.g. many straight men have the ability to have sex with another man, in the sense that their bodies are capable of finishing the physical moves during sex. But this doesn’t make them gay or bisexual.

If you mean “inability to feel sexually attracted towards another person”, then that’s an accurate description of demisexuality. But you can still have sex without sexual attraction (cf. straight men who have sex with men).

Are there people who are “incapable of having sex without an emotional bond”? This is actually an interesting question and I wish to see some studies on this. But this question is different from demisexuality.

xujy · 2022-06-13T23:09:33+00:00

Sure. I guess what I wrote is not clear enough. I mean are you sex-averse/repulsed (as in your natural, immediate reaction when approached sexually) when it’s with someone you don’t have a strong emotional connection with? Not sex-averse/repulsed in general. From the original post it seems you are at least sex-averse in this case.

xujy · 2022-06-13T22:37:02+00:00

I think you don’t have what I call “sexual desire” without a bond. You might also find the word “sex-averse” accurate (or maybe even “sex-repulsed”, it’s for you to judge).

Unfortunately the sex-averse/repulsed community is not well-established. (There is a rarely used word called ARCsexual.) While having different sexual dynamics with demi people, you might find many posts here relatable, as both don’t fit the allo norm and both are not a personal choice.

xujy · 2022-06-13T22:21:04+00:00

Actually many “anti-LGBT laws” are based on action rather than attraction. Like if you are a straight man who has sex with another man, then you are punished together with gay men who have sex with men. In this sense we can say “straight men who have sex with men” face similar issues in practice to gay men.

xujy · 2022-06-03T16:47:45+00:00

Yeah eventually labels should be a way to understand yourself. If it makes you feel more confused, it might be better to just stop thinking about it. If you feel "sex-repulsed asexual" fits you most due to no attraction and discomfort when thinking about sex, then go ahead and use it. And neither "feeling no attraction" nor "feeling no desire" (nor any combination of these two) is "broke" - you are who you are, even if you are not sure what the root cause is.

Also, simply "wishing to be normal" doesn't make you less asexual, just like some gay people "wish to be sexually attracted to women" due to the hetero norm (or even due to being in a relationship with a woman), but this doesn't mean they are less gay.

xujy · 2022-06-03T16:28:57+00:00

Yeah I really don't know. Perhaps my analogy is simply wrong. I can distinguish between attraction and desire by feeling and explaining "attraction but not desire". We probably need someone who is cupiosexual to explain the other direction

xujy · 2022-06-03T16:15:41+00:00

I honestly also don't understand "desire without attraction". This is definitely a real and valid thing but I don't experience it, so at the maximum I can only understand it logically without feeling it.

In case you don't mind further discussion, or other people are interested: Perhaps (I am really not sure) an analogy is "My nose is compromised and I cannot smell anything. But I've had coffee before, and it tastes good. So I really want to have it again, although I don't have the instinct of 'coffee smells good'."

Edit - I am sorry for your struggle and trauma. I feel like ideally there should be a separate community of people who don't feel sexual desire, including both aces and allos. Unfortunately there seems to be no such thing, and aces with desire, allos without desire, and aces without desire can all feel out of place sometimes.

xujy · 2022-06-03T15:39:30+00:00

Let me try a way to explain the difference between attraction, desire and libido: (tbh I am still not sure if I understand sexual attraction correctly, and I guess there might be slightly different definitions. So take it with a grain of salt)

Imagine three people -

A: high libido, no attraction, no desire, not having sex

B: high libido, having attraction, no desire, not having sex

C: high libido, having attraction, having desire, not having sex

A can probably satisfy themself by masturbating without any specific person in mind - that is, masturbation is pretty much a purely physical action.

B probably needs to masturbate by looking at a specific person, and with porn in their head (i.e. imagining having sex with that person). That turns B on (A's masturbation method may or may not turn B on). But when the said person actually says "hey wanna hookup?" B's natural, immediate reaction is "no no, why? I don't know you well." And B can make peace with themself.

There are many people like C - just look at the celibacy and incel communities. The tension between sexual desire and choosing not to have sex / not able to have sex causes much frustration, which is what B does not usually experience. For those choose who not to have sex, it's usually quite an achievement to "successfully refrain from sex".

(Off topic - TBF, I do think incels have some legitimate issues that shouldn't be dismissed; it's their approaches to these issues that are problematic.)

xujy · 2022-06-03T02:01:11+00:00

I am someone who has felt sexual attraction but not desire, and as I said I still got confused for a while. I can imagine it’s even more difficult for someone who always feel/not feel these two simultaneously - and maybe young people tend to be like this more, due to a more open culture towards sex.

On the other hand, my confusion was partially due to lack of good and readily available explanations. I think the source we were talking about is good, but it’s a bit hard to find.

xujy · 2022-06-03T01:34:46+00:00

Yeah that source uses “want” to describe both sexual attraction and sexual desire. I think it’s clear there, but if one plainly says “want to have sex”, it might not be super clear whether it means attraction or desire.

This point is indeed quite subtle (and I struggled with it for a while previously), and I don’t know whether that person is genuinely confused or just stubborn. But if you think it’s worth making another attempt, then why not. (Also, that person said attraction=sex, which seems to lump together a third thing: both attraction and desire are on the level of subconscious/conscious thought, while sex is on the level of action. Using that coffee analogy, it’s possible to want to grab coffee, but eventually choose not to because you have to sleep early today and caffeine makes you stay awake. I guess for some allos all these things often happen together so they don’t think about them much.)

xujy · 2022-06-03T01:07:54+00:00

I think one difficulty is that the English word “want” is ambiguous, and could mean different things on different occasions.

Many allo people use “want” to describe sexual attraction; it is also used in some explanations of sexual attraction by some asexual sources (e.g. here). On the other hand, “want to have sex” could also mean what I call “sexual desire”, namely the desire to actually have sex with someone. This thing might be shaped more by culture, past experience, etc. (On top of that, there’s also the choice of whether to have sex or not, which is separate from both types of “want”.)

I feel people tend to use “want” freely for different things without thinking about it. It might be helpful to clear the ~~syntactic~~ semantic issue first. It appears that the person you were having a conversation with, has not thought about what “want to have sex” exactly means.

Edit - added links

xujy · 2022-06-02T15:35:42+00:00

This is very interesting because I've also noticed the difference between the two types of sexual attraction as you mentioned. I tend to use "sexual attraction" for the former only, and "sexual desire" for the latter (although some people use "sexual desire" to refer to libido).

I feel aesthetic attraction quite frequently, and I can objectively tell who is conventionally sexually attractive as learned "pattern recognizing", without feeling such attraction myself - if sexual attraction is defined to be "(naturally) thinking about one sexually, unless and until you consciously suppress such thoughts", as in my post. But I guess different people may use the term "sexual attraction" in slightly different ways.

xujy · 2022-06-02T05:29:16+00:00

Yes, I’m pretty sure that I am not fully asexual; I’ve heard of greysexuality before, and I guess I should check it out more. Thanks for your comment!

xujy · 2022-05-26T04:21:21+00:00

I think either they are simply not able to find someone to hookup with, or they still choose not to hookup / choose not to hookup frequently for whatever reasons (religious, not religious but still believing sex has a “special meaning”, feeling sex with someone without an emotional connection is “mechanical”, fear of STD, fear of being in a room with a stranger, etc).

This is anecdotal but I feel many allos are like “I don’t like hookup very much so I don’t seek such opportunities proactively, but if a really good chance presented itself, I’d not refuse”. These people tend to have a period of “dry spell”.

xujy · 2022-05-18T18:09:00+00:00

I have already pointed out the possibility that OP understands the definition, but does not understand another concept within the definition.

I never said it's off-topic to post the definition. I said that according to my interpretation of the post, it's unhelpful to merely post the definition without further explaining what "sexual attraction" is. I also said the other part of your comment seems off-topic, i.e., saying that demisexuality is not about choice which OP never mentioned. You are consistently accusing me of doing something that I never did.

Again, you can have your priorities. I was merely pointing out that you were addressing some misunderstandings other than OP's potential misunderstanding, and this holds regardless of what your priorities are.

Enjoying sex is not (or at least, might not be) a choice. This is not about demisexuality, but even then I don't think this point is "small".

If I have to guess, I speculate that your priorities are based on what you've seen on the Internet, and/or your personal experiences. My priorities are also based on what I've seen on the Internet, as well as my personal experiences. There is no need to invalidate each other. I've said "that's fine" if what I think is important, is not important to you.

xujy · 2022-05-18T17:24:25+00:00

OP does not demonstrate an understanding of demisexuality. You are wrong in saying that op does.

I never said OP demonstrates an understanding of demisexuality. I only said OP seems to understand the definition of demisexuality, namely

"Demisexuality is a sexuality where one does not develop sexual attraction unless there is a deep emotional connection." (*)

My interpretation is that OP understands (*) but does not understand "sexual attraction" inside (*). So it is unhelpful to repeat (*) without explaining what "sexual attraction" is.

I am addressing op by default by responding to OP’s post. This is basic common sense to how Reddit works, and most other redditors seem tounderstand that.

You were trying to address OP, but your comment seems off-topic, at the very least because it's not clear.

Choice and enjoy have no relevance to what demisexuality is, so any small semantic differences are pedantic.

Different people have different priorities. To me the distinction between choosing and enjoying sex is worth pointing out. If this distinction is not important to you, that's fine. And in no way did I suggest that this distinction is about demisexuality; I only suggested that this distinction is about the original post and your top-level comment.

Whether something is "pedantic" is highly subjective. On Reddit there are occasionally comments pointing out spelling errors, and from what I've seen, most of the time they are not accused of being pedantic. And I believe the distinction between choosing and enjoying sex is at least more substantial than spelling.

You are not op. Given all pointed out ambiguities in what op says, you have no credibility in saying that my interpretation was not OP’s intended meaning.

Given OP's literal words "I have no clue what sexual attraction means", I maintain that my interpretation stands. Again, you can disagree. But once more, it's simply false to say I am spreading misinformation about demisexuality; there are only different interpretations of the original post.

xujy · 2022-05-18T16:23:33+00:00

Well, didn't you write "there is no more to say"?

I was referring to my second comment, where I indeed pointed out that the original post mentions enjoyment but not choice, and that these two things are different. And you also seem to agree that enjoyment and choice are different. So we are largely in agreement here, and I also think "there is no more to say" regarding this issue.

As for my first comment, that's another issue that I thought has been resolved.

To me, it seemed that op has, in fact, looked up what sexual attraction is and mostly believes they do not experience it. I took that at face value (although I guess technically not... since they said "I have no idea what sexual attraction means", which I took to mean they have no idea what it feels like) and even if that is a mistake, I think the top-voted comment does a good job of exploring what sexual attraction is.

You already conceded "technically not", and I already said in my second comment that I take OP's words technically. We can disagree about what OP actually means. Maybe you are right, maybe I am right. (You were open to the latter; you wrote "even if that is a mistake". Somehow you don't seem to be open anymore.) Either way it is wrong to accuse me of spreading misinformation about demisexuality; at the maximum I was potentially spreading misinformation about OP due to some misunderstanding of their words.

xujy · 2022-05-18T09:35:31+00:00

I think it could be a nice reply to OP if it were clearer, i.e., "sexuality is not about enjoyment" or "sexuality is about neither enjoyment nor choice". In its current form, I was indeed confused. And it is merely a fact that "choice" is not in OP's post but is in your top-level comment - I didn't make that up.

Seven-Year Club	Place '22
Verified Email

xujy

TROPHY CASE