DiscussionWe've had threads on asexuality, what about demisexuality?

submitted by hyunnahh from (self.LGBDropTheT)

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Wandering_Idiot 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (14 children)

I'm a demisexual. One of the reasons why I'm here is because on other sites cough reddit cough we can't talk critically about issued within the LGBT+ without being called a gatekeeper or phobic of some sort.

Now I know someone is going to chime in with "demi isn't a thing because everyone is like that!" which is sort of true in the sense the there has been a massive uptick in people misidentifying themselves as demi the same way every girl in high school was a 'bisexual'. Historically speaking the asexuals and those on the asexual spectrum made up about 1% of the population (Wellings 1994) compared to homosexuals which is around 8-10% depending on which study you look at. Yet now around 4% (GLAAD 2017) are identifying as asexual or on the spectrum. Which quite astounding as that makes them more prevalent than the 3.9% of gay men(Wiki), it's almost like you can't swing a dead cat without hitting six or seven 'demisexuals'. What I'm getting at is I don't think that +3% are asexual at all. I feel like the asexual and demisexuals are seeing the same climb that the trans are seeing with people who have internalized homophobia trying to identifying as anything but gay/lesbian. As well as too many people are confusing emotional bonding increasing sexual attraction and zero sexual attraction until some sort of emotional bond.

So on one hand I 100% understand the eyeroll when someone claims to be on the asexual spectrum; because statistically speaking they probably aren't. On the other hand it gets incredibly frustrating with people assuming I need to go to the doctor to get my hormones checked... which as nothing to do with sexual orientation. It can affect sex drive but not the direction, if hormones worked like that every time women went on hormone based birth control would they be at risk of becoming more of a lesbian? Less of a lesbian? What if a body builder took some testosterone to get an edge in competition would be become more gay? If so why aren't all of men's sports just men banging each other in the changing room b/c you know most of them are taking the T.

TL;DR I'm demisexual; but understand if people don't get it b/c it's turned into the 'bisexual girl in high school' of sexual orientations.

[–]hyunnahh[S] 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

You still haven't explained how demisexuality is real, how it separates itself from other sexualities (not overlapping) and in what sense the asexual spectrum is real. You type out multiple long paragraphs but always completely misses the point.

[–]Wandering_Idiot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

Asexuality was mentioned in 1869 as monosexuals, and 1896 as anesthesia sexuals. The label asexual didn't become a thing until the 1960's. Demisexual was differentiated from asexuality in the early 2000's simply to acknowledge there was some variance in the asexual spectrum. Essentially people who were in between sexual and asexual... thus demisexual.

" You type out multiple long paragraphs but always completely misses the point." Did I really now? Because " Has anyone here identified as demisexual before? (I have lol)" I have a feeling my long paragraph may have hit home. Just because you were confused about your sexuality doesn't mean it doesn't exist. I'm happy you apparently were able to figure it out; however, you are also a good example of what I was talking about. Asexuality and those who fall in the asexual spectrum are fairly rare.

[–]hyunnahh[S] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

Because " Has anyone here identified as demisexual before? (I have lol)" I have a feeling my long paragraph may have hit home.

I identified as "demisexual" because I was just like almost everyone else, who preferred to get to know someone before experiencing genuine attraction towards them, but was swayed by "demisexual" as a label. Your long paragraphs has often digressed from the topic at hand, as has been similarly stated by other commentators on this sub, and has certainly not have influenced my sexual orientation at all. On a previous discussion about "demisexuality" you brought up genital preferences, which was completely missng the point.

Just because you were confused about your sexuality doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

This also does not make sense whatsoever. My personal experience with previously identifying with "demisexuality" does not indicate that it is real, it is indicative of how mogai-labels and labels made up by tumblr kids has harmed LGB people and our identity.

And once again you have not truly answered my questions?

Demisexual was differentiated from asexuality in the early 2000's simply to acknowledge there was some variance in the asexual spectrum.

You still have yet to fully explain what this "asexual spectrum" is and how it's real and not some made-up tumblr fad for special snowflakes.

Essentially people who were in between sexual and asexual... thus demisexual

And yet "demisexual" overlaps with all other sexualities (with the exception of asexuality) because not everyone is into hook-up culture and would much rather get to know someone beforehand. There is no reason why "demisexual" deserves a label, nor is it an indicative of who or what a person is sexually attracted to, which is what sexual orientation labels are supposed to do.

Just look at the other comments, pointing out the ridiculousness of "demisexuality" and the potential existence of an "asexual spectrum", in fact, feel free to debate them too. Kudos to you if you can finally justify the existence of "demisexuality".

[–]Wandering_Idiot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

"asexual spectrum" is and how it's real and not some made-up tumblr fad for special snowflakes.

I literally gave a brief time line starting from 1869 tumbler was founded in 2007.

[–]hyunnahh[S] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

But you didn't explain what it is and how it's not some made-up fad?

[–]Wandering_Idiot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

150+ year old fad?

[–]hyunnahh[S] 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

And your sources?

I did some digging around yet I cannot find a single source saying that the "asexual spectrum" was coined in 1869, it was JUST the term "monosexual". This doesn't prove anything about the "ace spectrum" at all. You literally also said that "demisexual" was created in the early 2000s, which I found out was most likely in 2003 and even then it wasn't "demi" but "semisexuality". By this time the internet has already been invented, albeit not as efficient as it is now. The term, "demisexuality" was eventually coined on an online forum in 2006. Not tumblr but it's still an online forum, much like tumblr is now.

If you want to prove the existence and validity of demisexuality and the asexual spectrum then I suggest you try harder than giving one-liner replies and/or running away from discussions.

[–]Wandering_Idiot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I'm not going to continue this with you, as you clearly aren't willing to read or put in minimum effort. If you look back I included sources and even dates of the sources. I'm not going to do what 10min of googleing could fix for you.

[–]hyunnahh[S] 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Like I mean sure? From the moment you gave me a one-liner for a reply and neglected the rest of my comment I already knew that this discussion has hit a dead-end.

Edit : You did give sources, but they weren't relevant to our current discussion at all? Which is regarding the ace-spectrum and demisexuality and not the amount of people indentifying as part of the ace-spextrum.

[–][deleted] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I won't chime in and say everyone is demi because I don't think that's true. However if you experience sexual attraction at all you are gay, straight, or bi. The conditions under which you experience that attraction are a preference within those sexualities, not a separate one by itself. Yet I have never heard of a 'demisexual' calling themselves a gay, lesbian, straight, or bi demi. It's always just demi, when the reality is anyone of any orientation can experience 'demisexuality'. It may not be accurate to say that everyone is demi but it's certainly not rare enough to warrant being called a sexuality by itself.

A 'demisexual' can only experience attraction after a bond is formed. Okay fine. I can believe that. A straight girl or gay guy might only experience attraction towards bearded men. But nobody calls them beardsexuals. We understand that to be a preference. That's my beef with demisexuality. The label itself is meaningless because no other preference gets treated like this and it can occur in all non asexual orientations. Other preferences/fetishes and paraphilias might get a name, like so and so might have a 'thing' for redheads. But being into redheads is not a sexuality. It's a preference. Being into only those who you have a bond with is not a sexuality, that's a preference. Sapiosexual faded into obscurity for the same reason. Only being attracted to intelligence is a personal preference, not to mention sounds pretentious as fuck, regardless of if it's true. Demisexual as a standalone needs to fade away for the same reason imo.

[–]Wandering_Idiot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

The problem with just lumping demisexuals in with GL&B's is that your lumping someone who has no genital preference with people who have an unyielding preference. No amount of emotional bonding is going to make a lesbian like dick and I don't think they should be grouped together. Don't get me wrong the micro labels... have gone way to far and the majority of them are redundant. However I feel there needs to be something distinguishing between people who have physical sexual attraction and those who don't, we just don't need 500 labels amount of difference.

[–][deleted] 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The problem with just lumping demisexuals in with GL&B's is that your lumping someone who has no genital preference with people who have an unyielding preference. No amount of emotional bonding is going to make a lesbian like dick and I don't think they should be grouped together

That's not what I said though. If the sex of your partner does not factor into your attraction then you are bisexual. My point is that a person who needs an emotional bond before being sexually attracted can be of any orientation. Just to make sure I went and looked up 'demisexual definition' and here is the first result.

Demisexuality is a sexual orientation where people only experience sexual attraction to folks that they have close emotional connections with. In other words, demisexual people only experience sexual attraction after an emotional bond has formed.

Nowhere does this say demisexuals don't care about the sex of their partner. It says that for sexual attraction to take place there has to be an emotional bond first. From this definition a lesbian can be demisexual if she is only attracted to women she has bonded with emotionally.

Even if you say demisexuals by definition don't care about the sex of their partner, that would be a preference within bisexuality. Some bisexuals can get the hots for a stranger and some can't. That doesn't make the bisexuals who can't a separate sexuality altogether. We can agree that demisexuality shouldn't be in LGB, because demisexuality should not be labeled as it's own orientation in the first place. I agree that it exists. But it exists as a preference.

I feel there needs to be something distinguishing between people who have physical sexual attraction and those who don't

I agree. And we already have LGB on one side and asexuals on the other. Demisexual as a label is redundant and unnecessary because the definition of 'only experiences attraction to those they have a bond with' is a phenomenon that can occur in anyone who is not asexual, just like only being into tall guys or curvy women.

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I feel like the asexual and demisexuals are seeing the same climb that the trans are seeing with people who have internalized homophobia trying to identifying as anything but gay/lesbian.

And fetishists. Go search around on /r/asexuality for kink or fetish. It seems to be pretty common. It's better to be in the charmed circle of LGBTQIA+ than to just admit that you're mostly just into a kink or fetish and not really into sex. I'm not judging.

[–]Wandering_Idiot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

fetishists

I would to some extent have to agree. There was one post on r/demisexual that essentially was "I don't feel sexually attracted to people but now I have sexual feelings about this badboy trope TV character, am I demi?" and the comments was full of "Your valid" reassuring ass pats. Meanwhile my brain is melting b/c that's the exact opposite of what a demisexual is and the poster clearly had some kind of gothboy kink; but, you can't say that on reddit because that would be shamming and phobic.