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 →

[–]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.