Is sexual attraction only based on genitals, or is there more to sexual attraction (e.g. attraction to secondary sexual characteristics, "femininity", "masculinity", etc)?

submitted by [deleted] from (self.LGBDropTheT)

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

view the rest of the comments →

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

May I know what you think of the split attraction model? Split attraction model allows for identities such as homosexual heteroromantic, which means someone is sexually attracted to the same sex, isn't romantically attracted to the same sex, is romantically attracted to the opposite sex, but is not sexually attracted to the opposite sex.

The model was used by 'asexuals', and later on others started using it too. E.g. a woman who likes sleeping with other women but doesn't like having romantic relationships with them, but has romantic relationships with men would say she's a homosexual heteroromantic.

Are there such identities? Is romantic attraction separate from sexual attraction? If they are not separate why do many people feel like they are only romantic with one sex but only sexual with another sex, etc?

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

It's in its infancy. I would like to be able to objectively measure romantic feelings. fMRI is capable of this, and there has been preliminary work on "love" in general. Nothing on SAM. The outcomes thus far lead me to a belief that romantic love is in fact a physiological drive, same as hunger, thirst, or sexual desire.

It is however overwhelmingly concordant with sexual orientation, so an ideal-type asexual person who claims a romantic orientation, especially such a person who is say "asexual homoromantic" is highly suspect to me that they have a high degree of self-awareness. Likewise, an asexual person that claims a romantic orientation to the opposite sex, do they actually have that configuration, or are they being pressured to follow a heteronormative script? When they say "romance"--do they know what that means/have a consistent definition of it? Are we talking about a physiological drive, or merely the sex of a person one would choose to partner with, bereft of the typical motivations that cause people to partner?

Ultimately, the way people use it, to me, strikes me as the latter. It's just used to explain a preference, and not necessarily a phenomena.