What happens if all demisexual people are wrong

This is a guest post written by SlightlyMetaphysical of Asexual Curiosities.

Following on from Swank Ivy’s excellent tumblr post, I just wanted to develop and draw out some of the logic in her arguments.

One of the common reactions to the idea of demisexuality is that it’s a made up word which people use to make their normality seem special. Hit the link above for Swank Ivy’s on-the-nose dismissal of this argument.

I think it’s worth pointing out how odd it is to claim that everyone’s demisexual. While I find it difficult to distinguish between my sexual and non-sexual attraction sometimes, it’s clear to me that, when I do experience sexual attraction, I can experience it towards a stranger. It’s obvious to me that there is a cultural assumption that people can, and do, experience sexual attraction to people they don’t know well. It’s also obvious to me that there’s the odd multi-million dollar industry (most of the sex industries, for a start) which cash in on the premise that people experience sexual attraction to people they don’t know well. There are alternative explanations- it’s possible that all those industries actually rely entirely on a combination of sexual arousal and aesthetic attraction, propped up by social norms. But the burden of proof is with the people saying that people like me just don’t exist, and the burden is pretty high.

So let’s work on the assumption that the majority of people can experience sexual attraction to people they don’t know well. In those circumstances, it makes complete sense to make a word for ‘someone who only has the capacity to experience sexual attraction to people they know well.’

The idea that it’s arrogant to create a label for how your brain works differently from everyone else’s… I can’t follow the logic for that without my own brain frying slightly. I have spent so much of my life, in the ace community and in general, pushing against the idea that people think like me. It’s a difficult and bewildering process, it’s painting painstakingly around an invisible object, it’s trying to map the unmappable, and it goes against every instinct and bias that we have. For me, figuring out the ways people are different from you and respecting and working with those differences is the opposite of arrogance. To assume that people think like you and not to question it is the height of egotism.

So when demisexuals say that probably a tiny proportion of the population is demisexual, I see that as humility, not arrogance. They see the general insistence that everyone is non-demisexual, and define themselves against it. There is nothing wrong with this. In fact, the opposite.

But pushing further, there’s no reason that demisexuality can’t be something that 30% of the population can identify with, not 0.5%. There’s no reason that demisexuality can’t be something that 60% of the population can identify with. I’d stop a way before 100%, because I sure as heck am not demisexual, and I’m sure there are others like me (there’s that bias again).

But let’s say, for the sake of a hypothetical, that the naysayers are right, demisexuality is ‘nothing special’. It’s 30, 40 years down the line, and the word demisexual has spread, with record numbers of allosexual people saying, ‘yeah, that’s how I work too!’ 90% of the grey-a/allosexual population doesn’t experience sexual attraction (however we’re defining that this week) to people they don’t know very well. In the past, the non-demi 10% had been vocal enough that it looked like we non-demi’s outnumbered you, but that turned out to be wrong. Basically the naysayers have been right all along, and every demisexual who has ever proposed that they were among the 0.5% of the population with special attraction rules has been proven laughably wrong.

Great. Seriously, great. That is ridiculously awesome news.

Not because it’s inherently better to have an almost entirely demi population than the other way round, but because it’s inherently better to know. Because it’s awesome to have words to express how we think differently from each other and it’s awesome to know roughly how many people think one way and roughly how many people think the other. Because people can lead better-informed lives. They don’t feel the pressure to act non-demisexual. They can discuss their attraction styles with their partners and dates. They can happily have sex or a romantic relationship without having to fake sexual attraction if they want to (and, in mainstream society, I’m pretty sure sexual attraction is currently assumed in both of those things). It’s not a utopia, but everyone understands themselves and each other just that tiny bit better.

So when someone reveals that they’re demisexual, and the response is ‘You don’t need a word for that. That’s just what everyone is!’ I just don’t understand it. Not only because it’s patently obvious from being inside my head, or from just being in the world and looking around me, that it’s not true, but because if it were true, that would be even more reason to talk about it. If everyone was demisexual, and we were all absorbing this cultural baggage that makes us pretend to be non-demisexual, in the belief that that’s normal, how on earth is that an argument that the demisexual people who are just beginning to speak up and self-identify should sit down and shut up? That’s an argument that they should be singing from the rooftops.

About Siggy

Siggy is a physics grad student in the U.S. He is gay gray-A, and makes amateur attempts at asexual activism. His interests include godlessness, scientific skepticism, and math. While not working or blogging, he plays video and board games with his boyfriend, and folds colored squares.
This entry was posted in Demisexual, Guest post. Bookmark the permalink.

32 Responses to What happens if all demisexual people are wrong

  1. Andrew says:

    I want to raise two key issues that I think should be raised in connection to this issue. First, doubt about just how uncommon demisexuality is tends to treat sex/gender as an important issue. I think that the claim, more often, is that this is how most women are. Some people will criticize this as a sexist stereotype, but many stereotypes are overgeneralizations of actual between-group differences. Whether the prevalence of demisexuality in the general population is higher among females than males is an empirical question, and a lot of people wouldn’t be terribly surprised if it turns out that it’s more common among females.

    Second, I think that part of the opposition towards the term “demisexual” is that it isn’t merely a description of a certain sort of pattern in people’s attraction. It also comes along with a connection to asexual politics, and a consequent a tendency to see it as a sexual minority and a connection to LGBT politics. And then there’s the whole privilege/oppression dynamic, etc.

    • Siggy says:

      I agree with the second point. Demi-hate isn’t so much concerned about the description of demisexuality, but the implied identity politics. Not many people complain about “sapiosexual”, even though it seems like it might describe a lot of people, because no one imagines sapiosexuals claiming marginalized status, or forming an international community parallel to various LGBT communities. On the other hand, that’s exactly what people imagine from demisexuals.

      • Karina says:

        Ahh… if only there were more sapios, maybe demis wouldn’t feel so alone. (Speaking as one, no insult implied.

  2. Pingback: Wenn Demisexuell das neue Normal wird… | Der Torheit Herberge

  3. Hush says:

    Honestly, when I first read the notion that Demisexuals don’t exist, I got a little peeved. Honestly, labels, although they can be restrictive at times, can also help a person with self identification and such. I would challenge anyone to walk a mile in my sexual shoes and tell me I’m like everyone else.

    I’m a 33 year old guy who has gone through so many labels. Straight, Bi, Gay, Asexual…. none of them quite fit. I felt I wasn’t straight cuz I was meeting some hot women who I simply did not sleep with even though I very well could have. It wasn’t so much of a choice as it was something that felt fundamental about my being. Like I would mentally want to be attracted to these girls, but at the end of the day, it just wasn’t there? And one day, just out of the blue, chilling out with a straight guy friend of mind, I just felt so calm and comfortable… I don’t know how else to explain it, I was just sitting there across from him, and I felt insanely attracted to him, I wanted to kiss him, this confused the hell out of me seeing as up until that point, I not once ever saw a guy in that light… Obviously nothing happened between us two, but I only ever felt that type of attraction towards a handful of people, one other guy who won over my confidence, and 3 girls. One of whom started of as friends for 4 months. I wasn’t attracted to her in the slightest bit until one day I tried sleeping with another girl I fancied for months, and I realized I was in love with this first girl. We ended up dating for 5 years… and we fucked like bunnies, Some days we’d go at it for 2 or 3 hours. It was the most satisfying sexual relationship in my life. When we broke up, I went 2 years of celibacy. thought for sure I was asexual. Until I met a girl who soon became my best friend. One night, while she was sleeping over, she made a pass at me… And I just couldn’t resist. The only other time this happened was with this other girl, who, 4 years after we’ve broken up, I can say is the last person I was attracted to inspite of dating some fucking hot women. I even had a couple of dates with one of the hottest chicks I’ve ever met earlier this year. She came back to my place one night, as badly as I should have wanted to sleep with her, I didn’t.

    Break down: Sexuality is complex. Anyone who claims to think they know enough about something to dismiss it, or validate it… is quite simply, a pretentious douche who think too highly of himself, his opinions and his knowledge of society.

    No one know anything. People should stop pretending like they are the sun sets on their a$$#ole.

  4. Hush says:

    ps: I don’t believe for one second that most women are demisexual in nature. I’ve had sex thrown at me enough times to know this isn’t the case… Women are just as sexual as men are.

  5. CMC says:

    As someone to whom the term “demisexual” would apply, I find the label to be pointless. I also find it insulting. My sexual preferences are not halfway between asexuality and something else (which would be what, exactly–sexuality? am I not a sexual person in virtue of not being attracted to strangers?). This isn’t a continuum. If anything, it’s a shape (maybe a triangle, maybe something with some as yet undiscovered points). Is everyone “demisexual”? No, obviously not. Everyone who has ever had a satisfying one-night stand proves this. But I can’t see the point in the label. Hypersexuality and asexuality are clinically significant phenomena, but “demisexuality” as currently defined does not seem to be so.

    • Siggy says:

      Why exactly do you find it insulting? I consider myself to be between asexual and non-asexual, are you saying there is something inherently wrong with this?

      Since many demisexual people do find the label useful while you do not, have you considered that your experience and the experience that they are trying to describe may be different in some way? Demisexuality is often hard to explain, and personal experiences hard to compare.

      • Roseanne says:

        I identify as demisexual, I only discovered this term this year and found it fit me perfectly.

        I had no interest in sex at all until I made a huge connection with my boyfriend and found him insanely attractive.

        I hadn’t been sexually attracted to anyone before.

  6. Eva Lee says:

    Really, people. Labels. That’s all they are. Why fit yourself in a box at all? We are all different. We may share this in common with that person or that in common, but we’re all different from the person beside us, even if we’re identical twins. We should just accept who we are as who we are and what/who we like as what/who we like romantically and/or sexually. In the quest to understand and define ourselves, we too often limit ourselves. Then, too argue over labels is too often pointless, This is said from a mother of a young woman who is trying to find the right label for her own questioning sexuality.

    • Eva Lee says:

      Then, too argue over labels…*to, not too

    • Sciatrix says:

      I’m a little confused by this comment. Is it arguing that labels are inherently limiting? Because I respectfully disagree–I see labels as a means of communication, not as a means of limitation.

      Look at it this way. If you’re just presented with two labels to choose from–say, “straight” or “gay”, and neither of them fits well, you have three options. You can pick the label that fits better–if there is one–or you can say “I am none of the above.” But that’s a really hard way to communicate, right? If you’re looking for support, it’s hard to search for other people like you that way, because you have no means of finding each other, and when you do find each other you have no means of talking about yourselves and your reality as people for whom none of the existing labels fit.

      So the third thing you can do is to create a new label that does fit and go see if anyone else is using it, or to otherwise see if anyone else is talking about your experiences. If the latter is the case, as a byproduct of that discussion a new word will spring up naturally. It’s actually been fairly difficult for me not to say “nonlabelers” here in this paragraph, for example. It’s an easy shorthand for a group, and if I was going to discuss that group in much more detail I’d almost have to invent an equivalent word rather than use “people who don’t use labels” all the time. Single words are just so much shorter than bulky phrases.

      To say that people shouldn’t label themselves is saying that they shouldn’t need to figure out where they fit in terms of sexuality. They shouldn’t need to talk to other people who feel the same way that they do, or figure out what they do (and don’t) have in common with other people. They shouldn’t need to find support if they feel different. Because these kinds of conversations pretty much necessitate having a shorthand so you don’t have to navigate a long circumlocution every five seconds, trying to discourage people from using labels basically discourages the conversations themselves–which is pretty much the opposite of what you’d want to do if you wanted to support a loved one.

    • Max says:

      I used to feel the way you explain here about labels, Eva Lee. The problem was that when I didn’t have a label, other people would assign one to me and I resented them because I felt disempowered. It was as if someone defined me in a way that was easiest for them without fully taking me into account.
      I had to come to terms with the fact that, even if it wasn’t the case for me, for many people labels are necessary and they will assign you one if you don’t carry one of your choosing.
      I got tired of letting others define me. People simply didn’t accept my need to not label myself. It made them more eager to attach a label to me.
      When I could finally put a name to what I was, to how I felt,and when I could explain what it was and how it was different from other labels, I finally *owned* it. I finally didn’t feel like I was compromising or using an approximant.

  7. Eva Lee says:

    First, sexuality is not either…or and who we wind up with does not just pertain to our sexuality. Second, the question of who makes up the labels and what the lay person understands about the labels and the spectrum involved of the label and to what extent person A understands how he/she fits into the label and person B in the conversation understands of the label comes into play as well. Then, we have people who either don’t understand the full implications or construct of the label and don’t believe they fit the label in the first place, so they make up a new label, which now everyone has to learn and what if it interconnects with another label, so now which label are we? Now imagine there are four trains going through several tunnels. Train A is the degree to which you get hot and bothered. Let’s call tunnel A1 sexual tunnel A2 demisexual and tunnel A3 asexual. Train B is what gets you hot and bothered. B1 is homosexual B2 is bisexual B3 is heterosexual and B4 is omni/pan-sexual. Then there are the trains about how much you are romantic and what people touch your romantic soul. Add in friendships which may or may not get complicated in the sexual/romantic nature of things. Considering these are all spectrums in which the 7 billion plus people on this planet have a variance where they can move along different points in their tracks at different points in their lives depending on the people they meet, the culture in which they live, and many many other factors, labeling ourselves becomes a useless endeavor. We are all extremely different. I have kissed both guys and girls and not once did I label my sexuality before hand nor did we talk about whether I was demisexual or bisexual. Simply, it was what it was in the moment that it was. In the end, if we are using labels as a means to first understand ourselves and second communicate said understanding to others, it is far more effective to rely on our actions than on labels that may or may not be accurately applied or understood.

    • Siggy says:

      Do you have a problem with people identifying as asexual, or talking about asexuality? Do you think it would be far more effective (towards what goal?) for people to simply act as they like, and not use words to describe how they act, or how they feel about it? This seems to be the position you are advocating.

    • “Train A is the degree to which you get hot and bothered. Let’s call tunnel A1 sexual tunnel A2 demisexual and tunnel A3 asexual. Train B is what gets you hot and bothered. B1 is homosexual B2 is bisexual B3 is heterosexual and B4 is omni/pan-sexual. Then there are the trains about how much you are romantic and what people touch your romantic soul.”

      Erm… that’s labels. All that is labels. All that ‘well, this is the gender I am sexually attracted to’ and ‘this is how I experience romantic attraction’ is all just labels. Admittedly, you can say them as ‘This is how I experience romantic attraction’ rather than ‘I’m [demisapioromantic]’. The first way has the advantage of not binding you to an identity, the second way has the advantage of being easy to say (and easy to organise around), but they’re both describing sexuality with words and scales and common reference points. What you’re advocating is labelling.

      I’ve got to be honest, over the last few years I’ve been growing to see labels as reference points, as “I’m kinda near point ‘gay’ and close enough to point ‘asexual’ to be in zone ‘ace,'” rather than “I can’t fit into box ‘gay’ or box ‘asexual’ so I’m gonna have to make myself a whole new box,” so I actively resist labels as boxes or identities (for myself), but I will kick and scream if anyone tries to take away labels as reference points and say they’re not valid, because without that I would just be on an empty page with no way of speaking or even thinking about any of this stuff, and that would be horrifying.

  8. Sel says:

    My husband, we worked out recently, fits the definition of demisexual perfectly.
    My husband has never had any attraction to a person ever until he met me, no crushes, feels nothing when he see’s nudity and when he tried to watch porn. He tried a one night stand once (against his better judgement) and couldn’t go through with it and ended up feeling dirty and showering. I had a hard believing him or understanding how this was possible, but discovering the term demisexuality and seeing that it is possible for someone to feel that way, has really helped me understand. I think unless you are
    demisexual or you are with someone who is, it’s probably a hard thing to understand, but saying it isn’t valid is ridiculous, my husband didn’t chose to feel this way and always felt that he wasn’t ‘normal’ especially because of the way most guys are when it comes to sex.Luckily we met, because he had resigned himself to a life alone before that.

    • Rob says:

      Its nice to see something not derogatory on the subject of demosexuality, and thankyou for sharing this story.. I hope you and your husband have many happy years to come:)

    • Roseanne says:

      My boyfriend is the same, he had never been in a relationship before me and just wasn’t attracted to anyone before. At all.

      I had been in relationships (unhappily) and wasn’t sexually attracted to any of them. I had no interest in sex and had decided that relationships just were not worth the hassle.

      Then we met and it all changed!

  9. Pingback: Asexuals aren’t “just like everyone else, minus the sexual attraction” | The Asexual Agenda

  10. I think part of the reason lots of people look at the term demisexual and say “that’s everyone” is because it’s difficult to define the “well” part of the “only attracted to someone you know well,” Because “well” could mean different things to different people. Maybe one person isn’t attracted to a complete stranger but if they have a couple hours of fun conversation with said stranger, the stranger is now known “well” enough for them to be attractive. But for someone else “well” might mean a year of friendship.

  11. Rob says:

    Just because one may not be, or see the point of demisexuality, doesnt mean that it doesnt exist. It just means that you dont have an understanding of those of us who actually ARE demisexual. Anyone who speaks against a demisexual is obviously someone uncomfortable with themselves and seeks retribution through hurting others, not to mention how infantile it sounds, hearing how closed minded people can be. I love this world… Love it about as much as i love aids, abuse to fellow humans, and barak obama.this worlds fucked.

  12. Karina says:

    Exactly. It’s like a straight person saying gay people don’t exist just because they don’t identify that way, or vice-versa.

  13. Karina says:

    All I know is when I see a good-looking guy passing down the street I will check him out and slightly attracted but not feel impressed. Then five minutes later I’ll be focusing on my commute. I respect anyone who wants to act on their urges or be promiscuous but from my perspective I simply can’t imagine myself with someone who I barely know. Point finished. It would be ideal for me to have a relationship that begins as a friendship and develops into more with time. If something is meant to turn out, why rush it?

    Of course too it seems like a stereotype that most women are this way but many of my female friends have had quite a few partners, just like many of my male friends have only had one or two relationships.

    To anyone who doesn’t identify this way: you don’t have to worry, no one is trying to stop you from having sex either. 😉

  14. greenpie48 says:

    Demisexual is just a label that is created to help people figure out how people are attracted to other people. Yes, I am demisexual. I am only attracted to some men that I have a strong emotional connection with. I was never that girl who talked about how hot the guys on the football team are. My only celeb crush is Channing Tatum. The label does not define me 100% but it describes me best than other sexual orientations. It exists. The most important thing to do with labels is not define an individual with the label. Someone should say “Blanca is a person who is demisexual” instead of “Blanca is demisexual”. I know it takes time to say the extra words but it is important to acknowledge the fact that the person you are talking about is a human being. And if someone is confused about a label or mislabels, that person should simply ask the person about the label. The person with the label should not over react and simply educate about the label. Sometimes people have false assumptions about something and education is the best way spread knowledge about demisexuality. This also goes for other sexual orientations, religions, races, etc. Its just ridiculous how some people would believe the media and assume that all news is true.

  15. Fara says:

    Recently, there was a huge spat about demisexuality in the tumblr circle I frequent (despite not actually having a tumblr account; I think the blogs are funny, nothing more). Whenever I saw someone use the term “demisexuality” like a mocking insult, I felt immensely vulnerable and, after fifteen minutes of tracking the argument, had to close my laptop and go to my dog for comfort. It took me years to figure out that I was demisexual – otherwise, I interpreted myself as “broken”, a bulb that would rarely light up and when it did it didn’t burn very brightly – and before then, I assumed I was just a weird bisexual. I could never apply the term asexuality to myself because I knew, especially in regard to those I loved, I was fully [capable] of sexual attraction, even if I only had one or two concrete instances of that attraction.

    Finding the term “demisexuality” was my great awakening, of sorts. I’d only found it because I was trying to figure out what it was I was feeling for one of my best friends, with whom I’d fallen in love. These feelings of love sparked hungers I didn’t recognize in myself but knew elsewhere, which is why I’d been so confused. That someone would try to invalidate this self-discovery by saying “a teenager made it up” infuriated me, depressed me, because it means my soul-searching would’ve been for nothing and I’d be no closer to knowing myself than I was when I was twelve.

    It’s bad enough I can’t tell my family without them saying, “That happens to everyone.” It’s bad enough that my twin brother insists that I just haven’t found the right person, or haven’t put myself out there enough. Luckily, the friend I’d fallen for is wholly accepting of what I choose to apply to myself, and we’ve been in a relationship for two years now…but it’s just frustrating that the same people who totally support asexuality, bisexuality, genderqueer, two-spirit, and panromanticism were so completely against acknowledging that there could be a point in the Gray-A spectrum to which people can identify.

  16. I do somehow fit the definition of “demi” (I do feel primary attraction, just only for relatively few, extremely hot individuals. I’m much more reasonable with my secondary attraction). Yet I resent and reject this label.

    What I find wrong about the term “demi-sexual” is the normative implication that a promiscuous sexuality is the norm, that a promiscuous (indiscriminate) attraction to (random) strangers is what being fully-sexual means.

    I don’t think most people are promiscuous, or that they should be pressured into being promiscuous. I am somehow judgemental about promiscuity in general (especially when it’s related to young, vulnerable people who are yet to discover what makes them tick). I think this ubiquitous expectation of promiscuity has been imposed on society by certain interest groups (advertisers, porn industry etc) and by a minority of naturally promiscuous individuals who are sick of being shamed and wish to be considered mainstream. We live in a hyper-sexualised society where the hyper-sexuals don’t feel comfortable being a minority, so they’d rather let normal people redefine themselves. I think such a fake normality is hurtful for most naturally-non-promiscuous people (at least for the conformists people who might otherwise choose to behave differently – think typical teenagers).

    I don’t feel that non-promiscuous people (especially if they are a majority, as suggested in the article) are less than sexual, or are merely self-inhibited, frustrated “fulls”. If anything, people called “demi-sexuals” expect (and sometimes get) more from sexuality, not less, they look for and feel satisfied only with a more profound connection. In this sense they are “meta-sexuals”, rather than “demi-sexuals”. But such a word would be misleading too, because it also suggests a certain level of intensity. As far as I understood the term, a “demi-sexual” can be as passionate as a “fully-sexual” once their conditions are met, or they can still be almost cold and indifferent even with the few they are attracted to, being “demi” doesn’t say anything about intensity, only about taste.

    Also, I think it’s incorrect to define “demis” as yet another sexual orientation. It’s not an orientation by itself, demis can still be hetero or gay or bi. Being “demi” is more of a qualifier of their orientation, just like being sapiosexual, or like having a strong preference for a certain race / age group / type of physique etc. You wouldn’t say that someone who’s only attracted to skinny girls has a different sexual orientation than one who only gets hot for athletic girls or for girls with ample curves – those are just particularities.

    • Siggy says:

      (Note that the post is under my name, but I am not the author, since it was a guest post.)

      I don’t think the negation of “demisexual” is “promiscuous”. I don’t identify as demisexual because I’ve been attracted to people after not having known them for very long. That seems pretty far from promiscuous.

      You say that there is a norm in society wherein promiscuity is considered normal, and anything less is abnormal. I think people who choose to use demisexual perceive the exact same norm, and are trying to attack that norm by naming it. You think that naming the norm simply gives the norm more power and legitimacy. Is that correct?

      As I wrote very recently, I think you have a right to disidentify with any term, even if you think it technically applies to you.

    • ettinacat says:

      My father, from what he’s told me, has had consensual sex with only one other person (my mother) and they were friends for a long time before they got romantically involved, and romantically involved before they had sex. My father’s behavior would therefore fit the stereotype of demisexual, but he clearly isn’t demi. He’s told my brother and I that he finds many women he meets sexually attractive, including many strangers. He just doesn’t believe in casual sex, and does believe in upholding his promise to my mother to be monogamous.
      Non-demisexual allosexuals aren’t necessarily promiscuous. Attraction is not the same as behavior.

  17. Sup Doyle says:

    Okay seriously? I’ve seen people on here say “I identify with this because I dont find strangers attractive” Are you shitting me? Are you shitting me? Thats like me saying “I identify with asexual because sometimes I dont feel like having sex” Please just stop. Let me explain, its a lack of *SEXUAL* attraction, like yes I can find you aesthetically pleasing, but, I just cant find that..sexual need, I never had a crush, and one day after being best friends with a girl for 2 years, I woke up and I was like OH SHIT OH NO and I just had my first “Crush” type feeling, I had sexual feelings for the first time, it was nice while it lasted but I moved countries and now I haven’t experienced any sexual need since. I think we need some education on this topic and I think people need to realize that its not about strangers or friends its about a long platonic relationship that leads to sexual experiences.

  18. Charlotte says:

    Moderators note: I’m allowing this, but issuing a warning. Please play nice, and pay attention to our comment policy.

    Can we not just get rid of the labels and say fuck society and their need to identify us. THIS IS FUCKING 2015, it’s the older generation that has put us in this position of making us say we are heterosexual or homosexual or whatever. Can we not just say “I like boys” or “It takes me a lot longer to be interested in a relationship than most other people” or “I simple don’t care”. BECAUSE I FUCKING DONT AND I DONT CARE FOR THE BULLSHIT LABELLING. I have this friend who identifies as demi-sexual and every time she says this (every day I see her it feels like) she says with a smug smiler on her face, as if she feels superior to me because I’m not and it makes me hate that label and in turn people associated with it. At the same time she also says she’s pan sexual, and because I don’t like to state my preference she says that with a smug smile again as if she’s superior to me when I want to turn around and say “Fuck you, I know I’m hetro because I experimented when I was younger and I just knew I didn’t swing that way, you’re still guessing because you refuse to be in a relationship”. So let’s just get rid of the labels because things like this happen and I just feel so bad for thinking these things and I’m sure everyone else does

  19. SchizoidDemisexual says:

    All I know is I’ve had one crush in my lifetime and I wasn’t to the point of being sexual interested. And when I was home schooled (and therefore taken away from him), the next time I thought of him, I didn’t feel a thing other than fond attachment one would have for a dear friend. I don’t find celebrities physically attractive and it’s hard for me to find people attractive in photos. I find a guy occasionally attractive while I’m not actually ATTRACTED to him. Whenever I meet a new person of the opposite gender, I am confused about my feelings. It takes a while for my brain to catalog them into my two categories- brother or friend. When I do discover this, I treat them as such.

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