Demisexuality

[ThePriceOfSugar]

I hate using the nouveau term for this, but it is useful shorthand.

I am 24 and single, and I find I am just not sexually attracted to anyone if I don't have an emotional or intellectual connection to them. I have zero interest in sleeping with even very attractive people without that connection.

It's not that I am playing coy or only want to do it in the context of a serious relationship, but purely that I have no arousal or interest until I am close with someone or admire them.

I'm definitely not asexual and I've experienced this with both men and women, so I don't think it's an orientation thing.

Is this normal/ a thing lots of people (women) experience? Or am I hormonally unbalanced or something? I have never had a ONS, and to some degree feel I am missing out on some fun experiences.

AIBU?

That was in reply to @slashlover

Off-topic but you need to update your hot guy references 😉 Rob Lowe is old enough to be OP’s grandad 😂

So we don't need the labels heterosexual, homosexual or bisexual then as those are just a range of what is 'normal'?

Seems a very normal way to be OP. I also don’t think it’s a separate sexuality

So we don't need the labels heterosexual, homosexual or bisexual then as those are just a range of what is 'normal'?

Those are groups that have historically been horrifically discriminated/ persecuted against. We need/needed to be able to names those groups in order to gain protections and rights for them. It's also really handy to be able to filter when dating.
Have demisexual people been/ are being discriminated/ persecuted against? Do you only date other 'demisexuals' or those that believe in your label?

I believe it's 'demi' as in not entirely asexual, but on a par with it while not currently experiencing attraction or sexual desire for someone.

So many things people don't ever think about have different names/ labels. It's entirely normal. Because when writing certain academic papers or conducting research etc, it's important to be able to separate everything depending on what's being written.

It's only recently that being asexual has become less of a dirty thing. I have several asexual friends and family members who have had to deal with being spoken to like shit, or patronised, for it.

The male demisexual folks I know have battled being called gay or abnormal, for not being interested in women the way a supposedly normal red blooded male is.

As with any other label relating to sexuality, or gender, or neurotype, most of you can ignore the words, and the rest of us can use them to find solidarity.

Noone needs to get offended. It's just a word.

Utterly unremarkable and the norm for both sexes.

You're bi sexual and like to connect with someone before you have sex with them, it's that simple, surely?
You've felt the same with men and women so it's not orientation as you said - it's a personal choice that you have. It doesn't need a special term, it's all a bit ridiculous and dare I say attention seeking in my honest opinion.
Why does this need to be a big deal?

Heterosexual people have been discriminated against?

Not sure about demisexuals but asexuals absolutely have been/are.

Not sure about demisexuals but asexuals absolutely have been/are

Really? They've had their heads kicked in, refused jobs, surgically mutilated, imprisoned etc because they're asexual? They have passages in holy books dedicated to hating them and wishing death upon them? They have laws criminalising them? Really, is that what you're saying?

Heterosexual people have been discriminated against?

The name heterosexual exists because we needed/need to name the group that ipr sees . It's also helps when dating.

Oppresses* not ipr sees

Clearly the necessity for naming some group of people or some phenomena doesn’t just come from their relative oppression. It’s perfectly reasonable to have words for groups who are just different from other groups.

Asexuals have absolutely been persecuted and oppressed throughout history. Probably not for “degeneracy” as was typical with gay people, but many many asexuals will have been essentially forced into sexual relationships and marriages the were disgusted by and didn’t want. This will have been especially true for women asexuals. Asexuals were disrespected In many cultures. For example in India and Nepal Buddhist nuns would often be abused and spat at for taking the vows rather than marrying and having children. In among ancient Jews it was seen as against god not to marry and have children even if you were a rabbi. Today while it’s probably a lot easier than it has been, being sexual is still seen as an essential element of healthy, romantic relationships and so I imagine it can still be pretty lonely and stigmatising being asexual.

Really? They've had their heads kicked in, refused jobs, surgically mutilated, imprisoned etc because they're asexual? They have passages in holy books dedicated to hating them and wishing death upon them? They have laws criminalising them? Really, is that what you're saying?

repository.uchastings.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1418&context=hwlj

However, “outgroup hate” plays a central role in human beings’ social
identities.60 In a 2012 study, researchers revealed strikingly strong bias
against asexual people.61 Predictably, attitudes towards homosexual,
bisexual, and asexual people were more negative than attitudes toward
heterosexual people.62 The more groundbreaking result was that within
sexual minorities, asexual people were evaluated most negatively of all
groups, falling behind both homosexual and bisexual people.63 Further, of
all the sexual minority groups studied, asexual people were perceived to be
the least “human;” they were attributed with significantly fewer human
nature traits and were perceived to experience fewer human emotions.64
Asexual people are dehumanized by being characterized as both “machinelike” and “animal-like.”65 Because sex is so much a part of non-asexual
peoples’ lives, and because of the pervasive sexualization of our society,
those who reject sex are viewed as less than or not even human.66

As attention has increased towards asexuality, animosity towards asexual people has increased correspondingly.67 Beyond discrimination, the
most extreme form of this animus is sexual violence designed to eradicate
asexuality.68 Asexual activist Julie Decker reported that sexual harassment
and violence, including corrective rape, is disturbingly familiar to the
asexual community.69 She stated that people who carry out corrective rape
do so because “they believe that they’re just waking us up and that we’ll
thank them for it later.”70 Decker has received death threats and numerous
comments that she “just needs a ‘good raping’”—leading her to conclude
that when some people hear that a person is asexual, they see it as a
challenge.71 In recounting the sexual assault she personally experienced,
Decker said that after speaking extensively about her asexuality with a
friend, he tried to “fix” her by sexually assaulting her.72 She recalled that he
tried to kiss her, and when she rejected his advance, he pushed her against
the door, licked her face, and yelled, “I just want to help you!”

academicworks.cuny.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1050&context=jj_etds

Recognition is emerging that asexuality is a valid sexual orientation. This emergence shares similarities with past (and some present) attitudes toward other sexual minorities, including the attempt to label it as a pathological disorder by comparing it to sexual dysfunctions, similar to the manner in which the sexual orientations of lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) people were treated as medical conditions in the past (Scherrer, 2008). There are also certain forms of societal and legal discrimination that value people who have sex (particularly heterosexual sex) over asexual people, for example, there are laws that allow for the annulment of marriages based on non-consummation, implying that a marriage isn't valid if it does not include sex (Bogaert, 2015).

I especially like that asexuality has been called a "psychological problem" on this thread confirming this research.

Interesting op - the impression I get of NY from media portrayal is that dating is quite brutal and a bit 'cold' in which case your explanation and interpretation of your dating style/sexuality makes more sense. I understand a bit more why you might feel the need to define yourself in these terms now.

This is more a general comment on the amount of labels, rather than this specific one. I don't think it is always helpful for there to be so many labels, particularly for teens. Going through puberty can be quite a confusing/angst inducing time without feeling societal pressure to shoe horn themselves into a box and attach a label to it.

It is actually more restrictive, not more freeing, to expect people to define themselves by one label. "Pick a lane"-no one should feel preesurised to do that and unfortunately, that IS a very real pressure for teens.

Just be who you are.

But the the OP is not asexual - why all these attempts to shoehorn irrelevant stuff in here? Maybe start your own thread??

Who cares
Why you want a label?

IKR!

Not sure about demisexuals but asexuals absolutely have been/are

'In 2012, a study shows'. What study? Who was studied? What people were involved in this study? How many people?

I'm sorry, but I can't get on board with the idea that people who don't want a shag are discriminated against in the same way as lesbians are.

I believe it's 'demi' as in not entirely asexual, but on a par with it while not currently experiencing attraction or sexual desire for someone.

So many things people don't ever think about have different names/ labels. It's entirely normal. Because when writing certain academic papers or conducting research etc, it's important to be able to separate everything depending on what's being written.

Labels are one thing if they are neutral like heterosexual or homosexual, but this one isn’t. It’s news to me that not fancying people I’ve just met puts me “on a par” with someone who experiences no
or little sexual attraction. I wouldn’t mind if I genuinely was not very sexual because it would be accurate, but this just feels like being told an important part of myself is incomplete or has been downgraded in some way as not the full thing.

Are there other sexual preferences that must be ticked off if people aren’t to have percentages of their sexuality docked?

I'm sorry, but I can't get on board with the idea that people who don't want a shag are discriminated against in the same way as lesbians are.

ASEXUALITY IS NOT ABOUT HAVING A SHAG, it is about sexual attraction.

Don't believe what people who have experienced it are telling you, that's fine.

Who cares
Why you want a label?

I like the label as it helps me to find other people who are the same as me and who experience similar things. It helps me to understand that I'm not a weirdo or freak and that there is absolutely nothing wrong with me or that I don't need to be fixed.

'In 2012, a study shows'. What study? Who was studied? What people were involved in this study? How many people?

Sorry, www.researchgate.net/publication/258137973_Intergroup_bias_toward_Group_X_Evidence_of_prejudice_dehumanization_avoidance_and_discrimination_against_asexuals you can request the full text from the authors if you're interested enough. Although other papers which cite them state surveyed 148 heterosexual Canadian university students and then 101 heterosexual online community participants about their attitudes toward asexuals. Both groups were biased toward sexual minorities, and most biased toward asexuals compared with homosexuals and bisexuals.

I thought this part was particularly relevant Some evidence and commentary suggests that asexual people are viewed as a highly illegitimate sexual orientation group

Anyway, I think we've got to the point where nothing I say is going to convince people that my sexuality is my sexuality and discrimination is a thing. I've provided several links to scientific papers and I don't think there's much more I can do so I'm politely withdrawing from the thread. If people take that as flouncing or them "winning" then that's fine.

ASEXUALITY IS NOT ABOUT HAVING A SHAG, it is about sexual attraction.

So you are not sexually attracted to anybody and therefore don't want to shag anybody, so your sexuality is all about not wanting to shag anybody. So how are you discriminated against ? How would anybody know your sexuality anyway?

I was called 'demisexual' by a swinger at a social meeting, when I told her I didn't and wouldn't have casual sex with strangers (I was looking for a new FWB). I couldn't have sex with someone purely because if their physique either, OP. Some pretty looking men with muscles in the right places are ridiculously dull and shallow.

Probably not for “degeneracy” as was typical with gay people, but many many asexuals will have been essentially forced into sexual relationships and marriages the were disgusted by and didn’t want. This will have been especially true for women asexuals. Asexuals were disrespected In many cultures. For example in India and Nepal Buddhist nuns would often be abused and spat at for taking the vows rather than marrying and having children. In among ancient Jews it was seen as against god not to marry and have children even if you were a rabbi

That's not asexuals being persecuted because of their sexuality is it, the vast majority probably weren't even asexuals. Its society being against mostly women not doing as their told and having babies, against not growing the tribe.