Manga News: Check out this week's new manga (10/13/14 - 10/19/14).
Forum News: The nomination phase of the Community Awards 2014 is live! Visit new sections for Nisekoi and Kingdom!
Hey guys! Do you think it's possible NOT to have a sexuality?
It sounds a little weird, and I get that, especially because it seems like theres a sexuality for everything... except for NOT having a sexuality? I understand there is asexuality, however, asexuality is not being interested in sensual interaction at all. I do have sensual interaction, however, I don't like to define myself as a certain sexuality for a number of reasons. I'm just going to call it non-sexuality.
Basically, I believe sexualities are labels. "She's such a lesbian" "He's definitely gay" "That's so gay"; STEREOTYPES.
It's the most frustrating thing. I don't want to labelled. I want to be me, not "that pansexual girl". It seems so... dull in a way, just being characterized for your sexuality. I don't want to be a lesbian, I don't want to be pansexual or bisexual; I want to be ME. If only society would allow that.
Once upon a time, I used to like a guy who turned out to be gay. Long-story-short, it ended poorly. My heart was crushed. He didn't even consider me and him being together, he just said "Sorry, I'm gay, so". Guess what? THAT SUCKS. It sucks having to get over someone just because they 'aren't compatible'. It took me 8 months to get over him. To him, he was proclaiming his sexuality, but to me, it was like saying "I don't like you, I won't like, and I don't like anyone who is like you and I never will". It hurt. I became very attached to him for a while so during that time everything seemed to crumble.
I believe everyone deserves a chance. I would fall in love with a girl. I would fall in love with a guy. I would fall in love with a he/she or even a she/he. I would fall in love with a gender-less person. If I truly loved those people, I would have intercourse with them, and I'm proud of that. I believe that I can fall in love with anyone, not just girls or just guys.
I'm very indecisive. I know for a matter of fact that I'm attracted to girls, but whether or not I'm attracted to men is another. Sometimes I am, sometimes I'm not. But how can I choose just one sexuality? How can one sexuality decide who I am when it comes to love? How will this choice take affect in my life? Just to skip the trauma, why not just NOT have a sexuality?
If you broke it down, I suppose I would be pansexual or possibly lesbian, however, back to step 1, stereotyping.
This was long. Here's a few questions:
1. Do you think that someone can just NOT have a sexuality? Why or why not?
2. Would you consider non-sexuality for yourself?
3. Do you think that religion (like Christianity) would be a problem with non-sexuality? Why?
1-What you're giving as an example is pretty much the definition of pansexuality imo (but, as a person that has never felt that way nor... investigated enough, I can't tell). Like, I'm hetero, but that doesn't mean that I like every girl.
3-...yes and no, it really depends on the religion and the person following it. If I have to say I'd say yes, there will be always a religion with a case against something, lol.
Well, labels are used to define or classify groups of people or specific trends.... A label will be there the moment something starts because people will try to define it and put it into context and relate it to behaviors and whatnot. So... I don't think you can avoid labels because there is nothing really stopping us from trying to understand, classify and generalize things. Non-sexuality could just as easily be another label in that regard. I would argue that basic human curiosity and our need to understand things will inevitably result in labels of some form or context.
As far as the church thing, I doubt they would be cool with it but I guess it ultimately depends on the specific religion in question. If we go into Christianity in particular it usually makes a big deal out of the whole "prosper and multiply" so they would take a moral stand against anything that gets in the way of multiplying. I guess most religions will have something against men and women not calling themselves that though. Since non-sexuality seems to be something which you hope won't be defined it is actually hard to go deeper into this because the question is whether churches will be cool with something that does not have any specific characteristics attached to it.
As for the bit under the unfairness part... What? The guy was gay, he is simply not attracted to women. It is in no way or context about you.... Its not an issue of him discriminating you or anything of the sort, if he is gay then he is literally incapable of feeling sexually attracted to you. If he actually had the capacity to feel sexually attracted to women then he would not be gay, he would be straight or bixsexual or whatever else, its not about him not giving you a chance....
I don't think you can just choose a sexuality... Most people don't anyways. I guess you can be bisexual or pansexual and within your available options you can choose a specific group of people you will primarily target but that is ultimately your choice, it will not however affect your state as pansexual or bisexual or whatnot since you will still have the capacity to fall in love with everything that is available to pansexuals.
The scientific community in most countries accepts the labels, come to think of it, they are the ones "coming up with it". Anyone heard of gender studies and family studies as courses?
It's just that "gay" and "lesbian" which might be considered street terms are done so in a more scientific manner to fit academia with "homosexual". I can see however how someone would think of that as a label, but it's pretty clear where the relabeling of labels is originating from.
Sexuality: Do you like exclusively guys, exclusively women, both, or none? I believe it goes heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual, and uninterested.
Gender: Do you identify as a woman, man, or between?
Sex: Are you interested in sex or not (asexual)?
Romance: Are you interested in romantic connection or not (aromantic)?
I am heterosexual, but I don't have any interest in romance or sex.
When I was 15 years old (prime age for a teenager's sexuality), I lost all interest in sex. It took me a long time to even realize that I wasn't looking at girls anymore. I am still that way now (almost 4 years later). I don't have a problem with it now because I am used to it. It is strange to me to see how other people act around the opposite sex. I don't know if this will change over the years or not, but it doesn't seem to matter to me very much.
I've never been totally sure why some people can be so against "labels" in general. I mean, I get not wanting to be solely defined by a single (or even multiple) labels, but that's how we identify things that are different and manage to communicate effectively.
Homosexual, heterosexual, blonde, black, white, tall, short, fat, skinny. To say someone is heterosexual doesn't mean that's all they are. It simply implies that their sexuality is focused mainly on the opposite sex. In normal everyday interactions, a label describing sexuality may not be necessary, but in classrooms and labs it certainly would be. Labels are just meant to help describe things. Don't let them be used negatively
Also, yeah I think it's totally possible to not have a sexuality. I've never met anyone like that myself, but I can't imagine why it couldn't be possible or even relatively common.
I blame society for the whole thing against labels (seriously though). Realistically speaking there is actually a lot of pressure for young people to be unique. Parents convince themselves that their kids are basically pretty little snowflakes and raise them as such. Then you have kids believing they are unique and whatnot grow up and it turns out that as they do everyone labels them. They are no longer unique, they are whatever they were labeled as. So once that potential brain tumors settles in you have society telling you all this wonderful stuff about unique people that change the world and all that stuff. People from history are made out to be almost mythical, leaders are made out to be infallible, steve jobs was more than a good salesman and bill gates was never an asshole to anyone. So you grow up believing you are unique, then find out you are just a person and then the pressure to be a pretty little snowflake kicks in. And the thing is, its pointless... If you really were just you, if you were unique then you wouldn't need to concern yourself with how other people label you. You would be too busy being yourself....
I haven't met anyone that I am attracted too. I never even notice what girls are wearing. People walk past me and I don't know if they were a boy or a girl because I didn't care enough to pay attention. I'm a generally apathetic person.Quote:
Well, not to pry or anything...was just curious
I haven't met anyone that I am attracted to physically, or emotionally, in a very long time. A few years I considered myself to pretty normal. I would think about girls in my class or just hot girls in general, not any different from other guys. But I don't do that anymore. I have had crushes on girls in the past but nothing happened with them. I wouldn't say that I am asexual though, I think it is just extreme apathy.Quote:
I don't think you're asexual, but more like you haven't met someone who would stimulate you.