Too many Sexual Orientations?

Adrasteia

Adrasteia

[font=Comic Sans][/font]
    • 1,289
    Posts
    13
    Years
    There are more terms than ever to refer to someone who has what may be considered an 'untraditional' sexual orientation such as Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Asexual, Pansexual, Skoliosexual and even more I won't go into but I'll put a link here for anyone who's interested in the larger list and definitions.

    Definitions of the listed sexual orientations
    Spoiler:

    Do you think it's helpful or a hindrance to create a label to define all possible sexual orientations?
    Is it helping people by giving the feelings they have a name to go by a definition to quote to help them explain themselves to people who maybe don't understand what a Pansexual is?
    What's your opinion?
    Where you even aware of some of these? (I Just learnt Skoliosexual today)
     
    It was helpful in the past, but in recent years it's becoming more difficult which sexual orientation is true (e.g. LGBT) or made-up (e.g. an attack helicopter) because new "orientations" are being created from various social media such as Tumblr and Twitter, to the point where I believe they're purposefully changing their orientation for the sake of it rather than being true to their own sexual orientation. Just like you, I've recently learned what a Skoliosexual is, which looks real based on the source you've linked.
     
    OmegaRuby and AlphaSapphire said:
    Yeah, there are a lot. Btw, that definition of bisexual listed to me seems pretty close to pan sexual.
    Click to expand...

    'Bi' mean two, means it's either in for a guy or a lady like me.
    But Pan goes for any that includes Gay, Lesbian, Bi, Transgender and so on. (:
     
    The only sexual orientations I recognize are straight, gay/lesbian, bisexual, asexual, and pansexual. Most of the other "sexualities" you see floating around the Internet are made up by SJWs on Tumblr. You don't see people IRL identifying as "greysexual" or "sapiosexual". It's the same thing with all the made-up genders.
     
    Pinkie-Dawn said:
    It was helpful in the past, but in recent years it's becoming more difficult which sexual orientation is true (e.g. LGBT) or made-up (e.g. an attack helicopter) because new "orientations" are being created from various social media such as Tumblr and Twitter, to the point where I believe they're purposefully changing their orientation for the sake of it rather than being true to their own sexual orientation. Just like you, I've recently learned what a Skoliosexual is, which looks real based on the source you've linked.
    Click to expand...

    ....attack helicopter? That's a new one for me but the description was brilliant. I understand the need for certain orientations like the standards and Asexuality is sometimes considered the forth orientation. The need for a word specifically describing only being attracted to someone who has transitioned confuses me as I can't see why someone would have such a specification on who they are attracted to or how they would know if a person there physically attracted to was born as a person of the opposite gender it seems like an slight over complication, though that may just be because I don't understand it very well
     
    I just learned about Skoliosexual today as well. I dont think the multitude names are good or bad, but one shouldn't be expected to know all of them, or never make mistakes. Unfortunately, the many names has gotten to the point where people are making fun of it (even if they aren't homophobic). For example, people are suddenly jokingly identifying as attack helicopters (if its legit, I am sorry, but I'm just trying to get the point across).

    I think broader groups with subtypes would be more effective than just many types. I think it wouldnt intimidate people so much, and would make people more open maybe? Idk if that makes sense lol.
     
    zakisrage said:
    The only sexual orientations I recognize are straight, gay/lesbian, bisexual, asexual, and pansexual. Most of the other "sexualities" you see floating around the Internet are made up by SJWs on Tumblr. You don't see people IRL identifying as "greysexual" or "sapiosexual". It's the same thing with all the made-up genders.
    Click to expand...

    This is the first I'm hearing of people making up sexual orientations, though Iv never really looked on tumblr. Surely people can come up with a better way to support the LGBT community without making up there own orientations -_-'
     
    I can understand that there may be some... unusual sexualities out there. (I myself have some odd interests in this department, though I don't feel the need to make up a term for it) Honestly, the way sites like Tumblr and such portray them makes it all seem like a big joke of made up words meant to confuse the general populace. I've found that it's mostly just teenagers making up some silly labels because they want to seem special and cool, so I don't take anything that isn't bisexual, homosexual, and heterosexual seriously.

    Honestly though, I think that's all the terms we need. Anything more is getting far out of hand and is so specific that it only applies to a very small group of people. Asexual can just basically be pinned down to: "I'm not really interested in sex" without needing that term. Besides that, I think most people will have some kind of preference or liking for both or either. Pansexual is basically just bisexual+ or extreme bisexual, and doesn't really need a term because most people wouldn't be able to tell the difference anyway. It's too specific. Skoliosexual? Well, I've never heard of people being specifically attracted to non-binary genders... It is also unnecessarily confusing to most people. To be blatantly honest, that's not something that most people are ready to accept in real life, so it's probably for the best to keep it to yourself and not really have a term for it. Society's not there yet. But if you're amongst the right people, I guess just say you're interested in non-binary genders.
     
    Last edited:
    To deny the spectrum of orientations, or call any of the legitimate ones needless or unnecessary is a cruel form of erasure and marginalization. Nobody should be doing that, and people who do, deserve to be shamed for it. There's no need for each group to prove they exist. They exist whether or not you like it, care, or not. At least have the common decency to understand that. Common human decency dictates that we don't go around asking people to display the contents of their undergarments to prove their sex. Likewise, it should follow that you shouldn't ask people to prove who they are attracted to.

    As far as I'm concerned; all of the ones listed in the OP are the real, seriously-a-thing orientations that actually do exist in this planet's population to some extent. There are, indeed some, made up orientations and such created by the likes of tumbrinas, special snowflakes, trolls and worse on the internet to parodize the minorities that do exist.

    It is however wrong to let these stereotypes and red herrings confuse you, for intending to confuse others is exactly the aim of these childish people. Sexuality, like gender does exist on a vast spectrum of points on more than one dimension. While most of the terms given in the OP denote the extreme ends of said spectra; they are definitely the correct terms.

    It is wrong to call the color 'cyan' the color 'blue', if you know it is 'cyan', and you know that calling it 'cyan' will make things clearer for others. We have specific labels for a reason. Words aren't just created because we want to create them. Words are created to communicate a concept that people are trying to get across. When you use a different word to oversimplify something, you create more confusion.
     
    I think a more important question is "Why do we care?". I mean, does how someone chooses to label themselves in any way, not just sexuality, really impact on the lives of others at all? I'm pretty confident that the answer is no.

    Honestly, it doesn't matter how people choose to label themselves. It doesn't matter if people are just making shit up after a point or if they're not. It has absolutely no negative effect on anyone and if a person is getting up in arms over it they clearly have too much time on their hands.
     
    Basically what it boils down to for me is that there are only two genders. Those being Male and Female, obviously. Even if you are a transexual, which is totally fine by me, you are still either a male or a female, or identify as one or the other. If you are a male, there is no need to say that your sexual orientation is that you like guys who think they are girls. You're just gay, and whatever specific type of guy you like beyond that simply falls into the category of a fetish.

    As for Asexuality? That's just ridiculous, I'm sorry. You aren't interested in sex, that's fine. But you are still more physically attracted to one gender or the other. We are by nature a sexual species, so don't try to say you're not.

    Skoliosexual, pansexual, and asexual are completely unnecessary. You are either gay, straight or bisexual. Anything more specific should be kept in the bedroom, along with your favorite whips, chains and fluffy handcuffs.
     
    Last edited:
    Lunaris Adamantine said:
    Basically what it boils down to for me is that there are only two genders. Those being Male and Female, obviously. Even if you are a transexual, which is totally fine by me, you are still either a male or a female, or identify as one or the other. If you are a male, there is no need to say that your sexual orientation is that you like guys who think they are girls. You're just gay, and whatever specific type of guy you like beyond that simply falls into the category of a fetish.

    Skoliosexual and Pansexual are completely unnecessary. You are either gay, straight or bisexual. Anything more specific should be kept in the bedroom, along with your favorite whips, chains and fluffy handcuffs.
    Click to expand...

    So basically, because something bothers or irks you personally, it should be swept under the rug?
     
    gimmepie said:
    So basically, because something bothers or irks you personally, it should be swept under the rug?
    Click to expand...

    None of it irks me at all. I'm just saying that you don't need to go into specifics until a relationship is already in bloom, and only with those that it affects. Nobody else is going to care, and in many cases it might cause someone to distance themselves from you for your unusual tastes. Such a thing can be harmful in both personal and professional relationships. (Even though it really shouldn't)
     
    I don't think anyone is making the case that such groups should have to "prove their existence", as it were. Rather, people are posing the question of whether or not it's necessary to subdivide ourselves into so many different identity groups on the basis of minor differences in our sexual preferences.

    For example:

    Skoliosexual – (adj) attracted to genderqueer and transsexual people and expressions (people who don't identify as cisgender)
    Click to expand...
    A transgender woman is a woman just as much as a cisgender woman is, so why should there even be a distinction between being attracted to a trans person, and being attracted to a cisgender person? This is one reason why I think we should care (at least I do, as an LGBT person myself), is that when we draw too many distinctions between ourselves it could be actively detrimental to the cause of being viewed as all equal.

    Lunaris Adamantine said:
    If you are a male, there is no need to say that your sexual orientation is that you like guys who think they are girls. You're just gay
    Click to expand...

    Actually, just to point out, a male who is attracted to an MtF trans person is straight, since he's attracted to a female.
     
    Lunaris Adamantine said:
    As for Asexuality? That's just ridiculous, I'm sorry. You aren't interested in sex, that's fine. But you are still more physically attracted to one gender or the other. We are by nature a sexual species, so don't try to say you're not.
    Click to expand...

    It's statements like these that make me think we do need the labels, no matter how tiresome they might be to people who don't have to partake in them.

    I think it's really cool that in this day in age people are more forthcoming about their sexuality. If you're lucky, you don't have to hide who you're attracted to. For a long time society couldn't even wrap their head around being gay, let alone anything else.

    It'll take time for people to come around, but I think they're necessary. You don't get to choose what exists and what doesn't, especially if it doesn't apply to you.
     
    Melody said:
    Words aren't just created because we want to create them. Words are created to communicate a concept that people are trying to get across.
    Click to expand...

    I agree with your post, except this part. In a world where 'Twerk', 'Crunk', 'Screenager', 'Totes', 'Woot', 'Grrrl' and 'OMG' are in the dictionary we defiantly create new words just for the sake of it and without an ounce of coherent thought
     
    Sopheria said:
    Snip
    Click to expand...

    I would argue that caring too much about what other people define themselves as is what causes the divide. I can certainly see the logic behind your perspective mind you, but it seems a bit silly to me to essentially blame the people who label themselves for the way others react to the label.

    I don't think its up to us to decide what a person can/can't be. If someone says they're only attracted to people who a transgender, then that should be that. We don't need a reason, we aren't expected to give a reason for who we're attracted to. We don't need to read into it. We just need to accept it and move on with our lives. That's my perspective anyway.
     
    You must log in or register to reply here.
    Back
    Top