>Gray asexuality is considered the gray area between asexuality and sexuality in which a person may "occasionally experience sexual attraction."
If you experience sexual attraction, occasionally, you're still allo?
I don't get gray aces at all, and I can't accept them. They're allosexuals with low libido to me.
Am I being a bigot?
> partly asexual
It just means you have high standards or particular tastes. It also means you're a special snowflake.
If you ever get sexually-attracted to anyone, ever, even just once, it means you're not asexual.
>>5535821
that's exactly how i feel but I keep seeing tumblr posts that say otherwise using the term "ace spectrum" as excuse
pic related
There is no such thing as Asexuality.
>>5535852
"Gray-ace" and demisexual are bullshit, the result of a generation being raised on bare-basics sex ed and filling in the blanks with porn and Hollywood sex. "I don't want to fuck strangers to death the instant I see them, I must not be a normal het/homo/bi person."
>>5535848
Cuddling and occasional sex is abnormal and "the opposite" of what filthy pervert allosexuals expect, according to these people. Holy shit this is sad.
Gray-aces confirmed for having no fucking idea what dating and sex are like in the real world.
>>5535813
>being confused about memesexualities
>taking memesexualities serious
pick two, and only two
>>5535848
>I'll want to do romantic stuff with you
>I'll want to have sex with you but not 24/7
That's literally how any regular person works.
I will never understand this trend of creating a whole new sexuality for everything.
My guess is that they're just teenagers who are in that phase when they want to be unique but at the same time belong to a group.
>>5535861
>people are only allowed to post on the internet if they receive my permission first!
lmfao
>>5535813
Eh, if you feel nothing like, the vast majority of the time even when looking at otherwise attractive people, and then rarely you do feel attraction to people, and then it goes away again when the chemicals ebb or whatever, or it only happens when you're drunk, or high, or whatever, then you're mostly ace. You're ace most of the time. That's legit.
It's all the people saying they're ace for attention but then wanting to convert that attention into sex that leads to this shit. They're not actually mostly ace, they're just saying it for the same reason people dress up in black clothes and call themselves goths - to get laid. Being a special snowflake is interesting. Very boring people are not interesting so they lie about shit like that in the hopes of attracting attention of people they could not otherwise bang.
>>5535929
>"I don't want to fuck strangers to death the instant I see them, I must not be a normal het/homo/bi person."
Honestly this is exactly what I think? Whenever I read about demisexuals it always confuses me like "Isn't that how it's supposed to be?" I always thought people fucked for loving one another, just because you don't wanna bang everything that moves like most people nowadays doesn't make it a whole different sexuality.
>>5535947
Yeah low libido is not lack of attraction at all
>>5536066
I'm not. Other people are and it's driving me insane. The only community that even knows what an asexual is, is tumblr, so I decided to follow some asexual blogs but it's all these people who ~fall on the ace spectrum~ aka straight allos trying to be special I guess?
>>5536218
Don't these people watch disney movies jfc
>>5536223
Nice bait
>>5536304
>you're ace most of the time
lmao what? sorry but it doesn't work like that. If people feel attraction then they're not ace. I don't care if you're high or drunk, you can't magically change your sexuality through drugs.
>>5536580
Can you magically change your sexuality through hormones and neurochemical imbalances? Because science (and science > 'lmao') says you can. And guess what, those chemicals and hormones do change!
So sometimes, some people might feel zero sexual attraction towards people, and then at other times with no different circumstances (other than their neurochemical/hormonal makeup) feel sexual attraction towards those same people.
Dick hard is not sexual attraction. Not being able to get your dick up != ace. It's about how you view individuals and what your brain, heart rate, etc do when you are attracted to those individuals. I have no personal stake in this, but if you're denying that, you're literally denying scientific fact. If you deny scientific facts to try to prove tumblr wrong, tumblr wins. Stop fucking making tumblr win.
>>5536661
If that was true then gayness would be cured and the most sold drug in the world to all the phobics.
You get drunk, you don't magically get attracted to other genders/at all. The attraction was always there.
>>5536799
Yeah because neuroscience knowing these things exist is the same as being able to manipulate them at will.
It's not a binary fucking switch flipped by alcohol. It's intensely complicated, and alcohol/other brain affecting substances can increase or lower levels of various neurochemicals and hormones which has effets on individuals. One person is just, dumber and more horny. Another gets more social. A third feels sexual attraction when normally they don't. It has different effects depending on the initial state of the person's brain, also various additional factors.
It's almost like science is actually complicated, gasp.
>>5536899
or it's almost like being horny =/= feeling attracted by someone, gasp
>>5537028
Feel free to conflate whatever you like in order to try to prove your failed points, mate.
The reality is, the brain is complicated, and what we understand of it, scientifically understand, you know, evidence, tests, that kind of shit, indicates that it's very possible for people to not be sexually attracted to other people. For a variety of reasons. And that they can be sometimes able to be sexually attracted to people and sometimes not able to be sexually attracted to people, because sexual attraction seems to rely on certain hormones and chemicals that are not reliably present. The changes in libido or gender found attractive reported by trans people taking HRT is an example of this. Sexual attraction is mutable. Chemical castration is a more extreme example. If brain chemistry changes, and a lot of things change brain chemistry in subtler ways than injecting yourself with estrogen or testosterone, sexual attraction changes.
Denying this is denying objective, scientific reality.
>>5536580
>lmao what? sorry but it doesn't work like that. If people feel attraction then they're not ace. I don't care if you're high or drunk, you can't magically change your sexuality through drugs.
For practical purposes, if you experience sexual attraction only like once every decade, it makes more sense to call yourself asexual.
>>5537335
It's cool that your gut feeling and shifting definitions are better than science, guy! But they're not, and you're wrong.
>>5537483
science can't change your sexuality omfg.
an asexual would never feel attraction toward someone else, they'd just feel horny jfc learn the difference??
>>5537530
>??
Science can't 'change your sexuality' (although it can certainly fuck it up, just not reliably 'change' it).
Science can, however, know roughly the mechanisms of physical attraction. That it can change. That it is based on hormones and neurochemicals in the brain, triggered by memories and thought patterns.
We also know, for example, how stars die, but can't MAKE them die. This is an example of how science can KNOW things but not necessarily CHANGE them. We know how and why fusion works, we don't know how to make it happen as a reactor that generates power.
Your inability to understand basic fucking logic means this conversation is literally pointless.
Oh, sexual attraction is magical and unrelated to brain chemistry! Anything you disagree with is 'horny', anything you want to make a sacred grail is 'attraction'! What's the difference? Well, you have all kinds of fuzzy gut feelings to explain those. What a cool guy!
Basically, you are provably, factually incorrect. People can feel one thing, have a head injury, and never feel that thing again. Lose memories. LOSE ALL SEXUAL DESIRE. These are all factual, documented things. We understand roughly how and why they happened. Your 'HUR MAKES SENSE LEARN THE DIFFERENCE' bullshit doesn't override recorded findings of doctors and scientists. People can and have gained and lost the ability to find things sexually attractive, in extreme, easily observable cases. It is entirely possible - and likely - that this occurs in less extreme, less observable cases. We understand how this occurs - the working theory, based on evidence, is that it does.
Your herpderp gut feeling bullshit doesn't contradict actual scientific thought.
>>5537593
>Anything you disagree with is 'horny', anything you want to make a sacred grail is 'attraction'! What's the difference?
There is a difference, that's why some asexuals still have a sex drive and masturbate, omg
>>5537606
>omg
There is a difference, you just don't understand it. You don't know the science behind the difference. You don't know that the way you are describing it is inaccurate to the actual physical mechanisms AND the effects (and even the subjective experience).
And are acting like it proves anything at all about your utter nonsense.
> Anything you disagree with is 'horny', anything you want to make a sacred grail is 'attraction'! What's the difference? Well, you have all kinds of fuzzy gut feelings to explain those. What a cool guy!
Insightful.
I think our friend here has this idea that lust and physical attraction has to feel like burning loins every single time, or else it's not sexuality.
Feeling warm butterflies and getting a boner/clit boner aren't two different things, just two ends of the same spectrum: sexual attraction.
>>5537755
They're not even two different ends. They're names given to like a double dozen different types of reaction, and arbitrarily classified as one or the other to fit a mental narrative that is largely cultural (as in, different cultures define it differently, thus proving that it's a learned distinction as opposed to natural - learned, but extremely common - most cultures have it).
>>5537755
Not really though. Especially if you're asexual but not aromatic they're 2 very distinct things.
>>5539215
'romantic' is a word used to attempt to differentiate fondness/love from 'sexual' urges, 'horniness' etc.
The word you use to describe a complex thing like it is simple doesn't actually cause it to be two different causes in the brain. Fish may not be apples, but your stomach digests BOTH of these substances. Neurochemicals, hormones, and electrical triggers are the sources of both, and they aren't actually separate. Sex leads to fondness, love, love for something leads to being sexually attracted to it, etc.
Your comforting lies to yourself about how things work a) contradict science b) are being used by you to say something that does exist, doesn't exist.
I don't give a flying fuck what you want to believe about love and romance and whatever the fuck. People have scientifically documented gaining and losing attraction of WHATEVER flavour, sexual or nonsexual, and it's supported by our understanding of the brain. Ergo, you're wrong.
People can gain and lose sexual attraction. They can also lose it and not gain it back. They can gain it when they've never had it. These are all perfectly possible. Some people might fake having that mental condition, but saying everyone is faking it is roughly the same as saying all gay people are 'confused'. It's bullshit, based on non-scientific stupidity, that leads you to treat people poorly because you have decided they are lying based on no evidence. Which makes you a fucking asshole.
>>5535813
I am asexual and I feel like demi/grey asexuals are either:
a) special snowflakes trying to be speshul/label fishing
b) asexuals in denial who are afraid of dying alone.
I used to be the second variant before I finally came to terms with going to die alone.
>>5535813
So, what's sexuality called if you experience sexual attraction but you don't actually enjoy or want to have sex?
>>5541394
Autochorissexual or lithsexual, not entirely sure.
>>5541410
Jesus christ. I was hoping for a useful label, not some of the most horrible, cringeworthy nomenclature I've ever read.
Thank you, though.
>>5541415
Yeeaaahhh, I am not familiar with those weird ass labels so I'm just guessing. Being ace I follow those Tumblr blogs, I feel like they're trying a too hard to think of labels for absolutely everything. You're welcome, anon.
>>5541394
What exactly do you mean by sexual attraction?
Personally, I blame Hussie.
