I've noticed that "straight-identifying" people are NOT ALWAYS both at the same time romantically and sexually hetero. Some combinations are: ✳️ HETEROROMANTIC - HETEROSEXUAL (basic straight) ✳️ HETEROROMANTIC - bisexual ✳️ HETEROSEXUAL - biromantic ✳️ HETEROROMANTIC - homosexual ✳️ HETEROSEXUAL - homoromantic ✳️ HETEROROMANTIC - asexual ✳️ HETEROSEXUAL - aromantic There are other such combinations. Sorry for making it complicated. Anyway, can you tell me what you guys are sexually and romantically and describe what it's like?
Straight women, are your romantic and sexual orientations both hetero?
DiscussionView all comments
All of these "sexualities" feel a bit like stolen valor. Reads to me as people wanting to be part of the LGBT community for various reasons while being completely straight. "Demisexual" seems the most sinister to me as it pathologizes what was once considered completely normal female sexuality. Also women who claim to be asexual but still have sex with their male partners... very bleak. Just admit you're not attracted to him!
So homosexual men who are closeted and have sex with their wives are not actually homosexual?
Of course they are, but if they are enthusiastically having heterosexual sex and actively chasing women while never even once coming close to touching a man they are either inhumanly repressed or more likely a bit bi.
So do you think asexual women are all enthusiastically having sex with people they're sexually attracted to? Otherwise I'm genuinely confused by what seems like a double standard to me, where you separate out sexual activity from sexual orientation for groups that aren't asexuals.
Because the straights certainly seem to realize the difference between an asexual person being willing to sleep with them and someone being sexually attracted to them. They very much know we are not one of them.
Honestly asexual is THE most confusing of all the terms based on the wide variety of people who claim it
If someone is saying asexual (rather than labels like demisexual), it really is simple! Just very different.
We don't feel sexual attraction. That's it. I can look at you and think you're beautiful and still not be sexually attracted to you. I can love you, romantically even, and still not feel any sexual attraction.
Everything after that? That's about how people choose to live their lives, and it is much like how bisexual people who have long term hetero relationships are still bisexual. I can decide to sleep with a romantic partner, but it won't be because I'm sexually attracted to them because I'm not sexually attracted to anyone. That's what makes me asexual.
If you have questions about asexuality, I'm glad to answer them. Once you get into demisexual or other groups, I'll cede to someone who identifies in those ways.
I don't see how it's a double standard given that asexuality is defined by a lack of sexual attraction to anyone. I believe if one is claiming to be asexual then one should not be enthusiastically engaging in sexual activity at all. Reluctantly, or begrudgingly engaging in sex is even worse. I constantly see this troubling dynamic of "asexual" women with straight partners having sex to appease them and supposedly they are somehow completely fine with it. Seems barely consensual if the woman genuinely has no sexual desire. It's disturbing. A gay man forcing himself to have sex with his wife to remain closeted is equally sad, but the topic of the post was about female sexuality. My read is they are genuinely not attracted to their schlubby, charmless boyfriends but want to have a partner so they claim asexuality as a way of coping.
But there are all sorts of reasons to have sex, even enthusiastically. There are likewise lots of reasons to consent to sex, even enthusiastically.
- The asexual person might love orgasms. They might have a high sex drive.
- The asexual person might love engaging in a particular kink. They might find certain sensations work better for them than others.
- The asexual person might enjoy a feeling of closeness with someone they love or simply be enthusiastic about fulfilling their loved one's needs.
If you'd prefer, I can shift my example to lesbians who choose to have sex with their husbands (rather than gay men doing so with their wives). It makes no difference to me. Either way, relationships are obviously complicated, and I really don't understand how it isn't a double standard when heterosexual behavior doesn't bar someone from having their homosexual identity acknowledged but it does so when you're asexual.
Is it possible that there are people who aren't asexual claiming the identity? Sure, but that isn't an argument about asexuality or asexuals' behaviors. That's about people lying.
My view is if you are enthusiastically having sex and have a high sex drive, you are not asexual. If you are consenting to sex you don't truly desire to keep another person happy, then that is sad and potentially very exploitative. If your entire entire sexuality revolves around a specific paraphilia, then you are also not asexual (object sexuals like Erika Eiffel are a perfect example of this).
I also don't view a gay man or lesbian forcing themselves to have sex with members of the opposite sex genuine heterosexual behavior. I don't see at all how it contradicts their homosexual identities. Telling a lesbian she must be bi because she once consented to most likely unwanted sex with men is cruel. Telling an asexual woman who enthusiastically has sex everyday that she's likely not asexual is just pointing out we've stretched the definition of this word to absurd lengths.
It is also making asexuality the only sexual identity where you view sexual behavior as more important than sexual attraction. As long as you acknowledge you're doing that? Despite the way that asexuality is actually defined? I mean I disagree with you obviously, but at least then you admit you aren't treating the sexual identities the same.