Challenges With Demisexuality

[Soandso]

OK... a new term.

I was on the path of sexuality as instinctive to life, which is why I had a hard time comprehending the scope of demisexuality.

The grey angle is just a new labeling format

Yah, new labels for things that have always been. The thing about sexuality is that it's not that cut and dry. Homosexuality would seem to be counter intuitive to procreation for example, yet it's a thing. If you want to really confuse the matter, people can be gray ace and homosexual as well

I wonder if being demi is something that comes from environmental factors, is something a person is born with, or is a combination of the two? From what I've noticed, my siblings all seem to be demi from what I can tell. Same with my parents. In my case, I've always been demi as far as I can remember

 

[JustGeorge]

Hmmm... I don't know if I'd say that I've been viewed as being a "disappointment" as far as I'm aware, but then again that might have more to do with my area and the kinds of friends I keep. Up here we have the "Seattle freeze," so folks tend to be a lot more low-key when it comes to their friendships

I do notice people regard me differently in their friendships than they regard their other friends though, but I'm not sure how much being demi influences that. I'm a pretty off beat guy, so I suspect it has much more to do with that fact, heh

I've heard of the Seattle Freeze. I don't think the Midwest is much different. We do smile, but we don't want to actually talk to anybody.

I tend to be offbeat, too... Offbeat, even for an offbeat person.

Yah, new labels for things that have always been. The thing about sexuality is that it's not that cut and dry. Homosexuality would seem to be counter intuitive to procreation for example, yet it's a thing. If you want to really confuse the matter, people can be gray ace and homosexual as well

I wonder if being demi is something that comes from environmental factors, is something a person is born with, or is a combination of the two? From what I've noticed, my siblings all seem to be demi from what I can tell. Same with my parents. In my case, I've always been demi as far as I can remember

That's really interesting! I'm unsure if its environmental or not... my sisters are definitely not demi. Pretty sure my parents are not. I think Mom was disappointed that I wasn't more "boy crazy" as a teen.

 

[Bthoth]

Yah, new labels for things that have always been. The thing about sexuality is that it's not that cut and dry.

I get it. many people make different choices.

Homosexuality would seem to be counter intuitive to procreation for example, yet it's a thing.

Correct, each have their own choice.

If you want to really confuse the matter, people can be gray ace and homosexual as well

Nice play on words

I wonder if being demi is something that comes from environmental factors, is something a person is born with, or is a combination of the two?

Learned (environmental).

From what I've noticed, my siblings all seem to be demi from what I can tell. Same with my parents. In my case, I've always been demi as far as I can remember

OK.

What are the challenges of being in between (Demi)?

 

[Estro Felino]

Based on the topic, that line and rational is beyond weird as it is almost like blaming men for what a woman does with her own choice.

You're right.
But let's not forget that our sexuality is the result of three components:
- DNA
- cultural conditioning
- social environment
I am not blaming men, I am just saying that the genetically predisposed women are incentivized by a social environment where men are allergic to commitment.
Even demisexuality must have, besides the genetic component some aspects due to society and culture.

 

[Yerda]

Demisexuality is a new word for me...I suppose I know people who don't seem to have a strong sexual drive until they are comfortable with a person.

What do you think? Do you think being able to label one's sexuality in such a manner has improved(or hindered) the romantic experience?

A thing I've found with myself, and I have observed/inferred in some other people, is that act of labelling can provide an urge to match the label. It is handy, when having a conversation, to have terms that you can point to that describe how you see yourself. But, if you don't know yourself very well sometimes you can end up trying to be a thing you think you are, but aren't. Not just in romance, of course.

A lot of people look to be tied in knots with this...hypervigilance towards matching themselves to things they think they should be. And it seems to come to the fore with sexuality.

I could be totally wrong though

 

[JustGeorge]

Demisexuality is a new word for me...I suppose I know people who don't seem to have a strong sexual drive until they are comfortable with a person.


A thing I've found with myself, and I have observed/inferred in some other people, is that act of labelling can provide an urge to match the label. It is handy, when having a conversation, to have terms that you can point to that describe how you see yourself. But, if you don't know yourself very well sometimes you can end up trying to be a thing you think you are, but aren't. Not just in romance, of course.

A lot of people look to be tied in knots with this...hypervigilance towards matching themselves to things they think they should be. And it seems to come to the fore with sexuality.

I could be totally wrong though

I see that at times with labels(sexual, religious, political, etc), too. It can be something to watch out for.

 

[Soandso]

I get it. many people make different choices.

How does one choose not to be sexually attracted to people?

Learned (environmental).

You seem rather confident of that assumption only having just learned about demisexuality even existing. Keep in mind, George and I are both demi yet have vastly different experiences growing up, from what I can tell. Where do you base your assumption?

What are the challenges of being in between (Demi)?

Hmmm... I wouldn't necessarily call it "challenging" more than it helps to give me a better understanding of myself and how I can better approach future relationships in a healthier manner

That said, people have all kinds of assumptions to what being asexual means, so I can't just tell anyone. I had a good friend who asked me about my sexuality. After I told her I was ace, she didn't quite know how to take it. She seemed bewildered and began asking weird questions, so meh... I just keep it under my hat for the most part now and just say "straight" when folks ask to avoid the weirdness

 

[crossfire]

<...>

Learned (environmental).

If you don't feel lust or only very rarely feel lust, how is that learned? Personally, I've experienced lust only a few times during my entire lifetime (just enough to know it for what it is.) Brains, however, I find sexy (which is not the same as lust, from what I can discern given my very limited experience with lust.)

 

[crossfire]

Yah, new labels for things that have always been. The thing about sexuality is that it's not that cut and dry. Homosexuality would seem to be counter intuitive to procreation for example, yet it's a thing. If you want to really confuse the matter, people can be gray ace and homosexual as well

I wonder if being demi is something that comes from environmental factors, is something a person is born with, or is a combination of the two? From what I've noticed, my siblings all seem to be demi from what I can tell. Same with my parents. In my case, I've always been demi as far as I can remember

You might be on to something there. My sibling seems to be about as asexual as I am, if not more so.

 

[Bthoth]

You're right.
But let's not forget that our sexuality is the result of three components:
- DNA
- cultural conditioning
- social environment

Tough topic, sexuality. A..... too many various opinions. B..... politically corrupted

I am not blaming men, I am just saying that the genetically predisposed women are incentivized by a social environment where men are allergic to commitment.

Lot's of combined ideas in that comment. but i do comprehend why adultery is a rule; people get hurt. Which can enable a person to do far more damage. You did make a comment, that men that do not commit, make women become promiscuous. Please keep that quiet, dont want that to turn into a meme and get to high school students.

Even demisexuality must have, besides the genetic component some aspects due to society and culture.

The genetic aspect is why sex and the parts even exist. In contrast, the culture of implants does not make a life evolve with bigger breasts.

 

[Bthoth]

How does one choose not to be sexually attracted to people?

Perhaps the same way a person turns away from drugs. I have no idea where the comment came from.

You seem rather confident of that assumption only having just learned about demisexuality even existing.

I prefer learning, then being told what to believe.
At least I am honest about my frame of reference. That previous question that you asked me was bait for a preconditioned response.

Keep in mind, George and I are both demi yet have vastly different experiences growing up, from what I can tell. Where do you base your assumption?

I didn't have an assumption. I thought the scope was weird.

Hmmm... I wouldn't necessarily call it "challenging" more than it helps to give me a better understanding of myself and how I can better approach future relationships in a healthier manner

The topic mentions 'challenges with demisexuality. So I asked a relevant query.

That said, people have all kinds of assumptions to what being asexual means, so I can't just tell anyone.

I know and you seem to enjoy assuming.

I had a good friend who asked me about my sexuality. After I told her I was ace, she didn't quite know how to take it.

See? Even a good friend was unaware until you TOLD HER.

She seemed bewildered and began asking weird questions, so meh... I just keep it under my hat for the most part now and just say "straight" when folks ask to avoid the weirdness

See? I am just one of the folk, just like your good friend. What is weird is the categorizing and positioning a stance. It's one of the reasons i dont trust the LBGTqrst gangs. too much like a religion, either follow their program or damned to hell.

 

[JustGeorge]

Perhaps the same way a person turns away from drugs. I have no idea where the comment came from.

I prefer learning, then being told what to believe.
At least I am honest about my frame of reference. That previous question that you asked me was bait for a preconditioned response.

I didn't have an assumption. I thought the scope was weird.

The topic mentions 'challenges with demisexuality. So I asked a relevant query.

I know and you seem to enjoy assuming.

See? Even a good friend was unaware until you TOLD HER.

See? I am just one of the folk, just like your good friend. What is weird is the categorizing and positioning a stance. It's one of the reasons i dont trust the LBGTqrst gangs. too much like a religion, either follow their program or damned to hell.

I think in this case, the categorization would have been helpful to have. When I was younger, what I was saying was "I am unable to feel sexual attraction for a near stranger". What was often heard was "I have super high moral values, and I'm choosing to abstain".

Sometime it put me in obnoxious situations "there must be some way I can get her to unwind". No, there isn't. Because its not how I operate.

 

[exchemist]

Well, demisexuality is part of the asexuality spectrum. There's variations of degree to attraction as well, with partial attraction being called "gray ace." It's difficult for folks who aren't ace to wrap their head around, from what I've noticed, so I don't really talk about it with folks unless they bring it up themselves

I must say I find this term ridiculous. I have read this thread with some amazement, never having heard of it before. Sexual attraction that develops only after you get to know somebody has been perfectly normal, and even thought to be the ideal, for centuries, especially among women. It’s been a truism for most of my adult life that women are not simply turned on like a switch but often need a long time to decide if they want you as a sexual partner. Giving it a label that suggests a form of sexual deficiency strikes me as narrow-minded, shallow and a bit offensive to many people. (Not that I’m accusing you of that: I’m talking about the concept you are describing.)

This terminology seems to want to frogmarch perfectly normal people, especially women who have natural sexual hesitancy, into unwanted promiscuity or else stigmatise them as weird or different.

I should say I speak as a 69yr old man who had 12 sexual partners, over the best part of 3 decades, before meeting my wife. (We got married when I was 47, in 2001). I think I was in bed after a couple of weeks with 3 of them. With the others it took quite a bit longer while we sussed one another out. The sexual attraction was by no means always obvious from the start. So while I admit my sexual ethos may belong to a different era, I do think we should be wary of assuming that the practices of c.21st Western sexual culture are some kind of scientifically sanctioned norm.

I’ve always understood there are sound biological reasons for women to assess a man in a variety of respects before going to bed with him. That’s because , biologically, it’s the woman who gets stuck with the kid. She needs a man who is reliable, capable, will stick by her and will take care of both of them. OK it’s no longer like that in modern societies, but biological drives don’t change quickly.

Sorry for the rant but this subject has taken me by surprise.

 

[JustGeorge]

I must say I find this term ridiculous. I have read this thread with some amazement, never having heard of it before. Sexual attraction that develops only after you get to know somebody has been perfectly normal, and even thought to be the ideal, for centuries, especially among women. It’s been a truism for most of my adult life that women are not simply turned on like a switch but often need a long time to decide if they want you as a sexual partner. Giving it a label that suggests a form of sexual deficiency strikes me as narrow-minded, shallow and a bit offensive to many people. (Not that I’m accusing you of that: I’m talking about the concept you are describing.)

This terminology seems to want to frogmarch perfectly normal people, especially women who have natural sexual hesitancy, into unwanted promiscuity or else stigmatise them as weird or different.

I should say I speak as a 69yr old man who had 12 sexual partners, over the best part of 3 decades, before meeting my wife. (We got married when I was 47, in 2001). I think I was in bed after a couple of weeks with 3 of them. With the others it took quite a bit longer while we sussed one another out. The sexual attraction was by no means always obvious from the start. So while I admit my sexual ethos may belong to a different era, I do think we should be wary of assuming that the practices of c.21st Western sexual culture are some kind of scientifically sanctioned norm.

I’ve always understood there are sound biological reasons for women to assess a man in a variety of respects before going to bed with him. That’s because , biologically, it’s the woman who gets stuck with the kid. She needs a man who is reliable, capable, will stick by her and will take care of both of them. OK it’s no longer like that in modern societies, but biological drives don’t change quickly.

Sorry for the rant but this subject has taken me by surprise.

I think sexual reluctance can be experienced by both genders. I wouldn't argue that its more common with women, but I've heard men complain they have to act like they're more sexually interested than they actually are(or face ridicule).

Growing up and in early adulthood, I was treated like I was 'weird' by many in these regards. Perhaps I'd have been better off in a different time, and a different place.

 

[exchemist]

I think sexual reluctance can be experienced by both genders. I wouldn't argue that its more common with women, but I've heard men complain they have to act like they're more sexually interested than they actually are(or face ridicule).

Growing up and in early adulthood, I was treated like I was 'weird' by many in these regards. Perhaps I'd have been better off in a different time, and a different place.

You would have fitted in perfectly at any time of history up to the 1990s, I think.

So who are the real weirdos, eh?

PS I have only once slept with a woman on first meeting her, and that one didn’t go anywhere. All the others have been really nice girls, with whom I had a lot of fun for many months if not years. I too have always wanted to get to know them first. It would have seemed completely arse about face to bonk them first and then find out what they are like!

 

[Soandso]

Perhaps the same way a person turns away from drugs. I have no idea where the comment came from.

Maybe I was mistaken, but it seemed to me that you were implying that asexuality was a choice

To answer your first point, that's not quite how it works; at least not in my case. People turn away from drugs because they are attracted to them in the first place. The difference is that I feel no attraction. Like, at all. One can't turn away from drugs if they aren't enticed to even be tempted by them. To that person, drugs are a non-issue

I prefer learning, then being told what to believe.
At least I am honest about my frame of reference. That previous question that you asked me was bait for a preconditioned response.

Eh, I'm not interested in "baiting," but I will not shy away from asking tough questions if I feel there is more information to be gained. The fact you compared sexuality to choice indicated to me that you may feel the same way about asexuality. Was I wrong?

I didn't have an assumption. I thought the scope was weird

The scope? I'm confused by what you mean by this; maybe you can unpack what you mean by "the scope" for me

The topic mentions 'challenges with demisexuality. So I asked a relevant query.

I agree. And I answered

I know and you seem to enjoy assuming.

Ok

See? Even a good friend was unaware until you TOLD HER.

...after she asked specifically about my sexuality. I think she could tell something was different about me, which is why I think she brought it up

See? I am just one of the folk, just like your good friend.

Not quite

What is weird is the categorizing and positioning a stance.

Ok

It's one of the reasons i dont trust the LBGTqrst gangs. too much like a religion, either follow their program or damned to hell.

Look, If you don't like LGBT terminology, I'm not quite sure why you are commenting on a thread about demisexuality. I mean, you can, but meh; what's the point?

 

[Soandso]

I must say I find this term ridiculous. I have read this thread with some amazement, never having heard of it before. Sexual attraction that develops only after you get to know somebody has been perfectly normal, and even thought to be the ideal, for centuries, especially among women.

Really? That's news to me. None of my friends experience this, from what I can tell. They are all very carnally driven

Giving it a label that suggests a form of sexual deficiency strikes me as narrow-minded, shallow and a bit offensive to many people. (Not that I’m accusing you of that: I’m talking about the concept you are describing.)

Wait, who said demisexuality was a sexual deficiency? I'm confused exactly what you mean by this... Do you mean a deficiency as far as sex itself goes or for the way the attraction manifests itself?

This terminology seems to want to frogmarch perfectly normal people, especially women who have natural sexual hesitancy, into unwanted promiscuity or else stigmatise them as weird or different.

How?... Demisexuality isn't a negative thing. It is what it is

I should say I speak as a 69yr old man who had 12 sexual partners, over the best part of 3 decades, before meeting my wife. (We got married when I was 47, in 2001). I think I was in bed after a couple of weeks with 3 of them. With the others it took quite a bit longer while we sussed one another out. The sexual attraction was by no means always obvious from the start. So while I admit my sexual ethos may belong to a different era, I do think we should be wary of assuming that the practices of c.21st Western sexual culture are some kind of scientifically sanctioned norm.

I agree that the information is new, and is absolutely subject to change, though honestly I don't see that happening anytime soon. Few care about asexuality from what I've noticed

As for your experience in relationships, what was it about them that attracted you? Was there anything physical, or was it emotional or mental? Speaking for myself, the attraction doesn't really come at all until after the fact, and physicality doesn't play much of a factor. I have physical preferences, sure, but those are such a non-issue for me that they are almost negligible

I’ve always understood there are sound biological reasons for women to assess a man in a variety of respects before going to bed with him. That’s because , biologically, it’s the woman who gets stuck with the kid. She needs a man who is reliable, capable, will stick by her and will take care of both of them. OK it’s no longer like that in modern societies, but biological drives don’t change quickly.

Eh... Not every person operates the same way, though, and as the world marches on what we thought we knew turns out to be an incomplete picture. What if what we think we know about "biological drives" doesn't apply to everyone in the same way? Neuro divergency is a thing

Sorry for the rant but this subject has taken me by surprise.

I appreciate your thoughts!

 

[JustGeorge]

Wait, who said demisexuality was a sexual deficiency? I'm confused exactly what you mean by this... Do you mean a deficiency as far as sex itself goes or for the way the attraction manifests itself?



How?... Demisexuality isn't a negative thing. It is what it is

That's true. It really isn't a negative thing, or a deficiency...

If anything, I feel its made the sexual experiences I have had all the richer.

 

[exchemist]

Really? That's news to me. None of my friends experience this, from what I can tell. They are all very carnally driven



Wait, who said demisexuality was a sexual deficiency? I'm confused exactly what you mean by this... Do you mean a deficiency as far as sex itself goes or for the way the attraction manifests itself?



How?... Demisexuality isn't a negative thing. It is what it is



I agree that the information is new, and is absolutely subject to change, though honestly I don't see that happening anytime soon. Few care about asexuality from what I've noticed

As for your experience in relationships, what was it about them that attracted you? Was there anything physical, or was it emotional or mental? Speaking for myself, the attraction doesn't really come at all until after the fact, and physicality doesn't play much of a factor. I have physical preferences, sure, but those are such a non-issue for me that they are almost negligible



Eh... Not every person operates the same way, though, and as the world marches on what we thought we knew turns out to be an incomplete picture. What if what we think we know about "biological drives" doesn't apply to everyone in the same way? Neuro divergency is a thing



I appreciate your thoughts!

The term demisexuality classifies the person as only half sexual. That’s what “demi” means, after all. I would be pretty annoyed to be classed in that way, as if something was missing.

What makes me uneasy above all is that I suspect this is normal for a lot of women and that this terminology may be another instance of women being judged , from an essentially male viewpoint, for not behaving just like a man. Which in my experience often women do not. Men are famously driven by looks. Women are often not, or not in the same simplistic way.

I find myself sharing the distaste of others on this thread about the urge to overclassify sexual behaviour and then to attach what seem to me rather facile labels to people, pigeonholing them.

 

[exchemist]

Spookily just the other day I went down this rabbit hole. Who knew there were so many "categories" ? Not me!
Not that it desperately matters but there seem so many I'm not sure which is most appropriate for me. Also, the "label" that suits me now is not the same as would have suited me in the past. I don't think such labelling would have improved or hindered me, but maybe others...

Yeah, it feels to me as if there is far too much labelling and pigeon-holing going on. I'm uneasy about it, as it seems to me both reductive and pseudo-scientific. It also has, maybe just to my increasingly elderly nose, a smell of that ghastly crusading American sexual politics that wants to slot everyone into a tribe so they can tell which "side" they are on and makes us all fight one another. (Exhibit A: J K Rowling; Exhibit B: Trump, and so on)

But to be fair, I see that @JustGeorge seems to have found the classification personally helpful in reassuring her she is not that unusual. So maybe it has its value, at least on the modern American sexual scene. This, from her description, seems to have become very demanding of instant attraction, in a way that is alien to my experiences of 30-50 years ago in the UK. Perhaps it's the advent of things like internet dating, or else simply the completion of the process of commodifying sex and detaching it from love, Brave New World style, that the 60s sexual revolution started. I admit to being amazed at the approach of my son and his peers at university today, with their "hookups", "friends with benefits" etc.