I came across someone who randomly posted on a lgbt group they were fictoromantic. Is this a legitimate sexuality? Attracted to fictional characters? It rings a bell to animesexual.... I just wanted to know.
Skoliosexual, allegedly a sexuality where someone is only interested in people who are trans. If you single out people who are trans from cis people then you do not accept us for who we are. (a corollary to this is if you specifically exclude someone because they are a transitioned person you also do not accept them for who they are). If you are only sexually attracted to someone who has a specific medical condition I would consider that a fetish not a sexuality.
I'd say most people are attracted to at least one fictional character in their life, regardless of their actual sexuality, and no, not really.
No, it's not legitimate. It's a nonsensical niche label that someone has created for themselves and are now trying to promote on the internet to gain traction. We have all seen television programs or movies where we like a particular character or actor, but we don't create a label to validate what we are feeling (and nor should we). Like most niche labels this one is based in cloud-cuckoo land. This is one of the problems we find with unmoderated spaces online, where people can post any crap that comes into their mind and pass it off as legitimate. I may sound harsh in saying this, but I know how very harmful it can be and it's one of the reasons we push back quite hard against it on this forum.
No need to apologise. We need to raise awareness of the harm some of these silly labels cause and we can do that without promoting or offering credibility to what people are conjuring up. In the majority of cases we should be able to accurately describe our feelings using existing well-known labels, without diving into a pool of alphabet soup.
Genuine question here as I have no real reference frame for any of this. How difficult it is to moderate something like alleged sexualities in a space that is there for marginalised people? I accept that there has to be boundaries and I am interested in how those boundaries are formed e.g. past experience, accept norms, context etc. Thnx Paul x
There are labels that are well established, widely understood and fully researched that are not problematic at all. We can work with those labels to help people come to a better understanding and a place of acceptance and happiness. That's our purpose and reason for being here. When people are given free reign to introduce untested ideas and promote labels of various kinds, like we have seen above, it adds to layers of anxiety, fear and confusion and does far more harm than good. Far from alleviating emotional distress, it has the effect of piling it on and locking other people into a miserable and harmful cycle (we know this to be true). We all have particular preferences in life and many of us are attracted to a certain type. That's normal and it's always been the case, but we don't need to concoct a new label or sexual identity to explain our preference. Sometimes less is more.
I agree here but would also add... I have had many straight friends who thought they were lgbtq+ because they discovered a micro label and that's all it really meant to be lgbtq... for me, that's fine up to a point where they start speaking out or speaking over other lgbtq people because I personally find it offensive, incredibly offensive, to treat sexuality like a BRAND or an ASTHETIC. Just don't do that... I see this among a lot of kids on the internet. Honestly I don't care unless it impacts me but that's just me.
Why exactly do people do that? It always baffles me why people make up words that nobody understands for their experience instead of just explaining it in plain words. Exactly *wonders* This is also my opinion. Interesting. I had no clue it added to distress when somneone is already confused. I just never felt attraction to too exotic labels myself. I mean, sure, I could use some, like everyone else btw, but it never made much sense to me to do so.
I've mentioned many times here how the crowdsourced snowflake labels were a great disservice to me during all those years I was under severe denial and terrified of my sexuality. So it's great to discuss from time to time which labels are based on evidence (and thus describe actual identities); and which aren't. Hopefully some teenager out there will read this and waste less time than what I did — you aren't X-romantic Y-sexual, unless X equals Y!
Well, at least romantic and sexual labels being separate make sense, at least to me. And their meaning is intuitive. I used to use that long ago, bisexual heteroromantic (as female). But what happened later confirmed what Chip keeps on repeating about romantic orientations: when I felt like I can chill out and just let things happen and be myself, I started to fall for women too.
i anyone says they are "animesexual" i am immediately cutting all contact. liking a character is one thing, but you can't say that anime is your sexuality.
