Tropes Media Browse Indexes Forums Videos Ask The Tropers Trope Finder Media Finder Trope Launch Pad Tech Wishlist Reviews Tools
Cut List New Edits Edit Reasons Launches Images List Crowner Activity Un-typed Pages Recent Page Type Changes Changelog
Tips
Creating New Redirects Cross Wicking Tips for Editing Text Formatting Rules Glossary Edit Reasons Handling Spoilers Word Cruft Administrivia FAQ
Tropes HQ
About Us Contact Us Advertise DMCA Notice Privacy Policy Report Bug
Go Ad-Free Changelog
  • Show Spoilers
  • Night Vision
  • Sticky Header
  • Highlight Links
 

Follow TV Tropes

Following

Discussion History Main / Asexuality

Go To
[007] Clanger00 Current Version
16th Jan '19 at 08:34:51 AM
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
Propose rewording the sentence: \
to:
Propose rewording the sentence: \\\"Many asexuals consider asexuality to be a spectrum, with \\\"graysexuality\\\"/\\\"gray asexuality\\\" and \\\"demisexuality\\\" residing somewhere between \\\"fully\\\" asexual (never feel sexual attraction) and \\\"fully\\\" allosexualnote .\\\"

to: \\\"Many asexuals consider asexuality to be a spectrum from \\\'fully asexual\\\' (never feel sexual attraction) through \\\'grey asexuality\\\' (occasionally feels sexual attraction) [note] this can include demisexuality, which is feeling sexual attraction only to those you have developed an emotional connection with. [/note] up to \\\'fully allosexual\\\' (the opposite of asexual).

My issues with the sentence as is, is that grey/demi sexuality aren\\\'t defined (the note says \\\'see the UsefulNotes page for specific definitions\\\' but the page doesn\\\'t give any definitions), and that they\\\'re both linked to SingleTargetSexuality and neither of them are an example of SingleTargetSexuality.
[006] Clanger00
16th Jan '19 at 08:34:24 AM
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
Propose rewording the sentence: \
to:
Propose rewording the sentence: \\\"Many asexuals consider asexuality to be a spectrum, with \\\"graysexuality\\\"/\\\"gray asexuality\\\" and \\\"demisexuality\\\" residing somewhere between \\\"fully\\\" asexual (never feel sexual attraction) and \\\"fully\\\" allosexualnote .\\\"

to: \\\"Many asexuals consider asexuality to be a spectrum from \\\'fully asexual\\\' (never feel sexual attraction) through \\\'grey asexuality\\\' (occasionally feels sexual attraction) [[note]] this can include demisexuality, which is feeling sexual attraction only to those you have developed an emotional connection with./note up to \\\'fully allosexual\\\' (the opposite of asexual).

My issues with the sentence as is, is that grey/demi sexuality aren\\\'t defined (the note says \\\'see the UsefulNotes page for specific definitions\\\' but the page doesn\\\'t give any definitions), and that they\\\'re both linked to SingleTargetSexuality and neither of them are an example of SingleTargetSexuality.
[005] NEX7
27th Mar '18 at 12:04:04 AM
Changed line(s) 3 from:
n
Anyway, it does count as Protagonist-Centered Morality and I already stated why. If the protagonists and the story at one point establish your life circumstances don't matter, only your free will, and use that as a basis to why it's justified to punish an antagonist, but then turn around and exonerate their friend based on his life circumstances, whether real or imaginary, while simultaneously ignoring the fact that all the evil acts he committed, he did so under his own freewill, it counts as Protagonist-Centered Morality due to the MoralDissonance that ensues which benefits the protagonists and their loved ones.
to:
Anyway, it does count as Protagonist-Centered Morality and I already made my case why. If the protagonists and the story at one point establish your life circumstances don\'t matter, only your free will, and use that as a basis to why it\'s justified to punish an antagonist, but then turn around and exonerate their friend based on his life circumstances, whether real or imaginary, while simultaneously ignoring the fact that all the evil acts he committed, he did so under his own freewill, it counts as Protagonist-Centered Morality due to the MoralDissonance that ensues which benefits the protagonists and their loved ones.
Changed line(s) 5 from:
n
You can't use the argument that if you live a bad life and choose to do bad things, you're a bad person because you chose to do bad things of your own freewill, regardless of your life circumstance, but then turn around and say that your friend isn't at fault because he thinks or was tricked into thinking he had a bad life, while ignoring the fact that he had freewill.
to:
You can\'t use the argument that if you live a bad life and choose to do bad things, you\'re a bad person because you chose to do bad things of your own freewill, regardless of your life circumstance, but then turn around and say that your friend isn\'t at fault because he thinks or was tricked into thinking he had a bad life, while ignoring the fact that he had freewill.
Changed line(s) 7 from:
n
And yes, Framework Fitz and realFitz are the same person, only with different memories. The
to:
And yes, Framework Fitz and realFitz are the same person, only with different memories. The \"former\" isn\'t dead nor erased, he just regained his real memories, but all of his actions are still realFitz\'s.

And to MagBas, in the spirit of fairness of this discussion, I was the one who added that post, not someone else.
[004] NEX7
26th Mar '18 at 11:58:53 PM
Changed line(s) 3 from:
n
Anyway, it does count as Protagonist-Centered Morality and I already stated why. If the protagonists and the story at one point establish your life circumstances don't matter, only your free will, and use that as a basis to why it's justified to punish an antagonist, but then turn around and exonerate their friend based on his life circumstances, whether real or imaginary, while simultaneously ignoring the fact that all the evil acts he committed, he did so under his own freewill, it counts as Protagonist-Centered Morality due to the MoralDissonance that ensues which benefits the protagonists and their loved ones.
to:
Anyway, it does count as Protagonist-Centered Morality and I already stated why. If the protagonists and the story at one point establish your life circumstances don\'t matter, only your free will, and use that as a basis to why it\'s justified to punish an antagonist, but then turn around and exonerate their friend based on his life circumstances, whether real or imaginary, while simultaneously ignoring the fact that all the evil acts he committed, he did so under his own freewill, it counts as Protagonist-Centered Morality due to the MoralDissonance that ensues which benefits the protagonists and their loved ones.
Changed line(s) 5 from:
n
You can't use the argument that if you live a bad life and choose to do bad things, you're a bad person because you chose to do bad things of your own freewill, regardless of your life circumstance, but then turn around and say that your friend isn't at fault because he thinks or was tricked into thinking he had a bad life, while ignoring the fact that he had freewill.
to:
You can\'t use the argument that if you live a bad life and choose to do bad things, you\'re a bad person because you chose to do bad things of your own freewill, regardless of your life circumstance, but then turn around and say that your friend isn\'t at fault because he thinks or was tricked into thinking he had a bad life, while ignoring the fact that he had freewill.
Changed line(s) 7 from:
n
And yes, Framework Fitz and realFitz are the same person, only with different memories. The
to:
And yes, Framework Fitz and realFitz are the same person, only with different memories. The \"former\" isn\'t dead nor erased, he just regained his real memories, but all of his actions are still realFitz\'s.

And to MagBas, in the spirit of fairness of this discussion, I was the one who added that post, not someone else.
[003] NEX7
26th Mar '18 at 11:57:17 PM
Changed line(s) 3 from:
n
Anyway, it does count as Protagonist-Centered Morality and I already stated why. If the protagonists and the story at one point establish your life circumstances don't matter, only your free will, and use that as a basis to why it's justified to punish an antagonist, but then turn around and exonerate their friend based on his life circumstances, whether real or imaginary, while simultaneously ignoring the fact that all the evil acts he committed, he did so under his own freewill, it counts as Protagonist-Centered Morality due to the MoralDissonance that ensues which benefits the protagonists and their loved ones.
to:
Anyway, it does count as Protagonist-Centered Morality and I already stated why. If the protagonists and the story at one point establish your life circumstances don\'t matter, only your free will, and use that as a basis to why it\'s justified to punish an antagonist, but then turn around and exonerate their friend based on his life circumstances, whether real or imaginary, while simultaneously ignoring the fact that all the evil acts he committed, he did so under his own freewill, it counts as Protagonist-Centered Morality due to the MoralDissonance that ensues which benefits the protagonists and their loved ones.
Changed line(s) 5 from:
n
You can't use the argument that if you live a bad life and choose to do bad things, you're a bad person because you chose to do bad things of your own freewill, regardless of your life circumstance, but then turn around and say that your friend isn't at fault because he thinks or was tricked into thinking he had a bad life, while ignoring the fact that he had freewill.
to:
You can\'t use the argument that if you live a bad life and choose to do bad things, you\'re a bad person because you chose to do bad things of your own freewill, regardless of your life circumstance, but then turn around and say that your friend isn\'t at fault because he thinks or was tricked into thinking he had a bad life, while ignoring the fact that he had freewill.
Changed line(s) 7 from:
n
And yes, Framework Fitz and realFitz are the same person.
to:
And yes, Framework Fitz and realFitz are the same person, only with different memories. The \"former\" isn\'t dead, he just regained his real memories, but all of his actions are realFitz\'s.
[002] NEX7
26th Mar '18 at 11:54:43 PM
Changed line(s) 3 from:
n
Anyway, it does count as Protagonist-Centered Morality and I already stated why. If the protagonists and the story at one point establish your life circumstances don't matter, only your free will, and use that to punish an antagonist, but then turn around and exonerate their friend based on his life circumstances, whether real or imaginary, while simultaneously ignoring the fact that all the evil acts he committed, he did under his own freewill, it counts as Protagonist-Centered Morality due to the MoralDissonance that ensues which benefits the protagonists.
to:
Anyway, it does count as Protagonist-Centered Morality and I already stated why. If the protagonists and the story at one point establish your life circumstances don\'t matter, only your free will, and use that as a basis to why it\'s justified to punish an antagonist, but then turn around and exonerate their friend based on his life circumstances, whether real or imaginary, while simultaneously ignoring the fact that all the evil acts he committed, he did so under his own freewill, it counts as Protagonist-Centered Morality due to the MoralDissonance that ensues which benefits the protagonists and their loved ones.
Changed line(s) 5 from:
n
You can't use the argument that if you live a bad life and choose to do bad things, you're a bad person because you chose to do bad things of your own freewill, regardless of your life circumstance, but then turn around and say that your friend isn't at fault because he thinks or was tricked into thinking he had a bad life, while ignoring the fact that he had freewill.
to:
You can\'t use the argument that if you live a bad life and choose to do bad things, you\'re a bad person because you chose to do bad things of your own freewill, regardless of your life circumstance, but then turn around and say that your friend isn\'t at fault because he thinks or was tricked into thinking he had a bad life, while ignoring the fact that he had freewill.
[001] NEX7
26th Mar '18 at 11:53:13 PM
Changed line(s) 3 from:
n
Anyway, it does count as Protagonist-Centered Morality and I already stated why. If the protagonists and the story at one point establish your life circumstances don't matter, only your free will, and use that to punish an antagonist, but then turn around and exonerate their friend based on his life circumstances, whether real or imaginary, while simultaneously ignoring the fact that all the evil acts he committed, he did under his own freewill, it counts as Protagonist-Centered Morality due to the MoralDissonance that ensues which benefits the protagonists.
to:
Anyway, it does count as Protagonist-Centered Morality and I already stated why. If the protagonists and the story at one point establish your life circumstances don\'t matter, only your free will, and use that to punish an antagonist, but then turn around and exonerate their friend based on his life circumstances, whether real or imaginary, while simultaneously ignoring the fact that all the evil acts he committed, he did under his own freewill, it counts as Protagonist-Centered Morality due to the MoralDissonance that ensues which benefits the protagonists.
Changed line(s) 5 from:
n
You can't use the argument that if you live a bad life and choose to do bad things, you're a bad person because you chose to do bad things of your own freewill, regardless of your life circumstance, but then turn around and say that your friend isn't at fault because he thinks or was tricked into thinking he had a bad life, while ignoring the fact that he had freewill.
to:
You can\'t use the argument that if you live a bad life and choose to do bad things, you\'re a bad person because you chose to do bad things of your own freewill, regardless of your life circumstance, but then turn around and say that your friend isn\'t at fault because he thinks or was tricked into thinking he had a bad life, while ignoring the fact that he had freewill.
Changed line(s) 6 from:
to:
And yes, Framework Fitz and realFitz are the same person.

Important Links

Ask The Tropers Trope Finder Media Finder Trope Launch Pad Tech Wishlist Reviews Go Ad Free!
Crucial Browsing
Resources
Top