A single unified LGBTQ+ conversation

It's only exsculisivly if you say "Exsculisivly Phallisexual" the main boon of these four terms is that you can stack and combine them.

For example by describing myself as gynosexual and Yonisexual it's clear I'm attracted to people who aren't female (IE transman), and attracted to people who don't have vaginas (IE transwomen). These are good terms for describing what you are, rather than what you're not.

And it's a fair comment that these sexualities function a lot like fetishes. Until recently the terms were normally Phalliphile, Androphile, Yoniphile and Gynophile.

But I'm not sure the distinction between fetish and sexual orientation is meaningful. For many people their sexualities ARE a fetish. For example a fetish for a gender.

edited 7th Mar '16 6:19:39 AM by Whowho

No, I still do not understand this concept.

"Yup. That tasted purple."

Here's the issue. Sexualities are meant to be blanket terms. A general term for the people you're attracted to. The point of sexualities is that it includes certain things and excludes other things. When you start stacking them and forming them into some sexuality voltron is where the issue enlies, and where unclear boundaries exist and they begin to lose meaning. Not to mention the fact that those terms are inherently fetishistic and not particularly related to sexuality.

Fetishes and sexualities are very different things. Fetishsizing genders is clear-cut objectification of a person.

Sexualities don't objectify. Those terms do objectify.

edited 7th Mar '16 6:25:15 AM by EpicBleye

"There's not a girl alive who wouldn't be happy being called cute." ~Tamamo-no-Mae

This is sounding a lot like an argument I had with someone this morning who tried to argue that pedophilia should be considered a sexual orientation.

And that's all that needs to be said about that.

"Yup. That tasted purple."

Well no orientation term is exhaustive. Being blanket terms they exist to allow people to give understandable approximations of their sexuality easily within conversation. Andro, gyno, phalli and Yonisexual allow people to do the same, but more accurately, with consideration of non-cis people who either don't have a binary gender, or trans and intersex people who's biological traits are not well represented by their gender.

And it's fully possible to use these terms to construct an exhaustive description of someone's sexuality, far better than terms like hetero, homo, or bi can.

As for your second point, speaking as a fetishist, fetishes are not inherently objectifying, sure you can use them as objectifying way, or use them to think about people in objectifying way, but being attracted to someone because of their gender, or a physical trait is by it self not objectifying. Dehumanising someone because you are attracted to their gender or physical traits is.

Anyone seen Hopey lately?

edited 7th Mar '16 7:19:36 AM by AdricDePsycho

Have you any dreams you'd like to sell?

Huh, I dunno. I haven't seen him in a while, and he hasn't talked to me on Facebook lately. :/

Trust you? The only person I can trust is myself.

I think I saw him last week in one of the Skype chats.

Also, someone sent me a Skype thingy last night. I have no idea if it was anyone from here.

Have you any dreams you'd like to sell?

This post was thumped by the Shillelagh of Whackingness

"Yup. That tasted purple."

1. I am not comfortable with giving an exhaustive description of my sexuality to a complete stranger.
2. Most sensible people will understand what I mean when I say that I'm bi.
3. The alternative terms are not used by most people, and people are far more likely to understand if I tell them that I like girls and guys.

edited 7th Mar '16 10:27:35 AM by SpaceWolf

This is a signature.

And that's grand. It would be shitty if you had to use these terms, there not useful for everyone. When I brought up this topic surprised that people hated these terms, I meant they hated that the terms existed at all, not that they hated the idea of using them themselves.

Like it's obvious to me that many people would have no interest in these. Pansexuals and bisexuals who don't interact much with the Non-binary crowd, or even people who have no desire to make their orientation publicly avalible bviously have no use for these terms.

The problem for me with terms like that is how I needed something which was my own, and 'Lesbian' as a descriptor works best for that. It's something which is mine, which I can label myself as and which as a Girly Bruiser of a lesbian is something my own which can't be taken by others.

"Did you expect somebody else?"

I figured that Hopey hasn't been around due to lacking a good entering joke, I was hoping Hopey would ask how his homo hommies are when he next arrived.

As for giving a "exhaustive description of someone's sexuality", do you need specific terms for that? If you're giving a detailed description specific terminology isn't needed that much, because the entire point of specific terminology is for quick short transfers of general information, if it's a detailed description of detailed information why the need for specific terminology? Why not just go "well, I like X, Y, Z, oh and E gets me right horny"?

"And the Bunny nails it!" ~ Gabrael "If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we." ~ Cyran

For me "asexual" and "aromantic" aren't really a part of the general public's vernacular. If I know the person well and want them to really know who I am, I'll explain them. But for random strangers I'll usually just say "I'm not interested in romantic relationships." You can infer a lot of contrasting ideas from that statement, but at least they'll know not to ask me out. If they continue pushing (asking me to "go on a date and live a little!" or something), then I'll explain further

edited 7th Mar '16 1:55:00 PM by Cailleach

x9 Wait a second, are people on here Facebooking with each other? And I am not a part of this?

I'm only facebook friends with a handful of tropers. I don't use facebook much anyways though.

And I'm really hating my facial structure. I can pass just fine, but I can't look cute. Bleh.

Yes you can

Oh really when?

I only friend people I've personally met. As such, I'm scared to friend anyone on here without making my parents question it.

Then again, my mother already knows I Skype with Kieran and that I'm planning on moving to Ireland in a few years with him...

Eh, I don't know. I might friend some of you guys, we'll just have to wait and see.

He's not wrong.

edited 7th Mar '16 2:12:11 PM by AdricDePsycho

Have you any dreams you'd like to sell?

All I do is go on Facebook, honestly. I'd love to friend some of you lovely people

I mentioned the thing to my head of house and me and other person are gonna go see him at recess to elaborate. I feel like crap though.

Stand up against pinkwashing, don't fall for propoganda

@Smokey: You already look adorbs.

TV Tropes's No. 1 bread themed lesbian. she/her, fae/faer

You're doing the right thing on this one, Kieran. Are you still sick?

Have you any dreams you'd like to sell?

And I'm stuck with that feeling that I made everything up to make everyone happy again.

"Yup. That tasted purple."

What are you making up?

Have you any dreams you'd like to sell?