1942 réponses à ce sujet

[Lady Nuggins]

The interpretation of Merrill being demisexual may be debatable, but my earlier point was that since there are only very minor mentions in the banter that contradict this (and some of them are ambiguous enough to be interpreted otherwise), it would have taken almost no effort to write that dialogue differently, if they had planned to write her as demisexual from the start.  As such, a character like Merrill who is intended to be demisexual would be easy enough to insert into the game.

[berrieh]

I'm not convinced that what she is expressing is sexual attraction - thus the discussions I've put forth about how people interpret signs of affection versus signs of sexual attraction.

A demisexual who knows herself and has been in love before may very well recognize the warden as someone with whom she could fall in love and find sexually attractive in time. If she is open to having that happen, then she might want to keep that door open instead of slamming it shut and being permanently friend-zoned.
 
I guess I can ask the same sort of question of those who insist that she comes on to the warden and expresses sexual attraction early on. What is it about her behavior that so undeniably expresses sexual attraction?

 

I was just comparing her to the OP, and it didn't seem to fit. I think the distinction between choosing to wait to have sex and methods of attraction seemed important, from that.

 

And, like I said, I remember her flirting with me quite early. I don't see why she would be open to that possibility based on where she seems to be at that point in the story, without the driving attraction, and she certainly seems quite comfortable with flirting. Of course, that could be The Game and her Bard skills in play - that basically makes everything Leliana says disingenuous. I don't see why a beautiful woman would think not flirting would lead to being permanently friend-zoned; I don't know other women who really think that way, as though not showing interest early on would lead to such a thing. It seems like an odd reason - the kind of thing someone really insecure might do, but not Leliana. 

[Pasquale1234]

And, like I said, I remember her flirting with me quite early.

This is where we differ.

I remember being fairly far along in the game and the friendship before she delivered the infamous hair compliment - the warden's response to which triggers the romance - but I never would have known that had I not read it in the wiki. I don't assume romantic intent behind a simple compliment between friends, and nothing in her behavior prior to that line was at all flirtatious imho.

I understand that a lot of people go through the dialogue a lot faster than I do. Some people have said they prefer DA2's method of meting out companion dialogue opportunities little by little instead of making it all available ala DAO, because they would exhaust all of it right away and then have nothing else for the rest of the game. I don't do that, so some of these conversations take place a lot later in the game for me than for others.

You seem to be trying to deny the validity of my experience, but I can assure you that it is every bit as real and valid for me as yours is for you.

I'd still like to know just exactly what it was about her earlier dialogues that was so undeniably flirtatious to you. Or how / where you draw that line that says, "this isn't friendship, it's sexual attraction."

[Nerys]

I would be open to seeing this kind of romance in game. I also wanted to thank OP Kallen for teaching me something new today. I had not heard the term "Demisexual" before. 

Blessings

[Kradus9]

I thought the op was asking for sex with demons...

[Battlebloodmage]

I wonder what the next sexuality will be.

[brazen_nl]

Only at BSN would you expect and could you have a discussion about this.

 

Fantastic!

[Grieving Natashina]

I've learned so much in my last year of being active on the forums.  It's been overall great and I've met some wonderful people.  

[GodBrandon]

bruh

[Gothfather]

And that is fine but you sure do not call them gay/lesbian/straight depending on the person gender they feel attracted too right? It is about that person definitions even if they date only women for 10 years and than never again, they are still bisexuals. 

Asexuals could be sexual repulsed and aromantic, demi are not in any instance none of this. 

In the end of the day is about respecting other people sexualities, even if they are not talk about a lot.

err My Bisexual friend gets called a lesbian by some lesbians when she dates a woman and straight when she dates a man ALLLLLLLLLL the time. Even when they KNOW she is bi.

 

I will say this once again. How people precieve themselves will ALWAYS be different from how we precieve them and visa versa. This dichotomy is impossible to remove / eliminate. Its not people being rude its not people being narrow minded it just people coming to different conclusions. Also people have to makes sense of the world for themselves if they don't understand something they are going to interpret things to the best of their knowledge. You don't own the identity people see of you, you only own your own self identity. The identity people assign you from their perceptions are their own not yours.

[JadePrince]

Part of the confusion with all these terms, I think, is really that English is stupid and uses the same word (“sex”) to mean two things: 1)male/female (aka “What is the sex of this being?”) and 2)the physical act of sex (aka “How does this being engage in sex?”). 

 

In the more familiar/first established terms (“homosexual” “bisexual” “heterosexual”), the root word “--sexual” does NOT mean “participating in/having/wanting the act of sex”, the “sex” in this case means “sex assignment”, aka male/female/etc. Thus “homosexual” does NOT mean “A person who has gay sex”, it means a person who is drawn to/falls in love with someone of the same gender as them, whether or not they’ve had sex at all (remember, children and virgins can be ‘homosexual’ or ‘heterosexual’ even if they’ve never had sex, or, in the case of some children, don’t even know what the act of sex is yet).

 

The difficulty is, that “demisexual”, if it followed the same rules, should technically mean “someone who is attracted to/loves half a person”. Obviously this is ridiculous and not what the person who coined the term intended. The “demi” in the term is intended to modify the word “--sexual”, which means in the term “demisexual”, the “--sexual” part DOES refer to the act of sex, UNLIKE “homosexual”. 

 

 

What all this means, is that is very very hard/confusing to talk about “demisexuality” and “asexuality” within the same context of “******/hetero/bisexuality”, etc. when the “—sexual” part of each of those two categories of words means something different. 

 

Which is all to say, I suppose, that yes, you should be able to ID as “heterosexual” (aka, you are drawn to be with a person of the “opposite sex”) but also ID as “asexual” (aka, you are not drawn to perform the act of sex at all).

 

 

This is one of the things that I think the asexual/demisexual community could improve upon: Because since “asexuals” and “demisexuals” are defining “[X]sexual” as meaning “[X] type of sex having”, then they also tend to apply this (incorrectly) to “homosexuals” and think this means “gay sex havers”, when in the word “homosexual”, the root “--sexual” does not mean ~SEXUAL~ (aka “she’s a sexual person”), it just means “the same sex (assignment)”. 

 

This is also why using the word “Sexual” to distinguish a non-asexual person is kind of gross, because not only is it assuming something about one’s sexual habits that might not be accurate, the word ‘Sexual’ (aka “He’s a very sexual person”) also has a lot of negative connotations especially for the gay/bi/lesbian community who are specifically, frequently, and historically shamed for the kind (and supposedly high frequency) of sex they have (“Ew, gay sex is so gross/evil/an abomination/etc~!" and "Gays/Bisexuals are so sexually promiscuous!”).

 

Whew. I know this is all really confusing, but I hope someone will get something out of all that, haha. 

[veeia]

I agree with all that! One thing that does rub me the wrong way is "sexuals", especially in demi contexts, because it sometimes sounds like "oh those gross sexuals who don't care about feelings"...even when its not intended that way. That was actually a hurdle for me in understanding what demisexuality meant. I don't think they need to change their own term to make it more understandable to other people...but finding clearer ways to define things would help a lot. Silly English language.

[Mihura]

err My Bisexual friend gets called a lesbian by some lesbians when she dates a woman and straight when she dates a man ALLLLLLLLLL the time. Even when they KNOW she is bi.

 

I will say this once again. How people precieve themselves will ALWAYS be different from how we precieve them and visa versa. This dichotomy is impossible to remove / eliminate. Its not people being rude its not people being narrow minded it just people coming to different conclusions. Also people have to makes sense of the world for themselves if they don't understand something they are going to interpret things to the best of their knowledge. You don't own the identity people see of you, you only own your own self identity. The identity people assign you from their perceptions are their own not yours.

 

Well I would call those people rude. When you tell someone your sexual identify is bisexual and people still call you a lesbian, well I would say get better friends or lovers that respect you.

This is not about other people perceptions but the respect yourself deserve. 

[veeia]

Agreed, Mihura. That's a huge frustration for me as a bisexual, because I get mislabeled and dismissed by both heterosexual and gay/lesbian folk.

I don't care if someone mislabels me as heterosexual because they don't know me or because I haven't told them. The constant assumption that monosexuality is a default is irksome, but I don't get mad at individuals for that or anything.

But my friends--gay or straight---know that I'm bisexual. It's not like me being with a man means I'm not attracted to women anymore. (This feeds into that "untrustworthy" bisexual stereotype --people thinking that you cannot be bisexual if you're not like, actively in a threesome at all times or whatever. ) and for a friend to do that is them willfully ignoring that part of me, and so its rude as heck. If a friend persisted in calling me that, I'd be pretty upset.

[JadePrince]

I agree with all that! One thing that does rub me the wrong way is "sexuals", especially in demi contexts, because it sometimes sounds like "oh those gross sexuals who don't care about feelings"...even when its not intended that way. That was actually a hurdle for me in understanding what demisexuality meant. I don't think they need to change their own term to make it more understandable to other people...but finding clearer ways to define things would help a lot. Silly English language.

 

Oh, absolutely. I don't think they should have to change their word-- people just need to understand that because the etymology of the terms is different, you can't say that "demisexual" and "homosexual" are the same type/category of word. "Demisexual" implies a lot about the way a person experiences attraction (but not the sex/gender of the person that attraction is directed to), "******/hetero/bisexual" only tells you WHO a person is attracted to, but not necessarily HOW they experience that attraction OR how they act on it.

 

I think that's why it's valuable to realize that most people will need at least two labels to fully explain their sexual/romantic identies. If you tell me you're "demisexual", I have no idea whether or not that means I might have a chance at a relationship with you because you might not be into dudes at all, even IF you got to know me really well first. 

 

TL;DR "******/hetero/bisexual" and "demisexual" do NOT have to be mutually exclusive IDs. Actually, neither are "gay/straight" and "asexual/demisexual". I know a couple of people who ID as both gay and asexual as well as people who consider themselves straight and asexual because they are only interested in being part of a m/f couple, even if sex isn't part of it. 

[Gothfather]

Well if you want to be offended when people just don't understand something go ahead. I think its a lot of wasted effort especially when there is no intent its just something they cant understand because they have no frame of reference. Some people will never understand calculus but that doesn't mean they are stupid. My doctor told me he couldn't to save his life figure out calculus, but the guy is an incredible doctor. he said this when he saw a calculus text book i brought to an appointment.

 

I understand there is a history of marginalization of but when I see people of ALL orientations struggling to grasp different orientations, struggling to explain things it tells me that this is isn't just a case of people being disrespectful. i simply don't buy the idea that they are motivated by well thats not me so pfffffffffftttttttt to you. Many of these people stuggled all their lives over similar issues so I doubt its they are just callous.

 

But we all own our own feelings and I'm not saying you can't feel they way you do. I am just saying I think is not as black and white as some people want it to be.

[eyezonlyii]

Maybe instead of using demi as a modifier, they use semi instead. Since the connotation between the two is very different even if the root means almost the same thing.

[Handsome Jack]

All aboard the Inclusion Express.

[eyezonlyii]

Who's they? Or is that a suggestion?

A suggestion they being "they" *waves hand in vague gesture* and we, and us and them. Basically change the prefix, and clarify the word.

[eyezonlyii]

If it's a suggestion and not an actual identity already, I'd say "semi" has some connotations too then.
 

 
Heeeey gurl. 

Oh truck! That's just prime...

[veeia]

Well if you want to be offended when people just don't understand something go ahead. I think its a lot of wasted effort especially when there is no intent its just something they cant understand because they have no frame of reference. Some people will never understand calculus but that doesn't mean they are stupid. My doctor told me he couldn't to save his life figure out calculus, but the guy is an incredible doctor. he said this when he saw a calculus text book i brought to an appointment.

 

I understand there is a history of marginalization of but when I see people of ALL orientations struggling to grasp different orientations, struggling to explain things it tells me that this is isn't just a case of people being disrespectful. i simply don't buy the idea that they are motivated by well thats not me so pfffffffffftttttttt to you. Many of these people stuggled all their lives over similar issues so I doubt its they are just callous.

 

But we all own our own feelings and I'm not saying you can't feel they way you do. I am just saying I think is not as black and white as some people want it to be.

 

I don't want to be offended. Who wants to be offended? I'm actually a super chill person.  I don't care if my friends understand everything about me, or if they get confused. That's life, and I'm always happy to explain if they want, but I also don't need them to understand. I don't need them to not make mistakes. But if they are purposefully mislabeling me because they're prioritizing their confusion over my certainty about myself....then that's really self-obsessed, especially given how clear I make it that I do not want to be referred to as such. 

 

I feel like people get tripped on the "understanding" part and just never get to the acceptance. I mean, here in this thread, it's sort of an environment that fosters a more abstract conversation, but...if you have a friend who comes out as anything: lesbian, bi, gay, pan, trans, ace, demi etc....and you can't go "Okay" unless you understand it perfectly & know it satisfies whatever x,y,z criteria you have for something being "legit"....I don't know, that doesn't sound like you're being a great friend. Which happens, people make mistakes, but I'm not going to tolerate it over a long period of time from someone who is supposed to be part of my support group, and I think that's perfectly reasonable. If there's someone who is genuinely not bothered by it, then that's great for them! They don't *need* to be upset if they aren't upset. I wouldn't assume, though, that just because someone isn't saying that it bothers them, that they're fine. People, especially those struggling with their identity, do not generally enjoy making themselves vulnerable. 

 

You're right, these things can be a struggle to convey and talk about.That doesn't mean it's not worth it to try, and it absolutely doesn't mean that the response to "I don't understand" should be "therefore I shall ignore it/deny it." 

[Blisscolas]

I think the misunderstanding has to do with what people put under each definition. I don't know if it's a known person or just someone I know who said this, but "language is a trap". We're never really able to convey our ideas and feelings because nobody else than us is able to feel, understand or define things the way we do.

 

I myself really don't understand this separation of the two spectrums because, as someone said earlier, I have no frame of reference and the way I understand this is that demisexual feels like it would fall within another definition of sexuality and whatnot.

 

Do I feel like I'm mistaken? Yes.....Therefore I shall put this term into the box of "I don't get this...Let's try to not offend someone because apparently I don't get it. Maybe I should reconsider my definition". But I still feel like my definition of it is pretty alright even though you might be in the right.

[veeia]

That's fair, blisscolas. IMO, it's not about what your understanding is, it's how you treat people who think differently, especially when that difference involves them describing themselves.

I'll be flat out honest and say I don't see a meaningful difference between bisexuality as I define it and how other people define pansexuality. I've tried, listened, and asked questions, but I still don't have an answer that is clear or makes perfect sense to me, no matter how many links I get thrown or explanations I'm handed.

But, I don't tell people who identify as pansexual that they're "really bisexual", not do I let my understanding of it derail conversations about pansexuality. If someone says they're pan, I refer to them as that and while I will talk to them about the commonalities we have, I won't act like the differences are nonexistent because even if I can't see them, they exist for the other person and many like them.

That's to me, a good baseline to have when you talk to people about identify issues you don't understand because you're talking about someone's personal reality...you can't deny it and you also have to accept that it's not always going to line up with yours.

I honestly can't tell if these conversations are good, or derailing, haha. I hope we can return to the larger topic though, because I think its a good one and we had some good discussions about it earlier, before the thread became about the validity of the label.