Hemy Tassel (@lestshemay) 9 years, 8 months ago

I’m new to this site, so I apologize if this is somewhat irrelevant to the purposes of High Existence.

In terms of sexuality, there seems to be an agreement that there are clear-cut differences between those who are attracted to members of the opposite sex and those who are attracted to members of the same sex. There is even a category for people who are attracted to both. However, this does not take into account the (perhaps minute) group of people who might develop attractions regardless of sex.

This brings in more than a few issues. For instance, although there are a significant number of individuals who claim to be asexual, they are neither widely recognized nor respected, and generally stick out as sore anomalies to a heteronormative society. So, is there anything wrong with this, and should they be deemed a proper category? I could say I’m sapioromantic asexual, or I could say I’m a heterosexual who hasn’t developed as much of an interest in sex as others have. Is that the so-called ‘special snowflake’ syndrome coming out, or do I justify a label? How far can you categorize the differences between sexual orientations before they become unnecessary? Are they ever necessary? If they’re not, is it possible for us to exist without them?

I guess the intent of my questioning resides somewhere between wanting to know if any of our characterizations of ‘weird’ or ‘disorder has any merit, and wanting to know if any of you would self-identify as ‘sapiosexual.’ I’d love to read any of your thoughts on the matter.


December 2, 2012 at 1:10 am
Anonymous (2,833) (@) 9 years, 8 months ago ago


I don’t really care about sex much. Its ok, its more for the other person than for me. I’m more of a “Damn she is hot, I really want to kiss her/hug her” the idea of sex out of attraction is.. meh. Instinctual, but not aggressively so.

Anonymous (512) (@) 9 years, 8 months ago ago

You could call yourself a human being, and cite your uniqueness as reason for your sexual orientation, if it differs markedly from most others. But the overriding question to answer, as you mentioned, was the relevancy of the topic as a whole. Are you experiencing negative vibes as a result of your search for answers? If so, I will help foster understanding (but only with a night of sleep under my belt, first). If not, drop the topic and focus on something else! That simple!

Always remember…nothing matters unless you say it does.

Filip (2,818)M (@filipek) 9 years, 8 months ago ago

We should stop putting labels on ourselves and judging so much. Just do whatever you please. I mean, whether you do not want to have sexual relationships, or whether you want to have sexual relationships with somebody from the same or the opposite sex, who are others to judge you? If you do not harm anybody else with it, and the opposite party shares the same believes, then why making a basal situation like this so complicated?

Hemy Tassel (2) (@lestshemay) 9 years, 8 months ago ago

Thanks, everyone, for your responses!

@optimystic, I’m not quite sure what you mean by negative vibes. I don’t pretend to suffer from being different, I just like the reassurance of knowing there are more people like me. So far, I haven’t met any in this exact area, so I decided to put a question out there about sexuality and how different people define it. Perhaps I should amend it to be more of a personal nature: do any of you consider intelligence to be a central reason for developing relationships at all? Do you find it to be the most attractive part of someone, or use it to define yourself?

Anonymous (512) (@) 9 years, 8 months ago ago

@lestshemay, I had not presumed you to be pretending about suffering from being different. I was also a little unsure about your intent for posting. I understand a little more now.

Please, allow me more time to formulate responses for the new questions.

Goodnight from Michigan!

Ben (148) (@cognizantelephant) 9 years, 8 months ago ago

I’d say that I’ve had a very sexual relationship come through due to discussions of the world (society, psychology, behavior). It can be very satisfying, emotionally and intellectually, to find a person who shares many of the same views you have about something.

Labels are often pointless, I think they only exist to make for a soft discussion. We can be attracted to many types of things at any one time, most of which aren’t noticed, it doesn’t have to be ‘this’ one thing or ‘that’ one thing at all.

Anonymous (216) (@) 9 years, 8 months ago ago

People are like Monet’s paintings; they seem pretty easy to figure out from a distance…haha

A label is an applied abstraction. While it’s not fair to assume that a person who fits under one fully embodies the entire concept, some people do assume that.

It’s not a big deal though because the people who force labels on others are probably uncomfortable with some of their own. A whole person sees past any labels.

Anonymous (2,654) (@) 9 years, 8 months ago ago

If a dog is attracted to you and shows it by fucking your leg, is it a normal dog?

There are so many categorizations that just put unnecessary pressure on people. As long as you feel good about yourself to make other people feel good about themselves, a label isn’t going to make a difference. Unless, you’re a necrophiliac or bestial. Or ruin relationships.

View post on

Alex (345) (@staylucky) 9 years, 8 months ago ago

I have been far more attracted to a woman based on a conversation than just an initial once over.

I’ve lusted over women who would be deemed “less-attractive” in the generically retarded sense by their sense of humour, quick wit or the ability to engage in interesting conversation. And at the same time I have felt completely repulsed by being forced to listen to a “beautiful” person boring the living shit out of me.

As people have said already about labels, they’re fucked. Don’t buy into them. You are you and that is all there is to it.

Anonymous (29) (@) 9 years, 8 months ago ago

I definitely don’t lack the ability to be attracted to someone on sight (moreso women than men by a large margin, though); however, I would say that it’s flexible and can be completely demolished within a second depending on what it is they do that turns me off (being rude or dumb is a quick way).
But when I have a good, especially intelligent conversation with someone who I already find attractive, its much deeper, much more instilled and way more intense. (Or it can make me become attracted to someone I found just plain/average.)

whales (37) (@pwhalen) 9 years, 8 months ago ago


“So, is there anything wrong with this, and should they be deemed a proper category?”

Sexuality is completely based on feeling. I have always had a long held personal belief that there is no division between heterosexuality and homosexuality or sexuality and non sexuality.

I personally feel like some days I have strong attractions to women and other days its just not there. Often my brain, based on social constructs, tells me I am abnormal if I don’t have these attractions. THIS IS THE CRAP OF SOCIETY, these categorizations.

So yes, I do think it is a bit of the ‘snowflake syndrome’ if what you mean is that every persons sexual history and identity is unique to them.

The important thing that I must remind my self of is to not let my feelings, no matter good or bad, to limit my potential for achieving my dreams. Good topic!

Anonymous (251) (@) 9 years, 8 months ago ago

I had no idea what a sapiosexual was until now. And it turns out I am one, but I definitely do not intend on starting to use the label. It seems a little silly to me if I’m honest. Some people like some stuff, some people don’t, some people love sex, some people aren’t too fussed. That’s kind of it.

Hemy Tassel (2) (@lestshemay) 9 years, 8 months ago ago

@beardlike, I tend to agree with you. I find many people physically attractive, but I’m not actually attracted to them unless they appear to be intelligent.

@siantastic, I didn’t know much about it till recently either. It’s been spreading on the internet, which is how I picked up the term. The reason it’s not very common is probably because 1) it’s not dividing attraction in the mainstream way, by gender, and 2) there always seems to be a tinge of elitism surrounding the idea of being attracted to someone based on their intelligence. Some would say it’s no more unusual than being attracted to someone based on their appearance, while others think it’s a snobbish way of proclaiming your own ‘specialness,’ where there is none. That also goes into the ‘special snowflake syndrome,’ @pwhalen, which I also picked up online, and that seems to refer to when people give themselves labels to make themselves feel unique, even where there is no need for any. This strikes me as a bit hypocritical, since there is no good way to define what requires a label and what doesn’t! Surely it doesn’t depend on the number of people. I suppose the most consistent way of labeling is to give everyone one or no one any. Alas, for practical purposes, and perhaps for the inevitable reason that we need to categorize everything in nature, including ourselves, we still label in big groups.

Thanks to everyone who replied! I’m glad that you’re all so open-minded.

haydini (0) (@haydini) 9 years, 8 months ago ago

@lestshemay, There is a more socially accepted term for asexual, or a lack of sexual attraction to anything. It is called “being in the friend zone”.

Hemy Tassel (2) (@lestshemay) 9 years, 8 months ago ago

@haydini, That’s not true at all. ‘Being in the friendzone’ is a term used on the internet mostly by bitter singles who think their supplication to their object of affection earns them the object of affection’s love in return. People who say they are ‘in the friendzone’ are really implying that they want a (sexual) relationship with someone who considers them a friend. That has nothing to do with asexuals, who prefer not to have sex of their on volition.

Lauren (86) (@laurenlouise) 9 years, 8 months ago ago

Sex is pretty crazy. I am a very sexual person, and while I would classify myself as heterosexual, I can always appreciate a beautiful woman, especially if she has a great personality. I don’t lust after them like I would a man, but I probably wouldn’t be disgusted by hooking up with a girl. So am I heterosexual with a slight lean to the homo side? Am I bi? I don’t know. I think a bit of labeling is a good thing, it helps you understand yourself at times. But too much of it and it can become an obsession of trying to fit into a box.
Recognize your feelings and accept them.

I used to be freaked out because I thought women were attractive, but I have realized that just because I find something attractive doesn’t mean I have to act on it.

I love intelligence. Especially with a good dose of humor. I have been attracted to what some may consider physically unattractive males, but because they can hold a good conversation with me about important things and they can make me laugh, I’m sold.

I’ve been realizing lately that love and sex aren’t the end all be all when it comes to life. It’s a very small part that we are all capable of living without (even the most sexual people).

Alex (345) (@staylucky) 9 years, 8 months ago ago

It is very hard for some to live without labels because most people are brought up to believe that you’re one thing or another (that also applies to families who are liberal in their views on same sex relations).

When I started to ask myself questions about my sexuality I decided to read about as much stuff online about what people had to say about their paths and was overwhelmed with the amount of people in both the straight and gay community who think that being bisexual or bicurious means you’re on the fence. I think if our society frowned upon heterosexual relationships then there would be a lot more people out there in homosexual relationships for the fear of being judged.

Just do what feels right if you’re not hurting anybody!

Viewing 16 reply threads
load more