#'same sex attracted' i think but. can u not just say gay?

[tobacconist]

TOO MANY FUCKING ACRONYMS

THERE ARE TOO MANY ACRONYMS IN THE WORLD

STOP IT. ITS GONE TOO FAR

Sub-Saharan Africa? Safe Schools Alliance, a British advocacy group? SSA Global Technologies, American software company acquired by Infor Global Solutions? Shan State Army, a former insurgent group in Burma? Slovak Society of Actuaries (Slovak: Slovenská spoločnosť aktuárov), professional association in Slovakia? Soaring Society of America, American sporting society founded in 1932? Society of Scottish Artists, artists society founded in 1891? Swedish Society of Radio Amateurs, an amateur radio organization? Singapore Scout Association, youth movement founded 1910? Seismological Society of America, international scientific society founded 1906? Scottish Socialist Alliance, a coalition of left-wing bodies, fore-runner to the Scottish Socialist Party? Shipconstructors' and Shipwrights' Association, a former British trade union? Sainsbury's Staff Association, of Sainsbury's, UK? Sudan Studies Association, US professional association? Society for the Study of Addiction, UK learned society with charitable status? Steamship Authority, a Massachusetts ferry service and regulatory body? School of Saint Anthony, Quezon City, Philippines? Secular Student Alliance, US? Shady Side Academy, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, US? Social Security Administration of the US government? Social Security Agency (Northern Ireland)? State Security Agency (South Africa), the South African intelligence service? Selective Service Act of 1917, an American piece of legislation signed by President Woodrow Wilson during WWI that established nationwide conscription? Software Security Assurance? Serial Storage Architecture? Singular Spectrum Analysis? Stationary Subspace Analysis? Static single-assignment form, a property of intermediate representations used in compilers? Stochastic Simulation Algorithm? Strong subadditivity of quantum entropy? SubStation Alpha and .ssa file format, a video subtitle editor? Super systolic array? Start of Selected Area, a control character in the C1 control code set? Solid State Array, in flash data storage using solid-state drives? Semantic structure analysis? Single-strand annealing in homologous recombination? Specific surface area, a property of solids? Side-side-angle in geometry for solving triangles? Senile systemic amyloidosis? Sessile serrated adenoma, a type of pre-malignant intestinal polyp? Special somatic afferent? Anti-SSA/Ro autoantibodies? Sulfosalicylic acid? SSA, Grand Cross of the Order of the Star of South Africa? Deputado Luís Eduardo Magalhães International Airport, IATA Airport code? Same sex attraction? Safe Sex Always? Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan, the Government of India's Education for All programme? Self-sampling assumption? Shared services agreement? Slippery slope argument, a rhetorical device (and often a fallacy)? ESA Space Situational Awareness Programme? Special services area or business improvement district? Special Service Agreement between the UN and a contractor? Supervisory Special Agent? Serious Sam Advance, a 2004 video game?

WHICH OF THESE ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT????????

[chuplayswithfire]

I have more thoughts on how and why the sex was a mistake. I will be thinking about this all week. All year.

Let's start with: the sex was consensual, they both wanted it, and that does not change that it was the wrong decision for their relationship in that moment. They should not have had sex! Ed is 100% correct and he is not running away when he says that! He is not just avoiding his feelings or getting cold feet, he is genuinely correct, and here's why:

They continue to be on different pages. They have not had a chance to talk it through. It's been like 2-3 max since Ed woke up from the Gravy Basket, and emotions are still running high. Even ignoring that they were just tortured in front of each other and that Stede killed a man right after Ed asked him not to, they were not in the same space emotionally regarding their relationship.

Fir one thing: Stede did *not* get his heartbroken (prior to this). He got his romantic affirmation. Season 1 was an entire arc leading to Stede realizing he is gay, that he is in love, that he is loved in return. For him, for HIM, sex is a natural next step, and we already knew he wanted it from how he deepened their kiss in episode 5. Their relationship itself is not a source of trauma for Stede; he loves Ed and he walked away from his old life to be with him, and now he found him again, and they've agreed to do it together, figure things out, his romantic hopes are realized.

And in that moment, adding to that background informations, is that Stede also wanted to avoid all his messy feelings by being physical. He was tortured and he watched Ed and his crew be tortured, he was insulted and had to listen to Ed be insulted, and he wanted to regain control and power by killing Ned Low, and removing the threat. That's where Stede's head is.

Ed, on the other hand, did get his heart broken and while the majority of what he's working through is about his self-hatred, his dissatisfaction with his career, and his desire to find a life that feels worth living, he is also dealing with a significant amount of trust issues with his relationship with Stede, because Stede left him. He has heard from Stede that he loves him, but Ed's deepest fear is that he's unlovable, and he hasn't gotten over that, or his hurt from how things went, in the like two days it's been.

But he loves Stede, and he's attracted to him, and he wants him, so when Stede initiates and manhandles him a bit and things get hot and heavy, he consents. He's all in, carried away by the moment.

And he regrets it.

He especially wasn't ready because Ed is a planner. I know we were all joking about how they definitely weren't going to take it slow and they were going to rush through, but I do genuinely think he meant it. Ed's natural state is as a planner and tactician, everything has an angle for him and even when he wants to just be simple, he always has a bajillion factors in mind that he's juggling, so we can be sure that Ed probably did very much have thoughts about how he wanted their first time to go, and what he wanted them to do and grow into as a relationship before they had sex, and instead they got tortured, Stede killed a man, and then they fucked in the aftermath.

Not bloody optimal indeed.

Now back to Stede: he is utterly unprepared for the idea that the sex could be a mistake because to and for him it was the natural next step in their relationship. This is his romantic fantasy is the thing; he was a cool brave pirate captain who made an enemy walk the plank in defense of his crew and his boyfriend, and then Ed came to him and Stede got to sweep him off his feet and shove him against the wall, kiss him, bring him to the bed, and pointedly shut the curtains on an audience that doesn't exist, followed by a lazy morning after with breakfast in bed.

So it probably hurts extra that Ed is like that was a mistake. This is literally him living his fantasy from episode 1, Ned Low even has facial hair and is mean to him like Izzy used to be. He could ignore all the realities of that situation, because he was living his fantasy, and Ed dragged them both out of fantasyland, back to the real world, where their relationship isn't fixed 100% and sex didn't change that.

They weren't on the same page. They still aren't, because they need to talk.

[mrs-monaghan]

I just watch Bon Voyage 1. And it gave me clarity on something. Jikook started being sexually active around 2016. Or maybe even before that. Why would you give someone a footsie under the table if you’re not sexually active with each other?

Damn anon. You're just gonna bring this up, no heads up? Okay then.

How do I answer this without getting crucified for delving into their sex lives? 🤔

Whatever. I'm already cancelled.

Disclaimer: this is just what I deduced. Only Jikook know what really transpired.

So due to certain behaviour I am inclined to believe that yes, by 2016 they had gone all the way. Maybe late 2015 (thus my theory for why 8/11/15 is important) or early 2016. Because 2015 we have the 2 things that I linked above, then 2016 we have; like you just pointed out, the crotch footsie and also Osaka Vlive. Oh! And let's not forget Jimin eating a sausage, saying he's a big eater, laughing at reasons only known to him, while looking at the person who was behind the camera. Possibly the owner of the sausage Jimin likes to eat. Idk 🤷🏽‍♀️

2016 was full of sexual tension and innuendos and just... things. I think we can all safely agree by 2016 the going was going. 👉🏽👌🏽

That being said, I think before the going started going, other things were being done way before that. I don't need to clarify obvs. Kissing, heavy petting.... c'mon I'm already saying too much don’t make me say it. O__L. Okay, there i said it.

But the thing is, there are Jikookers who have this thing where they say Jimin waited till 2017 in Tokyo or some shit or they didn't do anything at all before they went all the way. Again, because Jimin was trying to be respectful. Or because being gay is illegal in SK. Or a bunch of other stuff that I'm honestly not sure why they would apply.

Jimin is absolutely the type to feel guilty if he thought he made JK do something he didn't want to do. That much i agree on. But, that would come after the fact. Alright? Teenage boys are the same everywhere. Everywhere. The wind blows in their face too hard they get hard at that age. And now you want me to put my faith in two horny teenage boys, living under the same roof and are attracted to eo??? Nah fam.

I'm not doing that. Regret usually comes later, after the deed has already been done 😂😂

And if the accident was too good it happens again and again and again until you start planning for it and looking forward to it. Maybe by saying you'll be staying late practising the new choreo at the studio? 😌 who knows?

Moving on, we know for sure they had already shagged in 2016 because that is when the push and pull started to happen. This is the example I like to give. When you sleep with your teacher, or with your boss. Right? (By teacher I mean college, please and thank you) Do you know what happens when you fuck your superior? A little respect kind of goes out the window. Suddenly you don't care if you're late for work. You decide not to do your homework just because. Your behaviour changes because you know you can get away with shit now.

And this is exactly what happened with Jikook. Jinmin were reacting to that show JK went on and Jimin was lamenting how JK doesn't listen to him. He complained during the live... and he complained on twitter

He complained some more

And complained again

He was a dog with a bone, couldn't stop complaining

And that wasn't the only time. Eat Jin. That one live where Jikook were misbehaving with those lollypops. Jimin again complains that JK has changed. He doesn't listen to him anymore.

He was smiling... but mans was finding JK's behaviour baffling. He couldn't understand why JK had changed.

Jimin, you let that boy wreck you, he has seen how you look like pliant and at his mercy, begging for the Jungkonda. You did this to yourself. Like a friend said to me, Jimin had made his bed, and he now needed to learn how to lay in it and be comfortable. You chose to give that boy the jibooty, he ain't listening to u 😂

(Sidebar: JK replied "I take it from you" given the topic at hand you can't blame my mind for where it went 😂😂😂😂)

Anyway, it's okay, they worked it out and are now living happily ever after. 😁😁💛💜

So yes anon. By 2016 Jikook were Jikooking. Hard. Pun intended 😏

Bonus.

JK had no emotions....In anything.... Hmm 🤔

Does that sound to anyone else like JK was hitting and quitting or is it just me? Just me? Okay, I'll show myself out. My apologies.

[meatstroker3000]

What do you think gay men are attracted to in men that they can’t be attracted to in women?

It can’t be anything about femininity or masculinity obviously. That’s both sexist, and cultural so can’t be what drives men-only attraction.

It can’t be anything about stated identity because someone could lie just as easily as they could tell the truth in such a statement, and it makes no sense because homosexuality and heterosexuality exists in other species with no stated identities. It’s not like other animals without gender are all pan.

Saying idk it’s the vibes or some indescribable trait men have that women can’t but “I can’t explain” is a nonanswer.

Soooooooo what is it? Or do you think any sexuality but bi/pan is just cultural performance or an identity rather than an inborn orientation?

- [ ]

oh boy do i have a lot of words for this ask!!! thank u for sending this to me cus i fucking love rambling on about shit concerning language and man-made concepts and constructs.

at first i didnt know what this was referring to but then realized it was cus i reblogged that post that went "can straight men be attracted to other men? sure im not a cop"

https://meatstroker3000.tumblr.com/post/752617724959670272

(this one^^^^)

i mean i initially reblogged it as mostly a joke but i mean sure ill bite u seem well intentioned and im in a rare discourse mood today

sexuality (and more specifically labels such as gay, lesbian, bi, pan etc) isnt rly...a defined immutable trait for me, at least the way i view it, the concept itself and the identities that come with that concept are more so just labels people use to describe themselves with, to simplify their lived experiences. (example, many gay men use the label gay because their experience has been only attracted to men, or they consider themselves attracted to only men currently, andthey use this term because "gay" is colloquially understood to describe someone with that lived experience! its really just a way of simplifying and streamlining communication... sort of like pr...pronou- no. i shant say it.)

ANYWAY LOL i feel like u were asking more of a "WHY do gay men like other men , like why are they predisposed to be attracted to men" in like.. a biological sense? rather than an "identity" and "labels" way, and what they mean, ur question is more so asking in general why people are sometimes only attracted to one sex/gender despite gender norms and performance being largely cultural and not biological. and yeah, honestly fantastic point to discuss!. obviously its not really about femininity masculinity theyre not biological traits theyre cultural norms, the concept of being a woman and a man are, well, man-made and not genetic or "natural". obviously even scientists n shit dont know fully why some people are predisposed to be attracted to certain genders so im not knowledgable abt the physical aspect of same-sex or opposite-sex attraction nd predispositions for one or the other or both. i mean, to go more freudian here (sorry) it could be argued that it's nurture over nature for that sort of thing, and could be weighed in the same vein as preferring blondes over brunettes, or short ppl vs taller people (this is debatable obviously but u get my point.)

but like.........what the post itself was trying to say wasnt . rly. about why some people are attracted to certain sexes/genders physically, but more so about how labels such as gay are arbitrary and kind of pointless to gatekeep/argue over, and i feel (especially posted during pride month where queer and label discourse is RAMPANT) it was a commentary on how many people in queer spaces view labels as IMMUTABLE UNCHANGABLE CHARACTERISTICS and less so of.....labels to make describing urself easier? lol?

u say that it cant be anything about stated identity because "homosexuality and heterosexuality exists in species with no stated identities" and like. yeah obviously. but again, homosexuality and heterosexuality are just being used to describe (for example) lab rats as being attracted to male versus female rats, in order to streamline communication often in scientific studies. its just a way to describe "they are attracted to males/females" or whatever lol.

u also say people could easily lie about stated identity so it doesn't mean anything, and like. yeah lol! see, you're again viewing labels like "gay" as immutable characteristics rather than plain ol descriptors! obviously someone COULD lie about being gay lmfao! but someone could also lie about liking pasta. just because sexuality labels aren't able to have PHYSICAL PROOF backing their validity doesn't make them obsolete or suddenly all worthless. i mean, the same could be said for any concept/word. the color red isnt PHYSICALLY able to be PROVEN to be called RED, so if everyone called that color blue, they wouldnt really be any more wrong or right, just using a different descriptor to refer to the same thing.

"its not like all other animals without gender are pan" yeah lol i agree with u because again......pan is just a word some people use to simplify and better explain their lived experience and they use it cus they feel it describes them best.

the entire concept of these labels (and. language as a whole lol) relies on a colloquial / unanimous agreement that THIS WORD MEANS THAT. its the only reason why languages exist and function, people agree on what words mean so they can better communicate. and its honestly pretty interesting and cool but more of a philosophical question rather than a scientific one, in the way that there can't really be any actual answers to these questions .

SO,. if someone wants to call themselves a straight guy but is attracted to dudes, that.....is okay with me lol? it is physically possible for someone to call themselves (dare i say "identify as") a straight dude and also be attracted to dudes, like it doesnt contradict nature or the laws of physics cus the only thing that makes it "contradictory" is just a widespread agreement on what it means. if most people would view that guy as actually Not straight, that isnt really any more right or wrong than the guy viewing himself as straight imo. language and identities/labels are also everchanging and it's not uncommon to see words repurposed (i mean, the word gay itself is a great example ironically haha!)

contradictory labels themselves are honestly a non issue (and i believe that is what the og poster was commenting on which is why i reblogged!) cus ......not to go the corny ass tiktok annoying route but...........ALL WORDS ARE MADE UP LAWLLLL!!!!! my rb was more so agreeing with stupid label discourse that is so prevalent(for yeeeears and years) cus its just a non issue and hell im not a cop u kno! if someone is using language in a "wrong way". i dont...rly care lol? (LIKE THE BOOK FRINDLE. LOOK IT UP)

anywaysyss yeahh this is prob a real long and repetitive post but im glad i got something that wasnt just telling me to kms in my inbox and im in a silly mood today fuck it we doing label discourse on meatstroker3000! sorry this was probably totally fukcing rambly and inefficient, but i love discussing shit like this and it made me happy that i got to ramble on about my own little perspective whether or not u consider it correct or not :3 like, its fine if u disagree with me lmfaoaooaoao id be hypocritical if i said ONLY I AM RIGHT ABOUT THIS obviously. just tryna give context to my reblog of the post which inspired dis ask :3 but moral of the story. dont take a guy called meatstroker3000's opinions too seriously ok. i hopefully will never engage in queer discourse again, you just fucking hooked me in with my fucking uneducated passion for pseudophilosophical discussion and instead of english essays i suppose annoying self-important tumblr posts will scratch that itch for me. :3 happy pride!

[greetings-inferiors]

Just played class of 09 and MY GOD it is so funny. Nicole’s just a terrible person but she’s so fun to play as and just… watch as she chooses all of the wrong decisions. Like when she gets someone to kill himself and her immediate first thought is “I can use this”. Women’s wrongs let’s go. Same with Jecka, her turning into a white nationalist when Nicole leaves her alone for two seconds is hysterical (that’s probably my favourite route in the game lol)

But it’s also genuinely really heartfelt? I almost started crying when the text for a certain ending was from Jecka (the only number Nicole has saved on her phone btw) with just a “miss u”.

Also Nicole’s 100% gay. At no point is she ever attracted to any guy (the closest is when she agrees to date the gym teacher, but even then it’s just for money), but she constantly comments on the principal’s boobs, she says “I wish I was a lesbian”, and in the anime she says “what’s gayer, dating a girl or wishing she’d have sex with your dead body”, which is one of the most unhinged things she says in the whole series and I love her for that. But I just think that her being gay works great in the mechanics of the game, it’s not a dating sim it’s a rejection sim, she can’t date any of the women because it’s 2009 and you can’t do that, but she doesn’t want to date any of the men because she doesn’t like men. If she wasn’t so fucked up (seeing your dad kill himself and being named on his suicide note (god she said “hi my name’s Nicole btw WHAT THE FUCK DID I EVER DO TO HIM?” In the opening and I instantly knew I’d love the game) will do that to you) maybe she could have a healthy relationship lol

[belit0]

hi here's a req. can u do Indra and Itachi's reaction seeing his best friend acting gay with someone else? i mean the acting like gay is a joke LMFAOOAOAOAOAOOAOA THANKS-

Just for clarification:

The way I write Indra's character is based on him being villainous and terrible, a bad person with bad criteria, and a terribly traditional and horrendous vision of life. I DON'T ASSOCIATE MYSELF AT ALL WITH HIS THOUGHTS, it's simply the way I build his character🥹🫱🏼‍🫲🏼

His character is from an ancient era, and I always play with that, plus the factor of his curse, to create a man of rotten and affected mind, totally wrong in his general thinking.

Indra

- What the fuck is wrong with them? Since when did (Y/N) become interested in the same sex? One part of him, the ancient Indra unaffected by Zetsu, knows that it is not right to judge people, that one's preferences do not affect one's judgment or functional ability, that one is not crazy to find people of the same sex attractive. Another part of him, the part consumed by the curse, doesn't tolerate it one bit, and repudiates their behavior. Eventually, he will corner them with uncomfortable and unnecessary questions, and if (Y/N) does not answer as he expects, does not give a satisfactory justification as to why they would act in such an outrageous manner, then he will unfriend them, for the dark and rotten part of him does not want to be associated with such people.

Itachi

- There is no such reaction, as Itachi doesn't exactly care what they do with their life and tastes. This Uchiha doesn't rely on such trivial matters, as personal preferences, to decide who he has in his life and who he doesn't, he literally cares little and nothing seeing that situation. Perhaps he is a little surprised because he thought (Y/N) was heterosexual, or at least they never commented with him about any other type of attraction, and that is the only striking factor of the matter. He won't ask them about it, because if two people of opposite genders were involved, no one would say anything, so why should he have to make silly and needless questions?

[dukeofankh]

hey i really really appreciate your posts abt purity culture, desire and objectification and your perspective as an ex-evangelical!! having been born and raised a jew myself i've always been aware of how bullshit all of that stuff is, but not really able to articulate it as specifically as you seem able to, and i find your eloquence really impressive. with that known, i actually have a specific thing that's been bothering me, and i think it's an evangelical purity culture based thing, and hinges on that distinction you made in a post abt a week ago abt how to a lot of people "objectification" = "looking with lust" = "basically adultery"-- okay here goes:

on gay tiktok, there is currently a trend of women (or some nb ppl) who are attracted to women commenting on thirst-traps posted by women the memetic phrase "i am no better than a man".

now this really rubs me the wrong way for a lot of reasons (mainly: contextually this is almost always on videos that are INTENDED to be sexy so why is it weird to find this woman, who filmed and edited this video to be sexy, sexy?? AND what the hell do you mean abt gender by saying this???? women can't desire people?? men can only desire in predatory ways???), and it's weird in that specific way where i'm like. i smell weird cultural christian values embedded in this. but i can't quite articulate the way it all fits together.

this may be way out of line for me to bother you in your inbox like this, but i was hoping to get your take? your ability to explain this stuff clearly and with context i never knew existed is really valuable and while i have seen people responding on tumblr to say "uhhh don't say this", they haven't really articulated what's driving people to say such a specific thing, so much that it becomes a meme.

if u feel this isn't something you want to speak on, that's totally fine! and i just want to say thank you again for your thoughtful posts.

also i feel very weird abt dropping this veritable essay in your inbox so sorry!!

No worries! I love to talk, and I already have opinions on that particular meme 😆.

You've definitely gotten the gist of it, yeah. It's a bunch of unexamined sexist ideas about sex and desire repackaged in the sort of fun memey "it's not that deep, chill out" shell that absolutely thrives on social media. Some of it's Christian, some of it is the radfem repackaging of Christian ideas.

Basically, the version of Sexual Objectification championed by radfem writers like Dworkin was adapted from Immanuel Kant, a Christian philosopher/theologian, so it's not just cultural Christianity, it's also a direct intellectual connection. They just changed the idea from "all people, when overtaken by lust, cease to see people as people and can see them only as means to achieve their sinful sexual gratification. This cannot be avoided, but can be balanced out by keeping sex within a marriage that is otherwise built on commitment and respect," to "Men, when overtaken by lust, cease to see women as people and can see them only as a means to achieve their sinful sexual gratification (due to their patriarchal training to harm and dominate). This cannot be avoided, especially not by marriage, which is one of the main ways the Patriarchy codifies the subjugation of women to men."

Basically, Radfems and Christians get along because Radfems feel the same way about masculine sexuality that Christian men feel about their own sexuality. As for women...both Radfems and more modern Christians are pretty sure that women don't Do Lust in the same way men do. Like, women see people as ends in and of themselves, as fellow Subjects. Men see women as objects. As means to an end, that end being their own sexual gratification.

A few decades later and after a fair bit of social media iteration, we get to this weird point.

What they're basically saying is, "god damn. I swiped onto this thirst trap and I didn't even think about your personality or your accomplishments or anything. I literally just saw big jiggly titties and that's all I can think about. I am sexually attracted to you, and yet it isn't reflective of your soul or a deep connection between us or anything, despite the fact that I'm a woman and I'm supposed to be above just liking your body and that turning me on. Huh. This is what I have heard people describe men's sexuality as being like. You are so sexy that you are causing me to act as badly as men do."

See also: the way tiktok has redefined "the male gaze" and "the female gaze" to just mean "stuff men vs. women respectively like to look at" with most explicitly sexualized visual media being assigned to the former. Women are supposed to like things subtler than that.

Like, saying "I am no better than a man" could be a push to re-examine whether maybe a celibate 18th century theologian/philosopher is a bad foundation for your understanding of sexual desire. I would like to think that for some of these women it probably is sparking self reflection, going "huh, yeah, I guess we all do this."

But as a meme, honestly, even as it claims to lower ones own status I think it still maintains a claim of moral superiority? Like, "yeah, I'm being a horndog, but I am self aware about it. I can tell that I'm being horny on main right now, and it's something that has been conditionally activated by this very sexy thirst trap. Men are like this all the time and they don't even know."

I, obviously, don't like that. I don't like people saying "I'm acting like a man" when they mean "I'm perving on you", I don't like ranking a lack of desire as being better than desire, I don't like ranking genders or better or worse than another. I don't think it's causing problems as much as it's reflecting problems that have been there for a long time, but hey, it stinks.

[michellezagenda]

not to keep bringing up the same old but your screenshot of that tt vid of "signs ur a lesbian teeheh" and the comphet nonsense should be a big topic to discuss among bisexual women who might feel alienated by other bisexual women. what i mean is, is that no wonder some bi women proclaim to be gay when they're not since the average bi woman tends to be more leaning towards OSA rather than SSA (nothing wrong with that ofc!), tend to want to end up with men rather than women, and/or exclusively date men and only want to hookup with women for fun. its like always looking at the word bi as meaning "only taking the opposite sex seriously and only seeing the same sex as a short term thing" and then when we don't relate to that, we or other people then chime in and say "oh that means you're a lesbian bestie!" which is just. no its hard because ssa-leaning bis/febfems are hated everywhere and get attacked from all sides, yes even in gay/lesbian circles as well. reddit has banned r/febfem so there's just no safe way of meeting other likeminded bi women without going through the hordes of bi women who spit on you for not wanting a male partner or make you apologize to them repeatedly for not wanting to talk about their partners enough. they also proclaim that we are trying to get on the good side of lesbians when all we want is to have a chance at having a serious relationship with a woman; that's not lesbian behavior, that's just same sex attraction behavior. sorry if this got long lol but yeah idk, it's hard to feel secure in our sexuality when our sexuality feels hated on by everyone and then when we do try to make our own spaces, it gets shut down eventually, and then we're just floating through space with no secure anchors to hang onto. and so i think this is why some bi women insist on being called lesbians; its the one only true way of finding community with other women who do want something serious and long-term. its wrong yeah but it makes sense, you know? what says you queen?

yea i get feeling alienated as a bi woman, i still feel alienated bc i just don’t like men as much as a lot of them do. i still find myself trying to force it too…

I wish that bisexuality was treated normally so everyone can know that just because you experience certain things as a bi woman doesn’t make u a lesbian and yea we need spaces where we can talk about being mostly ssa as bi women. This is why so many bi women call themselves lesbians, accidentally or not. I still don’t call myself a febfem bc 1) i think it’s pointless for me personally and 2) idk what the future holds

[candyredmusings]

“Another One Of Those ‘Things My Discord Said’ Sentence Starters.

Things taken from DMs and a few group chats from Discord. CW: NSFT Change / Edit as necessary !

i am literally tom cruise

cum is cool.

[NAME]  is fucked up cus he is straight man

[NAME]  show me your fuckin tits

[NAME], you better not be standing catatonic in your room wearing your handmade jigsaw robe again.

its like they creampied me but instead of cum it was new music

like what about my pussy-area makes u think sea cucumber

the mind is weak. but the body is funky

so im reading that fanfic where 1d like, buys your soul or whatever and im shook

well tom servo is a sex god

and then i freaked it

FUCK YOU APPLE JACK FUCK

ILL SLURP WITH YOU

LEMME SHOW U DICK

ITS A SIDE QUEST YOU SILLY BITCH

I’m a zombie the law can’t stop me

LEAVE YOUR GOLDEN UNCRUSTABLES OUT OF MY HOME I WILL NOT FALL VICTIM TO THY TRICKERY

you, telling me to ignore a twink with side swept brown hair? foolish.

Hes so hot i briefly started texting like a straight person

and because I’m god and I’ve decided that. No. In fact. I’m not done.

MY DUMB BOTTOM BRAIN FOLLOWS COMMANDS TOO WELL

[NAME], I know you love bloopy reggae jams. Now is not the time

OH THATS WHAT I THOUGHT YOUD SAY YOU STUPID ACCIDENTAL HIMBO DEMON

man i rlly am attracted to paul mccartney.

its not that kennedy was gay af sleeping w jackies fat ass out, he just has a better one-

jealous of my massive honkeers

YOU BRAINCELLED BITCH

this forced open my third eye and i saw the devil--

oh me seeming romantically interested in u is making u uncomfortable?? noted

the only pussy this party city shake out wig looking mother fucker is getting

[NAME]  expose your teeth right fucking now

IN THE DEPARTMENT OF OLD MAN FUCKING, WEVE GOT YOU BEAT

What if we kissed while one of us got called racist and we are both boys

i just jacked it to minecraft piss porn

I will pop a huge tentacle boner

i hate females fr fr

we left u to die to play minecraft

IM GONNA FRICKLE-FRACK YOUR WIFE

CAN I KARATE CHOP IT LIKE IN SPONGEBOB

DWIGHT FROM THE OFFICE IS NOT MY SKRUNKLY

she would never ever take away one of these stupid fucking hats

My brother in Christ you’re being haunted

i want to wring you like a wet towel and slap u against a wall

Yeah you'll come to learn I just have a thing for milk

Piss ur pants harder pls I wanna watch

I'm gonna corn on the kill myself

good morning to parappa and his stans. everyone else..... hi ig

lol look at this clown with no slurs

God has abandoned his children but unfortunately for you I pay child support and I will smite thee.

this is how I reveal myself to be homophobic

I have no sluts

idk what it is abt it but boba makes me become like an actual whore

im homophobic suddenly

he was like ‘You're so big”.... and i just started crying

anyones penis can be hard hes not special

for the love of god please help me

i can talk about piss for hours

im sorry i havent recognized mickey mouse clubhouse ost as the cultural landmark that it is

I ASKED IF WE WOULD RP AFTER FUCKING BIBLE STUDY OR WHATEVER

the benefits of being a yandere is that i dont have to forgive OR forget and I am a living breathing PVP zone so Fuck with me white boy.

When toxic by ashnikko comes on I enter the gaslight gatekeep phases of my girlbosshood

im like a child in line for the newest fucked up disney ride

[NAME] is just all fucking Sorts of fucked up

im clownfaking

why are we here? to suffer? every other day i get messages from a whore

always thinking abt when my friend called me a "white boy whore"

you gotta PUMP the errand girl with cocaine

im beyond shame bc i love all cock try again

people have fetishes.

They really do crucify anyone these days huh

u may have never hungered for cock but you have hungered for a sub sandwich and honestly? theyre basically the same thing-

hi im drawing hentai

[NAME] idk why but that really. makes me want to stab you

“Don't have sex FOMO, [NAME], no! “

“TRY AND NUKE THIS, BITCH.”

“There's a group of golden skeletons behind you hitting the griddy “

“GRANDPA’S ASHES SUCKED MY COCK AND TOOK ME TO ARBYS.”

“You’re lanky with no gender and silly goofy with the rizz it works.”

“You can’t just tell me I could be a Tumblr sexy man to my face at 4:30 PM.”

"I have strong opinions about the soviet union"

“CALL THAT PUSSY THE MATRIX CAUSE IM IN THIS BITCH AND I CANT GET OUT “

“dont cry. 8000 types of reptiles on the planet, okay?”

[NAME] lives his life like he’s an RPG character but picks only the rude dialogue options.”

“I need to beat off to this before God destroys California.”

"No amount of pussy could get me on a rollercoaster with three loops"

"I love your senior citizen pussy"

"Gerber is pretty reliable .. I mean .. The Gerber baby didn't die .... did it?"

“you are white i assume”

"I hate you terrorist, and you may quote me on that"

"I love watching you play minecraft. It's like watching a baby fawn."

"I've never seen old men who fuck harder."

"i don't need him to KILL i need him to FUCK ME"

"well maybe if you just dicked down your wife she wouldn't have gone on a murderous slut rampage"

"why cant these BIG titty bimbos stop HANGING around me"

[kitkatopinions]

You want to know what I think about why they haven't confirmed Yang as queer yet or had either Yang or Blake explicitly say anything about be attracted to women (unlike our "hetero" characters)? Because the writers know the bees are the beginning and end of their gay representation. We can have Arkos, Renora, some Rosegarden and maybe some White Knight now (bc framing), but when it comes to sapphic couples, the bees are it. And they see no problem with that either.

As I'm answering this ask, I will be heavily criticizing RW/BY and Bumble/by. Fans of the bees, please beware. If you can't stand to see criticism, just move along.

Here's what we have for confirmation of attraction to the opposite sex from our main characters:

Weiss asks out Neptune. Blake goes on a date with Sun and she and Adam had a prior romantic entanglement. Yang openly leers at shirtless men and verbally says that she approves of their shirtlessness. Jaune is romantically interested in Weiss and kisses Pyrrha. Nora kisses Ren and openly says she's in love with him. Pyrrha kisses Jaune. Ren 'melts into' the kiss with Nora and talks about his feelings for her. Qrow goes on about how he was undone by the sight of a female waitress's skirt length. That's eight out of ten main characters (the other two being Ruby and Oscar,) and if you count Sun and Penny as main characters, that's nine out of twelve because Sun asked out Blake.

The majority of this happened in season two. In the second season of the show, people were asking out people of the opposite sex, and the only characters that didn't have their interest in the opposite sex confirmed within the first three seasons were Ren and Nora. When Ren and Nora kissed after they were hinted at being romantically interested in each other for seasons, they were far and away not the only main characters to have confirmed attraction to the opposite sex and weren't even the first kiss between characters of the opposite sex. If someone wanted to prove that the ship between Jaune and Weiss was going to happen, they don't have to say 'Jaune looks at her, he was upset when she almost died, they go out with a group one time,' they can say 'Jaune has confirmed romantic attraction towards her' and 'At the very least, Weiss has expressed canonical interest in men.''

Here's what we have for confirmation of attraction to the same sex from our main characters:

Nothing. Literally nothing.

We have two very small side characters who appeared in a couple episodes of season six, a villainous character who is in love with her former friend who is described by her voice actor as straight in what looks like official RW/BY merch, and a transgender character who has only existed for two seasons as a more minor character. And then we have Blake and Yang, who have been coded as queer for years now with no canon confirmation so that even though they're clearly meant to be perceived as romantic by queer people, homophobes can pretend it's not happening and Yang can still describe Blake as her sister in side content like video games while Rooster Teeth the company with a huge history of bigotry can sell pride shirts. This is behind the curve of heavily censored cartoons made by big companies like Cartoon Network and Disney. There's no excuse.

When people say that there's nothing queerbaity about Bumble/by and that it's just a slowburn like Re/nora and therefore we should all say nothing about it, they're really ignoring that Re/nora is the exception, they were some of the only main characters who hadn't expressed confirmed interest in the opposite sex, while even Ruby and Penny had seemed to want to talk about 'cute boys' in season one. And even Re/nora at this point is far more confirmed than bumble/by. People like saying that Bumble/by is a slowburn, but that doesn't mean that Blake and Yang couldn't have been confirmed as queer looong ago. Like, people act like Jim and Pam had zero confirmed romantic interest in each other or any other people until they got together and were shown dating in season four. Most slowburns don't look like this.

And people also are pretending like no outside meta matters at all, whether that's the history of a lack of representation for queer characters or considering the company's history of bigotry or the biphobia of one of the creators and lead writers Miles Luna. Despite the fact that there's no queer main characters in ten years, despite the fact that Blake and Yang's progression is unnatural because their tender moments are not allowed to be backed by even a discussion of feelings, despite the fact that the first male character who was coded queer was brutally murdered, despite the fact that there was wild heteronormativity in the early seasons where several characters just casually talked about their attraction to the opposite sex while the creator of RW/BY said that he'd be willing to include queer ships eventually maybe if he thought they were earned, despite the fact that Blake was described as straight by her VA as late as 2019, despite the fact that RW/BY is the biggest money maker for a company that is not only seemingly always struggling with funding projects but also constantly having controversies often about displaying bigotry and needing to get back into people's good graces, despite the fact that they've tried to sell Pride merch and Bumble/by merch that said like 'maybe they're a couple,' despite all of this... No one is allowed to suggest that there might have been intentionally stringing queer audiences along, or that it's a bit suspicious, or anything like that. No queer person is allowed to side eye a bigoted company. Because then we're 'ignoring the slowburn' and just being really unfair to Miles Luna the man who told an 'anecdote' about how hot he thinks watching girls make out is. No queer person is allowed to think that Bumble/by is badly done, because we'll literally get attacked, no matter how much we might like tons of other queer ships, including the canon queer ships from other shows like Adventure Time, Owl House, or Steven Universe.

I think that it is because Blake and Yang are likely to be the end-all-be-all as far as their confirmed queer characters, I think that's why fans are so defensive. Blake and Yang as a ship had juice before volume six and had a lot of people who shipped them, I'm not saying that the only reason they've been shipped is because they're likely to actually be confirmed. But. There's a habit in most fandoms to take what's either the only confirmed queer ship or the queer ship that's most likely to be confirmed and then instead of asking why there aren't more queer ships, people start acting like any fan who doesn't ship it or has any problem with it is trying to hurt queer people. Like if the content creators hear that the ship might not be popular, they just won't do it. Like we'll be punished for not being grateful for the scraps. So fans take it upon themselves to be knights and guardians for these ships, because instead of having grievances against the content creators who make queer ships so rare (and sometimes, badly done,) fans often seem to act like other fans are the enemy for not liking the one ship we have or might get. There's this element of...

A lot of rwde posters who care about queer rep wouldn't care very much about the relationship between Blake and Yang if they weren't the end-all-be-all of the main character rep in the show. If Weiss and Ruby or Weiss and Penny had been a thing, or Jaune and Neptune or Jaune and Ren or something, or other queer ships involving the main characters existed, then Blake and Yang's own status as queer wouldn't be as important because they wouldn't be the only (coded as) queer characters. Like, Lapis Lazuli and Peridot in Steven Universe weren't in an official relationship, but we had Ruby and Sapphire, and Pearl had been in love with Rose Quartz, so I at the very least didn't feel strung along by their 'roomies' language.

Another thing to note is that once again, what I at least care about is whether or not Blake and Yang are confirmed as queer, not whether or not they're in a relationship. People accuse rwde posters of not being happy with a slowburn queer ship and that we think that queer relationships should all be rapid paced (the defense against comparisons to Disney's the Owl House or Arcane having Vi out and out say that she thinks Caitlyn is hot.) But in actuality, this is willfully ignoring that they could've been confirmed as queer without getting in a relationship, just like Jaune talking to Ren about his feelings for Weiss doesn't mean they're destined to be together, and Weiss asking out Neptune doesn't mean they need to have an emotional journey with each other and have a passionate kiss at the end of the show. Yang could've gone to the Vytal dance with Velvet instead of with no one. Blake could've had feelings for Ruby before she had feelings for Yang instead of going on a date with Sun. Ruby could've had feelings for Penny before the Fall of Beacon the way that Pyrrha had feelings for Jaune. Neptune could've had a crush on Jaune during the Vytal dance, instead of having only turned down Weiss because he couldn't dance. Clover could've actually been confirmed as queer and wound up in a relationship with Qrow. But instead all we have is... Ten years of nothing but side characters who don't get much screentime and two main characters nuzzling foreheads and a bunch of fans screaming at us for saying 'we want more.'

It's disappointing.

[fellasleepinbaltimore]

What do you think gay men are attracted to in men that they can’t be attracted to in women?

It can’t be anything about femininity or masculinity obviously. That’s both sexist, and cultural so can’t be what drives men-only attraction.

It can’t be anything about stated identity because someone could lie just as easily as they could tell the truth in such a statement, and it makes no sense because homosexuality and heterosexuality exists in other species with no stated identities. It’s not like other animals without gender are all pan.

Saying idk it’s the vibes or some indescribable trait men have that women can’t but “I can’t explain” is a nonanswer.

Soooooooo what is it? Or do you think any sexuality but bi/pan is just cultural performance or an identity rather than an inborn orientation?

- [ ]

[p.s. upon rereading this, the tone is a little combative at times but im honestly assuming this was sent in good faith so please don't think I'm like being condescending, it's something many have wondered at one point or another, love u bae]

baby, what are you on about? what is it about strawberry ice cream that makes it someone's exclusive favorite? what is it about chocolate that someone just is not interested in? why is vanilla something someone craves only occasionally but never exclusively? the mysteries of human sexuality are as profound and evernuanced, with even the most minute and obviously glaring of factors playing their part, as human desire for anything.

I can agree there's an argument to be made attraction to femininity/masculinity is sexist (ig? is it sexist to not be sexually attracted to someone bc they don't perform a cultural identity in a way that gets your neurons firing?) but pretending it doesn't play into attraction is willfully ignorant; it does. there are aspects of it that play into attraction and while it doesn't drive it solely, it is part of it so like idk if being dismissive of it is like helpful to understand the picture that's been painted.

I agree that stated identity has little to do with same sex attraction. it probably has a small role to play but I do think that words are mostly fleeting in the case of sexual attraction.

it is true that same sex activities have been seen in a lot of species, but before that, speaking to your next supposition, "the vibes" is a valid answer. the "vibes" is quite literally every small little thing that together 'feels right' but when itemized aren't really things we consciously pick up on. the way someone carries themselves, dresses, speaks, acts, treats you, themselves and those around them, body type, body parts, etc., are all definitely factors in sexual attraction.

what I mean to say is: I think trying to simplify human same sex attraction into a pseudo-common-base-animal-sexual-attraction theory is unhelpful. we are not any other species(not said with arrogance). I think involving the whole of the animal kingdom is unnecessarily complicating things bc while we are related and referencing the occurrence of sex acts between members of the same sex in other species can potentially provide insight, ultimately it is not the cherry on top that will, imo, unlock "the special thing" gay men find attractive about men. why did that boy beaver fuck that other boy beaver and do you think it has anything to do with why boy humans fuck other boy humans? idk! probably cos he liked it, and maybe. probably because boy humans sometimes like that.

why does anyone like anything? why does any animal like anything?

what is it that gay men find attractive in men that they can't find in women?

what is gay, what is a man, what is attraction and what is a woman?

these are, in part, cultural identities and subjective, at least from my perspective.

but I see what you mean remove that, the societal bullshit, the lies we tell ourselves, at its base and most diluted, unnuanced and general, what does one biological male find attractive in another biological male that cannot be found in a biological female?

my answer is that I couldn't tell you! I would think the biological male that can remove everything from a person beside their biological sex would probably say 'sex characteristics.' which ones? idk maybe genitalia, fat deposits, muscle build, skeletal build? maybe they are sexually attracted to narrow pelvises! but I think if they were honest with themselves, they'd also say their sexual attraction to someone probably has more depth to it than that bc I think you'd be hard pressed to find a biological male attracted to any and every other biological male regardless of extenuating factors. what I mean is: sexuality is inherently, for us, not simple and unnuanced and I don't think you will find a single defining reason or answer.

for the record I think there are probably things that exist in both men and women that gay men find "attractive" but what does that even mean, effectively?

when you ask,"what do gay men find in men they don't find in women?" the answer is: they find men they like, whatever that means. the next question is,"why do they find men attractive?" and that's a question people have been asking for a very long time babe!! or maybe it's,"what is a man really?" and that's a question I think many take for granted but is being asked more and more. or perhaps "what about men do they like?" for which you'll get a thousand answers.

I think the thing gay men find attractive in men that they can't find in women is that men are men and women are not. that statement has miles and pounds worth of nuance and subjectivity bc in that way it would be an accurate answer. I think you would have to ask every gay man what they find in men they can't find in women to get the full truth of it.

I think human sexuality is culturally influenced and plays into identity and is inherent as well as transient in nature, probably a bit biological, likewise a bit psychological. it's all these things and in my very humble, humble opinion, I really am just some cunt on the internet, cannot be further reduced to a singularity that is both honest and also all-encompassing or overarching. In other words, the vibes.

[transkingbee]

I’m thinking about that post that’s like “sometimes dykes and fags have sex with each other and it’s no one else’s business and doesn’t negate their identities” (I think it was spacelazarwolf?) and gay men and lesbians (largely cis) going feral about that claiming OP is forcing lesbians to date/have sex with men ??? When all the post does is point out that that happens sometimes and someone else’s identity and experiences in no way invalidate yours, and yet these ppl are claiming just that very notion homophobic, lesbophobic and misogynistic.

Like ??? The main problem with this argument is that your understanding of gender and sexuality and attraction and identity is so severely limited!

Lesbians date/love/have sex with trans men sometimes! Omg no call the identity police! 😱🙄 Gender and sexuality and all identity are JOURNEYS. And sometimes you’re 16 and you come out as a lesbian and then you U-Haul with your high school sweetheart and then you realize you’re more of a trans man than a butch woman and THATS OKAY. (And sometimes those identities exist in the same person, can y’all handle that?) Sometimes your partner just loves you and your identity doesn’t invalidate their identity and you can just love each other.

And sometimes your identity is EXTREMELY COMPLEX. Sometimes you’re a transman who is also nonbinary and you’re a girlboy in a boygirl way and a boygirl in a girlboy way. And sometimes you’re a butch dyke who’s a tranny fag. And sometimes you’re a gay man who is also sapphic in his relationships with women. And SOMETIMES lesbians have sex with you. And that doesn’t invalidate their identities as lesbians and it doesn’t invalidate YOUR identity as a gay man. Because we’re all just people and we’re all just bodies.

No one is saying you HAVE to have sex with someone you’re not attracted to. What we’re saying is YOU are not the identity police and you have no right to throw other queer people under the bus because YOU don’t understand their identities or love/sex lives.

And if you think you are? ACAB.

[sidebaxolotl]

This community is constantly accused of internalized homophobia... but I think it actually combats it!

People who've described themselves as having internalized homophobia will say "I didn't know I could be attracted to the same sex" and that makes them try to stop being gay, try to become the opposite sex to not be gay, leave the church because they don't think they can be both gay and Christian, or just suffer in confused silence.

Meanwhile, this entire community is nothing but: "Yes! You can be/have SSA and still be a person, Christian, saved, and loved! I'm a gay Christian, over there's a gay Christian, here's a gender-dysphoric Christian and more. And we don't even need to abandon God's teachings on sexuality to accept ourselves."

Because I've found this community, I don't have to beat myself up about something I can't control. I don't have to choose between salvation and self-hatred. I don't have to twist God's words to suit me, or leave because he has no place for me. I don't have to choose between being at peace and keeping my morals.

Instead, I can take charge for what I can control, have faith in God and know that he loves me, and I can avoid committing a sin and admit if I have rather than self-flagellate (confession is such a gift fr fr)

so hek'in uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuh BLESS YOU AND THE SIDE-B COMMUNITY 💖💖💖💖💖💖💖💖💖

100% AGREE

You describe so well what I love about side b and how it kept me in the faith. Couldn't have put it better myself.

ALSO

WE LOVE U TOO FAM 💕💖👌😊

[menalez]

I think a lot of those “ex gays” that are just bi genuinely believe they are “cured” homosexuals. I’m don’t think they accept bisexuality or fluid sexuality as a thing, and instead view themselves as heterosexuals with a homosexual infliction that they have “overcome”. I’m not saying that makes it okay, but a lot of it sounds to me like they assumed attraction to the same sex meant they were gay and didn’t believe in bisexuality, and then later think that they have been “cured” because they are now in a straight relationship and able to “handle” their ssa. A lot of the time it seems gay people who have gone through conversation therapy and gone along with getting an opposite sex partner desist very quickly and can’t go through with the relationship, but the bi people who went through it can because they think their ssa is now just a symptom of an illness that flares up sometimes but actually they’re het because they can be with their partners, ignoring the possibility of bisexuality all together. I guess that’s a result of the straight = good, gay = bad worldview probably emphasised in conversation therapy. I wonder if these “ex gays” saw sexuality as a morality neutral thing, that they would just accurately identify themselves as bisexuals

a lot of homophobic bisexuals do indeed think that way. some will even acknowledge that theyre well-aware bisexuality is a thing but theyre against using terms like bisexual. they even hate the term gay, they might argue they were never actually gay either (bc theres no such thing to them) just 'lost' and in need of jesus. they prefer terms like homosexual (bc it was so medicalised and deemed a mental illness) or even better just "same sex attraction" bc to them gay or bisexual is like accepting that these things are neutral. acknowledging theyre bi would also destroy their entire goal of spreading the "i was gay but saw the light and now im straight!" propaganda. bc saying theyre bi would just make it clear that they used to act on their same sex attraction and now they think its evil so they only act on their opposite sex attraction, which is far less sensationalist than validating conversion therapy by saying its possible to stop being gay, if u want to badly enough.

and the other thing is, many of these people didnt even undergo conversion therapy! if u watch the videos i linked, many of them talk about having some magical dream or bad moment that made them stop being "gay" all while talking about how theyve always liked the opposite sex. they view their same sex attraction as a result of some kind of moral problem and their opposite sex attraction as natural and they bring this into their pro-conversion therapy rhetoric to argue homosexuals can be changed and homosexuals have this internal desire for the opposite sex as well. they are literally used as tools to further conversion therapy, corrective rape, and homophobic rhetoric. a part of it is sad bc obviously theyre rejecting a part of themselves too (their bisexuality) but i dont feel that sorry for them when they allow themselves to be tools to spread homophobia and promote conversion therapy

[eleiyaumei]

Rambling about aro, ace, aroace, demi Sesshōmaru

romantic attraction =/= sexual attraction, aromanticism =/= asexuality

For most people, their romantic identity matches their sexual identity (e.g. aroace, gay, straight, bi) but that doesn’t mean that they are the same. Alloromantic asexual people and aromantic allosexual people might be the best examples for this but it’s also possible to be heterosexual and panromantic.

As far as I know, alloromantic allosexual Sesshōmaru is the most common representation of him in fan works which makes sense because most people on the planet identify that way.

In regards to “proof” that Sesshōmaru might be one identity or another, in my judgement, there is none, neither in manga nor anime – not even in YH, which I do not include in this because for me, it is not canon. There are several instances where Sesshōmaru’s kind of feelings are ambiguous, especially in the case of Kagura, but none show explicitly that he feels romantic or sexual attraction to anyone. (If you disagree, feel free to let me know!)

So, in accordance with the “lack of proof on sexual and romantic attraction”, I interpret Sesshōmaru to be aroace. But this is influenced by me being ace and thinking in the pattern “asexual until proven allosexual”. Similarly, alloromantic allosexual people might think “allo/allo until proven otherwise” and see Sesshōmaru that way until he says something like “I am not interested in romance and/or sex” and that’s valid as well.

But 1) we can’t look inside his brain, heart or body and determine what he experiences

and 2) we as fans can headcanon him as whatever identity we like.

(I personally separate interpretation from headcanon for interpretation to mean “something that can be supported by the text” and for headcanon to mean “whatever someone imagines – whether supported by the text or not”.)

Interpreting or HCing Sesshōmaru as demisexual and/or demiromantic seems to be the best compromise for a lot of people, allo and aro-/ace-specs alike. Like, he ‘is’ asexual/aromantic until he forms a deep bond with someone and he then ‘becomes’ allo.

Demisexual/-romantic people, please tell me what you think of that wording because I’m not a fan of it. It reminds me of things allo people tell a-spec people, the whole “You just have to find the right person”, or of what supporters of Purity Culture want people to be like: Abstaining from sex, sexual thoughts, fantasies etc. until you marry and then having sex regularly to reproduce, pleasing your partner etc.

I’m also not fond of the wording of the common definition of demisexuality/-romanticism: “Experiencing sexual/romantic attraction after developing a strong emotional bond with someone” because it can make it seem like you automatically experience these attractions once you formed said bond when I don’t think that’s the case for most demi people.

I prefer the definition that I heard from a demi person (Christi Kerr), in the vein of “rarely experiencing sexual/romantic attraction and when you do, it’s towards someone you developed a strong emotional bond with”. [Source]

Demisexuality and -romanticism aren’t experienced in a monolithic way. Some might develop sexual/romantic attraction to every person they bond with emotionally, some might predict a possibility that they will develop attraction once they get close to a specific person and some might get close to people (with the hope/assumption that they’ll develop attraction) only to realize that they still don’t feel attraction towards them.

(As an asexual person who only experiences sexual attraction towards 1 fictional character, I’m pretty jealous of the first two groups. Like, “It’s THAT easy for you guys? GREAT. Wish that were me.” But I know that no experience is “easy”, people can still deal with unreciprocated feelings/attraction, fleeting attraction, and many other struggles.)

What worries me about people HCing Sesshomaru as demisexual/-romantic is the potential that some allo people only use that HC to fetishize/project their own fantasies onto the real identities of demisexuality/-romanticism. Like, they might accept the aro/ace parts only because he does experience attraction towards them/their OC(s)/the person(s) they’re shipping him with (and attraction is kinda a must-have in romance/smut works) and because it gives them a sense of relationship security, fewer reasons to get jealous towards people he’s interacting with.

But I have to be fair and acknowledge that people can separate fact from fiction and can see their fantasies as such. Though, I must admit, I’m pretty pessimistic about that since the spectrums of asexuality and aromanticism are not common knowledge and a lot of misconceptions are roaming about...

[etherealwanderings]

Sex isn't dirty and it has nothing to do with "rushing things to feed a fantasy." How don't you see that you're sounding indistinguishable from ron desantis and televangelists?

Homophobic GA members think all of Byler is creepy just because it's gay. I promise you that keeping it "pure" is not gonna make them be okay with Byler. You can keep dancing around the truth, but it doesn't change the truth: you think sex, and gay sex in particular, is creepy.

This is puritan behavior.

You post stuff like "I'm gonna protect these 2 cuties from the creeps of the fandom" without any hint of irony. That is purity culture. It's the same mindset of those who try to shield their daughters from their own sexuality or who try to tell people that the only acceptable way of having sex is in a heterosexual marriage, as if sex is something that corrodes and erases innocence. Do you hear what you're saying?

Never mind that there's an obvious thematic significance to a Byler sex scene given the 80s context, as well as emotional significance (since most of sex is psychological, and it's about exploring these character dynamics. It has nothing to do with being "creepy" or "forcing fantasies" on people TF.

The show itself has already shown Byler be sexually attracted to each other, are you denying this? Have you seen hosegate? Have you watched the show?

Another example of a show that handles queer teen sexuality perfectly is the new Chucky show. After showing them fall in love in Seasons 1 and 2, Season 3 has shown their two queer teen main characters ready to take things to the next level. And they openly communicate with each other and talk about safety/consent.

No one's saying that a byler sex scene would be some weird horny thing. It would be a display of love between two characters who have grown up together and would fit within the show's main anti-conformity character arcs and themes. It would be wholesome and tastefully done. Most Bylers would want it to be implied anyway.

It's not like Stranger Things is gonna suddenly become Euphoria or Sex Education or Riverdale.

Didn't you listen to all the minors of the Tag who are feeling uncomfortable thinking about that things? Don't u care about them ? Why do u call them puritans? Also no offense but hosegate is an interpretation lol. If you watch the show without analysing it like crazy,you wouldn't even interpret that scene that way. When I first saw that scene I saw a Will being sad and breathing loudly while looking at Mike because he is nervous. He would love to run to Mike and tell him that it's his painting and his feelings but he cannot and the fact that now he thinks that Byler has 0 chance of happening. It is giving him anxiety. Noah made the same look during the rain fight and generally starts breathing loudly when Will is nervous. If you don't look at the hose and think about a banana , hosegate becomes bs. It's not even a Byler evidence. My problem isn't about Byler sex scenes in general cause if Byler was like over 20 I wouldn't say anything, it's the fact that you are burning to get that scene. You want it so bad that it becomes creepy and when a minor feels uncomfortable because of what u are saying, you call them a puritan.It is basically child manipulation! Not everyone is ready to understand anatomy ! Not everyone likes to see 2 people having intimate moments! Not everyone agrees with minors having s.x! And it's fucking valid !