I have a question that I'd very much appreciate your input on. However, ever since I can remember, I've always jokingly called myself a prude. Ideally, I knew I would like to have sex with only one person in my entire life and that person would be my soulmate. Is this naive of me? But it is what it is. Keep in mind that I'm an athiest.
Anyway, a few days ago I came across the term 'demisexual' on the internet and immediately it clicked. This term fits me much better than just 'homosexual. Do morals play a role? Within the past 72 hours, I've become aware of the fact that I have never actually been sexually attracted to somebody. I've definitely been attracted to guys before, but it's never been oriented around sex whatsoever.
When I think about the person I want to be with, sex is not even a part of the picture for me. That's not what it's about at all. I've never even masturbated before. I have no desire to do that either. Relationships, for me, are all about the emotional and romantic connection. So there I was, thinking I had finally found the label for me. The reason I think this is due to a couple of things. If you use sex as an expression of romantic or emotional attraction love rather than because you are driven to do so by a sex drive, then that need not contradict an asexual identity.
I have no sex drive or desire. But I can see myself possibly having sex with the person I love for the above quoted reason. So basically what it comes down to is: Or is this indeed demisexuality? Because although in this situation, I am - in a way - wanting to have sex, it's not coming from a sexual place.
It's being used as an extension of love. Then I came across this excerpt from Rabger's original post he was giving examples of contingent sexual attraction that made me further believe that I was actually asexual: After developing a friendship, a romantic attraction develops and with it the desire to be physically close. This then develops into contingent sexual attraction, as sexual activity is used to express emotion.
If the relationship comes to an end, and the romantic attraction fades, the contingent sexual attraction will end as well as all sexual desire.
So according to this example, I would be homo-asexual. But what I'm confused about is Or could it be considered both? My hypothesis is that at the time of Rabger's original post, the term 'demisexuality' didn't exist. So back then, people who are what we now refer to as demisexual identified themselves as asexual. And although the above example is uncommon among asexuals, as Rabger mentioned, that's pretty much irrelevant. If I'm wrong here, pleasepleaseplease correct me.
Now I'm the first to admit that labels are NOT this important. I could easily just identify as gray-a and move on. However, I'm very curious as to where I lie exactly. Before coming across these couple of things I thought for sure that I was demisexual, because I could see myself potentially having sex with somebody.
But I'd be doing so for reasons different than those of sexuals. So what do you all think: