WalrusDragonOnABike [they/them]

  • 0 Posts
  • 62 Comments
Joined 6 months ago
cake
Cake day: December 31st, 2023

help-circle





  • The US government provides weapons for the genocide.

    One of the main campuses in the protests is opening a campus in Israel, which students are opposing until Israel ends genocide and apartheid.

    Many of the campuses donate money to or have partnerships with candidates and organizations that are also complicit in the genocide.

    Of course Israel isn’t going to stop genocide because a bunch of college students in the US don’t like it. But that doesn’t mean students have to sit idly as their tuition dollars go to fund genocide.


  • When I was making that kind of money, I still saved way more than 5%. Granted, after inflation, it is like $11.50 now. Still, 10% would have been pretty easy. 20% would be possible if I didn’t blow money on things like spend $3K on a bike for hobby use. Also, that’s assuming you don’t have unexpected expenses. I lived somewhere where having a car wasn’t necessary, so that made a huge different in budgeting. And when I needed surgery, I was lucky with insurance. Otherwise, that could have easily have eaten up the savings I had.

    So 15% is definitely possible… with lots of luck and good circumstances.






  • Demisexuality is under the asexuality umbrella, so it should seem relatable.

    If you do experience sexual attraction towards those you are close to then that would be demi. If you want to have sex despite lack of sexual attraction, then that would be black-stripe ace.

    The food analogy is the comparison I’ve seen people use to explain what sexual attraction is. Hunger is like libido and has little to nothing to do with sexual attraction. Sexual attraction would be like when someone brings out a fresh cake and you need to have a piece even if you just ate and are not hungry. I guess demi in this analogy would mean you wouldn’t feel that way unless you already knew that specific dessert well. But if you just eat tasty desserts when you are bored, because you like the taste but don’t have the mouthwatering reaction to it being presented, because the person who made it is important to you and you feel eating it’s a way to bond with them, etc, you could still be a black-stripe ace.

    That said, what counts as sexual attraction has confused me a lot despite spending a fair bit of time reading people trying to explain it.

    Anyways, if demi is a functionally useful label, there no need to change. In-practice real-world usefulness of language is more important than weirdos on the Internet trying to be precise in the meanings of words.



  • This is like saying “yes, gay men can still have sex with women, as long as they’re not attracted to them. They’re still gay! It’s only a name!”

    But that’s true. Straight men can and do have sex with men and that should be accepted as normal. Etc. Nothing wrong with that. What would be a problem is if people were to try to pressure people into having sex outside their sexual orientation. Because its wrong to pressure people into having sex. Doesn’t matter their orientation. But you seem to be suggestion that its okay, as long as aces get left out.

    It’s an awful precedent. The amount of times I’ve been asked if I’m “one of those asexuals who have sex” is gross.

    Some people don’t have boundaries and don’t know basic sexual etiquette. Acknowledging diversity exist no more justifies asking aces you barely know than it justifies asking trans people about their genitals. And yet, somehow people seem to somehow just forget basic etiquette when they meet queer people. As if our existence is either inherently sexual, so simply existing means we started the sexual conversation in their mind (even when we’re aces somehow) or we’re subhuman and don’t desire basic courtesy/privacy. That said, some guys are really just that direct with each other and think its normal.

    But there’s no such thing as “grey asexual”. That’s greysexual. It’s a separate thing.

    Asexuality is used both a specific label and an umbrella term that includes both.

    “Asexual” becoming “inclusive” to almost everything muddies the waters. I am against not being able to use the label to distinguish clear what I identify as anymore. It’s frustrating as hell.

    Sounds about as valid as transmeds/truscum being upset that NBies and people who want something slightly different than them are under the same umbrella of “trans” and that they would need to use “binary” to qualify more specifically what they want to communicate.






  • Sexualities generally refer to sexual attraction. Homosexuals are sexually attracted to people have the same gender, not to repeating the same sex acts over and over and heterosexuality is about attraction to people with different genders, not to novelty sex acts. Pansexual does not mean attraction to pans not to literally everyone or everything. Taking the words too literally is not really useful.

    The differentiation of the ace/allo axis and the sex-favorable/sex-repulsed axis is particularly useful for aces, but it still has its use for allos as well (some people who have PTSD related to sexual activity may be sex repulsed, but can still experience sexual attraction). Lots of reasons to engage in and enjoy sex other than attraction to a specific person. Even allos often engage in sex with those whom they aren’t attracted to.

    The major ace subreddits regularly had issues with sex-favorable people complaining about all the posts being sex-negative and sex-repulsed people (sometime simultaneously) complaining about too much sex-positive content. Would be more amusing if those types of posts didn’t waste so much space…