Romy

Moving to H&A. ~Romy

Sounds interesting... :-k

I concur.

Something that always intrigued me, is that (other) animals will always try to keep their head above the water line. They just will, even when there's no hope. Us humans just are not the same. I guess it requires a certain level of intelligence to go about and kill yourself. I also find it amazing that so many people fight suicide with phrases like "The right to live", when it's [bleep]ing illegal in many countries. Looking back, I know I was suicidal once. I didn't realize that back then, but I just was. Today I love living and love my life, that's just incrdible, unbelievable... :unsure:

^ Yeah, that's old news. :XD:

And it's all thanks to Peter, that guy that does magic with tech. <3: Woo, lots of new shiny TIF stuff! :thumbsup:

^ They can, there're varying degrees of asexuality.

5/10 Silver summed it up... :unsure:

I'm not the one making these definitions, flawed or not. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asexuality http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_orientation

"The desire for sex, but to not act on it." "The lack of desire for sex." Yeah, seems to be contradictory definitions with this term. The fact that the definitions contradict each other means nothing about it, really. "Asexuality" simply has more than one definition. The difference is, that asexuals that decide not to act on their desires (usually for religous reasons), aren't like gays that repress their desires out of fear, denial, etc. Asexuality by that definition is simply choosing not to have sex as a result of a... point of view. Oops sorry then. Well, at least that's more reading material for TIF. I'll re-reply since I love semantics. I think if there is a hint of liking both genders whatsoever (Even the tiniest bit!), then you've crossed onto the threshold of bisexuality. The word "heterosexual" loses purpose if that can also be used to describe men who sometimes have thoughts about other men. You could argue that one bisexual man is more straight than another, but neither of them are straight. Just like you could say one wavy line is more straight than another, but neither of them are actually straight. Yeah, coincidentally that was the best analogy I could come up with, heh. Again, it's all about semantics. You define any person with a hint of attraction to both sexes as bisexual. The accepted definition is still just "gay"/"straight".

3/10 I mean, c'mon. I have a new avatar, so I might as well get graded. :grin:

I usually just point out that it's an awkward moment with a bit of enthusiasm, smile and laugh. Not the kind of awkward laughter that makes things worse, the kind that after a second already makes me and the other side more comfortable. It breaks down tension and eliminates the moment altogether. Kind of hard for me to explain this, I just did it once, a long time ago, when I was with a group of people who were strangers to each other and awkward silence was born. People laughed almost immediately and the whole mood was more playful to everyone. I've been using it ever since. Not sure if I got the message through, but meh...

Asexuals CAN and sometimes DO act on their desires, they just don't normally do. Well, it depends, asexuality currently has more than 1 definition, I only used the one that fit my theory. It was all directed to your first two paragraphs. I'm not really sure where I stand when it comes to pansexuals and polysexuals, other than that I think if it makes anyone feel better about themselves, I don't have a problem with it. But I thought all sexualities must be acted on, as it would be terribly unnatural for people to practice any restraint whatsoever? Asexuality, by the definition I used, is not restraint, it's the lack of a desire to act on their (possibly existing, possibly not existing) sexuality. Other forms of asexuality can be to choose not to act on their sexuality, etc, in which case they obviously do have a sexual orientation, that is simply not brought to actions. Wikipedia really puts it better than I could: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asexuality

^ But, asexuals for example, many times really and actually have a sexual orientation, that just is not strong enough to "act on". In other words, their desires do not exceed their willingness (or lack thereof) to act. That, in a way, fits what I mentioned above (of a straight, that could partially, and to a very low degree, be "attracted" (for the lack of a better word) to the same sex, but not enough to actually be anything other than straight.) I could be right, and this could also just be my way of explaining things. In the end, it's all semantics.

Couldn't agree more with the two above me. So very annoying...