muggiwhplar

That doesn't really make sense though. If someone's "attracted to 12 year old girls" then by definition they desire 12 year olds... which consequently makes them a pedophile :P If they have no intention or desire to ever have sex with a 12 year old or watch child porn, then they're not a pedophile. Like I said earlier, though, being a pedophile would just be a subcategory of one of the 4 primary orientations.

This discussion reminds me of... [hide=NSFW Language] [/hide] Skip to 0:50 :lol:

You'd either be straight or a lesbian depending on your gender. I don't see how someone can have no gender yet be attracted to a specific gender. What do they think about when they masturbate? How do they have sex? That'll give you your answer. If they do neither, then they're asexual. If she's sexually attracted to males and females, she can call herself a lesbian all she wants but she's still bisexual. Like I said before, though, if she's never actually had sex with a guy, never plans to have sex with a guy, and doesn't even masturbate to guys, then yeah she's a lesbian... and she also cannot claim to be sexually attracted to males.

You're gonna have to elaborate on that then

I disagree, I think it's completely objective. Everybody fits into one of the following categories: -likes only their own sex -likes only the opposite sex -likes both sexes -likes neither Sure nobody likes being defined by others, but that doesn't make the objective criteria any less applicable to them. It just means they're uncomfortable with whatever category they belong in.

I guess what I'm arguing is, the only "real" sexual orientations are straight, gay, bisexual, and asexual since those four are all mutually exclusive and anyone can fit into any of those categories. Anything else should be taken with a grain of salt because they're too vague to have any real meaning. If someone wants to claim to be a semisexual, that's cool but it's not its own category. It's just a subcategory of one of the aforementioned four categories.

If they don't masturbate and have no desire to masturbate then yes they are asexual.

I'm saying you should take both things into account, however "attraction" on its own without any experience/evidence is meaningless. And like I said in an earlier post, certain orientations are vague and ambiguous enough that anyone can claim to be that way, which makes having such orientations sort of pointless

If she's only ever dated women, and only ever wanted to date women, then I don't see how she could be considered bisexual in any way. Unless she masturbates to guys all the time or something. If she's genuinely attracted to both men and women (and masturbates to both genders, for example), and would have sex with either gender without hesitation, then sure she's bi. No, they're a serial monogamist. Their goal can be to become polyamorous, but they aren't polyamorous until they're dating multiple people. Just like my friends who are in "monogamous" relationships but sometimes cheat can call themselves "monogamous," but they aren't actually monogamous because they're cheating. They're polyamorous whether they want to admit it or not. Don't you think this sounds a bit silly? Guy: I'm polyamorous Girl: Oh really? That's awesome, how many people are you seeing right now? Guy: One. Girl: wat

That's because you're mixing sexual attraction/orientation with sexual activities. You can definitely sleep exclusively with men and still be heterosexual if you're attracted exclusively to women, because the definition covers attraction (Not to say that people wouldn't wonder why, but hey, it's your business). You can have sex with your partner and still call yourself asexual because you're not sexually attracted to anyone. You can be celibate and still call yourself bisexual because you're attracted to men and women. Hell, you could call yourself bisexual when you've only had relationships with one of the sexes, or even just one person. The list goes on. I mean, sexuality is a spectrum (that goes back to the Kinsey scale). Of course things are going to get messy when you try to apply labels to each individual part of it. But that's just silly. That's like calling myself a mathematician when I went to school for psychology lol If we define things that way, then you can claim to be something simply because it interests or appeals to you, even though you have little-to-no actual experience with the subject at hand. It's like being a hot girl whose only video game history is with Candy Crush, but she proudly describes herself as a nerd lol

I think there's a line to be drawn at some point though. With homosexuality and heterosexuality you can objectively define your preferences, whereas with these other obscure, vague new terms it's all entirely subjective... which kind of defeats the purpose of trying to categorize it. You could claim to be demisexual and justify any of your sexual activities by saying "yeah I personally felt an emotional connection there." You could be "semisexual" (lol) and justify any sexual activity by saying "yeah I personally found them to be physically attractive" (even if they're hideous to 99% of the population). But you can't sleep exclusively with men while avoiding women and then go on to claim that you're heterosexual.

Ok then I'm now identifying as a "semi-sexual." That means I can only be attracted to really really ridiculously good looking people. A girl can have the most amazing personality in the world but if she's fat or ugly then I'm not interested. Fair enough? :P

I'm not sure if I believe that demisexuality is a real thing. If it is then that would mean as a man, I could have a beautiful woman standing in front of me and I wouldn't feel ANYTHING because I didn't know her. Basically the ONLY way to get aroused would be to fantasize about someone whom I'm emotionally invested in, because I'd theoretically have no emotional investment in porn stars or anything like that. And when you think about it that way it almost sounds like a sexual disorder lol

same. looks like it's just the same thing as bisexual lol

you mean A Local Girl :D

Click on the link in Arceus' post. It shows where they are located

I watched that with my brother last night on Netflix. I liked it until the film started pushing an agenda and twisting the facts around, at which point I started losing interest in it. It bothered me how they implied that the girls were forced to do certain things, when in reality they volunteered for it :| There were still some notable amusing moments though such as: - the girl who somehow couldn't figure out why the Duke girl was getting more attention than her - that one girl's chump boyfriend (and the purity rings LOL)

If you can think of something you both talked about, text them about that. Otherwise a simple "hey what's up" is fine (but boring). If she's already interested it doesn't really matter. Just make sure you pitch the meet right away and don't get sucked into a big conversation

From a psych perspective, feeling like we're getting closer to crossing things off our bucket list makes us happier than actually crossing things off. That's why when you complete a goal, you can't just be happy and content for the rest of your life. You've always got to keep coming up with challenges to conquer

What do you mean

Yea dream theater owes me some commission on all the free advertising i gave em :D

Now they have the opportunity to experience the pain and suffering of marriage just like eveybody else :lol:

Since (I'm assuming) you still have some overall confidence/carefreeness issues around women, I would sign up for OKCupid membership, Match.com membership, and use POF for free. Then I would do one massive dating blitz on the first Sunday of every month. That way you schedule all your dates at once and so it'll make you a lot more relaxed from all the abundance that week. This is opposed to simply trying to schedule dates one at a time whenever you feel like it. You'll be a lot more comfortable with taking risks when you literally have 5 more dates on the calendar that week with girls blowing up your phone for logistics instead of just having one date all week. Also like I said it's harder to get dates in the summer, so doing a big blitz will make it a bit more tolerable

This might belong in the questionnaires subforum. I'm surprised the majority said 2015. I have a feeling that "new" players skewed the results there since AFAIK most veterans usually say their favorite years were 2006 and 2010

It's not unreasonable but it is unrealistic :P