idk if defining more subsets of grey(a)sexuality is. even useful, for folks, because yeah the safety and comfort and accuracy of grey vagueness. i chose “grey” for a lot of reasons
but as an exercise, to counter the “grey means low frequency” and demisexual as the only subset identity (which isn’t even always considered a subset but an overlapping set)…let’s explore some possible identities that might fall under a grey umbrella:
quoisexual / wtfsexual:
- similar to how quoiromantic/wtfromantic often means romantic orientation and/or romantic attraction do not make sense for a person, instead sexual orientation and/or attraction does not make sense as a concept or an experience
- can also mean someone for whom the experience of sexual attraction is confusing, someone who cannot tell if they experience sexual attraction or if what they experience is indeed sexual attraction (except, perhaps, through extensive abstract analysis, or through abstraction of a pattern of data sets acquired only through experimentation)
- can also mean someone who disidentifies with the concept of sexual attraction altogether, as a social construct or as not applicable to themself or otherwise
- can also be used instead of “questioning,” which indicates an ongoing search for a better term; quoisexual or wtfsexual instead indicates a troubled history with sexual orientation words/identities, and perhaps a frustration with searching, or finding such a search unhelpful; instead using quoisexual/wtfsexual as a more permanent, stable, unchanging, fixed point. ((this is the one that applies to me))
semisexual: ((i’ve seen this one around, like on the Demi Grace forums, but never a proper definition? the tags also seem small and undefined. so if this contradicts previous ones, or what people who identify as semisexual use it to mean, please disregard!! but this is my understanding and what i think would be useful, albeit still broad))
- someone who may “qualify” as “technically” allosexual, but who finds asexuality and/or greyness a useful, integral, and/or relevant concept/identity, enough to warrant a word.
hyposexual: ((again, seen it around, mostly on Demi Grace, but never defined, and here is my interpretation)
- most simply, someone who feels “less” sexual, enough to warrant a word.
- perhaps someone who experiences sexual attraction with low frequency, or with low intensity, or at a level that could “technically” be allosexual but coupled with such a low sex drive and/or motivation/interest in pursuing it, that they find asexuality and/or greyness a useful, integral, and/or relevant concept/identity.
the key points for all of these are:
- enough to warrant a word ((the key to addressing the “but this describes XX% large amount of people who don’t need this word” and “isn’t that already allosexual/etc” imo))
- finds grey(a)ness and/or asexuality relevant, useful, and/or necessary to explain before explaining their sexuality
because that’s how these words work, is that they’re useful tools and they build on / modify / add to / rework current understandings
discussion!!
The last two I hadn’t heard of before but they’re great:) I wonder if they have flags? Or do I need to make one? Hehe
😀
-Fy
Beyond MOGAI Pride Flags 