hi /lgbt/ please help me with identifying my sexuality im a

>>8346120
You know users on this site (and board) love to accuse people of making up labels to describe inconsequential differences just because they want to feel unique, and then I see threads like this all the time where people get really anxious and frustrated that they don't feel described by the terms they already know and would be so relieved to feel like they fit into some kind of consistent category and they aren't the only one like them

File: snowflake1.jpg (2MB, 1632x1360px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1632x1360px

Trying to describe yourself by a unique label for such a niche sexuality makes you a gigantic faggot, there is no point to absurdly specific labels, labels are supposed to be a shortcut and they fail to be that when you get absurdly specific.

I'm attracted to M, F, FF, MF, MMF, MFF, and am autoandrophiliac, but MM specifically turns me off. I sometimes look at solo male, female POV, SG4GE, for women straight porn, which you think would mean I was bi, except that I am totally and utterly uninterested in homosex. At the end of the day I just call myself straight because I'm only going to be interested in dating a woman. Does that fully encompass my sexuality? No, but it gives people all the information they really need to know, I'm straight, I want to date women, I don't want to date men.

Straight, Bi, Gay, and Asexual are popular labels for a reason, and really, you can get by without "asexual". 99.9% of the population are cis, and that literally covers who you are willing to date within 99.9% of the population, and everybody understands what the fuck those labels mean. If you call yourself by some faggy SJW made up sexuality label I will look at other way when a neo-nazi curbstomps you. Just say you are straight or bi and drop the SJW pretentiousness.

>sometimes i have gay fantasies but i get over them quickly

So do most men.

>i fap exclusively to 2d males

That's TMI, you don't need to tell other people that, just say you're bi or straight unless you want to refer to yourself as a weeaboosexual.

File: 1490698476377.gif (951KB, 500x384px) Image search: [Google]

951KB, 500x384px

>>8346233
alright thanks doc.

>>8346149
"Straight, Gay, Bi, and Asexual" are four labels which pretty accurately reflect who you're available to date 99.9% of the time with trans and intersex being edge cases not covered. Yes, people that fit into one label can be very different than people falling into the same label, and sexuality is more diverse than its cracked up to be, but simple broad labels are useful.

Language is supposed to be about helping people communicate. If OP is asked by a friend "Well what kind of relationship are you looking for and says "I'm straight, but I'm more interested in a romantic than sexual relationship" that is good communication. If he says "I'm bi, I'm more interested in a sexual relationship with a guy, and a romantic relationship with a woman" that is good communication. If he uses SJW jargon like "Well, I'm a heteroromantic, homosexual, Gray-A" nobody but neon-haired tumblr users are going to understand what the fuck they just said.

I find it amazing the far left types that push these words never have it dawn on them that using long ass words that describes incredibly small fragments of the population also makes it harder for kids, ESL, and the intellectually impaired to communicate. Average American reads at a 7th-8th grade level.

>>8346307
I can't help but notice that you felt you had to give my position a lot more credit than the average snowflake-hater.
Just by acknowledging that "asexual" and even "bisexual" are real orientations, that the distinction between romantic and sexual attraction is worth talking about (if not with arcane neologisms) and that some people really don't fit into the four common categories you named, if only a tiny fraction of the population.
And your problem with developing the language of sexuality is pretty short sighted, which is just that they're too complicated for most people to understand. But it's not like new ideas about gender and sexuality can't eventually be understood by mainstream just because it takes longer.
Lots of regular people still don't know what "transgender" means, and are deeply skeptical that it's something a person can actually be, but do you think it's not a distinct concept that deserves its own word just because sometimes you have to explain it to some people?
And even if these words couldn't be useful outside of a niche culture, what's the harm in a subculture that only a few people would ever need to belong to having its own vocabulary?
The trans community has lots of slang that would befuddle cishet people but its utility is to help us to understand each other, not to educate outsiders.

>>8346120
You need to be 18+ to browse 4chan.

>>8346120
Go to a gym locker room. Notice the smell of the man sweat. Think about fapping. Are you aroused? If so, you are attracted to men.
Buy some girls sweaty juicy panties off the internet. Put them over your face and deep inhale. Now touch your dick. Are you aroused? If so, you are attracted to women.
Real life relationships are heavily based on pheremones, and this experiment can test your physical attraction to real-life people, although it isn't perfect. You might simply not be attracted to those you are smelling, but more likely you will get a real answer.

>>8346389
Some of the jargon is good. "cis-" is useful although only in certain contexts. I believe there needs to be better language around describing openness to relationships with intersex/trans and most of the language is bad. Some language is intentional in-jokes like "hon". I think vocabulary which describes very little of the population, will be picked up by very little people, so you want to keep it simple.

In regards to OP talking about the difference between romantic/sexual, straight cis people have never had a problem expressing those preferences without neologisms, and consider sharing your porn preferences TMI. Given OP seems largely interested in a heterosexual relationship with somebody not very sexual, I would advise him to avoid jargon, as that will likely hurt his chances of getting into the relationship he wants more than help.

My problem with the jargon in that it makes it harder for most people to understand you, isolates you a bit, alienates others, and the language is becoming central to fights that are hurting LGBT acceptance, and OP will get dragged into that mess if he uses tumblr sexual identities to describe himself.

I know blue collar Trump supporting folk, they fucking hate the goddamned huge ass lists of gender identities and sexualities and such, and the perception certain words are being shoved down their throat, in some cases with threats of social ostracization or legal penalty. It is a lightning rod for their hatred, they just love "I sexually identify as an attack helicopter" and "My gender is slugkind" jokes. There are people trying to push awkward shit the mainstream will never remember, like lists of pronouns which apply to 0.01% of the population, instead of telling people to do stuff like use singular they as a catchall gender-neutral pronoun. It's creating conflict where none needs to be, and actually hurting LGBT acceptance, as well as understanding of LGBT people, and LGBT people, for no good reason.

>>8346681
Short sighted is still what I would call this. It's not this kind of appeasement to hatred that created an "acceptable" kind of LGBT people, it was a refusal to compromise. Besides, you're not giving plain folks enough credit. They're not so impossible to reach that we might as well accept that they will always hate us.
We really have changed more minds and opened more hearts. Support for gay marriage went from the ultimate electoral liability to something most people have accepted in how many years?

>>8346780
>It's not this kind of appeasement to hatred that created an "acceptable" kind of LGBT people, it was a refusal to compromise.
Shame this attitude has all but disappeared with LGB obsession with heteronormative marriage and T obsession with passing and stealth.

>>8346786
I don't think there are fewer radicals, they've just been outnumbered by fairweather allies. I trust the people who care about these issues when they're inconvenient to keep making a difference.

>>8346120
find an asexual gf and keep fapping to 2d boys

>>8346498
Underrated post.

>>8346120

You're biromantic.

>>8346120
I feel you so much bro

>>8346307
to be fair, straight probably is already more than 90%

>>8346120
>using the split-attraction model
you're bisexual, fuck off

>>8351452
What's wrong with describing yourself as being split-attracted?

>>8351469
the terms "homosexual" "heterosexual" "bisexual" etc refer to a person's attraction based on biological sex.

a person who wants to date the same sex exclusively but not have sex with them is still homosexual (ie gay) because they're attracted to the same sex, not because they want to fuck them.

saying "heteromantic and homosexual" and shit like that needlessly sexualizes the terms when they refer to any type of attraction, just based on bio sex.

bonus: saying you're attracted to the same sex but don't want to date them sounds like what a deeply closeted or traumatized person would say.

>>8351847
>is still homosexual (ie gay) because they're attracted to the same sex
I'm more attracted to the opposite sex though.

>>8346120
Hey, me too. That is all

>>8346120
>i fap exclusively to 2d males

you're just a fucking loser

>>8351947
i was using that as an example