The term is also used by some who consider themselves asexual and only feel emotional attraction to describe the gender or genders they are romantically attracted to. The terms used for different affectional orientations are typically the same as those which are used for sexual orientations: homosexual, bisexual or heterosexual (though actually "homoromantic", "biromantic" and "heteroromantic" are not unknown, if uncommon).
Lately, the aforementioned terms are considered to reduce a whole category of desires and emotions, power and connection, to sex.
There are also those who hold the view that their orientation is defined by whom one has affection towards and that their sexual attraction is based on affection for another human being's personal qualities rather than their gender or appearance, sex and gender playing no part in the attraction. This does not necessarily require either person to fall in love but is still based on a personal affection.
One might now consider the phrase, "conditional sexual attraction" for asexuals, as opposed to "primary sexual attraction" used by all "sexual" people, though not all would agree with this terminology, as some asexuals may be attracted to physical characteristics as well as or instead of non physical ones.

I thought the various definitions were great. According to me, I am strictly a 100% homoromantic/homoemotional only, of course. For me, these two (2) "newly discovered" terminologies are totally synonymous to Romantic Friendship too. I am not sexually attracted to women (don't want to nor care to engage in sex/lust or erotica activities with them); but I am very much physically attracted to them (as in wanting to be physically close to her, all the cuddling, kissing, constant nonsexual intimate touching; etc). What I am attracted to (specifically) is their soft skin, silky hair, smooth hands, gentle arms, pretty face, and nice lips. I don't care for "sexy boobs", "big butts", and "wet vaginas" never cross my mind (when I look at ladies). So, how can I be sexually attracted to them?? That's ridiculous. I am physically attracted to them; NOT SEXUALLY attracted. There is a particular distinction between the two terms. If anything, my so-called "sexual attraction" towards women are based on their inner qualities, personalities and characteristic traits (physical and also emotional aspects). FYI, I prefer feminine looks with a light touch of butchness in them **winks**
Anyway, if I were sexually attracted to chicks (for real), I would have pics of naked females all over my room (or at least naked pictures of them secretly hidden under my bed). But, this is NOT THE CASE. For some reason, I only seem to want to put up photos of fully-clothed and normal looking pretty women (hanging on my wall); mostly showing their faces and upper torsos. Among the posters I have (in my own bedroom) are of Allison Mack, Amy Jo Johnson, Sally Field, Sandra Bullock, Mariska Hargitay, Helen Hunt, Caroline Rhea, Carrie Fisher, Sasha Cohen, Dana Torres, Diane Lane, Deanne Bray, Demi Moore, Donna, Gillian Anderson, Patty Duke, Anne Bancroft, Leelee Sobieski, Glenn Close, Amanda Laura Bynes, Mary Stuart Masterson, Jamie Lee Curtis, Julia Louis-Dreyfus, Lucy Lawless and Renee O'Connor (duh, of course). My collection of pretty ladies will not be complete without these two gals. And yes, I do have romantic crushes on all 25 of them (to varying degrees).
I mean, having pretty shapes/figures are nice to look at. And I DO look at them (sometimes even stare). I'm not shy to admit this. There is nothing wrong with admiring; to gaze and wonder at the overall beauty of the female body. It is a work of art, indeed!

0 comments:
Post a Comment