Dear community and everyone:

jemimaaslana:

soultired:

metapianycist:

soultired:

thekrisblade:

freibiergesicht:

metapianycist:

Please stop saying “physical attraction” as if it’s a synonym for sexual attraction. Asexual people who experience sensual attraction are experiencing an attraction that is literally physical. Asexuality is about not experiencing sexual attraction, not about not experiencing physical attraction, although sexual attraction might be in the category of physical attractions.

Tagged: asexuals, if i separate my attraction into enough subcategories maybe i can pretend it doesn’t exist, I define the meaning of words now! Do not defy me!, words mean things, split those hairs finer! finer!, i will do all the mental gymnastics necessary to stay a part of this subculture.

Reblogging for watchful-entity’s amazingly accurate tags

@___________@ 

this is where language goes to die and is reborn as a beautiful asexual phoenix

That first thing makes “physical attraction” sound like some kind of magnetic thing.  (Fucking asexuals, how do they work?)

Physical attraction has been a euphemism for sexual attraction for forever, though. 

Thinking that we need euphemisms for sex, sexual relationships and sexual attraction sounds a tad slut-shaming to me. And clearly, desiring precision (and less slut-shaming) in language is the most absolutely outrageous & ridiculous request.

- the OP

We have euphemisms for everything, though.  It doesn’t imply shame.  Plus there are some situations where using the word sexual is ill advised. 

Wrong. Euphemisms for having fun indeed have nothing to do with shame. But euphemisms for sex and all things sexual are indeed caused by shame and centuries of “can’t mention such things in polite company”. That same thing goes for any and all euphemisms we have for bodily functions, be they eating, defecating, dying or procreating. Many, if not most, of the euphemisms we have for those things arose during times of incredibly strong Cristian influence on western societies. If you look at pre-Christian stuff from Northern Europe it’s very frivolous and open about all of the above things, if you look at post-Christian Northern Europe you’ll find all written sources full of euphemisms, but all of the oral narratives such as ballads full of unashamed mentions of all things related to life and the body. Not until Christian morals was efficiently stomped into the minds of the working classes to the degree of nearly completely eradicating the balladic tradition (speaking specifically of Denmark here - thank you Grundtvig - not!) did every mention of sex and the body’s other function come in the shape of euphemisms.

/linguist’s ramble

So yes, it implies shame. A whole truckload of it.

Sexual is the clinical and correct term for a lot of things. If that is the wrong word to use in some situations it is because people in those situations believe that all things sexual are shameful and taboo. And *that* would be thanks to the Christian Western world’s view that all things sexual are shameful and should never be mentioned in “polite company”.

source: metapianycist
asexuality language Christianity
  1. freibiergesicht reblogged this from metapianycist and added:
    oh i’m sorry, my non-legitimate criticism that i specifically brought up specifically in response to you was that...
  2. desliz reblogged this from freibiergesicht and added:
    it took me a moment to realize that said “fucks” and not “fucus”, because for all I know maybe a fucu is what happens...
  3. oysterbunnies reblogged this from metapianycist
  4. galesofnovember reblogged this from freibiergesicht and added:
    Shouldn’t the bolded be a clue that these discreet categories of attraction are, in fact, total bullshit created by...
  5. my-slightly-awkward reblogged this from metapianycist and added:
    Really, nice non sequitur there. I was responding to your...is not ” an irrelevant, often...
  6. vebbon reblogged this from freibiergesicht and added:
    The character’s pinkies look like thumbs, otherwise I’d say it’s a cute doodle. Sincere apologies for previous possible...
  7. mellopetitone reblogged this from goldenheartedrose
  8. waverindarkness reblogged this from metapianycist and added:
    SCREAMS FLAPS omg metapianycist you are magical because I think I have the words to describe my experiences with...
  9. equalseleventhirds reblogged this from greenchestnuts and added:
    lol “smart people” do you have any idea what my IQ is and I firmly believe there are at least six types of attraction...
  10. octobur-morte reblogged this from metapianycist and added:
    WHY IS THIS SO DIFFICULT TO UNDERSTAND. You know what, I’m going to have a conversation about all this crap with Ian,...
  11. goldenheartedrose reblogged this from metapianycist and added:
    Love this commentary; totally spot-on. Language means something and is a part of how we relate to the world. Doesn’t...
  12. sherlockcat reblogged this from greenchestnuts
  13. greenchestnuts reblogged this from metapianycist
  14. backhooks reblogged this from freibiergesicht and added:
    days ago that although I was skeptical, I was willing to be convinced that sexual attraction was an actual thing? I...
  15. lillezzie reblogged this from galesofnovember and added:
    trying not to be a hater, but I really don’t get how they’re different. What I’m hearing from some asexuals is that...
  16. apple-beveragesaur reblogged this from dysperdis and added:
    what are you talking about, dictionaries are infallible; it says so right in this dictionary
  17. raumlet reblogged this from voltafiish and added:
    I like how they made us make a word for people who experience sexual attraction as a group, and then turned right around...
  18. vesivett reblogged this from jemimaaslana
  19. nominus-expers reblogged this from metapianycist
  20. metapianycist posted this