View Single Post
Old 21-05-2018, 08:14 AM #133
kirklancaster's Avatar
kirklancaster kirklancaster is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 13,378


kirklancaster kirklancaster is offline
Senior Member
kirklancaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 13,378


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Toy Soldier View Post
I just think it's a huge oversimplification of heterosexual sexuality to say that it's about "liking specific genitals".

I can aesthetically appreciate the female form. I can aesthetically appreciate the male form. I (thus far I suppose??) have never been interested in a romantic or sexual relationship with a male. And my attraction to females isn't 100% reliant on stereotypical "attractive norms". Is anyone's? If someone is attracted to one brunette with a certain body type, does that mean they will DEFINITELY be attracted to a different brunette with that body type, if she has a different personality and carries herself differently?

For example, there's a reason that that old phrase "Oh you'll like him / her, they're JUST your type!" rarely works. The person who is supposed to like this other person who is their "type" nine times out of ten will be like "Meh... Nah."... Because attraction is subtle and nuanced.

Also the reason that you can be highly attracted to, say, a TV or movie character... But be left completely cold when you see the actor in an interview, if the actor is nothing like the role they're playing.

This is normal sexuality. I get the feeling that those arguing for "pansexuality" don't get that attraction to personality is a HUGE (the biggest) component in all sexualities?
A great post T.S. I agree entirely.
__________________
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but they are not entitled to their own facts". Daniel Patrick Moynihan (1927-2003)
.................................................. ..
Press The Spoiler Button to See All My Songs

kirklancaster is offline