(October 30, 2023 at 11:55 am)Ahriman Wrote:(October 30, 2023 at 11:38 am)FrustratedFool Wrote: 1) But I can't see the consistency here. If the criteria is about sexual proclivity, that would eliminate transfolk. If the criteria is being outside heteronormativity that would seem to include asexual folk.
2) The limit would usually be set at (within many progressive queer communities): sincere, with some reasoning, in a way that doesn't contradict objective external reality. All social construct identities, especially gendered ones, would therefore be valid.
3) OK.
4) I think that depends on what is meant by 'normative' as opposed to just 'heteosexual'. Heteronormative often seems to include more, and is a more expansive term, than just heterosexual.
I've always been in love with things or people that don't love me back. It isn't healthy at all.
I think there's quite a difference between fictosexuality, objectum sexuality, and unreciprocated organic attractions and relationships. If you want to discuss these with me, I'd encourgae you to start a thread on the topic. I would find such a discussion fun. I'm not sure I want to derail my own thread with that particular tangent here, though.
