endgaem:

not-quite-dynamite:

endgaem: not-quite-dynamite: poppypicklesticks-blog: Sapiosexual. Even stupider then demisexual. No wait: girlfags and guydykes by far. Lmfao wow, sorry sapiosexuals and demisexuals, poppypicklesticks the gate keeper of sexuality says you don’t exist. Except demisexual was quite literally made up, by a 15 year old, on a fetish forum. http://factualwiley.tumblr.com/post/46405111996 It was made as a joke, so that the creator’s character could fall in love with every other character in the story, but some the creator, (which is pretty pathetic and sad, really) started RP’ing her character outside of the forum, and began to convince people it was an actual thing, despite the fact that she herself invented it for the specific purpose of being a character attribute in some fetish forum’s story. Demisexuality is not an actual thing. Forming a relationship resulting in building attraction is how 99% of people operate. It doesn’t need “-sexuality” attached to it, that’s special snow-flakey and unnecessary. Don’t care who made it up or when it was made up - at all. 99% of sexual people don’t “form a relationship resulting in building attraction” we watch porn, we get sexually aroused by celebrities and strangers on the street; demisexuals do not.

You…you realize attraction isn’t strictly sexual, correct? You’ve heard the phrase “falling in love”, right?

People have turn-ons and turn-offs, many of which involve characteristics of the individual. I’m sure you’ve seen people say “Their attitude was a huge turn-off for me”, or something to that effect. Relationship and character can and do play a huge part in sexual attraction, for the majority of people-does that mean most people are “demisexual”?

“Don’t care who made it up or where it was made up-at all.”

So I’m going to go ahead and guess that you didn’t read the link I provided, since you clearly “don’t care” for factual evidence or otherwise. You don’t care it was made up? You know this makes you look exceedingly ignorant and stubborn?

How can you “not care” where it originated when that is a crucial point in the debate? Is that how you argue?

“The sky is blue.”

“No, it’s red.”

*shows evidence the sky is blue*

“Don’t care, it’s still red.”

That’s exactly how you sound, and if you cannot see how absurd that is, then I don’t think anyone can help the kind of willful ignorance you have.