#micro-labels

Yeah totally it’s common for bi people’s attraction to fluctuate. If you want even more specificity there’s a micro-label called abrosexual that is defined as the “genderfluid of sexualities” aka the attraction label would fluctuate. It exists under the bi umbrella though so go with whichever you prefer and not everybody likes micro-labels for themselves.

I’m coining another queer thing.

Irrexian (“ear-EHX-ee-in”): an adjective to be used by mspecs whose attraction completely disregards gender

> Only applicable to mspecs (biromantics, pansexuals, etc), obviously > Not applicable to all mspecs > Can be used for any kind of attraction > Derived from “irrespective,” which means “regardless” > Noun version: irrix (“EAR-ihx”)

It’s meant to replace “genderblind” because (1) it’s ableist and (2) it implies that you don’t see gender, which is plain wrong. “Irrexian,” however, is specific to attraction for those whose attraction, like my own, gives no shits about gender! An irrexian person could be attracted to women, men, and nonbins because gender doesn’t affect their chance of attraction to a person.

It’s worth noting that pan people can have preferences, despite the common definition being “attracted to anyone regardless of their gender”. This term helps to differentiate between mspecs with preferences and mspecs with no preferences.

Examples of use:

~ I’m an irrexian bisexual. ~ Xe is a panromantic irrix. ~ I don’t know what label I should use... all I know is that I’m irrexian!

Below is the flag!

Mind giving this a reblog to give my term some traction?

@uncommongenders @beyond-mogai-pride-flags @i-love-my-trans-body @mogaibun @mogaicore @gendertech @leptrois @mspecs-for-solidarity

They're respectively lesbians and gays who prefer sensual things (like cuddling and kissing) over sexual things, if they like sexual things at all. Here are their respective flags (respectively by @wuvsbian and this person):

I was interested! Thus, I decided to coin a nonbinary equivalent called...

Ronnbinary!

Basically, it's an adjective that refers to a nonbinary ACESPEC who prefers sensuality to sexuality! You'd say, "I am Ronnbinary," or "that is a Ronnbinary person." The noun version is Ronnby! Generally, it would accompany another sexuality label (like "Ronnbinary pan", for example), but it doesn't have to! It can also accompany another gender label (for example, if I'm Ronnbinary, I would say that I'm a Ronnbinary maverique).

Why that word? Where'd I get it from? It's a combination of Ronno + nonbinary! The other named fawn besides Bambi and Faline in the movies is called Ronno (Faline gay comes from Faline, the love interest of Bambi and Ronno). He's the second movie's main antagonist by being a dick to Bambi and trying to steal his girl. Here are Bambi, Faline, and Ronno:

Anyway, I figured I ought to make a new flag to accompany my new term! Below is the Ronnbinary flag I whipped up, which uses the colors from Ronno's palette!

Maybe reblog to give my word and flag some recognition? :>c

(I did kinda, sorta, half-promise to do this a bit ago. I was planning on doing this in time for Asexual Awareness Week. But there was too much to unpack).

Note: I didn’t even know any of theses orientations existed until I was 52 years old, six years ago. This here unpacking is all about me looking back over my life, and saying: “Oh!” very quietly to myself. Included are sample example experiences from my life that have led me to believe these labels fit, with the finer details sanded off.

Aromantic & Apothiromantic: Not feeling romantic attraction, & Repulsed by the idea anyone else being romantically attracted to me.

 I might have ended up romantic neutral (or even demiromantic)  if it weren’t for one particular summer camp session where I was romantically harassed by a boy in the cabin next to mine. I was 12, he was 13. And he would not leave me alone. All the camp counselors thought it was cute.

Until the last day of the session when I finally agreed to kiss him. I went in for a peck. He went in for a French kiss. I slapped him as hard as I could (pretty hard).

This experience did not “make” me aromantic, but I think it is the reason I have the urge to “nope” out at the first hint of romantic overtures (think Roadrunner in a Chuck Jones cartoon).

I’m not repulsed by the idea of anyone else in a romantic relationship, though. If it makes you happy, I’m happy for you.

Aegosexual: Enjoying sexual fantasy & daydreams with imaginary people, while leaving yourself out of the action (the double prefix “a” and “ego” means “Without self”).

I think this is the biggest single reason it took me so long to realize I wasn’t actually straight. I grew up in a culture that told me, as a visibly physically disabled person, imaginary sex was always going to be my only option. So I never stopped to consider that it was actually preferred option.

I will note, though: In all my made-up scenarios, in made-up places, with made-up people, sexual attraction between individuals is never the motivating reason for the action.

Demisexual: Only feeling sexual attraction after a strong emotional bond is formed.

This happened to me once, when I was 15, toward a fellow student that was in all of my classes, and the only other student in my Latin class. I think I did the math at one point, and figured that, during that year, I spent more waking hours with him than with any other single human being. I never told him of my crush.

Alterous: Defined as an attraction “halfway between romantic platonic.”

I think of it as a combined, intense, emotional and intellectual attraction (I’d use “queerplatonic,” since I don’t want any romance -- see above -- but as I understand it, queerplatonic is reserved for describing a type of relationship, not a flavor of attraction).

Until a relatively short time ago, when I learned there was more to “falling in love” than the Romantic/Sexual forms of love validated in our culture, I thought that was an experience I’ve never had. I thought I’d skated through my teenage years unscathed by the right of passage called “first love”. But looking back:

When I was sixteen or seventeen, as an alternative to summer camp, my mother suggested that I invite one of my good friends from high school -- a couple years ahead of me; as I recall, that was the year she graduated -- to stay over for a couple of weeks (also, looking back, I can’t help but wonder if this other girl’s mother was also in on it, as an alternative for both of us). We’d stay up ‘til 2 or 3 in the morning, talking philosophy, and mythology, and storytelling. We’d spend our days painting watercolors, and writing stories, and watching insects in the grass, and taking naps together on the living room rug.

We remained  pen pals for several weeks after that. And then, one day, I got a letter from her that had none of her usual art in the margins, or between the lines. Instead of her usual graceful handwriting, it was written in dense, cramped pencil. And in that letter, she admitted that she was going through a mental and spiritual breakdown, and that she was scared.

Her letter affected me so deeply, it prompted me to leave the religion I was raised in.

Looking back, I think that counts as alterous/queerplatonic: a friendship far deeper than an “ordinary” platonic relationship. I really think that was the first time I was in love, even though I didn’t recognize it.  It wasn’t the last, through the years. But I didn’t recognize those other relationships as full-fledged love, either, until the people were no longer in my life.

Once I did recognize those relationships as “being in love,” I also realized that I was:

Pan- (prefix to all the rest): Potential attraction to anyone, regardless of gender expression (my own definition).

I consider Bi- and Pan- to be almost synonyms, in the same way that “butter” and “goldenrod” are both adjectives for Yellow. Both prefixes mean “attraction to your own and any other gender.”

But in my head, “Bi-” refers to an attraction where a person’s gender expression (Note: this is completely independent of “what’s in their pants”) plays a large part in what makes them attractive. And “Pan-” refers to an attraction where the role of gender expression plays little or no part.     

I’m an AFAB cis woman. But I hardly give a moment’s thought to my own gender expression, much less anyone else’s. I recognize that some people are *chef’s kiss* artistes when it comes to expressing their gender, whatever that may be. But chances are, that’s not going to be what makes me want to be in their circle.

Polyamorous: Relating to relationships with more than one partner, with the knowledge and consent of all the people involved.

I realize this is somewhat rich, considering I’ve never been in an acknowledged, requited, relationship with even one person, much less many. But any time I contemplate my ideal relationship, there’s always a bunch of us in the kitchen.

Also, my favorite scenes in Rom-Com movies are the “Coming home to meet the Wacky Family™,” and being welcomed in to the wider circle.

I also wonder if this is related to my Apothiromantic orientation, and being wary of being the sole focus of a single person’s amorous/emotional attention. I wouldn’t be surprised.