#split attraction model discourse

[lovelydisgusting]

no more infighting over identity labels. i just saw a post where op listed various queer identity microlabels, sorted into two categories under "support" and "don't support". It was super silly, but also made me frustrated and sad. so here's my message to my fellow severely online queers: other queer people are not your enemy. you might think their labels are nonsense, or contradictory, or even offensive - learn to accept this. remember what you are fighting for: freedom of identity, freedom of expression, bodily autonomy, liberation from binary-hetero-patriarchy. FOR ALL! playing identity cop is utterly counterproductive to the cause.

[oidheadh-con-culainn]

i'm just curious. i see it primarily used in ace+aro spaces bc i feel like that's an environment where a lot of people experience romantic and sexual attraction differently and have a strong sense that they feel one and not the other, or that they feel them towards different people. however i know a lot of people who don't experience meaningful differences between these and it feels like outside of ace- and aro-spec communities it likely gets used a lot less (while in ace- and aro-spec communities it's essentially compulsory)

but i feel there are probably people between those e.g. who do experience or understand them as meaningfully different aspects of their orientation, while also feeling both and having them be "aligned" (e.g. feeling that you're both homosexual and homoromantic and that they're distinct in some way while still pointing in the same direction) so i'm curious about that

even the wording of this poll feels biased bc it relies on the split attraction model in the framing but i couldn't figure out a better way of putting it. if these are completely overlapping concepts for you and the whole framing of them as separate doesn't match your experiences, that would be option 3

[angrydino42-and-avathecannibal]

You are homophobic but not for the reasons you think.. just imo* (my correct opinion) demi and ace peeps who use the split attraction model are homophobic.

when did i ever say i used the split attraction model bitch that's a whole new sentence I said that I disliked people headcanoning AM as STRICTLY GAY when it would make more sense for him to be demi as he doesn't care for gender and simply would attach onto anyone who showed him mutual understanding also??? what the fuck has using the split attraction model got to do with homophobia. people can fuck guys and be only attracted to women. people can be only attracted to guys and fuck women.

[demonic-shadowlucifer]

ive ranted about this on threads already, but I need to complain about it here too, this whole "cishets dont belong at pride" and this whole telling bi girls to leave their cishet bfs at home... kinda defeats the point of pride and is still very fucking exclusionary. first off... do you guys want allies to show up or not? do you want allies to stand up or not? second, we need to get rid of the whole "cishet = not queer" mindset. aspec cishets exist. abrosexual cishets exist. intersex cishets exist. some nonbinary people consider themselves cishet. some cishets use the split attraction model as well. and that's not even getting into the cishets who have or are currently questioning their orientation or gender.

Also... when it comes to the cishet partners debate, I've noticed it's only bi girls being told to leave their cishet bfs at home, but never the other way around. Wonder why... 🤔 And sidenote, don't give me the whole "comfort" bullshit. I get being concerned about cishets causing trouble at pride, but if that were the case, why would their partner bring them in the first place? And if you get uncomfortable by seeing a bi individual with their cishet partner at pride, both of whom very happy together and accepting, I'm sorry but that's a personal problem you need to deal with yourself. (And also... if you think you can tell who's cishet and who isn't just by looking at them, or if you think you have to be a certain level of queer to go to pride... maybe you're the one who shouldn't go).

(TL;DR: the whole "cishets shouldn't go to pride convo" isn't doing anything to help queer folks feel more comfortable, in fact it's only biphobic, extremely exclusionist, and reeks of misogyny too).

[thee-radio-host-is-a-kookaburra]

I think “it’s aphobic to use SAM as a bisexual” probably takes the #1 spot on my list of dumbest queer discourse, solely because it only takes one Google search to see the the first example of a SAM was literally made to describe bisexuality

[g1deonthefirst]

was reminded this morning about people calling ianthe and pyrrha bi lesbians. no hate to anyone but the idea of pyrrha dve in any universe being involved enough in identity discourse to understand the term bi lesbian is really really funny.

[stag-bi]

what a whiplash going to see my 2016 tumblr dash (as linked in that last post) and getting slapped in the face w full blown ace discourse 😭😭😭

[gothamcityneedsme]

*sees a post comparing ace feelings to other queer identities* no u cannot come into my playhouse

[redysetdare]

Genuine question: What does platonic attraction mean. Genuinely i do not understand what it is supposed to mean.

Some ppl I've heard describe it as "wanting to be friends with someone" which to me doesn't feel right because I don't feel like I'm "attracted" (put in quotes cause im not sure what the feeling is) to the ppl i wanna be friends with.

Then i see ppl saying it means u want a strong platonic bond - like a QPR - with someone? but then i see ppl differentiate Platonic attraction and Queer Platonic attraction so Like... idk what thats about.

basically i am just confused as I overthink everything with the split attraction model and how complicated things have gotten the past few years since I've been inactive in the community.

[koifishanonymous]

hey fyi @/did-is-not-real is an aphobe, and as you can tell from their url, a pluralphobe as well. they just spread heaps of misinfo and arent even trying to sustain a debate so do yourself a favour and block them and also report them for hate speech (or spam? im not quite sure)

[unrestrainedbalderdash]

NOOO WHY'S THERE BI LESBIAN EXCLUSION IN THE ORIENTED AROACE TAG.

[bisexualsafespace]

exclus: the sam is homophobic because you are claiming to be oppressed while being heterosexual

sexual and romantic identity is more than just being oppressed, its experience, its identity, its emotion, its love, its sex, if you think its only about oppression, you're wrong, not denying that people saph/achi on both sides have much more discrimination than hetbi's or hetgays, but again someone else's experiences aren't "claiming oppression" they began their journey with the same question "what am I" "am I a lesbian" they all asked those questions.

[rotteneldritchhorror]

Sorry for discourse but I DID NOT JUST SEE SOMEONE LUMP AROALLO AND ALLOACE PEOPLE IN WITH STRAIGHTBIANS AS “Contradictory labels”

HUH.

Being allosexual and Aromantic isn’t contradictory??? Being alloromantic and asexual isn’t contradictory???

[organicmolecule]

there are only two phenomena in reality that the "split attraction model" makes sense for: "___romantic asexual," of course, and "heteroromantic bisexual."

i know "born this way" is a sacred cow but hear me out. I think a substantial portion of the "bisexual" population is naturally heterosexual with separate fetishistic attraction to the same sex that developed later.

There are men who report never having wanted to have sex with men until they went down porn rabbit holes and developed fetishes (e.g. being anally penetrated as a "sissy," degrading a "sissy," being degraded and made to worship "BBC") and still have no attraction to men outside these narrow scenarios. "Straight" men on Grindr who don't want to kiss or date men aren't saying so out of shame; it's because it would actually feel repulsive to them. Same with women like me who can get aroused by sexualized female bodies but only ever fantasize about having boyfriends, not girlfriends; we've been conditioned to associate female bodies with sexy and naughty and exciting but can't catch feelings for women beyond friendship.

if someone claimed to be "biromantic heterosexual," I'd be inclined to believe she's not really attracted to women and is just affection-starved and drawn to the ~sweet soft sapphic~ aesthetic. Her fullest attraction is clearly reserved for men and a woman would deserve better than to be in a relationship without her genuine sexual attraction.

[raspberry-vari]

rant about split attraction model (sam) discourse

honestly I don't totally understand why people are against the concept of it (some people could have romantic attraction without sexual attraction or vice versa). like obviously applying the sam to everyone is absurd. but some people really just have crushes on people they aren't sexually attracted to & vice versa. & on very rare occasions the sex(es) they are attracted to can be different with regard to romantic &/or sexual attractions. also there can be nuance, like sometimes attraction types can be combined and there can be others and whatnot.

idk I feel like many people just have a misrepresentation of it. like they hear about the sam and think it mean everyone has only romantic and sexual attractions that 100% separate and not connected and they always know exactly what attractions they have but like it doesn't mean that.

I totally understand being against the naming convention of it tho bc it is shit. words like heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual, mean what sex one is attracted to. not sexual attraction. it is overall attraction. so like if someone is attraction to men and women, they are bisexual. regardless of whether they have both romantic and sexual attraction or just one or romantic for men and sexual for women or whatever combination. so like to say something like "biromantic homsexual" is confusing because this person is still bisexual, not homosexual/gay. but what else can we do? I tried creating an alternate suffix for just sexual attraction (erossic, eg biromantic homoerossic), but it didn't catch on. idk. like I wish english original just had different words for sex the action and sex the quality so that we wouldn't be in this mess in the first place. idk. luckily at least we don't have this problem with like heteroromantic bisexual or homoromantic bisexual bc that still works. aromantic homosexual works as well. stuff liek biromantic asexual is just confusing because like why is asexual used just for sexual attraction even without the sam? but the other -sexual words aren't??

like deadass I have realized im not even varioriented but the sam is still useful to me. bc my romantic attraction is kinsey 3 (panromantic) but then my sexual attraction is kinsey 5 (homoflexible). like without sam i'd have to like clunkily explain that i have a preference for women but i also dont but it averages out to kinsey 4 anyway.

[just-a-queer-fanboy]

"You can be bisexuality homoromantic and vise versa, you can't be bisexuality lesbian or vise versa" I wasn't aware that lesbians weren't homosexual/romantic but go off I guess

(Edited it due to a misunderstanding due to the wording, sorry anon 😐)