Why do people say that romantic and sexual orientation are two different things?
I see things online a lot where people classify themselves as a biromantic lesbian, heteroromantic asexual, etc. (As if you're actually going to get married to someone and never have sex with them?)
In my opinion, if a woman marries a man and walks into a clinic for birth control, she's straight.
No, what I mean is if a woman identifying as lesbian gets into a sexual relationship with a man, she's bisexual (not lesbian.)
Same with asexuals. If they get into a long term relationship and have regular sex with their partner, they're straight.
Lust and love are synonymous. Sure, people can have a casual fling without any emotional attachment, but it doesn't work the other way around. Romantic relationships almost always include sex.
- Anonymous6 months agoFavourite answer
Romantic and sexual attractions are two different things. Sexual orientation is about sexual attraction.
EDIT - Wrong. I am gay. My best friend from childhood days is a girl. We loved each other when we were kids ( before even I knew about homosexuality .. prepubescent days). But as I grew up I never felt any sexual attraction towards her. She is still the only person I love and care about. But I am sexually attracted to men only. I am romantically attracted to that woman. But no sexual attraction. Now she lives with her husband and kids. That’s why I said, sexual orientation is about sexual attraction. To marry someone, you must be sexually attracted to that person. It is possible to feel romance without sex. But that is not enough for marriage.
- 6 months ago
There is a very simple solution to this conundrum. Your opinion is factually wrong.
- Raven SlightLv 56 months ago
To clarify the matter, let's use me.
I literally don't give two ***** about sex. However, my friends have cautioned me repeatedly when I begin dating others not to be too obsessive/invested in the relationship, to take things slowly.
I identify as asexual, because I don't exhibit or notably factor sexual desire. MAYBE one may term it "Gray-Ace" (a phrase to distinguish that, yeah I get horny/actively desire sex once in a while, say once every four or five months or a couple times over two/three years or whatever). However, either way my SEXUAL ORIENTATION is within the domain of being "Asexual".
Inversely, however, I am hyper-romantic and express this in either a bi-romantic or pan-romantic form. There's nuance between the two, with the overt divide being whether one factors or considers gender-coded norms as part of the attraction or not. (As example, my friend holds to me being Pan because there's no pattern to who or when I develop a relationship with. To paraphrase them, I like people for who the people are and form romantic relationships based on how well our personalities resonate with each other. Whether it's a guy or a girl or non-binary or even some form of otherkin, that's not something I even pay attention to until we've already started dating.)
In my case, it's pretty apparent that my asexuality and my pan-romanticism are independent of each other.
Also, it's funny to say that "romantic relationships almost always include sex" when, like, the most-sexual things my current girlfriend and I have done these last few months is that she's sucked my dick once and I finger her off when she requests it. If that's your standard for "including sex" then that's a really low bar to set. Especially when I'm not the one initiating these instances but am instead being involved overwhelmingly to please her and meet her needs.
- nineteenthlyLv 76 months ago
You can be into people as people and not fancy them, or really love having sex with them but not want a relationship.
- What do you think of the answers? You can sign in to give your opinion on the answer.
- Anonymous6 months ago
Because they are different. Sexual attraction is simply wanting to have sex with someone. That's it. Romantic attraction is wanting to cuddle, go on dates, spend time together, get married etc.
"As if you're actually going to get married to someone and never have sex with them?"
This happens. If 2 asexual people get married they are not going to have sex.
"what I mean is if a woman identifying as lesbian gets into a sexual relationship with a man, she's bisexual (not lesbian.)"
Well yeah shes not a lesbian if shes attracted to men and I would assume shes attracted to men if she sought out a relationship with one.
"Same with asexuals. If they get into a long term relationship and have regular sex with their partner, they're straight."
Some asexuals are homoromantic, biromantic or panromantic so definitely not straight. Those that are heteroromantic are kind of straight but not completely even if they choose to have sex to please their partner or to have kids.
"Romantic relationships almost always include sex"
The key word here being "almost".
Most peoples sexuality and romantic orientation match up and even if they don't it doesn't affect you so I don't know why you are even concerned about this.
- Anonymous6 months ago
They're inexperienced children who have never been in love. A massive problem with a lot of youth culture and the LGBT community is these kids have no f#cking idea what they're talking about. They're not gay, they're not trans, they're not anything besides confused straight teens. They're less self-aware than my generation was 30 years ago because they spend all their time on phones and online and they spent no time in their own head with their own thoughts. Also they have been LIED TO about all this gender nonsense.
Edit: everything people are describing as "romantic" is called friendship, platonic love. It blows my mind that we're regressed this far.
- SkyLv 76 months ago
Because they are two different things. Just because someone is romantically attracted to someone doesn't mean they are sexually attracted to them, and just because they are sexually attracted to someone doesn't mean they are romantically attracted to them. For example, if you are romantically and sexually attracted to the opposite sex, ie. you can see yourself being fully in love with the opposite sex, holding close and kissing, sharing the rest of your lives together, and making love because you are so turned on by the body of the opposite sex, but at the same time you are also turned on by the body of the same sex and could see yourself having plenty of hot sex with someone of the same sex while feeling no attraction or desire to be romantically in love with them because you don't feel compatible with the same sex, that would be considered bisexual heteroromantic. And that is just one example of numerous combinations of sexual attraction vs. romantic attraction.
You can have whatever opinion you want, that doesn't matter and that doesn't make your opinion factually correct.
- Anonymous6 months ago
The only thing I can say is this. I identify as polyromantic demigrayhomosexual. That means I’m attracted to most genders romantically but only sexually attracted to females once I develop a close relationship and sometimes I just feel asexual (part of the greysexual)
I’d also just like to mention that asexuals do NOT have regular sex, if they do at all for whatever reason
- Anonymous6 months ago
Panromantic grey ace, here. And just.. Sorry, mate. But you don't get to tell me what I feel. Not after I spent the better part of ten years feeling SO fundamentally f*cking awful, and ashamed, and "broken", over having a romantic orientation and a sexual orientation that do not align! And I would fall head over heels in love with people, yet still feel NO sexual attraction towards them, and no urge to f*ck them! I've had relationships broken because of this sh*t. I've had several deeply traumatic experiences, because of this sh*t. I've spent years completely convinced that in spite of having SO much love to give, and being a sappy, hopeless romantic in fact, I would still have to spend ALL my life alone, because of this sh*t. So no. You don't get to tell me who I am, speaking as an outsider, who has never even slightly lived it, or felt the pain I've felt because of it. Go f*ck yourself.
Also..? Some couples do indeed marry without having sex, yes. Especially if they're both asexual. And some couples..? Even if only one of them is asexual. If they have a strong emotional and romantic connection, and that is enough for the sexual partner. (Which.. most sexual people NEED sex, to be happy in a relationship! But there are also a few noble excptions. The love of my life, for instance..? Is not asexual. But is also not super sexual. He's got a sex drive, alright. But he's quite happy taking care of that by himself, too! Just as long as there is love, and romance, and lots of cuddles and affection, and a strong emotional connection. Just.. he is the BEST ever love! And he is SO darn respectful of me! He loves me exactly as I am! And does not in ANY way see me as "lesser than"! Which is really THE one thing that has helped me finally accept myself! I am SO incredibly f*cking grateful to him. He is my everything. <3)
Also, no. Just because SOME asexuals still have sex with their partners on occasion..? That doesn't make them not asexual! It makes them asexuals that are able to compromise, to make their sexual partners happy. Which.. some asexuals are able to do that, and don't really mind it. While others..? Are not.
- CogitoLv 76 months ago
Because they are different. Your 'opinion' is ill-informed and narrow-minded.
I know several people who feel romantic thoughts towards men but have no sexual feelings towards them. It's nothing to do with getting married or not. Personally, I might like to meet a like-minded man who I could share my life with, live together, go on vacations together, etc, maybe even marry, but I'm simply not interested in sex and would not want any sexual relationship.And for your information, many women marry men because they feel obliged to do so or are coerced into doing so by their families. A woman may well attend a clinic and ask for birth control. But she may actually be gay or bisexual.