Difference between revisions of "Talk:Primary vs. secondary sexual attraction model"

From AVENwiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(No attraction, but Primary desire?: new section)
(No attraction, but Primary desire?: response)
Line 28: Line 28:
  
 
[[User:Prometheos II|Prometheos II]] ([[User talk:Prometheos II|talk]]) 20:34, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
 
[[User:Prometheos II|Prometheos II]] ([[User talk:Prometheos II|talk]]) 20:34, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
 +
 +
: This is a wiki. If you wish to ask personal questions, please visit the [http://www.asexuality.org/en forums]. Thank you. --[[User:Robin|Robin]] ([[User talk:Robin|talk]]) 09:40, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

Revision as of 09:40, 19 December 2017

According to the wording of the definitions, what's sexual in primary or secondary sexual attraction? --Isaac 16:28, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

As I understand it; primary sexual attraction would be desire to have sex with someone based on what your senses (sight/smell/hearing/etc.) are telling you at the time and secondary would be the development of sexual desire after having spent some time with a person. In practice these would be (primary) "you're hot, let's go back to mine." and (secondary) "y'know, you're actually a nice guy, wanna go for coffee?" --Live wire 19:24, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

history or criticism section

This article is currently being discussed on AVEN. The user Rabger feels dissatisfied with the article.

I propose that we add a "Criticism of Rabger's Model" section and/or a "History" section. Some points to include:

  • Rabger's Model was originally meant as mere speculation on Rabger's part to deal with perceived problems in AVEN's official definition.
  • Rabger's Model appeared on the AVENwiki in 2006 without Rabger's knowledge or consent.
  • The model as described on the AVENwiki was very different from Rabger's original proposal, and was therefore mere speculation on the part of the wiki editors.
  • Rabger's Model remained in the AVENwiki for 4-5 years with few changes, and became popular for this very reason.

--Siggy 17:19, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

I may have already said this somewhere, but it would be great to have a criticisms or limitations section on all the theory/model pages. Questioning ideas is healthy. So yes, it makes sense to me. The impression I also get with the wiki is that it was started with the intention of being rather informal, and that it would be a place to throw any ideas and to plan meetups and projects, so that might be why we're getting this strange effect as it now has many formal articles alongside the older ones that have not been edited much. --Hexaquark 23:05, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
"18:16, 21 July 2011 Rabger This entry has been deleted by Rabger due to incorrect content and lack of permission to publish such work." Less then ideal situation, but I have orphaned this page. I will restore the internal links to it if a better solution arises. --Hexaquark 07:33, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
After some discussion, I have renamed the page and restored/tweaked the content, hopefully this will suit everyone ok. --Hexaquark 07:05, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

No attraction, but Primary desire?

Hello.

Actually, I feel like I've neither attraction, which makes me asexual in a sense, however, I feel Primary desire (without the Secondary), which makes me sexual.

So is there a specific type for those kind of people? Does it fall under sexuality, asexuality, gray-sexuality?

N.B.: I sometimes feel Primary Attraction, but it's an unhealthy compulsive attraction due to primary desire.

Thanks for your answers.

Prometheos II (talk) 20:34, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

This is a wiki. If you wish to ask personal questions, please visit the forums. Thank you. --Robin (talk) 09:40, 19 December 2017 (UTC)