I like that. I like it best of all, I think.

I'm sorry the term "stone" offended you. I saw it got explained and clarified in the other thread. The word "stone" actually gets applied to femme and butch women thusly: A "stone femme" is a woman who prefers only to be on the receiving end of sexual encounters, not reciprocate. She wishes her partner to pleasure her, touch her, penetrate her, perform oral sex on her, etc, but not do the same in return. This gets paired with a "stone butch" who is the exact opposite and prefers to pleasure her partner, but not receive the reciprocation. Women I have known feel this way for many reasons. Some simply for personal preference, some from reasons of gender identity, some because of negative past experiences or sexual abuse. I think the terms are limiting only because they imply that you have to be butch to want to give but not receive and femme to want to receive but not give and that's simply not the case. Incidentally, most stone butch women I've known have enjoyed masturbating, either alone or with their partner with them but not participating. Some women are completely stone, while others have limits (ie, fingers are ok, but no oral, or toys are ok but no hands or mouth, or clitoral stimulation but no penetration, or any other variation you could think of. One woman I knew wouldn't allow her underwear to be removed but anything you could do around or under them was fine.

To the topic of this thread. A lesbian transwoman I know recently introduced me to the term gynephilic which means a preference for women. This can be used regardless of the gender of the person being described as gynephilic, which is appealing. Unfortunately and rather unsatisfactorily, in my opinion, the antonym to this is androphilic, which is not an attraction to androgynous people, but an attraction to men or, alternately, a preference for humans over animals. So that's not quite right. And a lot of people dislike the terms because they sound clinical or like something from a psychology textbook or sound like pedophiliac or necrophilic or a variety of other terms with a negative connotation. But, I agree that a collection of terms to describe what a person is attracted to would be more useful that homo-, bi- and heterosexual and trying to shoehorn the trans, queer, genderqueer, and anyone else into those three categories which require a static and clearly defined gender of the person being described to be accurate. Unfortunately, nothing ideal exists at the moment.

That's what I said, but the way we describe orientation relies on the gender of the person whose orientation is being described, which is a problem for me since I don't technically have a gender.

And like I said, I don't like the term Pansexual because I'm not really attracted to all gender presentations, just most of them. (For instance, I'm not attracted to hyper-masculine men.)

Maybe Omnisexual is a good term.

I'd still say that you're pansexual, because the fact that you aren't attracted to hyper-masculine men is a specific preference that will happen within ANY sexuality. Being a straight male doesn't mean you're attracted to ALL women, you're going to have preferences and types of women that you aren't attracted to, but you're still straight. The sexuality terms straight/bi/gay refer to being attracted to certain persons with the genitals you're attracted to, it's not referring to their presentation, level of femininity/masculinity /androgyny, personality or anything else. Pansexual means that you're attracted to people with all/any type(s) of genitals, the femme-sexual/masculine -sexual/androg-sexual/ etc part is separate.

For example, a female who is attracted to males is straight. But, she ONLY is attracted to very feminine men. So she's straight femme-sexual, but she would probably just refer to herself as straight for the sake of simplicity, since the femme-sexual thing is just a preference within her sexuality. That would be harder to describe with pansexuality since you'd have to state EVERYTHING you're attracted to within the whole spectrum, so I'd just say "Pansexual, but I'm not particularly attracted to hyper-masculine males.".

I'm in no way trying to say that YOU CANT USE OMNISEXUAL or anything like that haha, but I hope this all makes sense.

That does make sense. Maybe it doesn't need to be super specific, but there does need to be a better system than what we have in place.

On the subject of Femme-sexual, though, I have actually met people who are attracted only to femme people, be they male or female.

Yes! I've met people like that too

Maybe someone should make a grid, with the top being male, female, intersexed, etc. and the side being femme, androg, masc, etc., with a bunch of boxes so you can fill in what you're attracted to hahah.

Maybe even color code it to be more specific about preferences, if you want to be that specific.




somehow I can't believe this hasn't been done yet!

Why put a label on it? I consider myself "Sexless" I identify with females though, crossdress. But I ALWAYS refer to myself as "it" never male or female.

I am in the same boat you are there. I am attracted to neither male nor female Here is a convo I have once had;
person- "Are you gay?"

Me- "No I am not."

person- "So... you are straight then?"

me- "No I am not at all."

person- "What are you then bi? I mean how do you identify?"

me- " I dont identify with anything at all. I am not gay, straight or pansexual. I just am."

See people do not get it. I mean you are who you are there is no need for a label.

I find myself many days wavering to be genderfluid, but quite often I feel strongly as our society's idea of male or female. When I'm really feeling strongly on one end or the other of this binary, I actually find that I'm actually very homosexual. I am attracted to people along the whole spectrum, but my preference tends to follow along with my gender identity of the moment.
In a sense, I would almost consider myself homosexual but genderqueer.

Thankfully I'm not monosexual, because I gay or straight definitely wouldn't work. So I know how that goes. I think that system would be better though, yeah. Personally I like (only semi-jokingly) identifying as "consenting-being-sexu al" because I don't like the word pansexual either, and omnisexual just makes me sound like I want to f*ck everything all the time. (Which shouldn't be a bad thing, but that's a whole other conversation.)