Content added Content deleted
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
Not all a-spec individuals use the split attraction model, most notably are [[Non-SAM Aro|non-SAM aros]]. Some individuals prefer more precise terms for differentiating forms attraction, including "[[Romantic Orientation|romantic orientation]]" or "romantic orientation labeling," "attraction types," "attraction subtyping," or "differentiating types of attraction." Not every individual who experiences different types of attraction necessarily has a distinct romantic orientation, and not every individual who has a romantic orientation necessarily experiences multiple types of attraction.<ref>[https://theacetheist.wordpress.com/2019/03/20/remodeling-on-the-reclamation-of-the-term-split-attraction-model/ Remodeling]</ref><ref>[https://theacetheist.wordpress.com/2019/05/16/three-narratives-of-non-rosol-identity-in-the-aro-community/ Three Narratives of Non-Rosol Identity in the Aro Community]</ref> |
Not all a-spec individuals use the split attraction model, most notably are [[Non-SAM Aro|non-SAM aros]]. Some individuals prefer more precise terms for differentiating forms attraction, including "[[Romantic Orientation|romantic orientation]]" or "romantic orientation labeling," "attraction types," "attraction subtyping," or "differentiating types of attraction." Not every individual who experiences different types of attraction necessarily has a distinct romantic orientation, and not every individual who has a romantic orientation necessarily experiences multiple types of attraction.<ref>[https://theacetheist.wordpress.com/2019/03/20/remodeling-on-the-reclamation-of-the-term-split-attraction-model/ Remodeling]</ref><ref>[https://theacetheist.wordpress.com/2019/05/16/three-narratives-of-non-rosol-identity-in-the-aro-community/ Three Narratives of Non-Rosol Identity in the Aro Community]</ref> |
||
==History== |
==History== |
||
[[File:Triangle of Sexuality.svg|thumb|200x200px|Between [[Suptilic|strict]] [[homosexual]]ity (top left), strict |
[[File:Triangle of Sexuality.svg|thumb|200x200px|Between [[Suptilic|strict]] [[homosexual]]ity (top left), strict [[heterosexual]]ity (top right) and [[Suptiliasexual|strict asexuality]] (bottom) there is a [[Greysexual|great diversity]] in the level of sexual attraction]] |
||
The first recorded instance of an orientation model describing split attraction was in 1879 by Karl Heinrich Ulrichs, a German writer who published twelve books on [[Unstraight|non-heterosexual]] attraction. In those books, Ulrichs came up with various classifications of orientations which are fairly similar to modern LGBTA+ identities. Among his works he described individuals who are 'konjunktiver and disjunktiver' or 'conjunctive and disjunctive [[bisexual]]ity'<ref>http://hubertkennedy.angelfire.com/FirstTheorist.pdf</ref>. The first is described as one who has both 'tender' and 'passionate' feelings for both [[men]] and [[women]]. The second is one who has 'tender' feelings for men, but 'passionate' feelings for women (if the individual was a man - the reverse if they were a woman). However, Ulrichs' model never caught on due to its complexity. |
The first recorded instance of an orientation model describing split attraction was in 1879 by Karl Heinrich Ulrichs, a German writer who published twelve books on [[Unstraight|non-heterosexual]] attraction. In those books, Ulrichs came up with various classifications of orientations which are fairly similar to modern LGBTA+ identities. Among his works he described individuals who are 'konjunktiver and disjunktiver' or 'conjunctive and disjunctive [[bisexual]]ity'<ref>http://hubertkennedy.angelfire.com/FirstTheorist.pdf</ref>. The first is described as one who has both 'tender' and 'passionate' feelings for both [[men]] and [[women]]. The second is one who has 'tender' feelings for men, but 'passionate' feelings for women (if the individual was a man - the reverse if they were a woman). However, Ulrichs' model never caught on due to its complexity. |
||