Content added Content deleted
(Undo revision 3287 by Osteophage (talk)) |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
If someone's sexual and romantic orientation are the same they can simply use one word. For example, one would not have to say "pansexual and panromantic" as they could just say they're [[pansexual]]. The exception to this is [[aroace]], which is often said together because only saying one could imply that one is [[Alloromantic Asexual|alloromantic asexual]] or [[Aromantic Allosexual|allosexual aromantic]] or lead to other confusion. |
If someone's sexual and romantic orientation are the same they can simply use one word. For example, one would not have to say "pansexual and panromantic" as they could just say they're [[pansexual]]. The exception to this is [[aroace]], which is often said together because only saying one could imply that one is [[Alloromantic Asexual|alloromantic asexual]] or [[Aromantic Allosexual|allosexual aromantic]] or lead to other confusion. |
||
| ⚫ | Not all a-spec people use the SAM, and one should not assume that another uses the SAM until the other people says so. Most notably are [[Non-SAM Aro|non-SAM aros]], but some people prefer more precise terms include "romantic orientation" (or "romantic orientation labeling," for the personal use of terms like aromantic) and "attraction types," "attraction subtyping," or "differentiating types of attraction." Not everyone who experiences different types of attraction necessarily has a distinct romantic orientation, and not everyone 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] |
||
Not all a-spec people use the SAM. Most notably are [[Non-SAM Aro|non-SAM aros]]. |
|||
| ⚫ | |||
</ref> |
|||
== History == |
== History == |
||
| Line 13: | Line 15: | ||
The first hints of what would become the modern SAM began with 'affectional attraction/orientation' which was coined at some point in the 1980's. It's unclear when the term was first used. Coining for the terms as often attributed to Curt Pavola, a gay rights activist from Washington, and to Lisa Diamond, a psychologist. However, there are instances of the phrase that predate both of these individuals. |
The first hints of what would become the modern SAM began with 'affectional attraction/orientation' which was coined at some point in the 1980's. It's unclear when the term was first used. Coining for the terms as often attributed to Curt Pavola, a gay rights activist from Washington, and to Lisa Diamond, a psychologist. However, there are instances of the phrase that predate both of these individuals. |
||
Around 2001 there was a push for a way to classify asexuals. One of the earliest instances to still is the ABCD classification system on AVEN<ref>http://wiki.asexuality.org/ABCD_types</ref>, which recognizes that some asexuals may feel romantic attraction. Around the same time there was a Yahoo e-mail group known as 'Haven For The Human Amoeba'<ref>http://wiki.asexuality.org/Haven_for_the_Human_Amoeba</ref>, where in 2001 there was discussions of term 'hetero-asexual'. It wasn't until |
Around 2001 there was a push for a way to classify asexuals. One of the earliest instances to still is the ABCD classification system on AVEN<ref>http://wiki.asexuality.org/ABCD_types</ref>, which recognizes that some asexuals may feel romantic attraction. Around the same time there was a Yahoo e-mail group known as 'Haven For The Human Amoeba'<ref>http://wiki.asexuality.org/Haven_for_the_Human_Amoeba</ref>, where in 2001 there was discussions of term 'hetero-asexual'. It wasn't until 2015 that the modern form of the SAM was created. By 2017 the terminology was widely used in asexual circles. |
||
Other asexuals also began using additional attraction terms, such as emotional attraction, sensual attraction, and aesthetic attractions, starting in the early 2000s.<ref>[https://theacetheist.wordpress.com/2019/05/17/a-mini-history-of-different-types-of-attraction-in-the-ace-community/ A Mini History of Different Types of Attraction in the Ace Community] |
Other asexuals also began using additional attraction terms, such as emotional attraction, sensual attraction, and aesthetic attractions, starting in the early 2000s.<ref>[https://theacetheist.wordpress.com/2019/05/17/a-mini-history-of-different-types-of-attraction-in-the-ace-community/ A Mini History of Different Types of Attraction in the Ace Community] |
||
</ref><ref>[https://secondlina.tumblr.com/post/21955456091/a-comic-about-the-different-types-of-attraction A comic about different types of attraction]</ref> These attraction types could also be paired with parallel orientation identity terms (ex. pansensual, panaesthetic), but that application of them wasn't necessarily as common. |
</ref><ref>[https://secondlina.tumblr.com/post/21955456091/a-comic-about-the-different-types-of-attraction A comic about different types of attraction]</ref> These attraction types could also be paired with parallel orientation identity terms (ex. pansensual, panaesthetic), but that application of them wasn't necessarily as common.<nowiki/> |
||
Beginning in 2011, ace bloggers on Tumblr began to experience waves of mass-scale harassment for identifying with the asexual umbrella, typically involving criticism of ace community language.<ref>[https://epochryphal.tumblr.com/post/108605620407/2011-in-ace-tumblr-history 2011 in Ace Tumblr History] |
|||
</ref> In 2015, a new criticism emerged among anti-ace bloggers: conflating the concepts of multiple orientation labeling, attraction subtyping, and universalizing language by sloppily grouping all three together as "the split attraction model." Many of the earliest Tumblr posts on this subject have been lost, but early uses of the term involve accusing the split attraction model of being homophobic, as well as defining it with an inherently universalizing element.<ref>[https://cupidisco.tumblr.com/post/118622623652/hey-im-sorry-if-this-is-a-bother-but-could-you Tumblr post using "split attraction model," dated approximately May 2015]</ref><ref>[https://morwinyon.tumblr.com/post/122370182643/could-you-elaborate-on-the-split-attractions Tumblr post using "split attraction," dated approximately June 2015]</ref><ref>[https://legislacerator.tumblr.com/post/124764170311/can-you-tell-me-what-split-attraction-model Tumblr post using "split attraction model," dated July 2015]</ref><ref>[https://vanillil.tumblr.com/post/128042336475/the-split-attraction-model-is-homophobic Tumblr post using "split attraction model," dated August 2015]</ref> The use of the word "split," in particular, seems to have possibly originated from Tumblr user pure (also known as Tumblr user medicine), who wrote "i got a prollem w ppl splitting a complex sociocultural influenced ting like attraction into only two distinct experiences that ppl present as inherently unrelated all the time."<ref>[https://songnumberthree.tumblr.com/post/114585671235/arent-romantic-and-sexual-attraction-unrelated Tumblr post using "split" for attraction, dated approximately May 2015]</ref> The term "split attraction" necessarily centers a more monolithic experience of attraction as the default, and the term "split attraction model" was typically used to describe inappropriate sweeping statements about how a romantic/sexual attraction distinction is universal for everyone. |
|||
| ⚫ | |||
| ⚫ | |||
</ref><nowiki/> |
|||
== References == |
== References == |
||