Website Logo

The Problem With Sexual Orientation Labels

Are 'kink' and 'poly' sexual orientation labels? Abi Brown looks at the way we define ourselves and our relationships.
 

Everyone has a gender orientation of some sort. It's about how they define their own gender, but also how they feel and behave as a result of that definition. Moreover, how do those things leave them feeling about their own body? I’m quite fond of the dictionary definition of ‘orientation’, which looks quite simple on the face of it. Orientation is defined as "a person's basic attitude, beliefs, or feelings in relation to a particular subject or issue." However, the more you think about it, the more you realise that simplicity is kind of deceptive.


A beginner’s guide to sexual orientation labels

Most people have a sexual orientation. This determines which genders of other people you’d like to have sexual and/or romantic relationships with. What is more, this is probably best expressed as a spectrum that has homosexuality at one end and heterosexuality at the other, with bisexuality and pansexuality in the middle.

The Y-axis of that spectrum is your romantic orientation.  This is about who you actually fall in love with and want to have romantic relationships with. While it’s often the same as your sexual orientation it’s certainly not universally so. I’m sure that heterosexual homoromantics exist, but the more common example is someone who is bisexual or pansexual while also being homoromantic or heteroromantic.

But really it’s a three-dimensional graph with a Z-axis, because we’re also all on a spectrum that describes how sexual we are. Asexual people don’t feel sexual attraction to anybody, regardless of gender, and may or may not experience romantic attraction. Furthermore, demisexual people only feel sexual attraction to those with whom they are already in an established romantic relationship.
 

Taking sexual orientation labels to the next level

Once you’ve figured out all that stuff, the next step is to think about how you would like your relationships to function in practice. All relationships have rules and boundaries of some sort, whether they’re made explicit or not. One couple might have a rule that says “don’t fantasise sexually about anyone who isn’t the other partner”, while another might have “send me a text if you’re going to fuck someone at a party”.

Additionally, there’s what kind of sex you want to have. For a lot of people, it seems like this is innate, but ‘kinky’ and ‘vanilla’ are a bit overly simplistic. What about people who get really into tantra, or are devoted to the idea of the Freudian pleasure principle, for example?

Furthermore, you’ve got people who enjoy some of the things we’d call fetish, kink or BDSM, but don’t feel like they’re necessary. In contrast, there are the people who just can’t seem to get into vanilla sex at all. Besides, the whole thing is just too huge to contemplate. There are thousands of different kinds of kinks and fetishes, as well as a zillion versions of BDSM relationships.

I’m wary of labelling polyamory as a sexual orientation because it’s just an umbrella term for a sub-set of something that is universal to relationships. With kink, I’m wary of it because I think there are simply too many individual options. If “what kind of sex you like to have” is a sexual orientation spectrum, it’s so vast that it is rendered essentially meaningless.
 

The bottom line of sexual orientation

This all seems incredibly complicated, and there are lots of people who react to it all by just going “why do we need all these definitions? Why can’t we just get on with it?” I can see their point, but it’s crucial that we think and talk about this stuff. There isn’t a person on this planet who wouldn’t ultimately benefit from living in a world where the full spectrum of human experience was better tolerated and understood.

There are a lot of terms and words and spectrums of sexual orientation involved, because to a certain extent what we’re doing here is battling hypocognition. Most of the time, people can only fully understand an idea for which they have both language and a framework. These are complex ideas, and relatively new ones at that. Indeed, it is the kink and BDSM communities leading the effort to give people the language and the framework that they need to understand them.

Just to make everything even more complicated, the extreme ends of this spectrum of sexual orientation are sometimes described collectively as “monosexuality”. This refers to someone who is attracted exclusively to one gender.


Abi Brown is a freelance writer and general pen-for-hire devoted to genre fiction, social justice and M.A.C lipstick. Follow her on her website or @see_abi_write.


Has this article inspired you to explore a different sexual orientation? If so, join fetish.com for free and broaden your sexual horizons.

 

Magazine Banner - Join Now [Fetish.com] (1)-min.jpg

 

Comment

Comments


    Related Discussions

    Related Discussions

    Are we putting too much weight on labels?

    I've been thinking about how much weight we put on labels like "Dom" and "Sub". Sometimes it feels like they're treated like a cheat code, as though the label itself does all the heavy lifting. But surely there's more to building a dynamic than deciding what to call yourself. You still have to earn the dynamic, build trust and bring something to the table. At what point does identifying with a role become more important than building it? Beyond the labels, we're people first. The role is earned. For me personally, I need a lot of mental stimulation. I find a lot of things and people boring, and passivity doesn't do much for me, even with subs. I enjoy some brattiness, attitude, personality and character. I appreciate someone who brings a bit of edge and tries to make things interesting. That kind of dynamic takes effort, imagination and a willingness to engage. Isn't the chemistry between two people, and how they play off each other, what makes a dynamic interesting in the first place? I've also never felt the need to confine myself to one little corner called "Dom". If I've connected with someone and have the opportunity to explore, why would I limit myself to a predefined role? In my vanilla life, I'm pretty bullish and used to being in control, but the idea of giving that up for someone who knows what they're doing is sexy. I won't live and die by a label. Surely there's room to discover things about yourself that don't fit neatly into the label you've started with? I'm curious how others feel about this. Do you think people sometimes mistake identifying as a Dom or a Sub for having already earned the title? And earned the other person's submission or dominance? 95 Likes 40 Replies· 5 days ago

    Comunidade kink RS

    Oi, pessoal alguém é do Rio grande do Sul? Sinto que a comunidade gaúcha não tem uma organização tao presente aqui no Sul? O que acham a respeito. Ps: aberto a conversa e interagir com colegas 1 Like 2 Replies· 1 day ago

    Romanticism in bdsm

    What if one of the deepest forms of romance is the one that looks the least like it? A Dominant entrusted with someone’s vulnerability, a submissive who freely chooses whom to surrender their power to. Two people meeting in a space where trust, desire, and control intertwine. Maybe romance isn’t always about gentle touches and sweet words. Sometimes, it’s about finding someone you can truly let go with, knowing you’ll be understood and respected. Do you think a D/s dynamic can hold a form of romance that’s even deeper than conventional romance? 29 Likes 9 Replies· 11 days ago

    🔥 Let’s talk body types, attraction, and body confidence in BDSM.🔥

    I’m genuinely curious about something, and I’d love to hear different perspectives from both Doms and subs. When it comes to physical attraction, what body types really catch your attention? Do you love curves with a flat tummy? A soft belly that you can grab, hold, and love on? A full, thick body that moves with every touch, kiss, and thrust? Or do you gravitate toward someone small and petite who makes you want to handle them gently, like something precious? Maybe your preference is something entirely different. Is it about a specific body type, or is it more about the way someone carries themselves, their confidence, their energy, and the chemistry between you? 👀 But here’s the part I’m even more interested in discussing: How do you help a partner who struggles with body insecurities truly "feel" desired? It’s one thing to tell someone they’re beautiful, but it’s another to make them believe you when their mind tells them otherwise. For those in a D/s dynamic, how do you use your words, actions, affection, and intimacy to help your partner feel safe enough to let go of those insecurities? How do you show them that your attraction isn’t conditional on a flat stomach, perfect proportions, or fitting some unrealistic standard? That you see the person beneath the skin, and that their body is something you appreciate rather than something they need to apologize for? I’d love to hear from everyone: What’s your physical preference, and how do you make your partner feel genuinely wanted, especially on the days they struggle to see their own beauty? Let’s keep it respectful, honest, and open-minded. ❤️‍🔥 246 Likes 123 Replies· about 9 hours ago

    Is BDSM still BDSM when you take away the sex?

    I've been thinking about this lately: A lot of what makes a BDSM scene powerful isn't necessarily the sexual part. It's attention, power, surrender, anticipation, trust, sensation, roles, ritual, the weird little things that can happen between two people when they're really present. So where does BDSM end and something else begin? Can a scene be genuinely transformative without being sexual? Or does taking the sex out of it change the nature of kink completely? I'm interested in how other people experience this, especially those who use kink for something beyond getting off. 126 Likes 68 Replies· 11 days ago