Good, the only other valid sexuality aside from heterosexuality, homosexuality and bisexuality

.

.

why does the validity of other peoples sexualities concern you?

.

mess the idiocy

Unnecessary. It's shocking to go on a forum predominately full of gay users to discredit other people's sexualities

It's embarrassing and uneducated, ATRL showing it's true colours

idiocy

Good, the only other valid sexuality aside from heterosexuality, homosexuality and bisexuality

because other "sexualites" (that are mostly being made on tumblr) aren't backed-up by science? hence why they aren't valid into educational programs.

....how is asexuality "backed up by science"?

You seem to be using attraction and arousal interchangeably to define your understanding of sexual orientation. Many asexuals can be aroused by **** or if stimulated - their asexuality is not defined by arousal. Many people define their asexuality simply by the lack of attraction (ie: the mental attraction to someone, not some physical manifestation of arousal). You can say sex repulsion is a medical condition backed-up by science because it deals with the biological to a degree, but not all asexuals are sex-repulsed and not all sex-repulsed folks are asexual.

Is it because asexuality is "documented" in humans? If asexuality (the lack of attraction) is documented, how is then something like pansexuality (attraction irregardless of gender) not?

Yeah, let's rely on the educational programme for this -- that barely touches anything about social issues and justice

asexuality is lack of sexual orientation, and sexual orientations (the ones mentioned in the first reply) are back-up by science. People not feeling any attraction is also backed-up just like feeling attracted to the same gender, opposite gender or both genders. "Pansexuality" is the same as bisexuality.

Hahahahahahaha

Demisexual is an a-spec term used by the asexual, sis. Google is free!

It's mainly used by sex-repulsed victims of sexual trauma who ID as asexual or a-spec, and a term to articulate the state of their asexuality.

You can't say one thing is real and the other not when they're inherently connected lol.

Though there is a difference between a mode of sexuality and a sexual orientation.

A sexual orientation is who you are attracted to (which more often than not places you on some social dynamic of privileged [no same gender attraction] or oppressed [same gender attraction]).

A mode of attraction is how you experience attraction, and it's obvious why many asexuals have a few different community-specific terms they use with one another because they lack one type of attraction. They use the split-attraction model too (Asexual-Heteroromantic / Pansexual-Aromantic). The split-attraction model isn't suddenly fake just cause non-ace/non-aro people don't use it lol.

Of course we wouldn't put them on a census because they're not directly related to certain means of population's needs because they're not inherently related to power dynamics or oppression, but by that understanding, it'd be perfectly fine to also add pansexuality to the census, since it includes a definition of "who" someone is attracted to and how they may be oppressed for their attraction if who they're attracted to includes the same gender.