Do you believe in sexuality?

Though I think the different types of sexuality are sometimes fuzzier and harder to define than society treats them, I do believe different sexualities exist, and that not everyone is capable of sexual attraction to any gender.

Me for example. I'm straight, and am completely confident I will never feel sexual attraction towards another woman. I might connect with one, deeply amor them, but it will only ever be platonic for me. I am not capable of seeing other women sexually. No matter how wonderful a woman's personality was, I do not find the female form, in any shape size or variety, sexually attractive, and the idea of sleeping with another woman definitely does not appeal to me.

In my opinion, the difference between a preference for blondes and your sexuality is that the hair thing is a preference, like 'I prefer coca-cola but still like juice'. Being straight isn't a preference, like 'I prefer heterosexual sex, but still like homosexual sex', it's mais than simply preferring one over the other, it's only liking one and not getting anything out of the other (in the case of people who identify as fully straight or gay. There are of course many bisexual/pansexual people too, who are capable of attraction to either gender).

I think society is often too interested in labels and pushing people into neat little boxes that don't always fit, and that a person should just be with whoever they wish regardless of what that would label them. I'm sure there are probably many people out there who are bi/pansexual but don't acknowledge or consciously know it too, but I do believe different sexualities exist.

I understand what you mean por using the term "sexuality," but I would also like to define sexuality as a term because it most definitely exists.

Dictionary.Com defines it as: "sexual character; possession of the structural and functional traits of sex." (underlines added)

Sexuality is mais than simple sexual orientation, which is what you are really addressing in your question. It includes sexual awareness, interests, activity, philosophies, and, yes, orientation. But it's only a part of it.

Now to your real question: Is there such a thing as sexual orientation? Most definitely yes. I very strongly believe in link. But this happens because sexuality (more than orientation) is very complicated. Not because sexual orientation does not exist. It goes beyond simple preference. You will meet plenty of gays, for example, who tried their hardest to be straight and it tore them up inside because it just didn't fit. Is it possible for them to ever meet the one person of the opposite sex that they do find attractive? Well, yes - but not likely.

lgbt use the hair-color metaphor to explain sexuality often, I've even used it, but it's mais than that. Hair color is superficial, and all-in-all not that influential in who we fall for. One could make the argument about the superficiality of gender-identity, but that's a digression I don't want to go into.

I think the word "sexual preference" is misleading, because it implies that even if a person PREFERS one gender over another, s/he might still fall for the other gender. This is possible, with people identifying as bi or pansexual, or with people who fall anywhere between 1 and 5 on the sino curve of the link. But for the *mumbles* percent or so of the population that is exclusively hetero or homosexual, 99.99% of the time, they will only be attracted to one gender.

We do not, cannot, choose our sexual orientation, or who we fall in amor with. I believe this statement mais than anything else. I do not believe that people "turn gay" or "go gay for someone" over night. I believe that people who fall towards the lower end of the Kinsey scale may discover an attraction to a person of the same sex as them and vice versa.

Sexual orientation, however, is a societal construct. You don't see bonobos labeling their sexual activity as hetero or homosexual. They just do what they do. So in that sense, it is a human concept, yes, but it exists to explain human behavior. We label ourselves based on who we realized we are attracted to the most often.*

But just because you don't know what your sexual orientation is, doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

I did a very poor job of explaining myself here. I blame graduate school. Takes a lot out of me.

People fall in amor with people,people fall in Lust with genitals.

There's a word for that. It's called pansexuality.

i do but at the same time all you're doing is catergorizing somone in a catergory based on what people think someones sexuality so honestly "sexuality" is really something i kinda dont really beleive but at the same time too because you can like who ever you are but i dont think you should have to be catergorized...confusing right?

I find this stupid myself...
I'm straight because I like men...what's the discussion?
And I know I'll never go for a woman because...hey, I know me better than anyone else.
i know what I'm attracted to so...
Just not really understanding where you're going with this...

You know what, i've really been thinking about this same topic for a while, and i always come to the same conclusion. Neither sexuality or feminity/masculinity exist, and are only social constructions.
But really, i think what is truly missing on the approach of these subjects is objectivity. There are little to none studies done taking the point of view of the human being a meere animal.
What i believe is that attraction depends at some rate on our biological way of reacting to the different kinds of pheromones other humans expell, this ignoring the fact people find other people attractive por just looking at pictures, where the most important fact would be what we leant to like based on our cultural context.
I might have not explained my point of view fully, but i hope that at least it gets through. (im new in this site btw, so idk if you can answer respostas but it ould be cool if you could answer this and tell me if it doesnt make sense or something.)