We’ve seen the movies: two people lock eyes and have an instant, electric chemistry, and in the next scene, they’re tumbling into bed together. It’s not all Hollywood magic – most people might look at a hot stranger and immediately feel sexually attracted to them. Meanwhile, others might want to be emotionally close to them instead of physically.
Are they just big flirts? No, they are simply people whose sexual identity differs from their romantic orientation.
In this article, we’ll discuss panromantic asexuality, the difference between romantic and sexual attraction, and what it means to identify as someone who loves love but doesn’t necessarily crave sex.
RELATED: What is pansexual? What is the difference between pansexual and bisexual? We got answers!
What Does It Mean To Be A Panromantic Asexual?
“Sexual attraction and romantic attraction are seen as being so intrinsically linked in our culture that it’s assumed that you can’t experience one without the other,” says asexuality activist Yasmin Benoit. “[That] isn’t the case.”
A panromantic asexual is just one example of someone whose romantic and sexual orientations differ. Asexual people can still be romantically attracted to any gender or sexuality. Meanwhile, panromantics feel romantically attracted to people regardless of their sexualities or gender identities.
Let’s break it down one word at a time.
What Is Panromantic?
You are probably already familiar with the term “pansexual”; panromantic is similar in that they both share the prefix “pan” which is Greek for “all.” The LGBT Foundation defines both as a person who feels “a sexual or romantic attraction not limited by gender, or gender identity.”
While panromantics experience romantic attraction to binary and nonbinary partners, that doesn’t mean they’re attracted to just anyone. Panromantics care about nurturing emotional intimacy with a partner they’re romantically drawn to, regardless of their gender. It’s different, and deeper, than just being close friends.
Panromantic vs Biromantic
It’s a common misconception that bisexuality is limited to the gender binary and excludes those who are nonbinary. In fact, biromantic people can experience romantic attraction to two or more genders but not necessarily all. Another definition is that biromantic people are attracted romantically to multiple genders.
The Bisexual Resource Center also asserts: “Pansexual and bisexual are identities that overlap and have nuanced differences, and someone who is attracted to all genders or regardless of gender might also identify as bisexual.”
Identifying as biromantic or panromantic is ultimately about how each label fits you and your experiences.
What Is Asexuality?
Did you know that the A in LGBTQIA+ means asexual, aromantic, and agender – not “ally”?
The Asexual Visibility and Education Network (AVEN) defines an asexual as someone who “does not experience sexual attraction – they are not drawn to people sexually and do not desire to act upon attraction to others in a sexual way.” Unlike someone who is aromantic (“aro” for short), an asexual person (or “ace”) can still experience romantic attraction to others. Meanwhile, a person who experiences sexual attraction is called an allosexual.
Asexuality is different from celibacy, which is the decision to abstain from sex usually for religious reasons. It’s a sexual orientation just like any other in the LGBTQIA+ spectrum.
The Asexuality Spectrum
Most people may be surprised to know there’s a wide variety of identities that fall along the asexuality spectrum (or a-spec)! Since we’ve already covered asexuality, which is also an umbrella term, here are a few more to learn about:
- Graysexual: People who experience sexual attraction rarely and/or at a low intensity.
- Demisexual: People who feel sexually attracted only after they’ve formed a deep, emotional connection. A desire for physical intimacy is based on secondary attraction (getting to know someone over time), not primary attraction (first impressions).
- Reciprosexual: People who don’t experience sexual attraction unless it’s reciprocated.
- Akiosexual: People whose sexual attraction fades if reciprocated.
- Aceflux: People whose sexual attraction fluctuates between asexual and allosexual but generally stays within the asexual spectrum.
Sexual Attraction vs Romantic Attraction
People conflate sexual and romantic attraction as one and the same and for some, they do overlap. But did you know a person’s sexual orientation and romantic orientation can be two different things?
Split Attraction Model
The Split Attraction Model (SAM) was created by aromantic and asexual people to help describe their identities to themselves and others. While SAM isn’t a perfect model, many in the LGBTQIA+ community have found it helpful to better articulate and understand their identities.
Sometimes who you want to date and who you want to have sex with can differ! People can desire a sexual relationship without romance (like a casual hook-up) while others, like an asexual panromantic, might desire emotional, rather than physical, intimacy.
Someone who is aromantic can identify as heterosexual. Someone can identify as a biromantic asexual or homoromantic demisexual. One identity does not invalidate the other.
What Does Being A Panromantic Asexual Mean For Relationships?
Sex isn’t the only difference between romantic relationships and friends! Panromantic asexuals may seek love and an emotional bond just like anyone else who wants a romantic relationship. Because only roughly 1% of the population identifies as asexual, a panromantic ace is likely to find an allosexual romantic partner.
Communication and trust are always important but especially so in mixed-orientation relationships that may require compromise. However, asexual panromantics can fall in love, get married, and have kids if they want! So long as each partners’ needs are considered and respected, they can share a very happy life together.
“To me, love doesn’t culminate in passionate kisses and the heated feel of skin against skin,” writes panromantic asexual journalist Malvika Padin. “Rather, it’s about a lifetime of warm companionship, kisses on the cheek, and comforting hugs. And it doesn’t matter who it came from.”
But What About The Sex?
It’s a common misconception that all asexuals are sex-repulsed. Some can be sex-positive while others are simply sex-neutral. After all, asexuality is about a lack of sexual attraction, not a lack of sex drive.
Asexual people can and do experience arousal (and many enjoy masturbation, too). There are several reasons why an asexual person might engage in sexual activity, such as:
- A desire to bond and feel close with their partner
- To relax
- Because it feels good (for their partner, for them)
- To conceive
- Because they’re curious
However, some aces might only want sex sometimes, under specific circumstances, or not at all. Angela Chen, author of the bestselling book Ace: What Asexuality Reveals About Desire, Society, and the Meaning of Sex, writes: “If someone never wants to have sex, that is okay forever. For people who do decide to have sex, it is a choice each time, not a set of ossified obligations that are impossible to challenge or change.”
What is always key with physical affection, especially with asexuals, is consent without pressure or guilt. And remember: having sex does not mean a person is no longer asexual!
The Panromantic Asexual Flag
While there are several versions on social media, the most common panromantic asexual flag features a heart in pansexual pride colors centered on the ace flag. Each stripe of color has a different meaning, so let’s break it down!
The pan pride flag has been in use since the 2010s and was created by Jasper V. It consists of three horizontal bars of color representing attraction to multiple genders:
- Magenta for those who identify as women
- Yellow in the middle stands for agender, genderfluid, and nonbinary people
- Cyan for those who identify as men
The ace pride flag was designed by AVEN user standup and was selected in a community vote in 2010. It features four horizontal stripes in black (asexuality), gray (gray- and demisexuality), white (allosexual partners and allies), and purple (community). There are variations on the flag design depending on where asexual people fall on the spectrum.
Here is the panromantic asexual flag too! pic.twitter.com/6fdFYMhCPZ
— Eli⁷ (@joons11thmoon) May 27, 2019
Is There A Test for Panromantic Asexuality?
Not really. While there are many unofficial quizzes online for folks who are curious about their sexual and romantic orientations, you know yourself and your experiences best.
That being said, you can read up on the signs of being asexual or panromantic to learn more. You can also try asking yourself a few questions:
- Have I felt attracted to someone before knowing their gender?
- When I imagine my ideal romantic partner, does their gender matter?
- How does identifying as panromantic make me feel vs biromantic, queer, or another label?
- Have I felt attracted to someone without feeling turned on by them?
- Do you feel alienated by or unable to relate to conversations about sex?
- When I show affection to someone I’m interested in, is sex important?
Romantic and sexual orientation can sometimes align and sometimes they don’t. Panromantic asexuality is just one example of how truly diverse romance and sexuality can be. There is so much nuance in a romantic relationship that goes beyond sex. After all, if sex without love can exist, then so can love without sex.
It’s possible to have a fulfilling romantic relationship without the need to feel sexual attraction – what’s important is communication, understanding, and consent.
RELATED: I am asexual. My story is exactly why LGBTQ inclusive sex ed should be required in schools.
oh for gods sake – these people are exhausting.
hahaha…I agree. Must everything be so thoroughly examined and analyzed? Some things are merely individual paths, each unique and personal. Are we forming clubs? Or, encouraging personal strength and positivity of self? Wait…stop…too much talking…stop me!!!
not nearly as much as dealing with people who feel the need to judge what goes over their head
Yeah, its just an extension of the self-centered egotism of today. Exhausting.
In order to find common bonds with others, humans find ways to differentiate themselves from others. Isn’t is ironic?
You nailed it.
@RKP Was just going to say the exact same thing.
I think this wins the most asinine “article” I’ve read in an extremely long time. My brain is fried.
Did not take much to fry your little brain SamB, BarryM et al! WTFE.
The human race evolves all the time. For some! The rest…..
WQA: Are you getting upset because you realize your expensive degree in Gender Studies is fundamentally worthless?
The right wing echo chamber articles that prompted you to claim the Durham filings proved Clinton and Russia colluded in spying on Trump were far more asinine.
Cowboy: LOL you hold onto that one. In 15 years you can tell me, “Remember that time I said you were wrong and then you corrected yourself?” And I’ll be all “Yes yes, you were very smart.”
I get that you really want to dismiss it but it truly speaks to who you are.
Anyone who actually read the Durham filing knew there was no claims about spying or Clinton. There were certain media outlets that completely fabricated that claim and best that drum. You were duped and shown to people a person that is incapable of independent thought. It only took a few minutes of googling and reading to see that the claim was false. That you lack the awareness to question how you got yourself in that situation and continue to repeat claims from the same media is telling. So it’s not about simply mistaking something, that happens. You have exposed that you lack basic critical thought skills.
And yes, I’m going to keep reminding you that you are gullible and susceptible to propaganda.
Eternal.Cowboy, you should google “Sussmann, Durham, warants” and READ the stories to reach reality. You can’t dismiss facts because they don’t support your own wild political conspiracy theories.
Facts are facts – your downplaying them speaks to your (dis)honesty. Pay attention to reality, it’s messy. Inconvenient truth can’t be wished away.
try asking questions next time you’re confused then
Ditto, ridiculous, and probably adds to why people hate LGBT
no more ridiculous than being straight. people tend to hate what is different from them or what they don’t get, hence the need for awareness
I’m of different minds. I do feel like this stuff can make it a bit easier for folks to understand themselves or explain themselves to others. It also helps some people not feel as if they’re alone or like others can’t relate to them. On the other hand, being so nit-picky and wanting to give an identity to every human trait, it does get exhausting and it even sometimes just makes things more confusing and can assist in people not being truly honest with themselves and others.
The reality is that human bonds, sexuality, preferences, motivations, preferences, psychology is such a specific thing and journey for people. While the gender, sexual, affection, romantic attachment, emotional investment, relationship contentment, commitment spectrum is incredibly wide and varied. And I don’t really think identities and flags are truly helping to get these point across or sell that to the world.
This is great! I love hearing about the wider ace community.
Articles like this are important because it helps people figure out that they aren’t broken, they’re just different. Having words to describe your experience is one of the first ways to help create a community.
I somewhat agree. But I also think these micro identities and the weight we give identities in general can sometimes lead to people not genuinely confronting their internal/external traumas and struggles. It can sometimes lead to fairly gender and hetero “normal” people attaching to queerness and exploiting it for money, clout, out of narcissism or simply because they don’t feel as if they belong in the “straight world”. In some cases it can help aid internalized phobias, gay panic, gay resentments, misogyny, misandry, self-misogyny, self-misandry. And it can sometimes lead to people not truly investigating and being genuinely honest as far as their dimensions and the elements of where they are in the gender, sexual, affection, romantic attachment, emotional investment, comfort, commitment spectrum.
There are good and bad things about all of this. The important thing is recognizing just how nuanced and individual people are.
I guess I am just gay, I was attracted to my partner by his looks and the warm, romantic feelings I felt from him.
The Pan community will find you and change you into their mold for you declaring you are “just gay”.
Sigh, just what we need another flag.
And remember Panromantic Asexual Awareness Day is February 30.
Do these people sit around all day dreaming up complete garbage like this? I mean, they’re a parody of themselves, already. Is there a Gender Anonymous for these poor, lost souls? “Hello. I’m a gender identity addict. When I realized I had twenty-seven gender identities, it had gone too far. I needed help.”
except that this has nothing to do with gender so you’ve just demonstrated you have no idea what you’re talking about
Well, max, if you don’t see the connection between gender and sex, you might need an eye test.
polaro might help your case to make a real argument instead of resorting to ad hominem. reality is you’re just confused. ones gender is not defined by their genitals. even a blind person knows that
I swear this is all funded by Russia and China to turn Western Civilization into a laughing stock.
I would imagine you find anything out of bama a tad terrifying.
As expected, most of the comments here are condescending to the point of being entirely dismissive and bitchy. I guess that partially highlights just how bitter and old a lot of demo who posts here is. What I will say is that this hyper nit-picking and micro-fying of identities still mostly comes from cis gender people who primarily indulge hetero commitments. Therefore, it often feels even more like “mostly” gender and hetero normal people looking to feel special and different and looking to distance themselves from gender/hetero normalcy and “straight world” politics while still ultimately taking advantage of their privileges. It can also be a way to covertly promote gay resentments and internalized phobias and narcissism (see, you “gays” and trans people aren’t so special after all. Just because I present as my born sex and am in a hetero commitment doesn’t mean I’m not queer and special too!). Also, give us something truly subversive, like inherently heterosexual or sexually hetero-leaning guys who are ultimately homo-romantic or non hetero-leaning when it comes to the sexual, affection, romantic, emotion, commitment spectrum. There’s actually plenty of guys like that, but hardly any of them are truly direct about it. However, as I said, it is important to respect people’s journeys and respect that many people are trying to understand themselves and fit in somewhere.
People are just tired of whiny fools who don’t want to be labeled as one, when we all know they are that. I have more respect for women and men who have the balls to just say “I am gay (or bi) and proud” or “I am trans and proud”. Everything else just adds to hate towards our community because it fuels that we are confused or can “change” our minds about who we are attracted to. That’s bs. We are who we are. I had a close friend who said he was gay until around 40 said he was bi. Dated a woman once and now is back to men and declares he’s gay again. I’m just like “Girl, you were always gay”, “you wanted to be something you obviously weren’t”. One of the topic at CPAC was sadly about pronouns which has become an annoying topic as well. When fools start wanting to be called “It” (and we know those people), I am done with that stupidity. Who wants to be referred to as “it”. Annoying!
Your perspective is pure politics and sociology. You also need to take into account people’s individual struggles and journeys. Fluidity, confusions, questioning, contradictions, traumas, mental health struggles are all fairly common. And there’s nothing wrong with acknowledging that. While ultimately, these are words people choose to or choose not to attach to. You can never truly know the dimensions of anyone’s sexuality, psychology, insecurities, motivations, where someone is in the gender, sexual, affection, romantic, emotion, commitment spectrum. All you know is what people present. While at least 30% of the population probably fits within the queer spectrum in some ways and to some extent, whether they acknowledge it or not. So, yeah, things are gonna be convoluted.
I definitely find all the micro identities and hyper obsession with identity in general a bit tiresome and sometimes counterproductive and problematic. But a lot of people are trying to figure out who they and are trying to belong somewhere. And a lot of folks (including yourself) don’t respect people’s dimensions, struggles, journeys and don’t truly understand gender, sexuality, the orientation spectrum. Being a persistent ass-wipe about everything does more harm than there being 100,000 identities.
Sexual orientation is NOT an identity.
That is what’s wrong about looking at absolutely every aspect of human existence through the lens of gender ideology.
inbama, you do not get to decide the identity of anyone but yourself
LGBT represents us all. Adding more labels adds to the hate against our community. Everyone wants their own “letter” when our rainbow flag is supposed to represent us all.
I also feel some who are gay don’t want to be called gay. I say “sit down”, you just hurting how far we’ve come and just creating more hate.
no, lgbt is just a short form. sure, it represents the entire spectrum of non cishet identites but it is not the entire initialism. its a double edge sword really. on the one hand, with a longer initialism, people are easily turned off since they don’t understand it and are less likely to take it seriously. on the flip side, only using the first 4 letters alienates identites outside it since they are lesser known causing erasure since some wont take it seriously past that. there is no real solution. some include a couple extra letters “lgbtqia” while others simply opt to use “+” to recognize there are more without listing them. if anything comments like yours hurt how far the community has come. not everyone has to be out and proud. especially since there is far more hate from within the community itself then there is directed towards it from the outside
You lot are hard to please. You whine that the articles at Queerty are too fluffy and insignificant and then when they put something of depth here, y’all still wanna whine about it. Holy Christ.
Pretentious introspective self-absorbtion is not “depth”. What’s next? Furry recognition? Fart smellertism? Sweat mongering? Precognitive dream-lovers? Red-headed hair extension attraction? Smurfism?
I WAS just a white gay guy. Today, my history makes me: multi-racial (Caucasian, Jewish, Black English, Irish), Straight, Gay, Bi, CIS, Queer, Trans and Pansexual. My combo plate has more depth than your skinny resume – ha ha ha. Such excessive identity politics is absurd – dividing the community against itself.
Den does a great job breaking down reality. The editors posting this crap are taking a piss on us.
ronbo, you are encouraged to ask questions next time you don’t get something instead of judging…
“I WAS just a white gay guy. Today, my history makes me: multi-racial (Caucasian, Jewish, Black English, Irish)”
I’m pretty sure you’re still just a white gay guy. All of those things you name off are still Caucasian. “Black English” in the manner that you seem to be using it just means that somewhere in the past, Spanish (which is Caucasian) blood entered your bloodline. I happen to have Black Irish blood in me, which is similar in that Spanish blood mingled with Irish blood waaaay back in the day. Nowadays though when people say “Black English”, they tend to mean actual Black people who are English. So unless by “Black English” you mean “English person of African decent”, you’re still just a white guy. The things you named off are ethnic groups, not races.
There are some really, really serious intellectual flaws in this article that make it more humorous than anything else.
Reciprosexual: People who don’t experience sexual attraction unless it’s reciprocated. [think on that for a second, in order for the desire to exist (and thus be reciprocated or not) it must be felt BEFORE its reciprocity is known.]
Akiosexual: People whose sexual attraction fades if reciprocated. [losing desire for someone if they reflect that desire back is practically the definition of a neurotic fear or relationship or commitment, it is certainly not some sort of “romantic preference”.]
Demisexual: People who feel sexually attracted only after they’ve formed a deep, emotional connection. A desire for physical intimacy is based on secondary attraction (getting to know someone over time), not primary attraction (first impressions). [this is called “the way most women are trained from infancy on…it feeds into the sexist myth that even a physically unattractive man has a good chance with a beautiful woman if he “knows how to win her”.]
“Have I felt attracted to someone before knowing their gender?” [empirical studies have repeatedly demonstrated that the first thing one does , unconsciously, when a stranger is seen is try to determine gender. Anxiety and discomfort can result when this is difficult or impossible. This is believed by some to be a source of transphobia, but it certainly makes the being attracted romantically to a person of unknown gender unlikely.
Additionally many studies of culture and literature indicate that romantic love didn’t really exist in a meaningful way before the 11th century or so, and marriages for love were rare prior to the mid 1800s. So romance is definitely a cultural construct, not something innately human or universal in any way. It seems to me to be a way to legitimize sexual longing in a culture that demonizes sexual desire.
I could go on, but you get the picture. This article is mere naval gazing, it is not at all grounded in empiricism. It might as well be about astrology or crystal vibrations!
except many aren’t flaws. you just misunderstand.
you frequently bounce back and forth between saying sexual attraction and sexual desire in place of one another but those are two different. things and all sexual feelings can occur independently without any one being needed to cause any other. as for your “fear or relationship” comment, sexuality has nothing to do with romance. two separate orientations. you can be in a strong romantic relationship with little to no sex ( or in a sexual and/or romantic relationship with someone you aren’t’ sexually attracted to). just like you can sleep with someone you don’t want to date
i am only going speak regarding demi specifically as it’s the only one i’m familiar with. the paragraph above is simply referencing the faulty logic you used on the other two. no this is not the way “most people feel”. the average allosexual (non ace) feels sexual attraction on a near daily basis. this can happen multiple times a day, to multiple people simultaneously, or even complete strangers. because society has tried to enforce the false idea that sex = love, most people will only date someone they are already attracted to, or, if they aren’t, they will likely only start to become serious with their potential partnters once they feel it. demi is a subcategory of asexual, in which the potential for sexual attraction can only be present once the individual feels a close emotional bond. key word being potential as it may never happen. even if it does, it may only ever be a one time thing and fade quickly or be such a weak feeling it’s not noticed or confused for something else. they will not look at some random person on the street or their server or an actor and get turned on. even if are in a strong romantic relationship, and even if they have/want/like sex, that does not guarantee that sexual attraction has or will ever be felt.
“have i ever felt attraction before knowing their gender”… there are several types of attraction i.e (sensual, platonic, aesthetic, intellectual, emotional, romantic, etc.) sexuality is ONLY about sexual attraction while romantic orientation is ONLY about romantic attraction. other types may influence these but they don’t have to have any part. also you have the concept of romantic love backwards. marriage began as a means to unionize two parties to share power and had nothing to do with love. it was a business transaction. marriage is a social contract sure, but love isn’t. one doesn’t have to be married for their love to be valid. it’s a natural feeling most people have. what is a social contruct is how love has been romanticized – the way in which society markets ways to show love. but thats more capitalism than anything. sure some believe the idea of love is just a chemical reaction to compel reproduction, but that is more lust than anything which again, has nothing to do with love unless you want it to
i could go on but you get the picture. your comments are not grounded in fact, or reality. might as well be fairy tale
What is with all the labels?
This is all the result of Gender Ideology which is now LGBTQ2+ religion.
right? heterosexual? what will they come up with next
no offense to anyone, but wasn’t it much easier when we were all just LGBT?
The object of getting gay men to identify as non-binary, gender-fluid, furby, etc. is to reduce our numbers and therefore dominance of previously LGB organizations like GLAAD (which in 1985 meant Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation, but no longer).
We have too much privilege.
not really since there were never just those 4. that has always been a short form. not the whole initialism. it’s a double edged sword. on the one hand, using a longer initialism makes people embarassed they don’t get it and in response, wont bother to take it seriously. on the flip side, using only the shortest version can risk alienating and erasing identites outside those 4 since they are lesser known and seen as less valid
and inbama, including others takes nothing away from you. says more about you if you think its some sort of agenda
To Inbama and whoever else:
Whatever inherent orientation someone may be, folks have always embraced the identities they wished to embrace. That’s always been a thing, and it will forever be a thing. There have always been people who are inherently homosexual or bisexual claiming to be “straight”, always been people inherently bi claiming to be “gay”, always people inherently heterosexual claiming that they’re something other than “straight”, etc. While there’s no real definition for what “sexuality” actually is (is “sexuality” supposed to be about arousal or attraction or sexual enjoyment or sexual preferences or lifestyle or desires or passions? Because guess what? Those are all different things). While different types and extents of fluidity has always been an experience for some people. Even Kinsey, with all his wrong-minded theories, wrote about fluidity. And yes, there are folks who are asexual and pan romantic or heterosexual and bi romantic or sexually hetero-leaning but homo-romantic/homo-commitment or bisexual and pan-romantic and homo-commitment. These are real contradictions people live with. Sense of gender and how you relate to gender has always and will always effect how you view yourself and others. Sociology, religion, politics, ego, insecurities, psychology, mental health, money have always and will always effect how people present themselves and what they choose to attach to and not attach to. While the gender, sexual, affection, romantic, emotion, relationship, commitment spectrum is wide and varied.
None of this is truly anything new. Things have always been convoluted. People are just coming up with different ways to express it. Older generations made a bit too much of a big deal about trying to prove someone is born some type of way. They made too big of a deal out of sex and identity in general. That’s really why things are so messy. The younger generation is trying to clean up that mess, albeit with sometimes mixed or cringe-y results.
This hyper and micro obsession with identity is still about filtering people through hetero and gender normalcy, and it’s still so much about ego and sociology and sex. That’s the main issue I have with it.
Whatever lens you use, we will always be exceptions to the rules.
I have no problem with “heteronormativity.” None of us would be here today without it.
inbama, beyond sad if you not only admitted you’re queer phobic, but also take pride in it… sounds to me like you’e just projecting something…
The most self indulgent article I have ever read.
Every person is unique. Every day is different. How I feel today may change. There, I just made it simple. All the rest is nonsense from pseudo intellectuals pretending to be insightful.
1. doesn’t matter if things change. just meant you either knew who you were at that point in time or your ruled out being X so no harm done either way
2. sexuality is inherently complex. the issue lies with those who do not accept that and insist on trying for force it to fit into neat boxes…
3. calling someting nonsense is an admission one does not understand. in no way does that make it any less true or valud. just makes one, at best, confused. ask questions next time instrad of acting like you know better
Max, you need a hobby. Your need to comment on everything looks pompous. You seem to know everything. How about solving the Ukraine invasion while you’re at it. Your assessment the people not accepting cuts both ways…a rational thinker would have seen the error in that argument. Good luck to you. Find a hobby.
1. so just so we’re clear, it’s not ok for me to call out or correct but it’s perfectly fine for you to comment multiple times to mock, judge and make baseless assumptions (you know what they say about that right? that’s called hypocrisy/ gaslighting/projection.
2. this is the fallacy (fault in logic either out of genuine ignorance or an intentional means to trick and distract in order to attempt to win an argument – or turn conversation into an argument they can attempt to win – not otherwise possible in lieu of fact, evidence, and sound rationale) of ad hominems. ignoring the actual argument to attack me in a vein attempt to make me look bad as if that magically discredits the argument and by extantion somehow makes you and and your lack of argument look more valid. you also resorted to red herrings. trying to distance yourself from the point being made by bringing up something entirely irrelevant in the hopes that will become the new focus
3. agree to disagree only works on trivial matters. that doesn’t apply to matters of human rights and facts as there is an objective right and wrong so disagreeing is, at best, confusion, and at worst, denial and willful ignorance
4. nothing you’ve said has been even remotely rational. just sad attempts to justify bigotry
not understanding or not liking what you hear doesn’t make it any less true. you are encouraged to ask questions. please come back when you’re ready to sit at the grown ups table and have a mature and civil conversation