Going on a date, and it's just the two of you? How ... quaint. OkCupid's setting up threesomes

Re: order by breast_size

>order by breast_size desc

Though not, presumably, when gender=1.

>gender can be encoded as a boolean value 0 or 1, based on similarity to a distinguishing body part

Alas, only in the myopic world of the programmer where everyone has a first name and last name, their name fits into 30 characters, uses the latin alphabet and has no punctuation. Leaving choice aside, some people really don't have a distinguishing body part and it does seem unreasonable to assign them to an arbitrary category for administrative convenience.

Actually, outside "dating" applications, I can't see the point of recording anyone's sex at all - it should be irrelevant. And within dating applications, it's presumably in everyone's interests for all the participants to be clear what they want and how they see themselves.

Re: To answer your question about demisexuals

'Demisexual' sounds a lot like 'married' from that description.

AC because...

Re: To answer your question about demisexuals

Like there's recently many new orientations and sexual states...

You're welcome. I know there are all these labels for different sexual attributes and I honestly feel most of them are because everyone wants to be a special snowflake. That's not really an idea I support; although I identify as asexual/nonsexual all that means to me is that I don't do sex or relationships. How other people react to me knowing that about me is a matter for their judgement. If it upsets or bothers them that's their lookout, as long as they don't assault or harass me for being what I am.

As anyone who is familiar with my posts on here knows, I detest political correctness and the idea that people have some right not to be offended. I hate how people feel they have to skirt delicately around certain topics for fear of being called a bigot or a something-phobe. If people want to label themselves as different they have to be prepared to accept that such differences make some people uncomfortable, and that's human nature. I myself have had some quite nasty things said to me about my asexuality but really, I'd far rather people honestly express how it makes them feel than they smooth over their interactions with a false layer of insincere niceness driven by fear of causing offence. Give me honesty over diplomacy any day!

As far as sexuality is concerned, I simply see it as a 3-dimensional space, with the x, y, and z axes representing orientation, intensity and abstraction, respectively.

Orientation is attraction to own (homosexual; -1 on the x-axis) or other (heterosexual; +1 on the x-axis.) Intensity is negligible sexual desire (asexual/nonsexual; -1 on the y-axis) to strong desire (hypersexual/nympho; +1 on the y-axis.) Abstraction is attraction to the concrete/physical (paraphilia/fetishism; -1 on the z-axis) to the abstract/ideal (sapiosexual, romantic; +1 on the z-axis.)

Given a -1 to +1 range for each axis, pretty much everyone on the planet can have their sexuality completely described by a triaxial coordinate. I would describe myself as an 0.5, -1, -0.5. At least then reducing it to numbers eliminates the special-snowflakiness of ascribing a million PC labels to all possible positions on the sexual scattergram! ;)

Re: "sapiosexual."

"It means that they find gender and (at least in theory) species irrelevant"

interesting one because it would be dependent on your definition of species..........for instance the historic trend to consider blacks or jews as sub-human species would make many of us sapiosexual.

Considering that modern research seems to indicate we are all various hybrids of sapiens / neanderthal / erectus and others, then maybe we are all sapiosexual....