>>General consensus is that it's quite OK to use as many descriptions as you need.<<
It is good to have confirmation that it is largely okay to use more than one term if it fits. I seem to be on some sliding scale intersection between those terms, with an unknown romantic orientation floating around just to confuse things further, so multiple terms can be very useful.
>>For myself, understanding that you range between ace and low-intensity demi, and that cuddles and kink are what holds a relationship together for you, is a perfectly adequate description, thanks.<<
I'm glad it was a sufficient description, and I may keep your phrasing in mind for later, because you seem to have summed it up very succinctly.
>>Learning subtext dialects and inferring which ones might be in play from whatever overt clues are present is much more challenging for some folks than others -- and introverts more than others<<
For me, I think it's a combination of being an introvert, never having really been taught how to actually recognize and use subtext, and being just far enough from neurotypical to have a hard time with social things. Although I don't think I realized before that being an introvert could be part of my difficulty with picking up subtext and other such cues.
>>Here's hoping you can work out something that might work better for you and try it out, and, if it works, can tell anyone who decides they're uncomfortable with that to go pound sand.<<
Thank you. :) I was in a relationship before and found it satisfying, but we definitely had our difficulties. And now I've had a lot more time to really start to learn myself and who I am, and how that might affect what I want. I don't know yet if that will be a conventional relationship or something else, but I'm going to keep an open mind and see how things go.
Re: Wise to be wary
It is good to have confirmation that it is largely okay to use more than one term if it fits. I seem to be on some sliding scale intersection between those terms, with an unknown romantic orientation floating around just to confuse things further, so multiple terms can be very useful.
>>For myself, understanding that you range between ace and low-intensity demi, and that cuddles and kink are what holds a relationship together for you, is a perfectly adequate description, thanks.<<
I'm glad it was a sufficient description, and I may keep your phrasing in mind for later, because you seem to have summed it up very succinctly.
>>Learning subtext dialects and inferring which ones might be in play from whatever overt clues are present is much more challenging for some folks than others -- and introverts more than others<<
For me, I think it's a combination of being an introvert, never having really been taught how to actually recognize and use subtext, and being just far enough from neurotypical to have a hard time with social things. Although I don't think I realized before that being an introvert could be part of my difficulty with picking up subtext and other such cues.
>>Here's hoping you can work out something that might work better for you and try it out, and, if it works, can tell anyone who decides they're uncomfortable with that to go pound sand.<<
Thank you. :) I was in a relationship before and found it satisfying, but we definitely had our difficulties. And now I've had a lot more time to really start to learn myself and who I am, and how that might affect what I want. I don't know yet if that will be a conventional relationship or something else, but I'm going to keep an open mind and see how things go.