ok. obvious you've never gotten ur peepee wet lol.
...
I didn't want to have to explain this, but now I have to.
That's actually how I "know." I didn't have love, of course, but I've masturbated like every normal teenager does. I didn't like the feeling at all, nor did the content arouse me. I felt like I was hurting myself more than pleasuring. Clearly, since I was "successful," I must have a love drive (aloveuals do have love drives, they're just not attracted to anything), and I'm most likely old enough to be able to know what I like and what I don't. I've already established that I like no one loveually, but I still like men romantically, which is even why I brought up my loveuality. I honestly don't get why everyone has to disprove my own feelings. Are you restraining some sort of tension pertaining to your own loveuality, and therefore get enjoyment from invalidating my own?
*sigh*
Am I the only person who wishes that "aloveual" would be kept to its original meaning? Originally, it meant "to reproduce one's own kind without the help of a mate (or through a symbiotic relationship)". Now people have added the extra definition reserved for people; the noun "aloveual". Couldn't they have come up with a different word? Every time I hear this on the forums, I think of you guys who claim to be "aloveual" to be fungus or plants or something.
You're not fungus or plants, right? Or is that some silly notion I have?Toothed DeerDangit.
It is keeping its original meaning. Why don't we break the word down so you see what I mean? Note that I'm not defining the word, I'm just explaining how the word hasn't been adulterated in anyway over the years.
a loveual"a" means without.
"loveual" in this context means loveual attraction. It can mean other things in other contexts, of course. (Definition 1 from dictionary.com refers to love, as in what parts someone has)
Fungi, plants, and cells all
reproduce aloveually, without loveual attraction. Which would mean that they procreate, as you said, without a mate or loveual attraction. The only way possible is through mitosis, meiosis, spores, seeds, etc. You are right: humans cannot
reproduce aloveually.
What I do not understand, however, is how the word for human loveuality "deviates from the original definition." If I am aloveual, I am without loveual attraction. I do not, however, reproduce aloveually, as I am human. Were I theoretically to reproduce, it would still be loveual reproduction from an aloveual. That doesn't change the fact that I have no loveual attraction to anyone and am aloveual.
Also, I'm just saying, dictionary.com states that the first, and therefore most common definition, relates to neither of your two definitions.
See for yourself.I still don't understand why people like to badger me about my loveuality. Am I arguing incorrectly in such a way it's funny? Why don't you guys explain to me why you know you're straight? How can I trust that you, too, are old enough to make such a bold decision?
I really want to change my username now; I think it ruins my credibility.