Talk:Orchid (orientation)

Should I add orchidpluric? Orchidpluric doesn't have any interest in relationships outside a system, and could be considered under the orchid- umbrella the same way ficto- is often considered under the a- umbrella because the only interest is in something not in this world (in-system, fiction). Are overlaps like that within the scope of this wiki? - Net

Hey. Sure, stick it under the related terms, just make sure it's sourced like everything else. It could fall into the orientations section, I don't personally think it should, but if you'd rather it goes there just lmk. Virgil - Talk - VDT 06:19, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

Tbh I think that would fit better in a Prefix/Suffix table. Related Terms are for full pages, but Orchidpluric doesn't really need a full page unless it has substantial history to it. And it's not an orientation type cause -pluric is just a general modifier, not like -sexual or -romantic. Jeb_CC, Bureaucrat | (xe/xem/xir) (talk) 08:19, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

I'll put orchidpluric under a prefix/suffix table. Where would I put terms/flags made for combinations like aromantic+orchidsexual (dendrian) or orchidromantic+allosexual (vandariac) etc? Are they orientations? - Net

If the combination of identities are not self-explanatory then they're added to their own page/section (something like.. Transfem AFAB is NOT self explanatory as an example, but Aromantic+Orchidsexual is pretty easy to understand). So in the examples you've provided, I would instead opt to put their flags in this category: Category:Combination_Flags. :) And again, as they don't need much explanation, they do not have their own article/text page. Jeb_CC, Bureaucrat | (xe/xem/xir) (talk) 04:07, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

Do we have a source for who coined Orchidpluric? Cause the carrd that the image links to is, from what I can see, is published without a creator name. So I'm not sure where the name Caprisunsandgushers comes from. Jeb_CC, Bureaucrat | (xe/xem/xir) (talk) 02:03, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

The source for the recoined terms says they are recoined from plurgai. Caprisunsandgushers is another one of its names, but I forget where I heard that. Would changing the credits to plurgai work? - Net

That might be better yeah, thanks! :) Whatever is written in text. Jeb_CC, Bureaucrat | (xe/xem/xir) (talk) 22:17, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

Definition of aego

As far as I am aware, aego does involve attraction towards specific people(s). This attraction just doesn't involve the aego individual/is "third person pov" attraction. Aego by itself doesn't specify whether someone is interested or not in having a relationship with the target of the attraction or with anyone else, it just specifies that (even if one were to be in a relationship with the person the attraction is towards) that attraction will always be "third person" and not involve the individual themself. All this to say that I am changing the definition of aego in the related terms chart, but if I am misunderstanding something please tell me. - Net

Unfortunately aego has always been such a confusing identity to me and I've never been able to describe it quite right so I'll let the other editors debate over this. :') Jeb_CC, Bureaucrat | (xe/xem/xir) (talk) 02:03, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

Aegoromanticflux here! Aego itself does not indicate attraction to others. It just means you experience an interest in certain relationships/attraction through the consumption of media and vague fantasies. In other words, they have a preference for romance in fantasy and fictional scenarios. Sources:https://www.reddit.com/r/aromantic/comments/cgh0tg/aegoromantic_what_does_this_mean_to_you/ https://aegoromantic-culture-is.tumblr.com/ https://www.lgbtqia.wiki/wiki/Aegosexual https://orientando.org/listas/lista-de-orientacoes/aego/

Ah, my understanding/experience seems to be more from when it was still called autochorissexual, which placed it with other sexualities/paraphilias that have a "target" of attraction, in other words a specific person(s) the attraction is towards. (Source: https://archive.ph/2022.02.15-090130/https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22576251/). That might be specific to the aegosexual orientation though, so thank you for your perspective from the aegoromantic side of things. The difference column of aego sounds good. For the definition column, I would argue that enjoying media and fantasies are common aego experiences, but are not inherently required. The aegosexual wiki link you posted (https://www.lgbtqia.wiki/wiki/Aegosexual) actually shows pretty well what I mean by the difference between definition (the disconnect/uninvolvement described in the first sentence of the page) and common experiences (all the different ways that disconnect/uninvolvement can be expressed that are listed after). Another thing I'd bring up is that fantasies being vague is common, but specific or detailed fantasies that just don't involve the fantasizer are also possible. I would remove "vague" from the definition for that reason. Put all of this together and I'd propose changing the definition to "To experience an interest in certain relationships or people in a way that does not involve oneself", with the consumption of media and vague fantasies being put on the aego (orientation) page as common experiences. I can't read the language the citation [8] is written in, so I do not know if this would change its accuracy. I'm not going to edit the page yet, as I'd like to hear your thoughts on this first. (Unimportant, but I find it a bit funny that all this aego discussion is happening on the orchid page.) - Net (June 22 2023)

I totally agree with you! On the main page, I decided to just refer to to it as an orientation that is centered around individuals other than oneself, which was a definition I found on another website that I thought encompassed all the various interpretations nicely. I listed each interpretation for the definition on the main page as well. Feel free to adjust the differences on this page accordingly! Also, Google Chrome has a translator for citation 8 if you have that available (that's what I used to read it).