Note: On occasion, and given the correct circumstances, Dina can demonstrate sexual arousal.
“dang, is THAT all it takes??”
I feel like this wouldn’t work with Becky.
Or really for DOA Dina at all. Actually she seems to have problems with the whole “act your age” thing.
“Wait! You’re twelve?”
“And, you’re not?”
Dina is definitely twelve… on a “best character” scale of one to ten.
I feel like that… actually is a quote from something, or close to it?
It’s the autism. Or, rather, the “not officially autism because it’s drawing on aspects of Willis and he’s never been diagnosed, but seems to blatantly be autism to everyone who has or knows about it, myself included.”
I know the idea is that Dumbiverse and Walkiverse characters are all fundamentally the same people despite having differences in their backstories that range from fairly minor as far as we know (Mike) to huge (Carla), and I’m mostly into that, but I can’t really get into it in Dina’s case. Even assuming things go well with Becky and she comes out of her shell, it’s hard for me to see Dumbiverse Dina ever acting just like Walkyverse Dina.
She seems more like a straight-up revision. They both loved dinosaurs and their hats to a fault and I can reluctantly agree with <I?Shortpacked‘s last-minute declaration that she’s neurodivergent, but IW Dina waffled between being desperately, unreasonably clingy and a disapproving “mom,” neither of which seem remotely like DOA Dina or even someone that DOA Dina might become. Now, I think the changes are definitely for the better, but they’re not subtle, minor edits.
That Shortpacked mention was supposed to go here: http://www.shortpacked.com/index.php?id=2189
So does this one last I checked
I’d definitely find it annoying if the person I liked was a slob, but it would probably take more than that for me to react like Dina did here.
No, Dina! Now his shirt is wrinkled and his posture is bent and his shoes…
… okay, his shoes are probably still tied.
Don’t forget the hair, it is probably messy again.
Which means, by the Transitive Property of Sexual Preferences, she’s not ace, I suppose. Demiace, perhaps?
I’m pretty sure that being turned on by a characteristic or action outside of those considered directly associated with sex is known as a fetish.
Do asexual or demi have fetishes?
Or would that simply be considered a normal hetero/homo standard someone has to meet.
Ace people can have fetishes, although they can also be nonsexual. I know quite a few asexual people who described it as “fascinations”. Also, nonsexual bdsm is a thing amongst them. It’s pretty interesting.
According to the self-described aces I know, they can feel sexual attraction and arousal, they just don’t do it with the regularity or abandon that non-ace people do. It takes more of a connection before it happens.
Wait, you can be asexual and still have sexual attractions and arrousals? Isn’t that like describing yourself as a vegetarian whilst eating beef?
(Wasn’t people wrongly assuming that Dina was asexual a plot point in DoA?)
Like most terms describing human sexuality the term “asexual” is a misnomer based on the most prevalently understood case examples at the time the term was coined and based on a nonexistent binary conception of how such things work.
Binary descriptions are limited but easy to apply. The more range you have the greater the nuance but also the greater the risk of making the term pointless. To use GuruBukaroo’s terms, if a self-described asexual says that they don’t feel sexual attraction or arousal as regularly as a non-asexual, you have to have defined how often is “normal”, and I can’t see that going well for anyone. Surely the line between “low-sex drive” and “asexual” would be extremely vague?
(I am eternally fascinated by the human desire to label and categorise everything. And this doesn’t really affect me, so I’m happy to go with what people agree with. If they do agree.)
Nitpicking the definition like that is like being that guy who gives everyone who identifies as a vegetarian the third degree on whether they’re sure they’re not really a pescetarian, because a lot of people who say that mean they’re a pescetarian, don’t you know.
Anyway fiddly differences in definition are why asexuality is sometimes described as a spectrum. (Which blankets demisexuality, as discussed elsewhere in this thread.) Personally, the fast and loose definition of ace is a godsend. I mean, as an adult who’s never dated, if I followed up “I’m not explicitly against the idea but” with “I have a low sex drive and near-nonexistent internal incentive to enter a relationship” instead of “I’m pretty ace”, people would start trying to workshop me faster than you could say yenta.
Oh, I get the “outsider telling the people in the group that they are doing the thing wrong”. I know at least one person who says “vegetarian” because they were explaining what pescetarian is. From watching them though, it doesn’t help, because it’s just changed the questions from “what’s pescetarian?” to “wait, why are you having fish if you’re vegetarian?”
I guess it depends on what circles move in. For the people I know, saying “I’m not saying I won’t date in the future, but I’m not fussed about being in a relationship and have a low sex-drive” would getless questions than “I’m not saying I won’t date in the future but I’m fairly asexual”. But it’s not something I have to deal with daily so I am happy to listen to others and try and learn.
I suppose the thing is that in my head, “regular sex-drive” and “low sex-drive” have more in common with each other than “low sex-drive and no sex-drive” do. Especially as your sex-drive can vary throughout your life leading to a fairly wide definition of “regular”. If I was 100% not interested in sex in any way, would I feel like I should share a label with people who are only interested in a bit? To go back to the vegetarian definition, if someone has a bacon sandwich once a week, do they still have the right to call themselves a vegetarian, or are they just someone who doesn’t eat much meat? Is that gatekeeping the term, or not?
(I am not in my element here so sorry if I say the wrong thing.)
You’re describing demisexuality, not asexuality. Not that everyone can ever agree on what constitutes asexuality, no, or whether it is an umbrella term or has a particular meaning of its own, but still: *specifically* saying a close connection is needed before interest in sex with a particular person will occur is the definition of demisexuality.
(It’s also not, in the most general usage, rare. Because where it coincides with heteroromanticity, it’s usually accepted as normal variation in relationship style and in some subcultures is in fact prized as The Ideal, but it is a very useful term.)
Generally, asexual is a spectrum. Some can have zero sex drive/desire or some may have it as a biological need (like eating or drinking — less a desire and more just a thing the body occasionally needs). There are those who don’t like sex at all and some who will have sex for their partner’s enjoyment and can find it physically enjoying but don’t generally actively want it. It doesn’t necessarily mean a complete lack of biological sex drive however. Sometimes it does but other times it’s just a lack of mental desire or need.
There is also graysexual and demisexual, which are variations where desire for sexual or physical affection is experienced sometimes or with the right person.
But as mentioned, it’s still debated quite a bit.
I will agree with others that this Dina definitely seems different from DoA Dina. I find this Dina to be quite a bit more serious — she has some of the aspects of Dina but it’s probably the character I see the biggest difference in.
Also as mentioned, that was kind of a plot point in DoA. Dina does enjoy being physical with Becky. I don’t know if Dina is ace so much as she just has trouble relating to and building connections with people enough to pursue a sexual or romantic relationship.
So dressing up nicely is enough to get her to let go of the fact that he almost got her killed?
because Nice People don’t kill (anymore)?
March 18, 2002
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *
*EMAIL — Get a Gravatar
NOTE - You can use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>
I'm so excited for a webcomic that's not about being drunk and depressed!
©1997-2017 It's Walky! | Powered by WordPress with Easel
| Subscribe: RSS
| Back to Top ↑