The Proliferation of Attraction Identities
Part 1 of 36 in the The 2026 Kink Field Guide series.
Something happened to how people describe who they want.
Twenty years ago, you picked from a short menu: straight, gay, bi. Maybe "curious" if you weren't sure. The categories were broad enough to fit most people, and those who didn't fit learned not to mention it.
Now the menu runs pages. Pansexual, demisexual, sapiosexual, asexual, aromantic, graysexual, omnisexual, polysexual, quoiromantic, abrosexual. Each one is a precise specification of how attraction works for that person. Each one says: the old categories didn't fit me, so I needed a new word.
This is either identity fragmentation gone mad or the natural consequence of people finally having language for experiences that were always there.
It's probably both.
Why Now
The proliferation has three drivers:
The internet. Before networked communication, you only knew the people around you. If your attraction pattern was unusual, you might go your whole life thinking you were alone in it—or broken. The internet let people find others like them. It let them compare notes. It let them name what they found.
The Tumblr generation. A specific cohort came of age on platforms that rewarded identity articulation. Tumblr, early Twitter, niche forums—these were spaces where describing your inner experience in precise detail was social currency. The habit of mining your interiority for specific labels got trained into millions of people.
The collapse of default scripts. When heterosexual monogamy was the only legitimate option, there was less need for precise vocabulary. You were normal or you were deviant. As the default weakened, people needed language for the variations that had always existed but never been speakable.
What the Labels Do
Identity labels do several things at once:
Recognition. "There's a word for what I am" is powerful. It means you're not alone. It means the experience is real enough that others had it and named it. The label validates the experience.
Community. Labels create tribes. If you're demisexual, there are demisexual spaces, demisexual memes, demisexual discourse. The label is a door into a community of people who share your experience.
Communication. Labels are compressed information. Saying "I'm demisexual" conveys in one word what would otherwise take a paragraph: I don't experience sexual attraction until I've formed a significant emotional bond. It's efficient shorthand.
Identity structure. For some people, the label becomes load-bearing. It's not just a description—it's a core part of how they understand themselves. This can be stabilizing or limiting, depending on how rigidly it's held.
The Criticism
The proliferation isn't universally celebrated.
The "special snowflake" critique. Some people see the label explosion as narcissistic—everyone wanting to feel unique, carving out micro-identities to feel special. There's something to this. The incentive structures of social media reward novel identities. But dismissing all specific identity language as attention-seeking misses that many of these experiences are real and were previously nameless.
The "it's just preference" critique. Some argue that most new sexuality labels are just preferences being elevated to orientations. Sapiosexual means you like smart people—is that really an orientation or just a preference? The line between preference and orientation is genuinely blurry. But this critique can be used to dismiss experiences that are more fundamental than simple preference.
The "infinite regression" critique. If we keep subdividing, where does it end? Will everyone eventually need their own unique sexuality label? There's reasonable concern about whether ever-finer categorization serves understanding or just creates more boxes.
The "identity capture" critique. When the label becomes more important than the experience, something has gone wrong. Some people organize their entire self-concept around their sexuality label, which can trap them in a fixed identity that doesn't allow for growth or change.
The Defense
The proliferation also has genuine value.
Language shapes experience. Having a word for something makes it more thinkable, more real, more discussable. People who discover the term "demisexual" often report relief—finally, a word for what they've always experienced. The label doesn't create the experience; it illuminates it.
Precision enables connection. Vague categories produce vague matches. When everyone's just "bi," you don't know if someone means "attracted to all genders equally," "mostly attracted to one gender with occasional attraction to others," or "attracted based on vibe not gender." The finer categories let people find their actual people.
Visibility enables advocacy. Asexual people were invisible for most of history—not because they didn't exist, but because there was no language to make them visible. The label creates the category, and the category creates the possibility of recognition and accommodation.
The Attachment Lens
Different attraction identities map onto attachment patterns in interesting ways.
Demisexuality has obvious overlap with anxious attachment. The requirement for emotional bond before sexual attraction parallels the anxious person's need for security before vulnerability. This isn't to say all demisexuals are anxiously attached—but the pattern resonates.
Aromanticism can correlate with avoidant patterns. If you've learned that emotional closeness is dangerous, you might experience less romantic attraction generally. Again, not a universal—some aromantics have secure attachment and simply don't experience romantic attraction. But the correlation exists.
The ace spectrum includes people with every attachment style. Asexuality is about attraction, not connection capacity. Secure aces exist. Anxious aces exist. The attachment system and the attraction system are related but distinct.
The IFS Lens
Internal Family Systems offers another angle. Different parts of us might have different "orientations."
The part that wants safety might be drawn to stable, predictable partners regardless of gender. The part that wants excitement might be drawn to novelty and intensity. The exile that holds shame might suppress certain attractions entirely.
When someone's stated identity doesn't match their behavior, parts conflicts might be involved. The conscious mind identifies one way; exiled parts pull another direction. The identity label represents one part's perspective, not the whole system.
This isn't to say attraction identities are "just" parts configurations. But it adds a layer to understanding why some people feel stable in their labels and others feel chronic uncertainty.
The Evolutionary Lens
Evolutionary psychology asks: why would this variation exist?
The ace spectrum is an interesting case. If sexual attraction is supposed to drive reproduction, why would some percentage of the population not experience it?
Several theories: Kin selection (aces help relatives reproduce). Frequency dependence (aces fill useful niches in social groups). Simple variation (not every trait is adaptive; some are just statistical spread).
The demisexual pattern might be adaptive for long-term pair bonding in species with extended infant dependency. Requiring emotional bond before sexual attraction means you're more likely to mate with a stable partner.
These explanations are speculative. But they counter the notion that the "default" pattern is the only one that makes evolutionary sense.
The Practical Consequences
The proliferation of attraction identities has real effects on how people date and form relationships.
Dating app complexity. Profiles now include multiple identity labels. This helps people find compatible matches but also creates information overload. Reading someone's identity list—pansexual, demisexual, poly, aro—requires decoding. The labels compress information but also require shared vocabulary to decode.
Community formation. Each identity creates potential community. Demisexual people find each other, share experiences, create memes and discourse. This is positive—people find their people. But it can also create fragmentation where communities become so niche they lose critical mass.
Identity rigidity. When labels become too central, they can trap people. Someone who identified as demisexual at 20 might feel obligated to maintain that identity at 30, even if their experience has changed. The label that liberated can constrain.
Gatekeeping dynamics. Within communities, debates emerge about who "really" qualifies for a label. Is someone demisexual if they occasionally experience attraction without emotional bond? These definitional battles can become toxic, recreating the exclusion the labels were meant to escape.
The visibility trade-off. More labels increase visibility for diverse experiences. But they can also make the landscape harder to navigate. Someone new to queer community might be overwhelmed by terminology, creating barriers to entry rather than welcome.
The proliferation serves real needs—recognition, community, communication. But it also creates complexity that requires management.
The Landscape
Here's what the attraction identity landscape includes:
Orientation to gender:
- Heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual (the classics)
- Pansexual (attraction regardless of gender)
- Omnisexual (attraction to all genders, but gender is a factor)
- Polysexual (attraction to multiple but not all genders)
Conditions of attraction:
- Demisexual (sexual attraction only after emotional bond)
- Sapiosexual (attraction to intelligence)
- Various other -sexuals specifying what triggers attraction
Degree of attraction:
- Asexual (little to no sexual attraction)
- Graysexual (rare sexual attraction)
- Allosexual (standard levels of sexual attraction—the unmarked category)
Romantic vs sexual split:
- Aromantic (little to no romantic attraction)
- The aro-ace spectrum acknowledges that romantic and sexual attraction are different axes
What to Make of It
The proliferation of attraction identities is a genuine phenomenon that reflects genuine experiences.
Some of the labels will stick. Some will merge or fade. Language evolves, and the words that are useful survive while the words that aren't get forgotten.
The criticism and the defense are both partially right. Yes, some of this is performative identity-seeking. Yes, some of this is real experience finally getting named. The work is distinguishing which is which—and that work can only be done individually, by each person examining whether their labels illuminate experience or substitute for it.
The following articles in this cluster will go deep on specific identities. We'll look at what each one means, where it came from, and what it tells us about the diversity of human attraction.
Not to judge. Not to cheerlead. To understand.
Previous: The 2026 Kink Field Guide Next: What Is Pansexual?
