sorcyress: xkcd panel with a single character alone at the computer and the text "Some nights, typing *hug* just doesn't cut it." (xkcd hug)
Katarina Whimsy ([personal profile] sorcyress) wrote2007-12-04 11:53 pm

It's HELLA EGOTISTICAL TIME!

I got told by someone recently that I'm really not very good at portraying the non-sexual self that I actually am, what with my recockulous amounts of flirting and my willingness to cuddle or sit in peoples laps or other such behaviors.

Thoughts?

~Sor
MOOP!

(To clarify, comments are not screened, feel free to toss stuff to make me more/less neurotic via e-mail if you don't want the world to see it, kdsorceress, gmail, you know how to fill in the blanks.)

[identity profile] zaphod-groupie.livejournal.com 2007-12-05 05:02 am (UTC)(link)
As a person who is very nearly on the other end of the sexuality spectrum, I think you do a perfectly reasonable job of representing yourself. There's a bigomfghuge difference between being *opposed* to something versus just not into it, and, correct me if I'm wrong (which I'm not, because I'm perfect that way ; D), but you're much more the latter, right? Other than wearing a sign on your back that reads "I hang out with stoners and condone their actions but I don't pesonally enjoy smoking pot!", who's going to know from looking at you what your feeling on the matter is, y'know?

[identity profile] kdsorceress.livejournal.com 2007-12-05 02:58 pm (UTC)(link)
I'm much more the latter. In the beginning of high school, I was pretty vehement "Ohemgee sex is the badzors and no one can have it, ever" but I've adapted that to be "sex is gross, and weird, and okay, you crazy people can enjoy yourselves, but I'll be over here. Being sensible."

That's a pretty good comparison. Hum.

Thanks Lauren. You are an awesome person, since I don't think I tell you that often enough.

~Sor