Abrosexual

Abrosexual (pronounced ab-ruh-seks-uhl (U) or ab-roh-sek-shoo-uhl (non-U))

Describing, noting, acknowledging or relating to a person whose sexual orientation is fluid and may from time to time fluctuate.

2013: The construct was abro- + sexual.  Abro- was not a standard suffix but was an adaptation of the Ancient Greek ἁβρός (feminine ἁβρᾱ́, neuter ἁβρόν) (habrós) (graceful, delicate, pretty) which scholars of the Classics note appeared usually in verse (though never in epic poetry) and was rare in early texts written in prose.  In abrosexual it was used in the sense of “graceful, delicate, pretty” (presumably because in Antiquity it was used especially of the human body) but originally it could also describe something splendid in appearance, an elegance of style or (often in a derogatory manner), dainty, luxurious or effete, thus the transferred sense of “delicate”, applied often to those from the Orient.  The construct of abrosexual appears one of English’s linguistic novelties and is unrelated to abrogate (now best known from the use in administrative law) which, dating from 1526, was from the Middle English abrogat (abolished), from the Latin abrogātus, the perfect passive participle of abrogō (repeal), the construct being ab (away) + rogō (ask, inquire, propose).

The word –sexual was a noun or adjective describing a state or style of sexuality, the construct being sex + -ual.  Sex was from the Middle English sexe (gender), from the Old French sexe (genitals; gender), from the Latin sexus (gender; gender traits; males or females; genitals), from the Proto-Italic seksus, from the primitive Indo-European séksus, from sek- (to cut, cut off, sever), thus the meaning “section, division (into male and female)”.  The use as it applied to women was influenced by the Middle French le sexe (women), traces of this development noted in the late sixteenth century.  The usage for third and additional sexes was calqued from the French troisième sexe (third gender), which was applied first to “masculine women” in 1817 and male homosexuals in 1847 (the first such reference in English apparently to in reference to Catholic clergy, a theme which continues, one of the internal criticisms of the Roman Curia (the Holy See’s ecclesiastical cum bureaucratic apparatus, the establishment which runs the Vatican) that it is a “gay cabal”.  Perhaps surprisingly, the use of the word “sex” to describe “sexual intercourse” seems not to have appeared in print until 1899 when was used in that context in HG Wells’ (1866-1946 and a noted proponent of “free love”) novel Love and Mr Lewisham; obviously an abbreviation rather than a euphemism and etymologists presume the use would for some time have been “verbal shorthand” in oral use.  Modernity arrived in 1929 when DH Lawrence (1885–1930) introduced the phrase “have sex” to idiomatic English; it caught on.  The –ual suffix was a back-formation from Latin adjectives ending in –uālis (formed from fourth-declension nouns suffixed with –ālis) and an alternative form of –al.  Abrosexual is an adjective and a (non-standard) noun; the noun plural is abrosexuals.  The companion word is the (non-standard) abroromantic.

Abrosexual seems first to have appeared on-line in 2013 but interest has recently spiked for reasons not immediately clear, sexual fluidity hardly a new idea; the current feeling seems to be it has become increasingly popular as a form of self-identification, one which has the advantage of infinite variability (no consistency demanded).  One early criticism of the word was it was unnecessary because the “P” in the LGBTQQIAAOP glossary referred to “pansexual” (those attracted to a person because of their personality; sex and gender both irrelevant) which seemed to cover the behavior.  The difference however is that pansexuality is a permanent state whereas abrosexuality is an identity in which orientation may shift, the implication presumably that whatever might be the orientation to which one has shifted, as long as it lasts, it is exclusive although how that maps onto some states has never been explained.  For example, a bisexual may be attracted almost exclusively to one gender and may then shift to favor almost exclusively the other: is that an example of fluidity within the rubric of bisexuality, an instance of abrosexuality or both.  In other words, must the shift be only between the LGBTQQIAAOP categories or can it also refer to degrees of intensity, a definitional puzzle complicated further by the multisexual umbrella which covers those whose preference span a number of categories.

The Abrosexual Pride flag.

The annual Abrosexual Pride Day is 2 July and of course, by definition, abrosexuals are not restricted to than one celebration.  An asexual might mark International Asexuality Day on 6 April and then shift to become a lesbian, thus enjoying also Lesbian Visibility Day on 26 April, Lesbian Day on 8 October and Coming Out Day 72 hours later.  There is also an acknowledged abrosexual flag although the origin of the design is contested as is the meaning represented by the choice of colors; the most popular suggestion being green signaling queer attraction, the fade to and from white the effortless transition and the pink the actual shift.  The hues are those of a watermelon, the use of which is analogous with the contemporary use of the N-word which is permissible only by (certain) people of color (PoC) in that it should be spoken only by those who identify was abrosexual, use by others a slur or micro-aggression depending on context.  It's not the first time "watermelon" has been co-opted: in Thailand the word is used to describe soldiers who are "green on the outside, red on the inside", the reference being to (1) the green military fatigues they wear and (2) red being the color of the political opposition (the establishment using the yellow of the royal family).  So abrosexuality is a permanent state of orientational flux.  Even if one switches from one to another only once in one’s life, one remains at least a latent abrosexual, however much one may rationalize such things as “just a phase” because the modern politics of sexuality are predicated on the “born like this” paradigm; the shifts inherent in abrosexuality are an inherent part of one and not a lifestyle choice like becoming a vegan or joining the Freemasons.  Phases might exist but they’re part of the whole and all are equally authentic but abrosexual doesn't belong in the LGBTQQIAAOP glossary; it is a process, not a category.

Just a phase: Lindsay Lohan with former special friend Samantha Ronson.

There are however those who have suggested such things could be a purely situational occurrence; a thing of time and place.  Interviewed in January 2018, Lindsay Lohan was asked about if she considered herself “sexually fluid” to which she responded with an unambiguous “No, I definitely like men”.  Probed further about her sometimes tempestuous relationship with former special friend Samantha Ronson she seemed amused and replied “I was living in LA.  I'm not saying it's a bad thing…” and that expanded a little on her observation in 2013: “I know I’m straight. I have made out with girls before, and I had a relationship with a girl.  But I think I needed to experience that and I think I was looking for something different.”  She concluded her 2018 comments by noting she was “having a break from relationships at the moment… not forever, but just for now."  In Ms Lohan’s case the fondness for women may just have been an “LA induced” phase and (now a married mother) she’s permanently straight but “not forever, but just for now” is the essence of abrosexuality.