sorry to interrupt your conversation. But I'd like to chime in.
Tbh, As a girl, I prefer guys with less sexual experience too. And I'm a woman. Guys who sleep around a lot don't turn me on. You can go psychoanalyst on me, and say I have a fragile ego or insecurities, ect. But I've always felt more comfortable with someone with less experience like myself. I don't mean it out of malevolence, and this isn't even me having an anti-virgin-shaming agenda. I've always preferred guys who were virgins. All the guys who had long list of people they were with I wasn't interested in.
Like maybe, JUST MAYBE, it's just a harmless preference as long as it isn't about demeaning someone. As long as you're not going out of your way to imply that your lack of a sexual attraction to a person AT ALL reflects their personal worth or devalues them, which obviously any intelligent person knows it doesn't.
The problem isn't preferences or people being discriminatory with their sexuality.
Since we have numerous cases of men that don't have these types of hang ups when it comes to female chastity, I would have to say that it is most likely an overwhelming psychological phenomenon And people have different hangups about all the things. For a universal example: gender. Are you implying because since OTHER people don't get hangups on the fact that someone someone is a particular gender in relation to them (bisexuals), that means homosexuality and heterosexuality (aka monosexualities) are invalid and there's actually a "more tangible component" as to why they are gender exclusive? If that's the case then homosexual and heterosexuals are sexist then. They won't be potentially attracted to everybody like they're 'supposed to'. It must be gender-based hatred! /s
Maybe sexuality doesn't need reasons to be validated. It just is what it is. Maybe sexuality isn't a moral compass, and needs to stop being treated as such. What we CAN evaluate however, is HOW people utilize and REACT WITH their sexuality. What attitudes they assume to both people they find attractive and people they don't.
Preferences in of itself are just apathetic statuses of arousal MANY describe as 'beyond their control'- the DIFFERENCE is HOW one can act on positively or negatively in one way or another rebounding sentiments from THEIR SEXUALITY. How they use their sexuality to reflect an attitude. If they use their sexuality in how they INTERACT NEGATIVELY WITH PEOPLE, that is a problem. E.g. people who pretend the world shares their views- and someone being ugly to them- means they're "ugly" universally- as if their standards are everyone else's, hence why they find it okay to call them 'ugly' to other people as if a fact. Nobody is truly ugly, because there is always someone that finds them beautiful. (That sounds really cheezy but hang on a sec.) Likewise a person is not beautiful to everyone. It's inevitable either way.
As long as you're not implying that your lack of attraction to someone means it's universal and they're not beautiful to anyone. Then what's the stickup? As long as you're aren't abusing, name-calling, or looking down on someone that doesn't turn you on? Why are you being terrible? It's the acts thereafter, and not the sexuality itself that is causing the problem correct? THAT'S why slut-shaming is wrong. Women are being LOOKED DOWN ON, harassed, or even abused- because they are considered LESSER. Lack of arousal ALONE, by itself, DOES NOT DO THAT TO THOSE WOMEN. Lack of arousal is NOT a physical act on someone else, nor will power; It's just a reaction IN YOUR BODY TAKING PLACE INTERNALLY, not on other people. It does NOT have to be a PREDISPOSITION toward: treating someone like shit. It DEPENDS ON THE PERSON- what their lack of arousal means to them, and if they are the kind to use it as reasoning to hurt other people. But someone just NOT be attracted to someone with a lot of partners, but still FULLY RESPECTING THEM and not letting their lack of sexual attraction change their treatment of them from anyone else- is DIFFERENT, and that's relevant to note.
The REAL ROOT Of the issue of why "specified sexuality" can be used to hurt people- is bigots demeaning those that they don't find attractive. Using sexuality as a means to deny people their right of basic consideration and kindness. They use their sexual attraction to dictate how they treat and how much they respect/disrespect others. And that's the problem. You shouldn't need to find someone attractive in order to respect them (or need to find someone unattractive in order to respect them and not treat them like a piece of meat for that matter). Sexuality needs to stop being an avenue of how much you VALUE a person as a fellow human being. THAT is what we need to educate on, not facilitate experiments playing god to attempt to "mold" people's sexuality forcibly. "I am able to treat you like a human being whilst never being attracted to you, and never use my sexuality as an axis to determine your importance."- is all we need to be teaching. Trying to force people to change their sexuality won't do a darn thing.
It could start internally even. Maybe even conquering the SELF's-standards that your worth as a person: is how sexually attractive you are to others... is part of how people externalize it- and see each other in that light similarly. Who's to say dicks are looking down on others because they're not attractive to them- hold themselves to the same standards, and I can only imagine how they must feel when someone isn't particularly attracted to them either- and how they'd self-evaluate similarly. assuming they're not a hypocrite.
With all that said, Someone not being attractive to someone else is not an 'injustice' or a persecution. Sexuality or mandatory arousal is not an 'evidence' of which I'm to prove i'm "moral" or a 'good person', it is MINE and not something I am obliged to share with everyone or anyone, even that would be 'more fair', even if you're not being found beautiful by someone for even the most obtuse or shallow reasons upsets you. It's my sexuality and my reasonings. Not yours. So the idea that in certain instances, you are 'obligated' to be attracted to someone or it's problematic when you aren't is a very big no no rape-culturesque notion I can't get behind. I don't owe anyone my sexuality. Nor to reform it around them, just so their attraction isn't one-sided or they feel more beautiful. I am not going to lie to myself or erase my sexuality, because some people's feelings will be inevitably hurt when feelings aren't reciprocated. You're not being attractive to me PERSONALLY, doesn't mean you're not worthwhile as a person. When I will face the same thing myself. =/ Sorry.