There’s a new sexual orientation out there, and it’s called “digisexuality”. This Canadian Broadcasting Corporation Radio interview, New York Times article, and Sexual and Relationship Therapy journal article by Neil MacArthur can give you a bit more depth into the subject.

Basically, it’s intense sexual and other emotional attraction to some form of technology, like holograms, artificial intelligence, robots, or even something more basic like an app. Look through those links above for more information as I’m not here to tell you about it.

Rather, I’m here to ask how we should include digisexuals into the LBGTQ2+ acronym with another character? Digisexuality will be on the rise and won’t be going away so why avoid the issue and lump them in with some other sexual orientation until they become prominent enough? Haven’t we learned from our past?

Now, if you were thinking a letter, D would be obvious for “digital”. Almost too obvious, I would say. Given it’s technological, moving to a wider range of options beyond letters and numbers to look at “character” would be more… progressive, shall we say? But it’s not that progressive given there is a “+” in the acronym already.

Then I thought, what’s all the craze these days in texting? And what’s driving a lot of lingo purists crazy in texting?

It’s the emojis!

Yes! That’s it! An emoji! How appropriately digital would that be!

As for what emoji? Why not let the texter decide? As long as it’s an emoji, it’ll stand for digisexuals. Claim it!

Let other sexual orientations that want to be included get their own characters, but not an emoji. The emoji stays with the digisexuals!

What do you think?

Btw, here’s a good article to sort out the delineations among the LGBTQ2+ acronym.