Do people focus too much on the "" part of ity?

First be it noted that there is not one uality, but two, very different, in fact antithetical, ities, male and female; to treat them similarly is to falsify them. With regard to ism, or female uality, it is probably true that it is less "ual" than emotional--or that there may not be any valid way of distinguishing between the emotional and the ual aspects of attraction between women. That seems to be the underlying message, at least, of "burning Sappho's" love-lyrics. With regard to male ity (particularly the same- attraction of masculine men), however, while it may have an affective or emotional element, every attempt to describe it as anything other than essentially, physically sexual rings false, usually with ludicrous or bathetic effect.