Your last question that was talking about attract made me want to throw in my 2 cents. I’m a big fan of the percy jackson series, which is a book series about greek demigods. one girl is a daughter of Aphrodite and has a power called charmspeak, which allows her to influence people’s decisions by talking. She could ask for free food at a deli or tell someone to fall asleep. I think attract works this way, so I don’t think it would force sexuality out of the target unless thats the user’s intent.

Hey, anything that involves Percy Jackson in the discussion is fine by me.  Piper’s charmspeak is an interesting comparison to make; I think we can all agree that Attract obviously doesn’t compel sexual acts, even where the target’s species would allow it, but at the same time the imagery associated with the technique is clearly meant to make us think that romance or sexuality is involved somehow (same way as charmspeak, really, since it comes from the goddess of romantic love and sexual desire – although the way that series portrays Aphrodite, and that portrayal’s relationship to the original myths, is actually kind of complicated).  It has similar versatility too; same way as Attract can work between Pokémon who would never breed, charmspeak can apparently work on anything that even approaches sentience, up to and including a robot dragon head.  I think the important difference is that Piper can’t easily command someone not to attack her because charmspeak works best if she can phrase it in terms of something the target actually wants to do, or at least could potentially be neutral to.  Attract seems like it’s maybe a bit more forceful in that way, which is weird.  I think it may have a greater capacity to create desires rather than just manipulate existing ones.