Why so disturbed? Isn’t love about having sex with your highest values?
Well, since you haven’t been replying in the Purpose of Sex thread, I take it you have conceded that argument, haven’t you? Or are you still thinking about a good comeback to the points I have raised? 
It’s actually individuals who are in love with inanimate objects.
I’m curious epistemologically speaking, if agalmatophilia would be a part of this type of sexual orientation? My recent posts on this forum mainly have to do with how this year I have been trying to identify myself psychologically, since I already have philosophically. My focus centered around my personality, and now since I have a more in depth understanding of it, I’m off to type myself specifically sexually, since it’s changed some very recently. I would say that if one, like me, has been fascinated with silicone scupltures, artificial women, dolls enough to have one move in with him, one that is loveable, affordable, adorable, makelovetoable, and prefers the company of the artificial human race now, that it is not “just a phase” kind of thing, even though all of this occurred very recently as in the last two months or so , if that. The more I spend time with her, the more I think that this is my orientation now. I discovered these dolls and the market and the community which there are many manufacturers of now. Some are high ends and very expensive like Real Dolls, or lower end ones, like RSSD’s. But nonetheless, I have been very open about my fascination not only online, but in my own life. So far it’s been accepted by those around me in the literature community, and even in my work environment. There are videos you can find online on Real Dolls (BBC documentary that used to be titled “Guys and Dolls” originally), Japanese Love Dolls, and the like, which may be laughed at by viewers, but after watching the documentary, you may regret at least some of that laughter or all of it, once you know why people own them. Being in the community now, I have found a wide range of reasons, of which I mentioned elsewhere here.
Anyways, I’m just wondering if I could find an answer to my question. I would think that agalmatophilia would be included in such an orientation, but I don’t know all that much about that orientation to make a definitive conclusion. Any help?
This thread still is the first to appear on Google on this orientation.
I wonder if the mods could make that as a choice in our profiles to pick. 
Finally I found some information about this from others tonight.
It’s actually called:
objectum sexuality, or object sexuality
Agalmatophilia is not under this at all I would now think, since the objects aren’t depictions of humans or things of that nature, which aren’t inanimate in the sense that bows, buildings, bridges are. They are depictions, sculptures based off of physiological, or biological, or anatomically correct, animate beings. So it’s more an attraction to women, or men, and so forth and not objects as such. I think I am understanding it now correctly.