The “romantic-sexual/platonic” love dichotomy leaves no room for the real emotional nuances people experience in their attachments, and I think that it often causes us to live with simplified relationships not because we want to or because we have simple desires and feelings but because we have no experience, cultural context, or language to accommodate a complex social life or set of relationships. This is why language is so important. This is why words and labels matter. How can you have the kind of relationships you want with anyone, if you don’t even have the words to accurately express how you feel? Hell, half the time, people don’t even understand their own feelings and relationship desires because what they feel is not simple at all, but the only relationship framework they know makes everything seem simple and clear cut: romance and sex go together, friendship is separate from both of those things, couplehood/primary partnership is exclusive to romance and sex, etc.
But if we are to accept the possibilities and realities of asexual romance, primary nonsexual/nonromantic love, nonromantic sex and sexual friendship, romantic (nonsexual) friendship, queerplatonic nonsexual relationships and sexual relationships, etc…. we have to drop this way of thinking and speaking about relationships and love in a romantic-sexual/platonic dichotomous way. None of those “complex” relationships fit into that model
Being in love was like China: you knew it was there, and no doubt it was very interesting, and some people went there, but I never would. I’d spend all my life without ever going to China, but it wouldn’t matter, because there was all the rest of the world to visit.
Aromanticism as misandrist praxis.
Every man ever was doomed to go no further than my friendzone the moment I recognized my lack of romantic orientation. I am the universal friendzoner, rejecting every man without giving him a breath of a chance, without mercy.
Various fill-out-able things and sometimes people: Single or taken?
I really wish there were more aro things not centered around asexuality
I mean aro aardvark is good for that, but it is largely submission based and a lot if ace people submit
I sort of want to make a blog for non-asexual aromantics but I don’t want to alienate anyone who’s asexual or divide the community or whatever
But if I made a blog for aros who are not asexual would there be interest?
Yes! I don’t think (though I am only theorizing, being sexyaro myself) there would be anything particularly alienating about a space for aromantic things that weren’t ace-related, since the large asexual population in the aro demographic means a lot of aro spaces already end up a bit ace-based.
Squish feelings are so nice to experience now that I know what they are. “Wow, I just want to spend time dorking out with you and have silly inside jokes and know you well enough to comfort you when you’re having a bad day and pick you up at the airport at three in the morning and mutually fangeek over things,” without “IS THIS A CRUSH SHOULD I CONSIDER HITTING ON THEM ROMANTICALLY DO I ACTUALLY WANT THAT?” makes everything a lot more relaxed and easy to enjoy.
I’m actually finding myself intrigued by the Homestuck trolls’ romantic drama because, ironically, I find their concept of romantic/close-but-not-romantic relationships a lot more accurately reflective of the human experience than the weirdly linear romance/friendship/stranger ranking system that’s accepted as the norm.
Hell, it was probably designed that way. Hussie is human (NO WAI) after all. He just took a handful of relationship dynamics that already exist and gave them names and made them Official.
I often default to thinking that my boredom with romantic plots/subplots in media is due to my aro-ness, but it’s really just because most representations of romance are really poorly done.
What do you want in aromantic representation?
So, just to keep the conversation going, what do you want to see in terms of aromantic representation in fiction?
Reblogging to signal boost, and also to add my 2 cents!
I would LOVE to see a character who actually openly identifies themselves as “aromantic”, and who isn’t a walking stereotype. I’d like to see the idea of queerplatonic/quirkyplatonic/committed platonic relationships (whatever you wanna call them) explored more in fiction. I’d like to see aros who are soppy and overly affectionate in addition to ones who are cold and calculating. I mean, I don’t think there is anything wrong with the ‘cold and calculating aro’ trope because some aros are that way! I’d just like to see something in fiction that shows being aro isn’t just a side effect of being emotionally withdrawn. Basically I want ALL THE AROS in fiction, not just ones like Sherlock, and for the whole spectrum to be represented as well.
^pretty much that, although honestly, I’m more in the mood for an over-saturation of sappy/emotional aros since the closest we get to straight-up rep is Sherlock (who, while not always cold, is always somewhat emotionally removed from most people around him.)
The only other popular character I can think of who comes anywhere close is The Doctor, but while he’s sappy and not interested in romantic relationships with his companions, the fact that an alternate human version of him ends up romantically involved with one of them, his past marriage to another Time Lord, and his current marriage to an, er, non-human (*BARREL ROLL SPOILER DOGE*) all imply that he just seems aro most of the time because his big bad alien self just isn’t interested in us humans.