nonmerci

I was reading the Artemis Fowl books,  who are very "aro friendly" considering they don't have a lot of romance in it (or any romance at all if you take the first books, it only started at book 5 because the author decided his main character reached "puberty", and even like that it is not a lot... I mean the only serious love interest for Artemis only appears in book 5 as if the author wanted to get rid of her, the other characters never dated or only one, and the only character who get married does it "off-screen" (I mean not off-screen because they are books, but you see what I mean)). To be honnest I even wonder if the author didn't put the few romantic stuff because he felt like he had to.

But now I just finished book 6. And even if it is said that it won't happen again and the romantic nature of that kiss is left ambiguous , it was so unnecessary and weird.

It doesn't change that these two characters have a wonderful friendship, a perfect "ennemies to friends" narrative. But it somehow upsets me more because I know what happened. A lot of fans ship these two characters (because in the world of allos you can't have a deep relationship that isn't romantic). So the author decided to give these fans what they want for one book. He tried to make it less weird with the age thing and left the romantic nature ambiguous so the fans who don't ship them won't be upset. But in the end I'm sure it satisfied anybody.

Well at least the book established it won't happen again, though shippers will always ship.

I know that there are more disturbing or upseting romances in other books, movies or shows, but I just finished this book and also, I was so convinced it would never happen that it upseted me more than a book where I see it coming. But don't get me wrong, these books are good and to be honest, they are even good for aros because there is almost no romance in it. It is just this particular book that was messed up in that regards.

I don't drink. Or maybe in some family reunions like weddings, champagne to fit the norm, but that's unlikely. I don't go in bars or things like that with my friends so I don't drink with them.

I just don't like the taste of alcohol. So I don't drink it lol. And the idea of being drunk never attracted me so it can be a motivation that would justify that I forget my taste.

When I first enter the community I thought we didn't, because aro's problem is amatonormativity, not cis or heteronormativity. But if we follow the idea,  then gay/bi/etc should not be in the same community as trans because cis and heteronormativity are not the same either.

Now, I just take the idea that everything queer is in the LGBT+. As aros are queer, we belong to the community.

I think LGBTQ is about differing from the norm in term if romantic and/or sexual relationship, and/or gender. And aro fits that definition even if it is not in the same sense as other orientations. It is not as visible but it is still different.

"Why fall in love, when you can fall asleep" describes me so well.

We won't have to face the "does he/she/they love me back or not?" phase, and that's perfect.

Yes, everytime you come out you have to turn into a dictionnary and it sucks.

21 hours ago, Acecream said:

in addition to: „I don’t think it’s good to label yourself, do you really need that? I just don’t want you to stick yourself into a box.”

I remember when I was having a discussion about Jughead in Riverdale and someone said "we should not learn to teens to throw themselves into their box because then they'll close themselves to romance" or something like that. That's just so stupid. Usually when we identify with a label, we have a reason. Of course it could turn out we were mistaken, but that doesn't invalidate anything we felt on the moment.

6 hours ago, Rainy Robin said:

I don't fully understand the significance of it and I'd like to learn more!

To keep it simple it is used by aros who don't differentiate their romantic and sexual attraction, or aros who think sexual attraction is not relevant to their identity.

I personnaly don't use the term but I see why some people do. I never really cared that much about my ace side. I don't feel the need to talk about it, to search about it, I don't have the feeling that it affects me that much. On the other hand, aromanticism affects my life in a lot of ways.

So it makes sense to me that some people just don't label their sexuality, if they feel it is not that important for them.

I don't think so. I mean, I am not a lesbian, but for me these things have nothing to do with being a being one. The stereotypical lesbian can be seen that way but for me, it is just a boyish style. Short hair was even a sign of woman emancipation before. I didn't know winged eyeliner was associating with lesbians, I think a lot of girls do it. And if you think flannel are great, I don't think wlw think of it as their symbol.

But again, I'm not part of this culture.

2 hours ago, DeltaV said:

A stable society of aros would in principle work. A bit difficult with getting and raising children, but that issue could be figured out probably.

I don't thin it would be a real issue. Some aros are allosexual or not sex-repulsed, and if this is a modern society, there is way to have children without sex anyway. And I'm sure an aro society ould have think about how a non-nuclear family could work.

The only problem I see is how many aros would want to have children, as many aros seem to not desire them.

As a French, when I see prom in American movies or shows, I always thought "sound like a fun way to en high school". Then I notice that people only care about is dating. And I am glad we don't have it here.

More seriously though, I don't think m we should care about people who think they are losers for going alone, in particular if you are aro. Those people probably don't know who you are or they would know you were alone by choic, or at least because you didn't care if you are not out.

I can't really answer but I think the difference is in the feeling involved. I suppose romantic date implies feelings that we don'y really understand. I can't tell but people often speak about butterflies in their stomach, feeling light, warm, and things like that. It's difficult for me to describe it but I hope you see the idea.

It's like, I don't know, seing your parents vs seing your friends. You can go to the restaurant or see a movie with all of them (or you could before covid), but it's not necessary the same feelings involved.

I suppose it won't be annoying if I have the possibility to quit one day if I want to.

6 hours ago, roboticanary said:

That sure sounds like it will last as they get older

The best thing : they were old. I mean, not that old, they were in their 40 or 50, I don't remember. But for a marriage that's old.

Oh yes, Big bang theory. I headcanon Sheldon as demiromantic asexual, but I can understand why this character upset people... in particular, I still remember this scene when he says he was broken and Amy cured him, I wanted to scream at my computer.

Depends if you call your video "aro moments" or "aspec moments" I guess.

I saw you're still looking for things, so I like to suggest some things from Todd in Bojack Horseman. I think it is official that the character is allo ace, but there are scenes that make me think he coud be on the grey area of aromanticism. In particular, the episode 2 of season 3, when Emily asked him who is his crush and he answers he doesn't have one, before invented one as she insists (it is at 2:35, just after the intro).

There is also the first time he speaks about his orientation at loud, but I think it is more ace oriented.

False.

TPBM didn't realize that the first Harry Potter movie is 20 years old, and feel very old now.

Night. I almost live at night.

Would you rather give up your phone or your computer?

Take your time to know yourself better.

Je te comprends pour la présentation sur les forums, je sais jamais quoi dire dans ces cas-là non plus.

9 hours ago, crazydreamer said:

Important lesson learned: Haircuts ruin marriages.

The other day I saw on TV the end of an show about make over. After seeing the makeover of his girlfriend, the guy said : "before we were ready to break up, now we are ready to get married".

Which of course really confused me but... Apparently for certain couples, your father isn't wrong. ?

It is possible that you are on the aro spectrum, maybe without being asexual. But it is hard to tell and only you can know if what you felt were real crushes or another type of attraction. However, from what you say, it seems that you don't feel attraction for men.

By the way, I don't see why you could not have fallen in love with someone on the Internet. Nowadays, a lot of couple meets like this.

If you think her boundaries are not clear then you should discuss together about what you are both comfortable with. That would benefit to both of you.

And that's okay if you can't have a life without sex or romance. However I think you should admit that the sex and romance doesn't have to be with her and will not be with her. As at @Jot-Aro Kujosays, there is a lit of alloromantic people out there. There is the myth of "the one" but you will find other people you will "click" with in your life. But you won't if you don't let her go because you expect something she can't give you.

I hesitated because it nos a big thing, but I am still furious and I need to complain lol.

So, I am French, so I watched English-speaking show dubbed in French or with French subtitles. I can read English but it is harder to understand when people speak, though the more I hear th more it gets easier.

I was watching Bojack Horseman (which is an awesome show by the way) with English subtitles. In this show, a character is discovering his asexuality. So there is the episode where this character thinks that asexual can't get married. Another character explains that some characters do get maried, and that « some are aromantic ». That's exactly what she says « some asexual are also aromantic ».

Now, if you speak French, you may think : the subtitles probably wrote : « certains asexuels sont aussi aromantiques ».

Well, no.

The subtitles wrote : « some asexuals are against any relationship » (« certains asexuels sont contre toute relation »).

1) If the person who make subtitles thought « aromantic » was not clear for people who are not a-spec, why didn't they write something like « they don't fall in love ». That simplifies things but it is more accurate.

2) I am not against relationship. If instead of « some asexuals are in couple like anyone else », the character said « some asexuals are alloromantic », would they have translated that as « some asexuals are against singlehood » ? Would they define heterosexuality as « being against homosexuality » ? I don't think so.

3) Where this « any relationship » came from ? Is romance the only relationship that exist ? (or romance and sex as I suppose it was implied « against romantic or sexual relationship ») Friendship is a relationship. Family is a relationship. And I am probably forgetting others too. The definition is « not attracted to romance », not « being an hermit » (though if an aromantic person is also an hermit, they are totally valid).

And the weirdest thing is : it is only the case in the subtitles. If you listen to the dubbed French version, she says the same thing as in English. So this is just the people who write subtitles that decided they will spread wrong ideas. And that's what makes me furious. There is this show that wants to be inclusive, and the subtitles were like « nope, let's ruin it for all the people who watch in vostfr ». That's not fair.

And I'll add it is not the first time something like this happen. It is related to asexuality, not aromanticism. But I remember a show (I think it was The end of the fucking world) that mentions briefly asexuality, and the French version didn't say the word. That's so weird.

As I said it is not a big thing, but my, that made me so angry for some reason.

I think she sees you as a close friends, that's why she shows affection. Aromantic tends to valueire friendship than others and so put mire affection into it. However it can be true for anyone. If someone is your friend, it is natural that they want to spend time with you. It had nothing to do with romance.

That's why I don't like the concept of friendzoning, by the way. It sounds like the only reason people spend time with each other is a potential romance and then the relationship has no value if it doesn't evolve that way. This is not true. People can spend time with each other for friendship too.

You can use analogy to explain. If tomorrow, a gay person in couple say to a single gay person "you don't belong in the LGBT+ community because you are not in couple and so you are straight passing", would they think it is acceptable?

You can also say that there are different ways of being oppressed. Risking verbal and physical agression by walking in the streets with a loved ones is of course one of the biggest and most dangerous, nobody denies that. But there is also the feeling of not being normal, of being alienated in a society that don't understand, being lost in a world that denies our existence... In ace in particular, some of them could deal with marital rape when they are not aware of their identity (because their partner can shame them from not wanting sex and as they fee broken about it, they will force themselves to please their partner to prove that they do love them). Coming out as an ace can be a way to say to people who are not aware of their sexuality, or people who are struggling with it "We exist. We are valid. This society makes you feel broken because you don't have sex but no one should force you". It is also, of course, a way to be true to yourself if it somehow come in the conversation, and you don't want to lie.

Finally, I would point out that being LGBT+ should never be define about how oppressed we are. If tomorrow, homophobie disappear, will gay people feel like they don't belong in the community anymore? I don't think so. Because there is more to our identity than oppression. It is a different way to react in this world, the need to talk about our experiences with people who can relate, sharing jokes, memes, anecdotes. Of course, fighting for LGBT+ rights is very important, but I think if we let this be the only thing that define our identity, we are forgetting that there are good aspects about it too, that oppression is not a part of our identity, it is something we struggle with because of our identity. I don't know if I express it well.