Jump to content

mpe0

Member
  • Content Count

    6
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About mpe0

  • Rank
    Newbie

Personal Information

  • Name
    Mark
  • Orientation
    Aro
  • Gender
    GQ
  • Location
    UK

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I wonder if part of what is going on is that because romantic attraction is seen as so important any strong attraction is assumed to be romantic. With allo-romantics not really knowing what to call a strong aestetic, sensual, platonic or other attraction... Probably especially difficult for straight people in that they are least likely to have encountered any concept of "split-attraction". Whereas the idea of differing sexual and romantic attractions is fairly well known in aro & ace communities. It's also more likely to be recognised within LGBT+ communities. Whereas str8 culture has this strange idea that relationships between men and woman can only be romantic and/or sexual.
  2. For me hand-holding is good so long as there is no romantic subtext. (Which is difficult to explain, I know). Something more like holding hands because we a part of the same "team", going to do something together, being lead somewhere, etc. Kissing great so long as it's sensual, sexual or both. But if there is romance there it feels "poisoned". What would be a good fun thing no longer is.
  3. About the only possibility I've found would be http://www.cuddleparty.com/ Though these can be uncommon and expensive (even without considering travel) too. For some people pillows, even life-size dolls, can be acceptable as cuddle partners. For others of us it really needs to be living, breathing, humans There's a whole spectrum of how people feel about this. Though it does appear to be fairly unusual for the "too little" side of the coin to get an airing.
  4. This can also easily go the "other way" with someone's sexual orientation being assumed from their romantic orientation. e.g. an aromantic person being assumed to also be asexual.
  5. IIRC terms meaning "heterosexual" have been part of popular culture for a shorter period of time than terms meaning some other sexual orientation. The other complication with sexual orientation is that it is not a hetero/homo binary. `Something like heterosexual, polysexual, homosexual and asexual being a better model. Something AVEN has done is to popularise the idea that romantic and sexual orientations are distinct things.Though it is commonly assumed that they go together. It can be very difficult to describe how you feel to anyone else unless suitable (and popular) term exist. Saying "I'm not interested in ever getting married" twenty plus years might have been interpreted several ways. But none of them would be that you had an aromantic orientation. Even now aromantic erasure is commonplace. Possibly a point in history before romance became so important and normative. Though it's possible that at that time people would have used different paradigms for sexual orientations.
  6. I've never understood wanting monogamy. Similarly I've always found the idea that couples do everything together, including things which arn't even sexual or sensual, to be baffling. Abandoning people in favour of someone you have just met dosn't seem in any way "friendly" or "loving" in the first place.
×
×
  • Create New...