NullVector

@Louis Hypo Yay, a fellow Bjork fan So much awesomeness in this interview about Isobel (also features Michel Gondry, who directed the video)

Synth-pop for the win (she also features on the hunger games soundtrack you posted @DeltaV)

Yes. People who are heteroromantic homosexual or vice versa would be an example of this. Does anybody here actually experience that? i.e. sexual attraction to only women and romantic attraction to only men (or vice-versa)? If so, I would be very interested in hearing the experience described by them (especially given that we are trying to tease out some of the differences between romantic and sexual attraction here) It wouldn't surprise me if this was rather rare though - would a 'split attraction' model really allow for that much of a split?

You are not wrong there! I'm listening to her Halfaxa album as I write this and it's hella trippy

@OMGitsGhastly The song you posted reminds me of Explosions In The Sky (even down to the drumming style...) so you might like their stuff as well? I remember listening to this album a lot in my first year at uni. I reckon it has quite a similar sound... @DeltaV Not heard of Grimes before, but really digging her stuff so far, so thanks! (I've just been playing the Visions album after listening to the track you posted). She gets bonus points for being from Montreal

Lol. And what was google's advice?

I get INTP on these tests. The seeming prevalence of INTP and INTJ types here is interesting...

One the one hand, yes. On the other hand, I guess you only gotta find one other person on the planet who thinks the idea isn't totally screwy and would be willing to give it a try . Interesting thoughts. Yeah, all of our cultural baggage around sex does seem like the most gigantic mess to try and unravel. Plus you've also got a millennia old sex = sin cultural association baked in from the same Judeo-Christian religious influence that co-exists uneasily with the sex = mystical awakening that you already highlighted! (it seems to me that it's only 'sinful' if it's actually enjoyed for its own sake - y'know without the enjoyment coexisting with a more 'utilitarian' basis like procreation - how messed up is that?!) In essence it's just a physical act. Don't see why it should have any inherent meaning. Different people could bring totally different meanings to it. I do like the sound of some 'dirty fun' though! Oh shit, I'm doomed then! There's gonna be no Folgers in my cup

@DeltaV Boy, that is a detailed response you wrote! Thanks I like the sound of Affirmative Consent quite a lot, actually. I think I'd be a lot more relaxed about 'romantic' scenarios if that was the standardized way of going about those things. It would help remove a lot of ambiguity around potentially anxiety-inducing questions like "should I try to kiss x now?" if it were standard practice to just ask x "may I kiss you now?" or something! . I think it's the "firmly implanted ideas" about what relationships should be like that most of us here are trying to get away from. That's why I found things like Relationship Anarchy interesting too. I think the only way to get away from defaulting to the established social scripts vis-a-vis relationships is to instead very explicitly articulate/communicate a desire for something different. Which also ties in with something @Mark wrote above : Maybe it's because romantic relationships can be quite standardised. So individuals matter less than being able to follow the script. Certainly the aim of the whole thing appears to be to merge into a couple... It strikes me that the probability of reverting to a standardized relationship 'script' goes roughly in proportion to how vague and subtextual the social interactions are kept. As it probably takes an explicit effort to break out of an implicit social habit... (unless you just happen to meet another aro or something? ) That's a good analogy, thanks. I can probably afford to relax a bit and make a few (minor) mistakes! Incidentally, I never learnt how to drive! Maybe! Another good analogy! So, you mentioned that you consider there to be three types of 'flirting' (friendly, romantic and sexual) - but how would you see the differences between romantic and sexual flirting playing out? (and would allo people tend to confuse the two?)

People here actually make sense. Don't make me go back out there! Please!!

Yeah, me too. I especially feel you on the "this way I'll sure as hell not ever find out". I always worked on the assumption that my summoning up the courage/recklessness/stupidity(!) to even attempt anything 'romantic' would need to be predicated on my finding the other person super-awesome from a friendship perspective first. So the idea of "romance first" made literally zero sense to me. Like, the opposite of sense, even. It took me a LONG time to figure out that most other people don't operate that way...

I don't mind I have plenty of non-awkward relationships with women (female friends and family members, for example). And of course I can rationally accept the notions that women are just people, that there is nothing really to be scared of about interacting with them and that my happiness shouldn't depend upon their reactions to me. But then I do find that the presence of strong sexual attraction can mess with my ability to behave like a rational human being in general I think that only makes it awkward for me initially though. Once I've had a few conversations with somebody I'm attracted to like that, it's generally fine. What I think I find more awkward is the trying to 'escalate' anything beyond that baseline of casual friendliness. I have problems with social interactions where there are a lot of unspoken rules operating. I don't really get how something like flirting is supposed to work. I'm paranoid about coming across as inappropriate, or pushy, or harassing someone. I don't like eye contact (especially with people I don't know really well) as I find it too intense. Stuff like that could all contribute to making it awkward. I figured none of that surrounding awkwardness would really matter, if I met somebody I 'clicked' with enough, so I was pretty relaxed about a lack of relationships/sex throughout my 20s. Now, I don't know. I feel like I may need to do things more actively outside my comfort zone to make something happen... (but, as I said earlier, that's never something I felt forced to do by societal pressures, so I'd kinda have to force myself...) I've had similar thoughts. Only I don't really care if other people think I'm 'abnormal' (I'd probably agree with them anyway ) I'd be rather more interested in the likely improvements to my self-image, if I was able to take the 'normal' step of having my 'normal' sexual desires fulfilled as a result of my own efforts. As it's rather frustrating to have all these desires build up that you never feel able to act upon.

That 'societal pressure' to be out there having sex is definitely a thing. Especially for heterosexual guys, I reckon. But I find I react to external pressures like that in an odd way, in that they don't really motivate me. If anything, it's the opposite. I so resent feeling placed under external pressure to act in a particular way that I'm kinda inclined to do the opposite, out of sheer bloody-mindedness! I'm not saying that this is a 'healthy' or laudable reaction, or anything like that! . It just is what it is. Actually, I think I might be in a healthier, less awkward place now (in terms of my interpersonal relationships with the opposite sex) if I'd been more inclined to react in the standard ways to those societal pressures when I was younger... None of this is intended to excuse the behaviour, but I could see there being an evolutionary basis for it. As in, in a hunter-gather society, if there is a woman you're regularly having sex with, you might then go on to raise a child together. A big investment of time. It would then make evolutionary sense for behaviours (and cultural practices) to develop to try and 'monopolise' that woman in the early stages of the relationship - to try and ensure that it's the man's own genetic offspring he's investing that time in and not somebody else's. Hence the 'drunk abusive oxnard' effect arises, as a very visible 'mating display' to warn off other potential suitors! (oxnard?) I guess it's not especially controversial here to say that I've always found a lot of conventional 'romantic' behaviours problematic. In particular the off-the-charts levels of jealousy and possessiveness that do seem to be very typical (and even somewhat fetishised) aspects of 'romance'. I guess the jealousy and possessiveness aspects of 'romance' might (in general) manifest themselves differently for men vs. women in the context of heterosexual relationships (with neither way being especially 'good').

Yeah, same. @aussiekirkland posted this in another thread : "The process to get there is too much work" is a pretty hilarious way of describing it! It's not even laziness per se - I'm not a lazy person, I can work hard to accomplish goals. I just can't imagine myself wanting to deal with all of the drama that seems to typically surround romantic relationships... Yeah, I can see it being like "Wow, that is a nice body, it sure would be fun to have sex with that person!" vs. "I need this person in my life! I cannot go on living without knowing if they feel the same way as I do". The second one seems like it would be a much stronger motivator to act and also much harder to ignore and/or rationalize away. With the first one, you can always say to yourself "The process to get there is too much work" . But with the second one, it's like, you need to know, one way or the other - the perpetual limbo state is not a bearable psychic state to remain in indefinitely. By its very nature, it compels affirmative action.

Maybe "weird" is the perfect word! I googled the etymology : So turning "weird" doesn't sound so bad - "weird" people are people who recognize that they don't fit societal norms very well but have the power to control their own destinies, rather than simply follow the conventional social scripts. They may or may not be witches (joking aside, it seems pretty reasonable to spend time actively planning not to end up alone too much as we get older - it's a fear that a lot of us here seem to have)

Not sure if this has already been posted here, but: http://anagnori.tumblr.com/post/69145328274/you-might-be-aromantic-if These are the ones I can relate to most :

Me too! Yeah, 'awful' is one word for it Having a 'normal' sex drive, but coupled with a degree of both aromanticism and social ineptitude, can be an incredibly frustrating experience! I sometimes think about how much simpler my life would be if I could just turn off those sexual urges like a tap. Then again, they can be kind of fun (though please note that I haven't been formally diagnosed as being on the autistic spectrum. I do identify with / relate to a few of the standard traits though. I certainly have had somewhat 'obsessive' interests. A lot of socially conventional behaviors don't make a great deal of sense to me and I do struggle with things like eye contact - which is something I find very distracting and unpleasantly intense, particularly with people I don't know well. I certainly can't make eye contact and think about what I'm saying / conduct a conversation at the same time! . And I hear that eye contact is quite important for signaling romantic and/or sexual interest in somebody...)

Ooh, quiz. lemme try! 1. "I enjoy fictional romantic relationships and would like to experience the same kinds of feelings" I like art that explores the idea of romantic relationships and/or the feelings involved. e.g. A lot of the music I listen to does explore 'romantic' themes, but it's often done in unconventional ways (otherwise I get bored, lol. The stuff they play on the radio bores me ). Sometimes the songs highlight the darker or more unhealthy aspects of romantic infatuation. For example, here's some lyrics from the song "It's You" by PJ Harvey: Now that is NOT something I want to experience! 2. "I like nearly everything about romantic relationships but do not experience romantic attraction" Nope, see above! Although, as @Mark pointed out, sex! (and companionship) I might have experienced 'romantic attraction' this one time though, but I'm not sure... 3. "I would like to be in a romantic relationship, just not with anyone I have ever met" This sort of fits me. I have fantasied about the idea of being in a committed romantic relationship. But then, when the possibility of the actual reality of it presented itself, I never felt sufficiently motivated to pursue it - and always invented some excuse instead to not do so. 4. "I love the idea of romance but I can't deal with it in real life" Yeah, maybe. See above. I don't like the idea of a lot of obligations suddenly being placed on me and could easily see myself feeling trapped/suffocated if the 'romantic' situation ever made the jump from fantasy to reality. 5. "I would like to be in a romantic relationship for practical reasons (not feelings)" There could be practical advantages, for sure. Like lower living costs and having a someone to discuss important life decisions with and receive general emotional support from (although that starts to edge more into "feelings" territory, I suppose) 6. "I think I would like it if someone had romantic feelings for me" Hmm, maybe it's sort of flattering. But I might also get a bit freaked out by it and be worried about hurting them if I didn't feel able to reciprocate. In practice it might lead to me avoiding them, as I'm not the best at tackling head on situations that make me uncomfortable 7. "I would be fine in a romantic relationship or a QPR" Based on what I've read about them, I suspect I'd prefer QPR. Less pressure (from both my partner and other people) to take a conventional path like living together, getting married, etc. - and to see those things as necessarily being 'improvements' upon the relationship / things that make it 'deeper' or more 'mature'. 8. "I would like to know what it's like to experience romantic attraction" On balance, probably not. What @Ettina said is a massive deal for me: 9. "I'd rather be romantic than aromantic" This question doesn't even really make sense to me. If 'I' were able to change such a massive, central aspect of my personality and become conventionally 'romantic' then 'I' wouldn't be 'me' anymore! I don't want to cease to exist, so, em, no! 10. "I can't imagine spending the rest of my life as an aromantic person" I do worry about what happens as I get older and my friends increasingly pair off and have kids (massive time sinks = much more limited time available to socialise in wider friendship groups ). I wish we had some members here in their 40s, 50s, 60s etc. to give some perspective on what happens as you get older and how to plan for it and deal with it... 11. "Being in a romantic relationship would help me attain other goals in my life" Maybe - but, given that my goals are somewhat unconventional, it seems more likely that a romantic relationship (and certainly a conventional one involving marriage, kids, mortgage, etc.) would require that I sacrifice many of those other goals. 12. "I think dating sounds like fun" I've always been kinda freaked out be the idea! I really enjoy socialising in groups and meeting new people that way; but being in a one-on-one situation with somebody you barely know just strikes me as a really artificial and intense experience, with so much potential for awkwardness! Well, I haven't actually done it, but I suspect I'd find it super awkward were I to try!

Okay, sure. Were there any ways you experienced sexual attraction after transitioning that were totally new to you? Like being able to see new colours or hear new sounds, ones that you couldn't see/hear before? Or, were you finding that you experienced attraction in the same ways as before, but it just felt stronger afterwards (like you were seeing/hearing the same sounds/colours as before, but experienced them as being brighter/louder than before). Hope that makes more sense! Again, only answer if you feel like it, 'cos this is all very private and I don't want to pressure anyone to answer any invasive, personal questions...

You'll have to explain that some more, cos I really can't remember the book! I must have only been about 15 when I read it, which is half a lifetime ago now Were dodecahedrons a thing in the book? 314 refers to Pi, I'm assuming? I should totally read it again though. And then we can have an actual discussion, instead of this, ha I was so into Carl Sagan back in high school; a big part of why I got into science. I loved his sense of wonder at what humans could become. Although I find that harder to believe in now than I used to... Oh, why the hell not

Ooh, nice one! I really need to read HDM again (I read it years ago, right after it came out actually, and I thought it was the BEST.BOOK.EVER ) I really liked the character of Mary too. Ended up studying particle physics as well, hah. I think it will be interesting to read her again in light of my recent aro discoveries. @Jade, have you read Carl Sagan's novel Contact? Again, this is coming from vague memories of something I read a long time ago, but I seem to recall Ellie Arroway as being a similar character to Mary Malone. Possible that she's aro too, but I really can't remember the book that well (she has a relationship with Palmer Joss, not sure if it was 'romantic' though. she seemed more interested in science than boys, lol). But I recall that there is a lot of stuff about science and religion in there too (much more so that the movie; the book was a lot more interesting). So you might like it

Hmm. Romantic interactions in general seem to involve a lot of this subtext. This makes it a real challenge if you're seeking something akin to a sexual friendship, when: Romantic interactions are seen as the exclusive gateway to any sort of sexual relationship Subtext is seen as an important and necessary aspect of romantic interactions. You personally aren't very good at reading into (or broadcasting) 'subtext' in the context of interpersonal interactions anyway. The social consensus is, apparently, that there is a hard dichotomy between 'Platonic' friendships on the one hand and romantic, sexual relationships on the other (with strictly no intermingling of components from either side of the dichotomy). It's a trap! I could try an activity like dating (would that be incredibly dishonest? Is 'aromantic dating' an oxymoron?) but then 2 and 3 would probably bite me in the ass, as dating is 'romantic', right? (well, I could try communicating my extremely non-normative expectations subtextually, given that that's the expected interaction dynamic here, but how the hell would that even work? y'know, given that people cannot read one another's minds... doesn't 'subtext' here tend to just imply 'default to socially normative behavior'?). Then again, I could try an alternative route through the morass; make friends with the aim of it developing into a sexual friendship. But then 4 will probably screw that up instead.

And, why not, let's add a few cherry-picked song lyrics to support my case And then leaning on your window sillHe'll say one day you caused his willTo weaken with your love and warmth and shelterAnd then taking from his walletAn old schedule of trains, he'll sayI told you when I came I was a strangerI told you when I came I was a strangerI told you when I came I was a strangerI told you when I came I was a stranger [Stranger Song] And then you got away, didn't you babe? You just turned your back on the crowd You got away, I never once heard you say I need you, I don't need you I need you, I don't need you And all of that jiving around I don't mean to suggest that I loved you the best I can't keep track of each fallen robin I remember you well in the Chelsea Hotel That's all, I don't even think of you that often [Chelsea Hotel #2] I did my best, it wasn't muchI couldn't feel, so I tried to touch [Hallelujah] Ah baby, let's get married, we've been alone too long. Let's be alone together. Let's see if we're that strong. Yeah let's do something crazy, something absolutely wrong while we're waiting for the miracle, for the miracle to come. [Waiting For The Miracle] Steer your heart, precious heart Past the women whom you bought Year by year Month by month Day by day Thought by thought [Steer Your Way] Everybody wants a box of chocolatesAnd a long-stem roseEverybody knows [Everybody Knows]

Any Leonard Cohen fans here? I was speculating that he may have had some aromantic tendencies/attitudes. I made a whole new thread for it, but then @Holmbo pointed out that this thread already existed. So, um, apologies for the duplication of content, but... Watch and draw your own conclusions I also found this interview where he is directly confronted with "a difficult question" and the response is... interesting...

I guess for me, I experience the "pure lust" forms of sexual attraction as being like a kind of hunger. It's a raw, animalistic, frenetic energy, whereby seeing a body shape that those more primitive parts of my brain categorize as desirable triggers a kind of magnetic pull of intention towards that body and a sub-verbal feeling that, were you able to articulate it verbally, would just sound something like "want" (as in, picture if you hadn't eaten for several days and then some sort of warm and delicious food was placed in front of you; you'd experience an immediate, involuntary and bodily sense of want-ing that food. The experience of raw sexual desire a.k.a. "pure lust" feels somewhat like that to me. So, nothing intellectual going on there whatsoever, lol. My neocortex is probably not coming along for the ride But then, like @LunarSeas wrote further up, you can get to know a person and the more "cerebral" forms of attraction she mentioned become entangled with the "pure lust" forms and it all get extremely convoluted and confusing! I've also experienced cases where I wasn't really sexually attracted to a person initially (or else it was borderline) but then the person said or did something(s) I found interesting and after that I noticed an attraction developing. Another interesting question would be how these experiences differ for male vs. female sexual aros, or with male vs. female hormones cascading around in your body systems. I remember now I was watching some documentary years ago where one of the female researchers was saying that she (it might have been accidentally) took some testosterone and that the effects were very noticeable! And her comment was that it made her more sympathetic to the way the teenage boys she remembered from her schooldays had behaved . Because she experienced it as a very powerful urge to, ahem, engage in certain behaviors! In Iain Banks' sci fi novels, it's common for the characters to spend years at a time in bodies of the opposite gender to the body they were born with and I was thinking that that must give you an interesting insight into the opposite gender's experiences. It would probably make you a better lover, for instance! I was reminded of all that by @LJ_84's comment: So (and only answer if you don't mind me asking, as it's pretty personal!) did you experience that as a purely quantitative difference; or was there a qualitative difference there as well?