DeltaAro

1.) We read “A Doll's House” by Ibsen in school. What a confusing play, far too much romantic love in it! I managed to get my teacher quite angry with my... unconventional interpretations. 2.) I was known to never “admit” that I had crushes on anybody (I never had them). Then I once made a not so nice remark about a new girl in our class “X is so funny... with her accent. And her silly old-fashioned braids.... who seriously walks around like this? She's like from a Dutch cheese commercial, ok, that would be kinda cute. <chuckle>” And now my friend started to tease me that I had a crush on her. Yeah, but I didn't and I was extremely annoyed by it.

Some people think like this and by asking “why?” they attempt being an amateur therapist to cure you.

I agree that monopolization itself is an alloromantics thing in general. But monopolizing while not committing, that's a behavior I mainly noticed in het men. Questionable behavior as this (well, questionable “even” from an allo POV), is usually not called romantic. We have a no-true-Scotsman-fallacy built into our language. “Romantic” is contrary to “sexual” always positive. We say “Stalking is not romantic!” and the like. It's like the only adjective we had for describing something sexual was “sexy”. Would you wanted to say “sexy assault”? (no!!!!) Probably that's one reason why some people still would think “Aromantic men... hey, isn't this like black darkness?”. Which annoys me to no end. My opinion would depend on the details. Is this exclusivity valued by itself or does it result from something else by rational considerations? The latter I could relate to... but the former is weird to me (repulsive would be too strong). I guess, if the consequences for the victim are benign, it's ok to feel a bit gleeful about it, lol. But then there are stories which make you cry. People being scammed out of their life savings, going into debt, committing suicide. Of course such scams are only the most egregious examples of the dark side of romantic love. Other behavior, like pushing for an apocalyptic divorce of a marriage with children and a mortgage... for no other reason than “falling out of love” (!), is something far too many can sympathize with. (disclaimer: I'm not against alloromantic people engaging in all the romantic love they want, of course! This is just about the ridiculous adulation of romantic love)

Oh, I just love this board, we have everything here – others are total aces! Sadly, I can't help you with your problem, but be assured, you have my heartfelt sympathies! I like this Tanaka guy, can relate to him! Even with the sex drive of my early teens, which was like ten times from what I have now, it would have been “too much work”. Societal pressure was actually a far stronger motivator! Just couldn't walk around as virgin. And it's not just theoretically not wanting it. Ya know, there could still somebody come around, who pierces your aro heart. But I've met women who I grew to like very much, and who are really attractive and intelligent. And there still isn't one I started pining away after. It must seem completely natural to everyone but aros, that those ingredients should give an explosive mixture. And even if cishet men don't fall madly in love, they nearly always get a strong urge like “I must, must monopolize this female!”. In this sense even Conan the Barbarian engages in complex bonding behavior. Sure, it's not the romanticism of flowers of candlelight dinners, but of not being content with just having NSA sex. So, it's really Conan the Romantic and he would be very irritated by a free-roaming sex kitten. Probably human mate-bonding behavior is part of the higher cognitive functions and so it feels completely natural to allos, like it's just a fundamental part of their personality. And also because of that, romantic love can swiftly disable rationality. And in this state they believe that reading “please send the money with Western Union” and “you're my love, my life, my heart” in the same email is totes normal and not at all suspicious.

A bit late, but....: I think this test is great, ok it's “unacademically” written but it works for our purposes. It detects aros very well. And those questions in part V are not so ridiculous, imho. Homicidal fantasies are very common in the population, the majority had at least one. And with all likelihood many of them happen in a romantic context. I mean, a few people actually go through with this stuff. As long as it's just a fantasy, I don't think it's that wrong. “Everyone is entitled to commit murder in the imagination once in a while, not to mention lesser infractions.” (Thomas Nagel) Death threats and the like are not okay, obviously. But are they really abnormal? Anyway, my result in the test is 2 points. Am I the record holder? 174. Do I believe that 'falling in love' is a natural phenomenon? YES. We see some animal species show similar behavior. 175. Do I reject any suggestion that romantic love is an invention of culture? YES.

For me, sexual attraction is a very strong “disgust reducer,” which makes a lot of stuff that would feel normally “barf” just neutral/tolerable or even semi-enjoyable, but it comes and goes and is not present in everyday situations. I guess romantic attraction is a “disgust reducer” that works all day...? I experience sexual attraction as a yearning for someones body, with a focus on the genitals and other erogenous zones and on achieving climax. From empirical evidence, romantic attraction seems to be a desire for an over-the-top “merging”. Over-the-top, because romantic attraction compares to the “merging” component in platonic attraction like an industrial strength super-magnet to a compass needle. It seems very reasonable that romantic attraction alone can bring enough motivation to have sex with the romantic partner. That's probably why romantic sex-repulsed asexuals seem so “broken” to most people. But I digress... I can experience sexual attraction as “unwanted”. Like craving bacon but not wanting to crave that bacon, because I want to lose weight. Can romantic attraction feel that way? I believe only very rarely.