aro_elise

aromantic just means you don't experience romantic attraction, which logically tends to lead to disinterest in romantic relationships, but that's not what defines the orientation. (some aros enjoy dating, and some are interested in queerplatonic relationships.) it sounds like you do experience romantic attraction but maybe infrequently or fleetingly. if you feel that that's accurate, you could go with gray-aromantic. another possibility is lithromantic, meaning your romantic attraction disappears when it's reciprocated. otherwise it's certainly possible that you're not on the aro spectrum but you just have a different approach to romantic and/or sexual relationships--nothing wrong with that. it's not selfish to not want a long-term or very involved relationship; i don't know what would make you think that, to be honest. you don't owe anyone your time, affection, or anything else--as long as you're honest about what you're looking for in the relationship, if you do enter one, which again, you certainly don't have to. if the other person doesn't share your feelings or attitudes, it's not your fault any more than it is theirs.

tbh some people will even think that if you do come out. like they can't accept that you're not romantically and/or sexually attracted to anyone; they think you're hiding or repressing that attraction, whatever gender(s) they think it's towards. like i told a friend my orientation and we were talking about platonic relationships and i talked about my best friend and he said "i think you love her romantically". he thought it was more likely that i'm heterosexual and homoromantic than het aro. not that that's not a possible combination, but it's not common, and more importantly, i'd told him my orientation and my platonic feelings for my friend! another friend thought that since i'm virgin i must be gay or religious (i am that, but that's not the reason). others assume my lgbt+ community involvement/allyship must mean i'm gay or bi. and of course pretty much everyone who detects any indication of my heterosexuality assumes i'm also heteroromantic, though probably unconsciously. all this to say, it kinda sucks, but it just be like that. like the others said here, you can tell people your orientation or not, that's your choice, but either way they can make assumptions you might not be able to change. just like, try to associate with people who don't make you uncomfortable and remember that what you know is more important than what others think.

i'd say platonic attraction can just be wanting to be friends with someone, like not that strong, and then wanting a qpr could be described as queerplatonic attraction (it's in the initialism). my squishes tend to be somewhere in between; i don't know which i'd call them. like i don't think i've ever wanted a qpr with a specific person (but not opposed to the general idea), but there is a difference between having a squish and just liking someone as a friend. so yeah, we're using all these terms--squish, platonic, qp, etc.--and they exist at different places on the spectrum of platonic attraction or whatever you want to call it, not to mention at a slightly different place for each person. also, for me, there can be sexual attraction involved but certainly not always (obviously never in the case of girls). they're unrelated types of attraction but they can just happen to coincide. like, "oh, he's fun and nice and also hot." do y'all (allo aros) not relate?

Care 100% Loyalty 50% Fairness 78% Authority 44% Purity 61% Liberty 53% Your strongest moral foundation is Care. Your morality is closest to that of a Left-Liberal. i'm surprised care is the highest--maybe it sort of means kindness--but not surprised by left-liberal.

interesting, i kind of assumed most aros did. i definitely do.

haha yeah. i'd never considered that i might be anything other than straight because i thought it was synonymous with heterosexual, nothing else to it. one day i just stumbled upon explanations of aromanticism and split attraction and thought "hmm. interesting." and so it began.

@Apathetic Echidna ash hardell? and i've seen a post somewhere by a woman who identifies as queer and polyamorous but not aro-spec--while she has mostly casual romantic/sexual relationships, she lives with her longtime qpp. she did use that term, but not 'squish,' but you know, it was clear she experiences queerplatonic attraction.

1. i don't really know what to say to that; to me, attraction is just something which exists (whether or not i experience a certain type), whether i like it or not. if you mean distinguishing types of attraction then yes, i define four types: romantic, which of course i don't experience, and sexual, platonic, and aesthetic, which i do. i don't separate sensual, since for me, certain things which tend to fall under that are romantic and others are sexual (and hugging is platonic), so i just sort them into those categories. 2. yeah, it makes sense to me. i definitely like people in a platonic way and i do get squishes; it's not always clear where to draw the line between a squish and the less intense "they're fun, i wouldn't mind talking to them" that everyone (like, allos) gets, but i don't think it really matters. i don't call it part of my orientation, though--like, if i gave it a prefix it would be pan, but i feel like that's the case for pretty much everyone. it's just nice to be able to understand how i like a certain person, like before i knew about aromanticism, let alone squishes, when i'd get them on girls, i never thought the attraction was romantic or sexual, never doubted my heterosexuality, just thought "huh, she sure is cool. crazy." (same with aesthetic attraction towards girls: "she sure is pretty. yup, that's that.") i knew what i was feeling, i just didn't know what to call it. of course i'd get squishes on guys, too, and if it was only platonic i'd think the same thing, but if it was also sexual (or whatever you'd call it when you're a kid, you know, thinking they're cute), i might mistakenly think it was a crush. so yeah, my discovery of the world of aromanticism and relevant terms was useful in many ways. 3. well, i've explained what i consider attraction, so i guess anything besides those four are...not. love, to me, is a feeling; i wouldn't say i love a squish, and sexual or aesthetic attraction certainly wouldn't lead to love. rather, i love very close, longtime friends and family members. so the only time attraction could lead to love is if it's platonic and we end up developing a special relationship of that nature. (of course i might also find that person beautiful, for instance, but that's not a factor in why i love them.) actually, there is an exception to that: longtime celebrity squishes who mean a lot to me for whatever reason, even if we've never met; i love a few of them. well, what other feelings might be within this realm? admiration...sure, i can admire someone's talent, intellect, character, etc. without being attracted to them, or it could be part of the reason for my attraction, probably platonic. but i guess i consider attractions to be types of feelings, anyway, just a distinct class of them.

found the term at 16, went from denial through various stages of uncertainty, to acceptance around 8 months later, at 17. so that's when i count it, when i first said to myself 'ok, i'm going to identify as aromantic,' even though it still felt kind of daunting so i told myself i didn't have to stick to it or tell anyone. i became more and more comfortable with it, and my first coming-outs (boyfriend and parents) were about 5 months later. i can point to a couple other significant events along my journey; as i'm sure you all know, it's not a single, definite moment. or maybe it is for some, i don't know. but yeah, 17.

that does sound like my experience. especially if she's heterosexual, or bi/pan i guess, she might assume her romantic orientation was concordant, or even be unfamiliar with the concept of romantic orientation. and in any case, enjoying your company and friendship (possibly a squish, sure) could have led her to believe dating was a logical next step...part of the idea of amatonormativity (basically the idea that romantic relationships are the most important type and are necessary for happiness), which is not separate from heteronormativity. and yeah, i kept trying to make it work, i thought i just had to get used to it, but i never did. i'm glad to hear that you're taking an interest in her possible aromanticism while acknowledging that it's up to her to label it or not, and continuing your friendship.

i get it, i would hate to lose a friend that way. i actually had this friend, i'd told him i was aro at some point (it just came up randomly), and several months later he told me he was "interested in [me]" and asked me on a date, saying that he understood i wouldn't feel the same way. so we went on the date, which was just like a dinner between friends, and then kept being friends. now he has a girlfriend and i've moved to a different building and we've pretty much drifted apart. more recently, i complimented a random girl on campus on her band hoodie (always a good thing to bond over, imo) and we started talking and exchanged numbers. partway through, i got the impression that she was flirting with me but hoped i was just paranoid (but the signs were pretty clear). she later texted me asking if i wanted to "go out or hang out," even suggesting a gay bar, and i wildly improvised a lie about having a boyfriend, for some reason, but agreed to get coffee with her. i was a bit disappointed because i'd hoped we could be friends. so i worry, when i try to strike up friendships or even casual conversations, that i might inadvertently give someone the wrong impression. and yeah, what with allos developing romantic attraction over longer periods of time in some cases, it's not like i can relax or whatever once a platonic relationship has been well established, even if i am out to them--see anecdote 1. it kinda sucks, tbh.

cool, i'll be 21 on sunday! close birthdays.

surely romantic attraction's been around--can you manufacture a feeling?--but it wasn't a big thing. like these days the feeling exists but the hype/amatonormativity is what makes it such a big deal. like people are thinking about it and actively looking to date or find their soulmate or whatever, so there are more chances for romantic attraction to occur, i guess. back then they had the feeling but not the hype. although it is interesting that there's an ancient greek myth (mentioned in plato's symposium) which basically says we were all born as these creatures with 4 legs and stuff and those split apart into two people, and the other person is your soulmate (literal other half). that was not a pro explanation but i believe that's the gist.

at 20 i'm in shorts, a t-shirt, and flip-flops and i'm comfortable, at 25 i'm uncomfortable and lethargic but will still go to the beach as long as i don't have to be out of the water for too long, at 30 i'm in my shaded but not air-conditioned cottage/yard, lying down with a cold cloth on my face and a cold drink. i'll sleep with only a sheet, the cloth, and difficulty. if i have to go outside, i will complain and bring lots of sunscreen and water. i once made the mistake of travelling to barcelona in june. to be fair, school doesn't give me much of a window. i'm not sure i've ever experienced 40. at 15 i'm comfortable in jeans and a t-shirt, at 10 i'll add a sweater or light jacket, around 5 or 0 i'll switch it for my winter coat, and in the negatives i'll add a sweater, hat, mittens, and boots and still go for a walk, skate, or ski. i might complain at -10 or -15, and prefer to be inside with a fire and tea. it rarely reaches -20. i'd take the -5, i've never experienced -30. quebec's nice btw. good skiing, unlike ontario. winter is my favourite season so it's usually between 5 and -15 but it's easier not to wear outerwear so like 10 to 20. i picked 15 and less.

there is always that decision of whether or not to use the word, and it depends on the situation for me, but mostly i do, because that's what you'd do for any other orientation. like i haven't heard anyone say they're interested in relationships with people of more than one gender; they say they're bi/pan. for us it will usually involve some more explaining but i am generally happy to do that. because that's how i found out about aromanticism, right--i read about it, and if someone hadn't put that out there, who knows how long i would have not known and what that could have led to. so it's good for (questioning) aros as well as allos. but of course whether and how you come out is a personal decision.

similar thing happened to me in grade 9. i had what i call an aro crush--squish + sexual attraction--on this guy, evan, and my friend sylvia liked him. eventually he asked her out and she said yes, and when she told me rather nervously, i was like, 'that's nice'. then my other friend asked me how i was taking it and i was like, 'uh, fine?' and she said i was a good friend and i'm like, 'thanks, i guess...what's the big deal?' i didn't care because i didn't want to date him. we were friends, like, throughout high school, and it never occurred to me to be upset that he didn't want to be anything else, because i didn't really. they would make out in front of everyone, and any annoyance/weirdness i felt, i would have felt the same about any other such couple. btw they were such a preposterously bad couple, on-and-off multiple times a week, that another friend got sylvia a bracelet where one side said 'single' and one said 'taken' so we'd know what the situation was that day. it was like, kind of a joke but kind of not. anyway, the next year, they were done for good, and a different friend (man, i had more friends in hs than i do now) asked me whether i still liked evan and i said something along the lines of "not like before but i'll ask myself 'ok, do i not like him then?'" and she supplied "and you can't say no," and i said "exactly." in retrospect, what i meant was that i still liked him as a friend and thought he was hot--i couldn't disagree with that--but the aro crush had just petered out; it just wasn't really relevant. but yeah lmao whenever i had squishes on girls, i figured i just thought they were cool/wanted to be their friend, and i was right--i was/am so straight that no alternative crossed my mind (even if i admired their looks)--but then with guys, sometimes it was the same and sometimes there was the added element of sexual attraction, so i never knew where to draw the line, like, do i have a crush on this guy or not? so that was weird. a lot made sense later.

it's definitely hard for alloromantics to understand our experiences without comparison to their own. we may describe a qpr as "like a relationship, but not romantic," or a squish as "like a crush, but not romantic," and they equate "not romantic" to "less than". they see friendship, sexual relationships, or other non-romantic relationships as a step down, so we're kind of backed into a corner when we try to explain their significance to us, and using words like "more," "stronger," or "deeper" just makes them think "closer to romance" (and further contradicts the notion that purely platonic relationships, for instance, can be quite meaningful). they have this idea of a sort of hierarchy of love/relationships, where romance is at the top--often monogamous, lifelong/married, sexual and romantic relationships--this is amatonormativity. so as for other types, like just sexual, just romantic, just platonic/queerplatonic, or the latter in combination with either of the others, is seen as less complete or meaningful, when (aside from the fact that any given relationship could be more so than a traditional romantic one) the point is that they can simply be different. no comparison of value or anything else is necessary. so when i explain my attraction or relationships, i may make comparisons to something they'd understand, but i add that it's a separate thing and that my experiences won't be the same as every other aro/spec person's. for some, a qpr may be between a friendship and a romantic relationship, and/or more important than "regular friendship" and that's ok. everyone should be able to conceptualize and describe their experiences in whatever way works for them. so i guess my best solution is just to emphasize this, and that there's no inherent hierarchy.

What have you seen people using "split attraction model" to mean? What does it mean to you? distinguishing between different types of attraction, usually romantic and sexual. usually because they don't match, and usually because one is a-spec (like me: aromantic heterosexual) but not necessarily (apparently the most common non-matching combination is heteroromantic bisexual), and they could match but feel distinct (i know someone who IDs as "asexual and aromantic"). If somebody says that they use it, what does that mean to you? If somebody says they don't use it, what does that mean to you? if they use it, they want to distinguish their different types of attraction; if not, they don't feel the need to (or don't know about the SAM). i agree with this: i actually talked about romantic vs. sexual attraction to my high school lgbt+ leader (back when i'd just become familiar with the SAM and was questioning about being aro) and she looked confused and said to her they were the same. (???) Do you usually think of "split attraction" correlating with "having more than orientation," or no? generally but not necessarily. Does anybody have a source dating it back prior to 2015? i learned about it in conjunction with aromanticism, which must have been 2014/2015, on my first social media site, google+. good times. Any other thoughts on the dilemmas raised? Does it fill a lexical gap? Does it have multiple meanings? Is it useful? it's useful to me, as understanding that romantic orientation existed and didn't have to match sexual orientation allowed me to realize i'm aro. i've also seen other people describing what sounds like variorientation in confusion, ex. "i like dating everyone but only sleeping with girls--what am i?" i suggest "panromantic homosexual?" and explain the SAM. i don't see any problems. use it if and as you like.

thanks, it's from my tumblr, i made a meme: https://every-reason-shes-fine.tumblr.com/post/183048066134/me-i-want-a-bf-me-to-me-you-know-youll-probably. i know i could have just put this link in a post but i wanted to just have the image in it. oh, well.

it ends with me, too. i'm an only child, my mom's an only child, and my dad has two sisters, one of whom has two kids, so we three are it. i don't feel badly though; i don't owe my parents anything, certainly not something which impacts my life and body in pretty much the most major way imaginable, and theirs in a minor way. even if i had a kid at the age they were when they had me, 38, they would be 76/77. they'd see them every so often for maybe a decade (my mom's family tends to live into their 90s but who knows), while i'd be with them every day for about two (and really the rest of my life), supporting them financially and caring for them on my own (no spouse/partner, right?) while i can't even do either of those for myself. and i don't want to. nothing about having kids appeals to me. there is no way i could endure pregnancy or labour (i couldn't even endure a procedure to prevent those things) and as i say, i don't want the next part, either; i want a fulfilling career, adventure and flexibility, and friends my own age, and yes, i'm confident that will be the case as long as i'm capable of having those things. i think i could be a great parent if i wanted to be (i've been babysitting for 8 years and i seem to be liked by kids and parents), but since i don't want to, i wouldn't be. it wouldn't be fair to me or the kid(s), so no, i'm not putting us all through that to let my parents see them part-time when they already had me full-time, by their choice. this is my choice. and i'll add that i've seen many parents who constantly complain about their kids and can't wait to get away from them--so have my parents, who can't relate--and just about all of them surely wanted those kids in the first place, or thought they did, so if you have any doubts at all, i urge you to give it the most serious consideration. the decision to have kids should require infinitely more of it than the decision not to, and it should be only for your own reasons. yes, as honourable as your intention to give a child a home by adoption may be (i do agree that this is a great option, especially as we don't need any more people in the world), if you're not absolutely willing and prepared to be a parent, it's a disservice to you both.

sorry, i was trying to say when i paste a url it doesn't work. oh, well, thanks anyway.