Neir

@Coyote Thank you for those resources! Our definition on AUREA is something we're open to changing as discussions happen, which is a big reason I asked this question. I also ask this question out of personal curiosity. So the big/powerful allies I'm thinking of are not AUREA-related (though AUREA will be thinking of partnerships with others too). I'm still thinking big/powerful but not quite on national or international scales. More local. When I come up against locally powerful queer organizations where I live or outspoken LGBTQ+ leaders/groups in my area, me as an individual having to sit down for a several-hour conversation on the intricacies of aromanticism hasn't been feasible. Like @nonmerci was saying, it would have been useful to have something broad or at least understandable in a short version to give before gradually introducing the rest, in order to take me seriously as a queer person (and not just "an attention seeker" or "queer wannabe"). I also know that this issue on a small scale is likely to replicate on a larger scale, and so as I've been working in AUREA and examining our definitions, this issue has magnified. Also, off topic, but in the future it will probably be useful to indicate whether I and other AUREA team members are posting as individuals or AUREA reps. We may open a new account for that or at least say something regarding it.

Hey @Star Lion I think you may be confusing the aromantic that is an identity (the identity that means experiencing no romantic attraction) and the broad aromantic concept that is what I'm talking about here. @Coyote YES this is exactly why I am so conflicted. I don't want to get into respectability politics (in fact, challenging the powerful and default definitions of romance are what we're all about anyway), but what I mean more is that very broad definitions have, in my experience with non-aros, been very confusing. Many non-aros who I want to understand aromanticism, who have big voices and are big allies, regard aromanticism as less legit when given too much right away. I want to get to a broad definition that is just simple enough that it can be a stepping stone for introducing people to the community without condensing it to the point that all we're doing is pleasing the authority (at the cost of our own erasure). In the end, I agree that it's their problem if they can't understand nuance. Anyway, I think we're on the same page here. We want to capture the community's diversity. Yeah, something like this! It's just deciding on what goes into [of some kind] that I was stuck on. Edit: Actually, I don't even know there needs to be something there, apart from common examples like those you listed and those I mentioned from AUREA's definition. Perhaps just common examples are the best middle ground we can have for now.

That post by Siggy you linked, @Coyote, is an excellent post. If I understand it right, Siggy is suggesting we drop "aromantic" as an umbrella for the spectrum in favor of other terms that have developed? I guess that even though I said I didn't want to talk about umbrella terms in this thread, the issue of defining "aromantic" does seem to greatly hinge on how we define the aro umbrella and where/whether we include grayros and demiros and other aros who do experience romantic attraction (or who are quoiro, like yourself!). Some grayros I know, for example, don't identify with the aro spectrum while others greatly identify with it. I think Siggy also made this point. The spectrum (and points on it) isn't easily defined and can't be generalized. It's hard to draw a line and have a definition of aromantic that won't confuse people, simply because different people define it differently. People are aromantic if they feel like aromantic experiences [of some kind] describe them somehow. That's why I was thinking about this and made this thread. People identify (or don't identify) with terms for a number of personal reasons and I want to be able to capture the definition diversity, at least in a "good enough" way. Sometimes drawing a prescriptive line can be extremely alienating. But on the other hand, being too inclusive of anything and everything can be argued against for being too wobbly a definition that escapes understanding at all. The balance is hard to reach but some generalization is needed at this point in aro activism to just get non-aros to somewhat understand our experiences and support us. It's umbrella-crunching, as you've referred to it before, for sure. But many powerful allies simply won't care to hear about experience diversity - they can't be convinced that a simple generalizable definition isn't adequate, at least not right at the beginning when they are first learning of the term. I think further conversations about the aro umbrella (and related terminology) is going on in this thread, in addition to other platforms like Pillowfort and other blogging avenues. I'm not sure about bringing that conversation to this thread (unless it specifically addresses the aromantic definition(s)), but if others are interested in talking about these things, those are places to go. Either way, I'll be keeping an eye on those conversations.

You don't have to understand or empathize with people to respect them, so as long as you respect how others feel, you're not at all transphobic/transmisic. I have a friend (also a cis woman) who has said almost exactly the same thing as you. She doesn't really view her gender as something that defines her at all. She's content with the gender she was assigned at birth and she doesn't think about being a woman explicitly, really, ever. I think it's also worth mentioning that some trans and non-binary folks feel that way too - that gender just isn't a concept they really care about or that affects them (I've heard some agender people and quoigender people say these kinds of things, for example, as well as binary trans folks and others under the big umbrella). Really, the best thing you can do is just nod and accept people's experiences, even if you don't understand them. Maybe you'll understand in the future, maybe not ever, but just because you don't doesn't mean you're doing us harm.

Aha here it is! For others, this conversation is continuing here:

@Coyote Apologies about using "end-case aro!" I should let you know I sometimes have trouble with words, so don't necessarily take everything I say completely literally. That's why I post these kinds of definition things here - I use words when speaking/typing that are close enough to what I want to say but those words aren't necessarily exactly what I'm looking for. By end-case aro I just mean to distinguish aromantics in a way that won't make our current conversation about the definition of "aromantic" confusing, since aromantic can stand for an aromantic at the end of the aro spectrum or for the whole concept of aromanticism or as a synonym for the aro umbrella (thus my "arospec umbrella" in brackets). It's difficult to separate this conversation out without being confusing, but hopefully this clarifies things a bit. What I'm after defining in this thread is that middle item.

What I meant by this discussion is defining the concept of aromantic to people who have no idea being "non-romantic" in some way, shape, or form is even possible. There's the aromantic that's a specific orientation (the end-case aro who never feels romantic attraction for example) and the aromantic umbrella (or arospec umbrella). Like how the concept of bisexuality for instance is based on the concept of "bi": two/many/more than one. I really like what you said, @DeltaV: I'm basically looking for a definition that covers what aro people all have in common (i.e., the "a"-romantic). What's encompassed in the "a?" Because it's not just "a"-romantic attraction, but also "a"-romantic behaviour and other stuff as mentioned in this thread. Essentially "a"-whatever romance stands for for that person. Hope that clears things up. @Coyote I like the definition edit you proposed: and also @bydontost's edit. A potential definition to capture what's been said, without alienating end-case aros or other aros on the aro spectrum: aromantic: describes a person whose experience of romance is disconnected from normative societal expectations, commonly due to experiencing little to no romantic attraction, but also due to feeling repulsed by romance, or being uninterested in romantic relationships

A long title, but it's something we were chatting about in the Arocalypse Discord that I wanted to share. When we (aros) explain the term "aromantic" to someone we often want to give them a short and accessible definition that is "good enough." Of course, defining aromanticism is complex because it overlaps with other terms we have (like "aro" and "arospec") and there are a lot of relationships within the community that are very tense right now. So, what I'm not asking is to define the best umbrella term for aromantics, because that's a separate discussion that we're not ready to have, but what I do want to know is how people feel about the current "official" or layperson-facing definition(s) of aromantic. Aromantic is often defined as experiencing little to no romantic attraction nowadays (as is the Merriam-Webster definition in the dictionary), but there are some identities under the aro umbrella that aren't captured by "little to no attraction." These identities might be covered under the "little" part of the definition sometimes, because even when people experience romantic attraction, their decision to engage or not engage in romance and romantic relationships makes their experience of romance "little" comparatively. But, the definition isn't perfect. For many aros, their being aro is dependent on factors other than attraction. Right now, this tentative definition is going around a few of us and I'm curious about what you think of using it for a quick but representative definition of aromantic.

This is anecdotal, but a couple of allo friends of mine, when they heard me use the term 'squish' and understood its definition, really liked the idea and said they have those feelings too. So some allos definitely do experience squishes.

The people I'm out to are friends I trust, and they have all been extremely supportive, either already knowing about aros (which was amazing when many of them aren't a-spec at all or in those spaces) or telling me that they went and looked aromanticism up to understand it better. There are a couple of people I came out as aro to that didn't understand it, though, and thought that being aro meant I would be alone forever. "You can't be by yourself, isolated with no relationships!" is something I've heard, even when I tried to explain that I don't intend to not have any relationships, just no romantic relationships. These people are older so that may be a reason.

Welcome! And your English is excellent, don't even worry.

Welcome, Em. I'm happy you've found a forum resource that might help you figure everything out. We're excited to have another [potential] aro here!

I don't think these terms were meant to be taken completely seriously. Just kind of fun terms to run with. They're cute and punny (and the fact you were drinking Strongbow just puts a huge metapun on this whole thing, which I'm laughing about).

@Mark I assumed this was for talking about any "A" labelled identity problems, including intersections. I could be wrong, but that's the interpretation I went with.

This is something I've heard talked about a lot recently; you're not the only one! I'm not one of those people (I'm pretty solidly ace and consider it to be an important identity alongside by aro identity), but there are some aros who just use "aromantic" to describe themselves without listing their sexuality, for reasons like yours. Some of these aros just use "aromantic," full-stop, and never talk about sexuality. Some of these aros have been trying to come up with terms for themselves instead, so that it's more explicit to others that they don't use sexuality labels. Some of the labels I've seen: Non-SAM aro/Unit aro: an aro who doesn't use the SAM (Split Attraction Model) and who focuses only or primarily on their aro identity, not on other types of attraction besides the romanticism Primaro/Archaro: an aro who is primarily aro, or has their aroness be their more important identity Unicum aro/Solaro: an aro who is solely or only aro, or who feels that their identity is captured by "aromantic," full-stop No pressure to use these labels at all - just thought it'd be something to share in case you're looking for a term or for aros who might share your feelings. If you look up some of those terms you might be able to find aros that use them and that you could connect with. It'd be nice to not have people assume you connect with a sexuality alongside being aro, but it's sometimes true that people make those assumptions anyway. In sum, you're super valid!

There's a term "allosexual" (abbreviated to "allo") that effectively means "not asexual" or "experiences sexual attraction" if that's what you're looking for. Some aros here say "aro allo" or "allo/aro." Welcome fellow space enthusiast! Have some aro ice cream and hang out with us:

Hi Max. Welcome to this little corner of the internet dedicated to aros. Have an ice cream and join us in discussions and shenanigans whenever you'd like:

I have had those experiences too, I am angry on your behalf! Welcome to this little space where we can all be angry about romanticizing romance together. And also, here's some aro ice cream for your troubles:

Welcome (officially)! I'm really happy to hear that the forums have been helpful for you. (They have been for me too.) Have some aro ice cream:

Hi aros! For many US/Canadian folks (and potentially others elsewhere as well), June is Pride Month. I think it'd be nice to have a thread to post if you'll be attending Pride events in your area, in case others want to meet up or even just to know where Pride events might be happening. I'll be attending Toronto Pride (in Canada) at the end of the month, myself. Big retroactive edit: I'm not even in Canada during Toronto Pride and am instead in England for a conference. And I'll be missing London's Pride Parade July 6th because that's when I fly home ;-;

This is cute! I say: No more actors

Ah, a little venting thread. I [platonically] love you for creating this. A problem I face: Constantly being asked out and hit on, even sometimes when I have explained aromanticism and asexuality to those people, because they think that my enthusiastic personality is flirting. Essentially, everything I do being taken romantically and not being believed when I say it's not.

What the above people have said is exactly right. Your experiences are valid and many aros share them too. I believe that 'aplatonic' is sometimes a term some aros use to indicate feelings like yours so if you're curious about connecting with others on this, searching 'aplatonic' on these forums or elsewhere might help too.

Yes, this place does exist and I'm happy you found it! Here's some aro ice cream to complement that ace cake:

Welcome. I really enjoyed reading your story and am really glad you've found a little nook of the internet to talk about your experiences. We're happy to have you