Themathlover

@SuperharoThanks ! I'll fill it !

I'll ckeck it out, thanks for responding !

I ignore how many different nationalities there are on this forum, but since there must be plenty, I was wondering if scientific studies in your native language had been conducted about aromanticism (without asexuality). I've researched in French and in English but haven't found anything...

I'm completely conscious of this, and this is the reason why I rejected my faith for a while. I knew that I couldn't pick what I liked and ignore the rest, this was nonsensical, so I ended up rejecting everything. But I quickly reverted, I'm really attached to spirituality and felt an expanding void growing inside of me. Currently, I'm still questioning, searching and changing. This will occur for sure if I choose to publicly "come out" as a progressist Muslim. However, I'm not surrounded by extreme and dangerous Muslims, they're rather "just" ideologically endoctrinated, and I'm not even physically in touch with them, I was for a short period of time and this was unwanted by both me and my parents, we were doubtful about joining a Muslim community or not and were disappointed by them once we made up our mind to try spending time with them.

Thanks for responding (Yep, that was me, my computer bugged). It's really annoying to put up with this as an aro-spec girl !

As a quoiromantic person, I personally don't get the difference, but the question is : Do alloromantics feel a difference ? I think that yes, it's not the same for them. I'm also idemromantic and have based myself my entire life on external actions to distinguish people being platonically attracted to and those being "romantically" attracted to, although I feel like people who say to love each other "romantically" act like good friends who have sex. This is my quoiromantic perspective, but they don't experience it this way. Whenever I ask them about this, they're not able to clearly put words on their feelings, they can just tell me what happens physically, such as tingles and blush, which sounds rather sexual to me. It's confusing... Anyways, squishes were invented for aro-spec people to better identify their sentiments, crushes are for alloromantics.

No problem, @MulticulturalFarmer directed me to a fabulous progressist Muslim subreddit. I checked it out, and they honestly are fantastic, I think I'm in love ❤️ (aro love 🤣). I read their guidelines, and they 100% share my opinions, values, thoughts... It makes me feel a lot less helpless and hopeless, soon will I certainly revert to Islam in a more steadfast way. I'll keep you up with my evolution, if you want.

Thank you so much, I'll check it out !

As an alloaro girl, I think it was something like "Wait, women can't be like that. You're a slut.". Sexism is a big part of my aromantic experience.

From your French pseudo Atypique, I can tell that you are French, so, I will write my respond in Français. Je te suis complètement sur ce point, c'est ce que j'ai d'ailleurs essayé de laisser transparaître dans ma publication plus haut. Puisque le mariage, civil du moins, n'a plus de réelle valeur, je n'arrive pas à me défaire de l'idée qu'ériger celui-ci en la plus grande preuve d'amour possible est mauvais pour l'amour lui-même : cela voudrait donc dire qu'un contrat légal purement administratif entre deux personnes qui s'aiment et décident de s'unir signifie plus que deux personnes non mariées qui s'aiment tout autant. L'amour réside-t-il vraiment dans des bouts de papier, comme tu l'as toi-même dit ? Je ne suis pas sûre, en tout cas, il y a vraiment matière à réfléchir, à mon sens, sur le rapport à l'amour dans nos sociétés modernes. Je ne sais pas si le fait d'être quelque part sur le spectre aromantique permet en général de mieux cerner les contradictions des structures alloromantiques, mais je crois bien que la communauté aromantique a clairement quelque chose à apporter aux institutions traditionnelles romantiques. Peut-être pouvons-nous la parfaire, la questionner, la compléter ? En tout cas, quelles que soient les raisons de notre existence (biologiques, sociales, psychologiques, neurologiques...), je ne pense pas que notre différence par rapport à la majorité soit une fin en soi, mais que nous avons un rôle à jouer nous aussi. Nous ne sommes pas "inutiles" et "bizarres". Il me semble qu'il existe une théorie similaire en ce qui concerne le neuroatypisme, une théorie qui suggère qu'il ne s'agirait pas d'une défaillance ou d'une chose "atypique", mais que ce serait simplement une autre manière de fonctionner aussi acceptable qu'un trait de caractère inégalement réparti au sein de la population, comme l'introversion, qui est certes moins répandue que son opposée, l'extraversion, mais n'a jamais été considérée comme une défaillance pour autant. Tout dépendrait alors de la manière dont la majorité perçoit les minorités, et ce par un processus de socialisation axé sur ce qui paraît au premier abord comme le plus naturel au monde. Quelque part, c'est compréhensible, et je ne crois pas qu'il faille jeter la faute sur les autres. L'hétérosexualité et l'amour entre deux personnes est un comportement typique de nombreuses espèces qui assure la survie, la perpétuation et la stabilisation d'un groupe. Mais cela veut-il automatiquement dire que toutes celles et ceux sortant de ces "normes" sont "défaillants" ? Je pense que c'est un raccourci très grossier, car les relations et sexualités humaines dépassent largement le cadre de la reproduction, reste à savoir pourquoi et quel équilibre sont censées apporter ces minorités à notre espèce. Or, tant que les gens resteront coincés dans leurs stéréotypes, leur rejet et leur ignorance, plutôt que de s'ouvrir à la recherche, ce travail sera bien difficile. Je ne me souviens plus du nom de cette théorie, mais je l'avais trouvée intéressante, elle fait écho à mon expérience de fille quoiromantique et hétérosexuelle, car j'ai moi-même dû faire face à beaucoup de stigmatisation voire discrimination en raison de ma "différence".

I don't know about the US and else in the world, but as a French person, I don't see many legal benefits from civil marriage. The spouses must have a common residency, share their bills and most of their belongings... I don't want it, especially as an arospec girl. Why would I do this, what would I take advantage of in this situation ? I mean, isn't it simpler to settle down with someone you want a lifetime long relationship with without being romantically attracted to them, like a queerplatonic commitment, and just enjoy your life together ? Honestly, I don't even know why the concept of marriage was invented. I think it originates from religions, to control sexuality, reproduction and preserve bloodlines, but why does it remain in secular societies ? That's a real question, why do people feel like marrying is the accomplishment of love, it's merely a formality, how does it impact the initial love you had for your partner ? I don't know if alloromantics feel the same about it, but the value attributed to marriage in secular societies by atheist people has always left me perplex. If you're not in any religion and don't believe that marriage is a sacred command, then, what's so special in it ? I remember attending a wedding when I was 11, on March 2019, and faking enthusiasm about it because everyone did and I wouldn't have appreciated being frowned upon. But, even at 11, I had this uncomprehension. It meant nothing to me, it was worthless. I was just happy to get so much food in just one day, but the wedding in itself didn't interest me whatsoever. I'm Muslim, therefore, I do attribute value to religious marriage, however, in Islam at least, there is no need for preparing a ceremony and having fun partying all night, you're not obliged to celebrate anything : it's a contract. This is what I learned from my recent reasearch. Two persons agree to share responsibilities and fulfill each other, then, whenever two Muslims persons think they can live together and have the same needs and wishes, they can marry. So, I don't think I will ever marry civilly, but religiously, perhaps.

I just wanted to inform you that I checked the Aspec Muslim discord out, and its members' brains are as much filled with stereotypes as other Muslims... I think I'll leave it and look for another one, or perhaps will I simply give up on finding Muslims like me... However, I'm glad to see that you are respectful and helpful, maybe will I slowly abandon my Muslim fellows whitout losing my faith.

I could endlessly discuss that. Romance is really a non-sense to me. Since amatonormativity is embedded in most cultures but my aromanticism has always been a part of me nonetheless, I suppose that I didn't escape this normative structure, instead, I ineluctably shaped it in an aromantic way, from my personal divergent perspective. When I was just a child, nothing was wrong with this, I wasn't aware of my noncomformity yet, I simply adapted my personality to my observation of common standards, but growing up made me realize this. Actually, aromantics claim to be because they define themselves in opposition to this "norm", and it's possible because of their different interpretations of/feelings about it. For example, I assumed for a long time (I've just lived for 15 years but don't mind) that romance was good friendship and sex. I did great with that, but then heard about "friends with benefits" and wasn't able to figure out the difference from romance. Also, when I entered teenage and most of my fellows began to be obsessed with "crushes", I was something like 12 or 13, but I immediately assumed crushes were persons you craved having sex with. In fact, I couldn't assume anything else, what else would make people so crazy about someone they don't know anything of except the way they look ? I started to be confused at that time. It was so ridiculous and uncomprehensible that you could feel a "romantic" connection with a complete stranger, especially celebrities. They've never ever met them ! What makes them special in these person's eyes ? Even now, this remains a mystery... Personally, I'm a teen but have never experienced crushing on someone. I did experience crushing on someone in the way I thought crushing was at first, but that's another thing. It doesn't mean I've never bonded with someone I wanted to know more about, but this was for a reason : this person shares my opinions, they're calm, they're not too excentric... Inversely, when my classmates had crushes, it was never the result of an attraction towards one or several of their qualities, but entirely random, based on nothing but "just a feeling". Once I started to look into aromanticism, I discovered "demiromanticism", which basically means "feeling a romantic attraction towards someone only after developing a significant bond with them", I believed it to be the norm for literally 15 years !

Hello everyone ! Since I'm just 15 years old and have talked to adults only up to now, it would be nice to meet other teens here.

@nonmerci, Merci beaucoup de ta réponse. Les conseils que tu me donnes sont intéressants mais je ne sais pas si les psychologues qui interviennent dans les collèges et lycées peuvent faire un suivi complet de l'enfant. Ça m'étonnerait, d'ailleurs. Peut-être nous dirigent-ils vers d'autres psychologues qui travaillent en dehors de l'éducation nationale ? Mais dans ce cas-là, comme tu l'as dit, ils sont sûrement tenus d'en informer les parents, ce que j'aimerais, dans un premier temps du moins, éviter. P.S : You can speak both in English and in Français !