Low-Key Crushes Were Probably Squishes

[[Deleted Account]]

Well, I thought I figured out that I was basically Quasi-Hypo-Panromantic because my crushes didn't really fit the idea of romance, but I recently saw the wiki definitions of crushes and squishes, and it looked like they fit squishes instead of crushes. This means I'm probably aro, even though I've been hoping I'm not. I know lots of aros who are happy to be aro, but I don't see myself as being one of them because the chances of finding a qpr aren't great and it would feel unfair to be in a romantic relationship if I don't feel any desire for the romance. I guess one thing that would be helpful to me as someone who has never really tried to get in a romantic relationship, though I thought it was because of my age, is what do you imagine yourself doing with squishes vs crushes? We all have these imaginary scenarios in our heads, so maybe I should look at what goes inside my head rather than the very different feelings everyone has and what they do with them. Thanks for reading, and any responses would be helpful! Thank you! Merci! Gracias! Arigato! Danke! Etc.

[Momo]

4 hours ago, QuirkyGeek said:

I guess one thing that would be helpful to me as someone who has never really tried to get in a romantic relationship, though I thought it was because of my age, is what do you imagine yourself doing with squishes vs crushes?

What do you do with your friends? On a more serious note though, personally I don't. My squishes manifest as a desire to talk and get to know someone rather than as a wish to do anything specific with.

 

4 hours ago, QuirkyGeek said:

I know lots of aros who are happy to be aro, I don't see myself as being one of them because the chances of finding a qpr aren't great

To be honest, I don't believe this is true. There's a smaller set of people who are valid(?) partners, but if you focus in on the aromantic community there's quite a few people looking for QPR's. It is definitely harder, but I wouldn't say that the chances are bad.

 

4 hours ago, QuirkyGeek said:

it would feel unfair to be in a romantic relationship if I don't feel any desire for the romance.

I tend to agree, but I know this isn't universally the opinion, of aromantics and some alloromantics both.

[cute kitty Meow! Mewo!]

Disclaimer - I have no idea what I'm saying and I could very easily be entirely stupid. feel free to ignore me or question what I say. make sense of things for yourself, not for what others think. 

 

 

On 7/24/2017 at 1:40 PM, QuirkyGeek said:

 This means I'm probably aro, even though I've been hoping I'm not.

 

why do you want to be romantic? that could be the very reason why you are! remember, harry potter didn't want to be in slytherin. and that was exactly what made him not one. his choice was just as important in determining who he was, as his underlying personality. 

 

just because "it isn't a choice" doesn't mean that our choices don't influence who we are. it is both but also neither. idk how to say it... 

 

if you got a squish and it turns into an emotional tie with the person. if you want that to be romantic and special - why can't it be? you don't need to choose who you are based off what some wiki said to you. wiki explanations.. definitions.. they are guides to understanding. but just like you need to really explore use-cases of effect v. affect to understand the meaning, you need to explore who you are to understand yourself as well. you don't like what the wiki says? there is a reason - and find that. let your intuition guide you to realize yourself. if your intuition is to trust logic - then so be it. if your intuition is to distrust some definition - so be it. 

 

you don't have to be romantic to be romantic. many romantics aren't very romantic at all. many romantics are very romantic but not very infatuational. there's a broad range of what romance and sexuality means to anyone in the world. the cliche definitions are nothing but broad sweeps to try to find some overlying similarity - the more abstract the definition the more it is all-encompassing, the more detailed it is the more it doesn't address certain people. 

 

I'm some kind of not-romantic not-aromantic weirdo. I don't usually got crushes tho sometimes I do. but anyway the point is - I don't fit the normal definition of "romantic person" and I could go my whole life alone and be perfectly happy and I know it. but I intend to have a partner some day and whether that is an aromantic close friendship or a romantic love, I'll find a way to make it work. in the end -  that is what really matters, not some random label word that has no meaning unless I give it meaning. 

[aro_elise]

I don't get many squishes but I have one now, on an internet friend.  Basically I like talking to her, even listening to her (she does live streams on her YouTube channel), and I think about her fairly often.  I can be platonically attracted to anyone and sexually attracted to guys.  When I feel both for a guy, I used to think it was a crush but now like to call it an aro crush.  When I first got the notion that I might be aro, I was pretty conflicted and tried to convince myself I wasn't.  Now, though, I am one of those people you mentioned who's happy to be aro and to have found that way to identify.  You sound like you could be but you totally don't have to decide now or ever whether that feels right.  I hope that helps some and I'd be glad to offer any more insight.  

[Zorcodtoa]

.