Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Hi, 

I didn't find any posts about schroromantics so I decided to start one. It's only a couple of days when I realized I'm a schroromantic. For me it's an important part of my identity now because I have a correct term to describe it for others. I'm 26-years-old. Overall I feel romantic or aromantic feelings quite rarely. For now I counted six romantic and four aromantic crushes/love in total. I never thought that am also aromantic so it's been a little confusing. I'm also allosexual and polyamorous.

Romantic attraction is a powerful feeling when I think the other like almost every moment at first but then it will calm down when the time passes but when I got aromantic crush it usually lasts changeless for a really long time like 5-10 years. Moreover if I haven't seen this person in many years I still got the feelings towards them! *sigh* And if the person who I've crushed likes me back my affection might last unchanged for the rest of our lives I guess. 

More schroromantics here?

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That sounds very interesting. Thank you for raising awareness about this ignored yet fascinating and important romantic orientation!

 

But I must unveil my former ignorance in this matter and admit that I had never heard “schroromantic” (not to be confused with “schromantic”, a relatively popular and mainstream romantic orientation) until a month ago! Back then some other schroromantic mentioned it. I was surprised and, as usual, first looked it up in “The Uplifting Aro Primer for Times of Need” by Arthur Frogg – yet it was nowhere mentioned in there.

 

And then I wondered if schroromanticism is even real…

 

The schroromanticism issue troubled me and I did not sleep well that night. I always thought myself well-educated about romantic orientations and often boasted that I knew every single one of them! Yet here I was, having never heard anything about schroromanticism. And even having serious doubts about it.

 

I woke up at 4 am after having a nightmare how I deeply offended a schroromantic by ignorantly questioning the very existence of their romantic orientation! And mocking them!

 

Then I went down into the dungeon of my house and consulted my private library. And sure, I did make a find. Schroromanticism was mentioned in a footnote on page 3784 in “The Grand Compendium of Aromantic Knowledge and Lore both Familiar and Arcane” … and I can tell you what was written there exactly fits your own description!

 

So though I am not a schroromantic and was very ignorant about schroromanticism, please note that I have educated myself and now fully support schroromanticism as a concept.

 

tl;dr schroromantic people exist and are valid!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, DeltaV said:

Yet here I was, having never heard anything about schroromanticism. And even having serious doubts about it.


Maybe it's that being able to feel non-romantic and romantic feelings at the same time makes no sense or something. I guess that being schroromantic is really rare but who knows. Now I'm just happy that there's an explanation.
 

Quote

Schroromanticism was mentioned in a footnote on page 3784 in “The Grand Compendium of Aromantic Knowledge and Lore both Familiar and Arcane” … and I can tell you what was written there exactly fits your own description!

 

What did the book said? Would be interesting to hear. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On a more serious note, “schromantic” is mentioned in “The Invisible Orientation” book:

 

* Participants were allowed to choose more than one answer. Some people aren’t sure how to describe their romantic orientation, or they reject the idea of specifically defining their attraction patterns, don’t find any of the existing definitions useful in describing their feelings, or don’t know whether they have a preferred gender or set of genders. A variety of creative ways exist to express this ambiguity. Terms that have been seen in asexual, aromantic, and questioning circles include WTFromantic, quoiromantic, ambiguously romantic, and Schromantic (describing romanticism in terms of Schrödinger’s cat[3] as having the possibility of being romantic and aromantic at the same time).

 

and probably “schroromantic” is a variant word of “schromantic”?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, gardensnake said:

More schroromantics here?

 

Hi! *waves* I'm quoiromantic. Not the same label, but I consider a lot of these similar/related labels/descriptions to fall under a kind of shared umbrella. It was actually just the other day that I posted about looking for more quoi bridge-building w/ allosexuals. :icecream:

 

For the curious: I first encountered "schromantic" (as a term) in Effi's list of words for those who struggle with the concept of romantic attraction. The term "Schroedinger's dating" was introduced on Aroplane by Sciatrix, who's the coiner of wtfromantic, which was the precursor to quoiromantic. So there's a lot of overlapping family history there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The term is very confusing. You can just not feel romantic attraction sometimes and feel it other times and still be alloromantic. Again, most alloromantics don't feel romantic attraction all the time. I don't think there's any way to feel romantic attraction and not feel it at the same exact time. You either do or you don't.

 

It sounds like "I think maybe I'm aromantic but I also think maybe I'm alloromantic".

On 2/9/2020 at 10:58 AM, DeltaV said:

 

 

Then I went down into the dungeon of my house and consulted my private library. And sure, I did make a find. Schroromanticism was mentioned in a footnote on page 3784 in “The Grand Compendium of Aromantic Knowledge and Lore both Familiar and Arcane” … and I can tell you what was written there exactly fits your own description!

 

 

Can't seem to find it on google search, do you have a link?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't know this orientation, thanks for letting me know! 

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, TripleA said:

The term is very confusing. You can just not feel romantic attraction sometimes and feel it other times and still be alloromantic. Again, most alloromantics don't feel romantic attraction all the time. I don't think there's any way to feel romantic attraction and not feel it at the same exact time. You either do or you don't.


Just to be clear I got the picture that schromantic/schroromantic means that you are able to feel both alloromantic and aromantic crushes. What I've undestood that aromantics still have crushes that just aren't romantic but still crushes and they may not be completely platonic but some kind of strong feeling of friendship and desire to be close to someone. I don't know if every aros have feelings like that. 

My aromantic crushes have also been asexual and my alloromantic crushes have always been allosexual. So there's really difference between them but I admit that the term is confusing, it says:

Quote

''Schromantic - Is someone who is aromantic and romantic at the same time, or some mix of the two. (A term used here on AVEN)

(describing romanticism in terms of Schrödinger’s cat as having the possibility of being romantic and aromantic at the same time).''


And I'm not mix of the two, I just simply feel both of those separately. I don't feel aromantic and alloromantic feelings at the same time towards someone. It's either alloromantic or aromantic crush and I know some people may have difficulties to believe that. It makes no sense to me either but it is what it is.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My understanding is that "crush" is inherently romantic. non-romantic attraction is a different thing...

And aromantic is different than non-romantic. Most people have non-romantic relationships. My understanding that a PERSON is aromantic, not a relationship, an attraction, or a crush. As such, if you feel both non-romantic feelings, and alloromantic feelings for different people, or at different times, or whatever... that makes you ... normal? 

Basically, I'm having trouble understanding what the alternatives to what you describe are: you feel both romantic and non-romantic attraction... Well, the alternatives are, one can only experience non-romantic attractions, which makes one straight up aromantic with no qualifiers, or one can experience only romantic attraction, which makes one... what? that's not a Thing, as far as I know... 

I'm not trying to deny your experience. I just don't understand your experience because you're using words in very different ways than what I'm used to, and so what you are saying sounds non-sensical with the definitions of the words I'm used to...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like to clarify- If you're talking about squishes when you say "aromantic crushes", not all aros get those. I sure don't! And some alloromantics get them, too! I totally respect your identity, but I just wanted to put that out there for the sake of clearing up any misinformation. I know a lot of people who are new to the aro community get confused by getting introduced to aro terminology and then thinking all aros use or experience such things, so just to set the record straight: No, not all aros get squishes, and that's ok. Yes, some alloromantics get squishes, and that's ok too.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jot-Aro Kujo said:

I would like to clarify- If you're talking about squishes when you say "aromantic crushes", not all aros get those.

The term "aromantic crushes" could also mean those which involve sexual, sensual or aesthetic attraction, which may not be the intended meaning.

 

1 hour ago, Jot-Aro Kujo said:

I know a lot of people who are new to the aro community get confused by getting introduced to aro terminology and then thinking all aros use or experience such things, so just to set the record straight: No, not all aros get squishes, and that's ok. Yes, some alloromantics get squishes, and that's ok too.

It may even be the case that only a minority of aros experience squishes. Which makes the all/majority of aros do this kind of message all the more troublesome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, LBMango said:

As such, if you feel both non-romantic feelings, and alloromantic feelings for different people, or at different times, or whatever... that makes you ... normal? 

Normal as “alloromantic”... I find also it rather difficult to distinguish schroromanticism as described in the original post from alloromanticism or greyromanticism (greyromanticism if 6 [romantic] crushes over the course of many, many years are a bit on the low side? Don’t know how many are typical…).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/14/2020 at 8:21 AM, gardensnake said:


Just to be clear I got the picture that schromantic/schroromantic means that you are able to feel both alloromantic and aromantic crushes. What I've undestood that aromantics still have crushes that just aren't romantic but still crushes and they may not be completely platonic but some kind of strong feeling of friendship and desire to be close to someone. I don't know if every aros have feelings like that. 

My aromantic crushes have also been asexual and my alloromantic crushes have always been allosexual. So there's really difference between them but I admit that the term is confusing, it says:


And I'm not mix of the two, I just simply feel both of those separately. I don't feel aromantic and alloromantic feelings at the same time towards someone. It's either alloromantic or aromantic crush and I know some people may have difficulties to believe that. It makes no sense to me either but it is what it is.

I think the fact that you experience romantic attraction like alloros do still means you're alloromantic. I mean I wouldn't call someone who still experiences romantic attraction but is in a qpp aromantic. And I don't feel comfortable with people referring to squishes (which is the deep desire to either be friends or be in a qpp with someone) as crushes. crushes are romantic. I'd at least make the distinction by saying alterous crush. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In looking for more information and to see how others who identified this way thought of the identity, I actually found an older Arocalypse thread speculating on shromantic that may be of interest.

 

I know overall a lot of members here have many legitimate issues with AVEN (warning - the following link goes to AVEN), but I did find this post by arden_jay interesting:

 

Quote

The reason I currently identify as greyromantic is because I'm still unsure about whether I'm panro or aro. I'm non-binary, very ace, and very introverted, so I reckon attraction for me would come in the form of falling for a particular person's attributes rather than being attracted to a particular gender. However, while I'm not opposed to the idea of romance, I don't know if I've ever even had a crush, and I find it difficult to tell sometimes if it's just that I really want to be friends with a person despite my anxiety and awkwardness, or I'm nervous for another reason. I've taken to calling it "Schrodinger's attraction."

 

I actually never got my hands on swankivy's book. Is this the only part of the book that goes over schromantic? (Because there don't seem to be many more other places out there where people have specifically talked about what schromantic means to them.)

 

On 2/9/2020 at 9:32 AM, DeltaV said:

* Participants were allowed to choose more than one answer. Some people aren’t sure how to describe their romantic orientation, or they reject the idea of specifically defining their attraction patterns, don’t find any of the existing definitions useful in describing their feelings, or don’t know whether they have a preferred gender or set of genders. A variety of creative ways exist to express this ambiguity. Terms that have been seen in asexual, aromantic, and questioning circles include WTFromantic, quoiromantic, ambiguously romantic, and Schromantic (describing romanticism in terms of Schrödinger’s cat[3] as having the possibility of being romantic and aromantic at the same time).

 

From limited information, it does sound like ambiguity is an important part of this identity (and interesting how many people seem to have come to Schrödinger's identity individually, just judging the by results I got when searching!), though it's not consistently defined this way in the resources I found. What seems to have become the standard definition you find upon searching the term, "describes a person who is aromantic and alloromantic at the same time, or some mix of the two", doesn't really express or imply an inherent ambiguity to me, and I can see how people who find that and relate to it would have quite a variety of different interpretations and experiences as to what this means to them and why they came to labeling as such.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...