Jump to content
  • 0

I'm feeling disabled as an aromantic


Question

 

I'm feeling invalid as an aromantic, not for someone,But on my own, this is really boring, I started to feel that way when I realized this need to have a romance that I still have.I see that aromantic people don't have that desire or that will, I've never had a crush or been in love with someone (I'm almost 15 years old)but I feel this need to want to have a relationship, people always speak, it is always represented, so that made this need and will arise.There was a time when I researched symptoms of being in love, and I was kind of scared with, that at that moment I saw that I didn't want to fall in love or have a relationship, when I see couples in love I think it’s kind of boring, and I don’t care about that,It seems so boring and boring compared to what is said and represented, when I see my mother and stepfather dating,like kissing, saying how much they love each other, walking hand in hand, hugging and etc ... I see that and think "oh man, this is not for me, this is boring,Why do people comment so much about? Why is it so important? ".I want to stop feeling disabled so I don't know how to do this.

In a nutshell this is how I feel, I feel disabled because I want to somehow form it, even without feeling romantic attraction all my life.I thank those who read this, and I'm sorry for my English, I am writing by the translator.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

4 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0

First of all: being disabled is nothing negative. Yes, it can affect your life very much and yes, it can leed to other experiences and specific needs abled don’t have and we really have to listen what is needed and how we can form life barrier–free, but it’s not about „low life–quality“ or something like that.

second: being aromantic is not “being disabled”. Nobody (apart of homomisic people) would call being homoromantic being disabled. So, why should being aromantic be “disabled”? It’s just another romantic orientation (yes, with a lot of prejudices about)

being aromantic also does NOT mean being alone all life.You can form relationship people settle “higher” than friendship (which is bullshit because I don’t think you should rank your relationship.. friendships are beautiful and not worse than “romantic relationships” at all). You could form a queerplatonic relationship for example. Or you could even enter a relationship with a romantic partner without being romantic by yourself, if you want to!

you don’t have to “be in love”, like kissing or holding hands therefore. Just be honest to yourself and a possible partner

the whole world of relationships is still open to you (yeah, I guess it would be harder, but nothing is impossible)

 

please excuse my english too

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Posted (edited)

 

44 minutes ago, Acecream said:

First of all: being disabled is nothing negative. Yes, it can affect your life very much and yes, it can leed to other experiences and specific needs abled don’t have and we really have to listen what is needed and how we can form life barrier–free, but it’s not about „low life–quality“ or something like that.

second: being aromantic is not “being disabled”. Nobody (apart of homomisic people) would call being homoromantic being disabled. So, why should being aromantic be “disabled”? It’s just another romantic orientation (yes, with a lot of prejudices about)

being aromantic also does NOT mean being alone all life.You can form relationship people settle “higher” than friendship (which is bullshit because I don’t think you should rank your relationship.. friendships are beautiful and not worse than “romantic relationships” at all). You could form a queerplatonic relationship for example. Or you could even enter a relationship with a romantic partner without being romantic by yourself, if you want to!

you don’t have to “be in love”, like kissing or holding hands therefore. Just be honest to yourself and a possible partner

the whole world of relationships is still open to you (yeah, I guess it would be harder, but nothing is impossible)

 

please excuse my english too

 

 

 

Thanks for the reply, I discovered myself recently, I'm still in the process of accepting,It is still difficult I still have these invasive thoughts that I end up alone for being aromantic, I always try to end this in some way,Your answer helped me, thanks

 

Edited by Jackson
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Feeling as though you would want to form a romantic relationship but just cannot yourself is a common thing here. There is a lot of societal pressure that this is something you should want.

As Acecream says

On 4/27/2021 at 10:52 PM, Acecream said:

being aromantic is not “being disabled”.

As much as it is a frustration to not feel these feelings you may desire it is not something which disables you.

Even if you never end up in a relationship that is similar to a romantic one that does not mean being alone. I know quite a few old people who are not in romantic relationships because their partners either died or divorced. These people are not alone, they indulge their hobbies, they meet people. One of them moved in with a neighbour in a relationship of convenience. So it is useful to remember that there is this major difference between not being in a romantic relationship (and even not being in a qpr/nonromantic relationship) and being alone.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
On 4/27/2021 at 8:59 PM, Jackson said:

I started to feel that way when I realized this need to have a romance

Right on point. It's a cultural construct, not an urge. You may feel a compulsion to reproduce ["that's the species talking to you, stupid"], to have children. And even this can be negated.

Regarding the necessity of romantic attachment, this is a very new concept, dating back to European Middle Ages (especially "amour courtois"), and then the spreading of novels (romans) in the 18th century. Without forgetting Romeo & Juliet (which is only showing the idiocy of young lust...).

If I were to put romantic attachment on the stoic scale of needs (my interpretation, not evidently canon): [classification being natural/non-natural, necessary/non-necessary]

  1. reproduction: natural + non-necessary
  2. friendship: non-natural + necessary/useful
  3. romantic attachment: non natural + non-necessary, leading to harmful, illusion, deception
  • Like 1
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
Answer this question...

×   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...