Negativity towards aromanticism

[UncommonNonsense]

23 hours ago, Mark said:

That's assuming that you can even find depictions of aromantic people in popular culture.

Other obvious ways in which aros can not fit expectations is by not being ace or haphephobic.
Additionally many aros are interested in and/or enjoy romantic coded activities.

 

As well as taking the view that romance (and amantonormativity) is "natural"...
It seems to be the case that aros view "friendship" differently from allos. Including aros seeking QP relationships. Maybe in some cases with the same degree of passion that some allos seek romantic relationships.

 

Yes, the way we approach all of our relationships seems to be different than the way allos do.  We place more value on friendships (and often end up very hurt when allo friends drop us in favour of a romantic/sexual partner they've only known a short time, compared to having been very close friends with us for years - that was something that hit me over and over again as my friends paired off into romantic/sexual couples, dated, married, and had kids, and I've seen so many threads from aces and aros here and on AVEN lamenting feeling left behind and abandoned by allo friends once they enter dating relationships), and a lot of us seem to place unusually high value on familial relationships as well, even though those are often fraught with their own stressful misunderstandings due to family not understanding (or not approving of) aromantacism, asexuality, differing gender perception, etc.

[LJ_84]

On 10.10.2016 at 5:14 AM, meesemouse said:

So today was a rough day, and I didn't see any forums that really covered this topic, so I figured, hey I'll go out on a limb here and start one up.

Earlier today, I went shopping with my two of my friends that I haven't seen in a while, but I am super close to. We hung out for a while, and then I finally decided this would be a good time to tell them that I think I'm aromantic. I started explaining myself to them and they practically laughed it off, telling me that with the few examples I quickly gave them were not legitamate at all. I am 15, so I can understand their hesitancy in believing me, but they didn't give me a chance to explain myself, they just treated it as if I was delusional and thus my idea was a phase. Additionally, it was the day after their homecoming dance, so in addition to the both of them being boy crazy, all they kept doing is talking about guys and who was grinding on who and were no joke snapchatting and texting 5 different guys between the two of them during the day. It was sickening. They weren't deliberately mean to me, but their ignorance and immediate dismission of what was such an important thing to me hurt so badly. I'm not one for having a ton of fake friends either; I prefer to have a few close friends I can confide in. This seriously left me feeling doubtful and invalid, and as a person with crippling anxiety (yay!), what I once was excited to tell a few of my other close friends, I am now afraid to for fear of rejection or dismissal. Any advice, I guess? Anyone with similar experiences? Feel free to comment this stuff so we can spread love and advice like a contagious disease! 

I knew I was aro when I was 17 although I didn't know that something like this existed. Let me guess, they came off with the "late bloomer" argument eh? I heard the same. And "You're only shy!" -.- I tried to explain to my only friend that I just didn't have interest in relationships but she didn't get it. She even started to try to match me up with boys without my knowing! And this boys crazy stuff, I know too. I just don't get why girls change their boyfriend every week?! (Yes, it really was like this) Or like my friend, flirting, kissing, making out with literally strangers she only knew a few hours, days! In my opinion that was not only slutty but also dangerous.

 

My advice: Try to talk to your friends again and show them that it's not "just a phase". That you seriously has no interest into relationships. One day they'll accept it.
In my case, my friend stopped after a while, after I called her out and stated again and again that I wasn't fucking interested into this relationship and flirting stuff. She still thought I was just shy, but at least she stopped to try to couple me up with some boy -.-

[Untamed Heart]

On 10/14/2016 at 10:56 PM, Louis Hypo said:

I cannot relate enough. I hate to watch depictions of autism spectrum because it's not me, it's something else. I guess that's because it's such a varied thing and you just have to treat people like anyone else but be aware of their differences (which is even easier than it sounds)

I agree. I'm also autistic and know someone who manages a home for people with it, and she says if you've met one person on the spectrum, you've met one person on the spectrum. The one other person I've met that I know has autism was completely different than I am.

I'm only out to 5 people so far and it's been OK, nothing overwhelmingly positive but not really negative either. I don't think my best friend understands fully, but she didn't outright dismiss it at least.

I am really sorry about the reactions you got, though  

[Holmbo]

I'm so impressed with people who are in their teenage years and so well informed and self knowledgeable to know they are aromantic.
I was way to wrapped up in how "I should be" to even reflect much on how I might be different and that could be ok. I think a lot of people are like I was in their teenage years. So for young people who have older people say you're too young too know, they are probably just remembering their own uncertainties and projecting it onto you.

[cute kitty Meow! Mewo!]

to be honest the young people are in a better position to "know" than any generation before, with the impact social media has on kids these days. of course knowledge is power and power corrupts. on the one hand I am very impressed thinking of how it's unlikely high school students will face the same issue I faced - noticing a difference in identity, but lacking the words and knowledge anyway to understand that you aren't mainstream cishet. but on the other hand - I imagine the mindset youthfulness puts humans in, regardless of how much knowledge they have access to - and I worry that people will cling onto the first thing they understand as ultimate fact and never change their perspective.

 

[aussiekirkland]

6 hours ago, Holmbo said:

I'm so impressed with people who are in their teenage years and so well informed and self knowledgeable to know they are aromantic.
I was way to wrapped up in how "I should be" to even reflect much on how I might be different and that could be ok. I think a lot of people are like I was in their teenage years. So for young people who have older people say you're too young too know, they are probably just remembering their own uncertainties and projecting it onto you.

 

I think this is pretty common. Almost everyone I knew came out in year 12 or as school finished, including myself. In my experience, most of us spend our teenage years trying to be something we're not (other people did this way more) and only start thinking about what we want and need once the status quo of school is being threatened.

[Mark]

On 22/11/2016 at 7:39 PM, cute kitty Meow! Mewo! said:

ton the one hand I am very impressed thinking of how it's unlikely high school students will face the same issue I faced - noticing a difference in identity, but lacking the words and knowledge anyway to understand that you aren't mainstream cishet.

Quite literally lacking the words, given that "aromantic" is a neologism. (As is "cishet" for that matter.)

[Philbo Wiseroot]

2 hours ago, Mark said:

Quite literally lacking the words, given that "aromantic" is a neologism. (As is "cishet" for that matter.)

But a neologism is a newly coined word...

 

Quote

neologism
nɪˈɒlədʒɪz(ə)m/
noun
a newly coined word or expression.

 

[cute kitty Meow! Mewo!]

15 hours ago, Mark said:

Quite literally lacking the words, given that "aromantic" is a neologism. (As is "cishet" for that matter.)

yeah like. until i was 20 I only really knew about straight and gay. and kind of bi but not really. I "knew" i was different but i just thought i was "enlightened" or something

[NullVector]

On 11/22/2016 at 6:56 PM, Holmbo said:

I'm so impressed with people who are in their teenage years and so well informed and self knowledgeable to know they are aromantic.
I was way to wrapped up in how "I should be" to even reflect much on how I might be different and that could be ok. I think a lot of people are like I was in their teenage years

 

I'm 31 and only started exploring all this stuff a few weeks ago. I wish I'd encountered it all a decade or more back, it might have saved me a lot of wasted time second-guessing myself! And I'd now be further along in building the kind of life relationships I really want.

 

On 11/22/2016 at 7:39 PM, cute kitty Meow! Mewo! said:

to be honest the young people are in a better position to "know" than any generation before, with the impact social media has on kids these days. of course knowledge is power and power corrupts. on the one hand I am very impressed thinking of how it's unlikely high school students will face the same issue I faced - noticing a difference in identity, but lacking the words and knowledge anyway to understand that you aren't mainstream cishet. but on the other hand - I imagine the mindset youthfulness puts humans in, regardless of how much knowledge they have access to - and I worry that people will cling onto the first thing they understand as ultimate fact and never change their perspective.

 

Yeah, I have the same worry. I think there's a definite balance to be had with 'labeling ourselves' as aromantic (or whatever label). A 'disclaimer' or 'caveat emptor' if you will. The label might seem to capture aspects of our inner world at a particular moment in our lives - and that can be really helpful (and is something I feel I missed out on - see above). But, at the same time, the label shouldn't become a prison or box that we put ourselves into, that then fixes us at a particular snapshot of personal development forever after. We're always changing, developing, improving in various ways, until the day we die, I'd say - that's what characterises a human life lived well to me (that process of always changing, developing, improving in response to our lived experiences and our reflections upon them). It might be fine to say at 15 (or whatever age) 'I think I'm aromantic' - but then if you meet another person(s) and, upon introspection regarding those interactions, realise that you are developing 'romantic' feelings towards them - well then, at that point it is time to put aside the label! (at least for the time being). And to begin exploring those feelings.

[aussiekirkland]

15 minutes ago, NullVector said:

Yeah, I have the same worry. I think there's a definite balance to be had with 'labeling ourselves' as aromantic (or whatever label). A 'disclaimer' or 'caveat emptor' if you will. The label might seem to capture aspects of our inner world at a particular moment in our lives - and that can be really helpful (and is something I feel I missed out on - see above). But, at the same time, the label shouldn't become a prison or box that we put ourselves into, that then fixes us at a particular snapshot of personal development forever after. We're always changing, developing, improving in various ways, until the day we die, I'd say - that's what characterises a human life lived well to me (that process of always changing, developing, improving in response to our lived experiences and our reflections upon them). It might be fine to say at 15 (or whatever age) 'I think I'm aromantic' - but then if you meet another person(s) and, upon introspection regarding those interactions, realise that you are developing 'romantic' feelings towards them - well then, at that point it is time to put aside the label! (at least for the time being). And to begin exploring those feelings.

 

This is definitely true, but I notice this sort of thing (the don't put yourself in a box speech) is only said to young people. To be honest I've never heard this said to anyone over 20.

[NullVector]

46 minutes ago, aussiekirkland said:

This is definitely true, but I notice this sort of thing (the don't put yourself in a box speech) is only said to young people. To be honest I've never heard this said to anyone over 20.

 

I'd be ready to say it to anyone at any stage of life though, if I felt like they could use 'the speech' - particularly given that older people appear to have more of a tendency that younger people to get stuck in their boxes! 

 

Maybe it's an age bias/privilege thing going on - that it's seen as more legitimate to challenge the opinions of a younger person than an older person, as the older person is supposed to have 'figured it all out' by now (nobody ever does that IMO - fortunately, as it would make life very boring!) Also, perhaps, an older person's identity tends to be more fixed? And I have this sense that many people conflate criticism of ideas with criticism of the person expressing the ideas. As in, when you challenge an idea that somebody expresses, it can often be taken instead as a challenge to the legitimacy of their personal identity - "I disagree with idea x" gets put through a weird person-to-person translation filter and they hear something more like "you have no right to exist as a person!" I think that's why a lot of 'political' conversations can get so heated. People feel their identities are being constantly challenged or invalidated, when really you may just be interested in discussing some ideas. And because older people (generally - not always) have more fixed and less fluid identities than younger people, they may feel more threatened in that context?

 

So it's maybe seen as more 'taboo' to give 'the box speech' to older people and more socially acceptable to give it to younger people (by older people usually. lol) for those sorts of reasons? At least, I can understand the social conventions this way - without agreeing that they represent the right way to go about things.

[Mark]

1 hour ago, aussiekirkland said:

This is definitely true, but I notice this sort of thing (the don't put yourself in a box speech) is only said to young people. To be honest I've never heard this said to anyone over 20.

Something else I have noticed is that it rarely gets said to people who identify in normative ways. (Ironically I see normativity as being a, small, "box".)
A heterosexual, heteroromantic, strongly monogamous, etc. teenager would more likely get praised as to how good it was that they knew what they wanted even how "mature" they were. Far more likely that peers who were LGBT, ace, aro, non monogamous, etc. would get this "don't put yourself in a box" attitude.

Nor,, IME, does this happen just to young people. I still get variations on "you might change your mind and thus should be open to romance, monogamy, nesting, etc.".

[cute kitty Meow! Mewo!]

8 hours ago, aussiekirkland said:

 

This is definitely true, but I notice this sort of thing (the don't put yourself in a box speech) is only said to young people. To be honest I've never heard this said to anyone over 20.

well like tbh. younger folk who ask questions on here and on aven usually say "is this me" while older folk usually ask "is this real" 

 

and that's the marker that changes what I say. 

 

someone who is asking, "is this me" is really asking, "am I allowed to think this about myself" and that's a huge sign that they're boxing themselves into their labels.

Generally, humans somewhere between the age of 12 and 17 reach a point in their self-awareness where they start to seek a need for individuality on a level that they're willing and able to change their life for the sake of individual expression. And most humans, some time between the age of 15 and 25, reach a point in their self-awareness where they understand that the perception of others is not the same as one's perception of self.

 

and it's just, when someone says "is this who I am? am I allowed to say it?" telling them "don't let other people choose what you are" to respond to their question, "am I allowed to be this" doesn't mean the right thing. So instead I say, "be what you believe, just don't box yourself into your labels" because even though they are looking inwardly, they are still letting the opinions of others derermine their self-worth and their awareness of their own individuality. So, it is better to say "be who you want to be, just don't box yourself of course heh" because they shouldn't be asking for permission, they should take what they see and say,  "this is part of my experience."

 

that is what is meant by "don't box yourself in" what is meant is, "yes, you are as you observe yourself to be, but don't let that limit your vision of what you want to do and what you want to be" 

 

 

 

6 hours ago, Mark said:

Something else I have noticed is that it rarely gets said to people who identify in normative ways. (Ironically I see normativity as being a, small, "box".)
A heterosexual, heteroromantic, strongly monogamous, etc. teenager would more likely get praised as to how good it was that they knew what they wanted even how "mature" they were. Far more likely that peers who were LGBT, ace, aro, non monogamous, etc. would get this "don't put yourself in a box" attitude.

Nor,, IME, does this happen just to young people. I still get variations on "you might change your mind and thus should be open to romance, monogamy, nesting, etc.".

 

I dunno what normally happens but it would strike me as odd for someone who perceives themselves to be normal to go about asking, "am I really normal guys? is it ok for me to say I am normal?" 

 

and it would be unusual for someone to go up to someone and say, "hey, I have something I need to tell you. I'm straight. I'm cis. I'm sorry if this is unsettling news"

 

 

it isn't said to normative people because the conversation doesn't come up under normative framework. 

 

I have, on the other hand, seen it said to normative people under other frameworks, such as maybe someone asking about what career path they should take, or what school to look into, and under that framework, the wording of what is said is different then too. instead of the person saying, "is it really ok that I'm an architect" they're asking, "is it reasonable for me to pursue architecture" and saying in response, "be an architect if you want, just don't box yourself in" doesn't respond to their question appropriately, because they're question is instead, "can I do this" not "am I this" so I would say, "it takes experience to make you great at something, so if you want to be an architect, then just get in there and do it. give it some time, and you'll find you're great at it, with experience. all it takes is interest to drive a pursuit of learned skill"

 

it's basically the same conversation... just different context. 

[Cassiopeia]

2 hours ago, cute kitty Meow! Mewo! said:

and it would be unusual for someone to go up to someone and say, "hey, I have something I need to tell you. I'm straight. I'm cis. I'm sorry if this is unsettling news"

 

Actually there are people who realise the are cis and/or straight after years of IDing as queer and/or trans. 

But as far as I have seen, the reactions they get are usually:

• "the gay/trans agenda brainswashed you" (btw I have also seen the internalised version of this, straight transboy turned twerfy cis lesbian...it wasn't a pleasant experience to listen to that)
• "I told you so" (this person usually the one who "has a gay friend", or worse case, convinced that people can change their identity just by praying/wanting to and use this person as an example to make that point)
• "gender/sexuality is fluid" (now, there are at least two different variations of this one)

You can validate and support someone, or push your ideas on them.

There is a difference between "you are allowed to change, interpret your feelings a different way" and "you shouldn't call yourself that, that is silly, invalid, wrong". A """caring""" homophobe is still homophobic. This BS is conventional, coded into people since birth, everyone is raised transphobic, homophobic, etc. 

 

Quote

I have, on the other hand, seen it said to normative people under other frameworks, such as maybe someone asking about what career path they should take, or what school to look into, and under that framework, the wording of what is said is different then too. instead of the person saying, "is it really ok that I'm an architect" they're asking, "is it reasonable for me to pursue architecture" and saying in response, "be an architect if you want, just don't box yourself in" doesn't respond to their question appropriately, because they're question is instead, "can I do this" not "am I this" so I would say, "it takes experience to make you great at something, so if you want to be an architect, then just get in there and do it. give it some time, and you'll find you're great at it, with experience. all it takes is interest to drive a pursuit of learned skill"

 

it's basically the same conversation... just different context. 

 

The problem here is, that people see identity as a life choice.

 

Being an architect is a decision one makes based on their neat drawing and math skills, sense of 3d space, expected salaries and job opportunites. People usually don't develop maladaptive coping skills and depression because they can't study architecture.

You may get shit for going to art college when you come from a poor family, or becoming a butcher when your family is vegan or doing sex work to pay the bills, but its not the same dynamic. People may hate your job, you may hate your job, but at the end of the day, you get to be something else as well.

 

But I guess none of us were lamenting if we wanted to be a marginalised minority, treated like shit, get tangled up in complicated relationships, discriminated against, disowned etc. Yes, most of us were or are questioning whenether or not our experiences fit this or that framework. We question if we would be happier if we entered a non-normative relationship, wore different clothing, used different pronouns, stayed single, took hormones etc. but these decisions are based on the big question of one's identity. Even if they don't do these physical things, people will still feel the same way inside.

 

[cute kitty Meow! Mewo!]

I don't understand where you read any of that in my post. 

[Cereal Tendencies]

When I came out to two of my friends they reacted similarly to yours, but then again those were reactions to me telling them I was asexual, they assumed aromantic on their own

 

"Maybe you're just gay and confused, do you want to kiss me?"

 

"You're just a late bloomer lololol"

 

"Come back to me in 5 years and maybe then I'll believe you"

 

It sucked, but while they were moving on to a different topic (something I didn't relate to, so didn't feel the need to listen/contribute) I kept thinking of my response to all of the above remarks

I did and it worked. They both looked shocked, looked at each other, then back at me and realized how serious I was about this. They apologized and I felt better :3 

[Mark]

13 hours ago, Cereal Tendencies said:

"Come back to me in 5 years and maybe then I'll believe you"

Seems likely that you will see commercial electricity using nuclear fusion sooner

[Blue Phoenix Ace]

On 11/25/2016 at 4:45 AM, NullVector said:

I'm 31 and only started exploring all this stuff a few weeks ago. I wish I'd encountered it all a decade or more back, it might have saved me a lot of wasted time second-guessing myself! And I'd now be further along in building the kind of life relationships I really want.

 

+1  37 for me though. If aromanticism and asexuality were widely discussed back in the 90's, I might have figured it out sooner.

[Kojote]

On 25.11.2016 at 11:25 AM, NullVector said:

As in, when you challenge an idea that somebody expresses, it can often be taken instead as a challenge to the legitimacy of their personal identity - "I disagree with idea x" gets put through a weird person-to-person translation filter and they hear something more like "you have no right to exist as a person!" I think that's why a lot of 'political' conversations can get so heated

 

Fun Fact: This weird "person-to-person" translator stuff is totally a thing in psychology, most prominently discussed in the "Four-Sides Model" by von Thun and Watzlawicks "5 Axioms of Communication". If you are interested in communication, or better phrased: miscommunication, I recommend to read Watzlawicks "The situation is hopeless, but not serious" and other works. He's brilliant, entertaining and very sarcastic (it's also a short read and you don't need any prior psychology wisdom, though it does make the reading a tad funnier). And I'm not paid to say this, I'm just a fan! 

[meesemouse]

On 11/22/2016 at 2:39 PM, cute kitty Meow! Mewo! said:

to be honest the young people are in a better position to "know" than any generation before, with the impact social media has on kids these days. of course knowledge is power and power corrupts. on the one hand I am very impressed thinking of how it's unlikely high school students will face the same issue I faced - noticing a difference in identity, but lacking the words and knowledge anyway to understand that you aren't mainstream cishet. but on the other hand - I imagine the mindset youthfulness puts humans in, regardless of how much knowledge they have access to - and I worry that people will cling onto the first thing they understand as ultimate fact and never change their perspective.

 

I definitely agree. I feel like there is a fine line between the media helping and hurting my generation. While information is a valuable thing to have, it is bound to be misused. On one hand, stumbling upon an idea or concept and having an "oh damn that's me" moment is liberating, and is such a valuable thing, as kids learn it's okay to not fit the societal norms. yet on other hand some people either feeling different can cling to the first term that pops out to feel like they have an identity, or sometimes people want to be different because it's "trendy" or something, so they find something that "sets them from the crowd" or whatever and then cling to the fact as if it's 100% true.  Unfortunate but I've seen my fair share of it.

On 11/22/2016 at 1:56 PM, Holmbo said:

I'm so impressed with people who are in their teenage years and so well informed and self knowledgeable to know they are aromantic.
I was way to wrapped up in how "I should be" to even reflect much on how I might be different and that could be ok. I think a lot of people are like I was in their teenage years. So for young people who have older people say you're too young too know, they are probably just remembering their own uncertainties and projecting it onto you.

I definitely agree with the fact that information is helping a younger generation become truly self knowledgable. However, we should be lenient and open to change, as we are surrounded by all of these open sources full of ideas. For example, I'm 16, and I know I fall on the aromantic spectrum. I do feel like I am aromantic mostly, but I realize that it's going to take time to settle in and really figure out myself. So, there's no point in trying to set my identity in cement. For example, at this moment, I have no clue what my sexuality is, but it's just something that I'll discover with time. Life is about figuring yourself out, and this process does not happen overnight. 

[Ace of Amethysts]

On 10/10/2016 at 2:23 PM, Zemaddog said:

I had a conversation with someone (while I was questioning whether I was aro or not) and I got some of the classic phrases. I even have screenshots!

There's more but I'd have to go back a while to get more screenshots and I can't be bothered.

 

I also don't like when people have their romantic partner in their profile picture

My dad is living in a split marriage with my mum but they`re slowly divorcing. Anyway, my dad got a new romantic partner three years ago, and both of them are featured in his Facebook profile picture and his phone wallpaper.

 

Although to be honest, it doesn`t really bother me. What does bother me is that I`ll probably never have that kind of relationship for myself. (Romantic or no. As I said in an earlier Arocalypse post, I literally have no idea what my opinion on romantic relationships is. I haven`t tried one yet, either.)

[aussiekirkland]

22 hours ago, meesemouse said:

yet on other hand some people either feeling different can cling to the first term that pops out to feel like they have an identity, or sometimes people want to be different because it's "trendy" or something, so they find something that "sets them from the crowd" or whatever and then cling to the fact as if it's 100% true.  Unfortunate but I've seen my fair share of it.

Unfortunately I've seen a lot of this too. It puts a bit of a dampener on community forums and such, especially when they're clinging to a word they relate very little to, so it's hard to share common experiences with some people.

 

But the thing I think is great about these identities is that people can learn about different ways of doing things. Discovering that you don't have to date, or that you don't have to conform to gender roles can be quite liberating, regardless of if that person chose to identify as trans or aromantic. As long as you're not boxing yourself, it can free you up to be yourself with fewer societal constraints (this is of course given that you're in a safe environment to do so).

 

22 hours ago, meesemouse said:

For example, at this moment, I have no clue what my sexuality is, but it's just something that I'll discover with time. Life is about figuring yourself out, and this process does not happen overnight. 

I think this is a really healthy way of approaching sexuality and it took me a while to realise myself. The word doesn't matter if you're learning about yourself through time and experience. I also have the plus of being in the aromantic community here on Arocalypse so I'm not too worried about it anyway.

[Ace of Amethysts]

@aussiekirkland Aren`t you ace?