Confused

[Oko]

4 hours ago, DeltaAro said:

I can't answer it for you! 🤷‍♂️

Regarding the original question: You can adopt "aromantic" provisionally or tentatively. There's nothing to fear about the identity itself. If it doesn't fit anymore, drop it.

So I don't know why it's such a big deal to find out if you're "objectively" aromantic.

Identities don't work like "my image of myself must correspond to my real self".

The real self is not strictly separable from the image. It's easy to end up ruminating about this endlessly, which is even recognized as a form of OCD.

So for me personally, I'd only ask what practical difference does it make in your life?

There's certainly a huge difference between a version of you who starts actively looking for someone or one who just gives up about this.

So that's it. I don't have anything more to say. 🙂

You're right, maybe I just search a problem, where it isn't. But I hope I don't have OCD.

I don't look for someone, but I didn't "give up". I just don't need to do it.

4 hours ago, Synthetic Adrenaline said:

Yeah I sometimes feel like I'm intruding on this forum and unfairly taking a space from someone else lol. I'm not a true aromantic in some senses of the word. I absolutely have had crushes and an attractive man can certainly have hypnotic power over me...I just don't like relationships and find them hard on my introversion. I always end up wanting my freedom back. Relationships are a bit too much like 'people time' for me.

I joined this site largely because I wanted to meet people without the risk of someone developing feelings for me and then being upset if I didn't reciprocate. I had just had that happen with a male friend from a meme group and I didn't want it happening again.

 

You speak from my heart. Be in relationship is like "sacrifice" my freedom for someone, be in "trap".

I had a lot of situations when someone felt "something" to me and I said honestly "No!" but he still hoped and then he was angry and I was the worst person for him because "I gave him hope"😶

[Synthetic Adrenaline]

1 hour ago, Oko said:

You're right, maybe I just search a problem, where it isn't. But I hope I don't have OCD.

I don't look for someone, but I didn't "give up". I just don't need to do it.

You speak from my heart. Be in relationship is like "sacrifice" my freedom for someone, be in "trap".

I had a lot of situations when someone felt "something" to me and I said honestly "No!" but he still hoped and then he was angry and I was the worst person for him because "I gave him hope"😶

Yeah even when I genuinely loved someone I still found relationships annoying and wanted freedom. I've stayed in a few longer than I wanted because rhetoric about male mental health weighed heavy. 

[Oko]

10 minutes ago, Synthetic Adrenaline said:

Yeah even when I genuinely loved someone I still found relationships annoying and wanted freedom. I've stayed in a few longer than I wanted because rhetoric about male mental health weighed heavy. 

Yes, me too. But sometimes I said "why not" and started to date with someone but then I regretted and I wanted my freedom back.

[Fruitpunch]

Synthetic Adrenaline, I feel exactly the same way about relationships and about joining aro spaces looking for community, but not necessarily identifying with the concept.

Oko, there are identities that are more single-life focused than aromanticism, which encompasses a mix of relationships types. Single-at-heart is a term created by singles researcher Bella Depaulo. She has a new book out as of last week under the same name and Singled Out is an older book of hers that's good. She's great in that she's done a lot of scientific studies on single-at-heart people and how they function and live their best lives. There isn't much research on aromantics, so I appreciate her data. There's a nice chapter in "Stepping off the Relationship Escalator" about solo people, which is another term for people who prize their freedom, independence, and prefer to be single. The aro community uses the word "nonamorous" for people who prefer to be single, though it seems like the exactly definition of it is still evolving. Lastly, solo grew out of the poly community and its concept of solopolyamory, so you might find some resources from searching that term.

[Oko]

On 12/9/2023 at 7:52 PM, Fruitpunch said:

Synthetic Adrenaline, I feel exactly the same way about relationships and about joining aro spaces looking for community, but not necessarily identifying with the concept.

Oko, there are identities that are more single-life focused than aromanticism, which encompasses a mix of relationships types. Single-at-heart is a term created by singles researcher Bella Depaulo. She has a new book out as of last week under the same name and Singled Out is an older book of hers that's good. She's great in that she's done a lot of scientific studies on single-at-heart people and how they function and live their best lives. There isn't much research on aromantics, so I appreciate her data. There's a nice chapter in "Stepping off the Relationship Escalator" about solo people, which is another term for people who prize their freedom, independence, and prefer to be single. The aro community uses the word "nonamorous" for people who prefer to be single, though it seems like the exactly definition of it is still evolving. Lastly, solo grew out of the poly community and its concept of solopolyamory, so you might find some resources from searching that term.

Thank you for it. I never heard about this term, but now I read about it and this is what I am. I didn't know exists term for it and I'm glad it is. I will use it if someone will want to date with me :)