Article by Cosmopolitan

[Confirmed Bachelor]

Three People Get Real About What It Means to be Aromantic

 

http://www.cosmopolitan.com/sex-love/a9644122/aromantic-definition-meaning/

 

 

[SamwiseLovesLife]

This is really interesting and in some places, very uncomfortable for me to read.

Woman A: I first felt some akinship, but soon found some of her answers disturbing (to me, each to their own). E.g when she talks about the 'games' she plays with strangers. Personally, I don't like that

Woman B: I totally relate to her. I assume we have similar experiences partially because I too am Asexual Aromantic.

Man: I don't relate as I am Asexual but his answers seem very consistent to the Sexual Aros I've spoken to so this seems like a good reprisentation. Maybe a little too judgemental about people's appearances, but at least he's honest.

[SoulWolf]

Well, they definitely picked a wide variety of different 'types' of aromantics for that article... interesting. I'm cringing a bit at some of them though.

[techno]

We were discussing this on the discord server today. Parts of the article were nice to read, and I'm glad it exists at least, but I agree that parts of it were definitely cringe-worthy. Even the questions that were asked were incredibly frustrating. Why were so many of them about dating when this is a Q&A with a group of aros? Shouldn't they be talking about what it actually is like being aro? I don't know. I guess beggars can't be choosers.

[Mark]

On 15/05/2017 at 9:57 AM, SamwiseLovesLife said:

This is really interesting and in some places, very uncomfortable for me to read.

Woman A: I first felt some akinship, but soon found some of her answers disturbing (to me, each to their own). E.g when she talks about the 'games' she plays with strangers. Personally, I don't like that

Woman B: I totally relate to her. I assume we have similar experiences partially because I too am Asexual Aromantic.

Man: I don't relate as I am Asexual but his answers seem very consistent to the Sexual Aros I've spoken to so this seems like a good reprisentation. Maybe a little too judgemental about people's appearances, but at least he's honest.

Some parts I could relate to, others I found cringeworthy. Through very much spread between all three of the people.

[Star Girl]

I appreciate it for visibility, but...  (and the title... really?)

 

Woman A came across as very manipulative and not the person I would want people to think of in association with aromanticism.  Not that there is a "correct" sort of person, but the way she talks about relationships makes me inclined to see where her coworker is coming from (third question).  I feel that, especially with the lack of visibility, anything that is not "normal" (something most people can relate to) is in danger of being credited to being aromantic.  (And I really don't want woman 

A's views of relationships to be seen as normal for someone who is aromantic.)  I suppose that makes the variety of 'types' of people they interviewed good, because it is another way of pointing out how varied aros are.

 

I didn't really relate to any of them, but I think I just don't share their way of thinking about things.

[NullVector]

11 hours ago, Star Girl said:

I didn't really relate to any of them, but I think I just don't share their way of thinking about things.

 

Yeah, same.

 

'Woman A's answers were... interesting... 

 

'Woman B' seems like a nice enough person, but her experiences as an asexual aro aren't that relatabe to me. I liked her answer to the "What about romance is unattractive to you?" question though. Same to that!

 

'Man A': I also couldn't relate to him much, as casual sexual 'hook-ups' are not something I've ever been interested in personally (if that's your kind of thing and you're straightforward/clear about it with the other consenting party (as he appears to be from his answers) then fine, I'm not judging anyone here - just stating my personal preference against it).

 

On 5/15/2017 at 9:57 AM, SamwiseLovesLife said:

Man: I don't relate as I am Asexual but his answers seem very consistent to the Sexual Aros I've spoken to so this seems like a good reprisentation.

 

He's a representation. I'm a aro-sexual (well, probaby aro) and didn't find his answers that relatable. Possibly he represents a certain sub-category of sexual aromantics reasonably accurately? In some ultimate sense though, we're all intrinsically different people, with unique experiences, so somebody can only really represent themselves 

[shotinthehand]

My best friend in the Bay Area sent me this article and in the same text bubble "Cosmo needs to stAHp" even though honestly, I was pretty happy with it. Yes, Woman A is a sociopathic or in some way unhealthy in regards to her personal relationships, but OK. They had two people who seemed relatable enough and seemed quite capable of having healthy relationships. I don't want to devolve into respectability politics or claim that only neurotypical people can use the label "aromantic/arospec". PEOPLE ARE TALKING ABOUT AROMANTICISM IN COSMO! A LOT OF PEOPLE READ THAT, A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO MIGHT NEVER HEAR ABOUT US OTHERWISE! We've come so far in just a few years, guys! OK, I've only been a part of the community for about a year, but, still...I'm happy. Maybe my generation will be the last generation of aros, at least in first world countries with the internet all over the place, to grow up feeling confused and "off".

[DeMorgan]

On 5/20/2017 at 5:48 AM, shotinthehand said:

PEOPLE ARE TALKING ABOUT AROMANTICISM IN COSMO! A LOT OF PEOPLE READ THAT, A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO MIGHT NEVER HEAR ABOUT US OTHERWISE!

 

I feel that may be the very reason that some people feel squeamish about this: thanks to this article, there is now a huge group of people who may prejudice their future positions about aromanticism solely on what they can remember from this article.  There probably won't be any aromantic activism on the same scale as this article for quite some time yet, so it has the potential to cause irreparable damage to the public image of aromantics—there's no point to gaining visibility if it results in the masses considering their aromantic brethren to be sociopathic robots. 

 

That said, you probably do have a point regarding the overall tone of the article, as it is not at all shocking that a Cosmopolitan piece would be somewhat sensationalized.  It's something that we should nevertheless keep an eye on even despite our lackluster political power just to be ready to combat misinformation if we're ever given the chance.  This topic may gain social relevance in the near future, and we should be ready to capitalize on that before less altruistic groups can exploit it for economic gain.

[shotinthehand]

On 6/9/2017 at 3:29 AM, DeMorgan said:

 

I feel that may be the very reason that some people feel squeamish about this: thanks to this article, there is now a huge group of people who may prejudice their future positions about aromanticism solely on what they can remember from this article.  There probably won't be any aromantic activism on the same scale as this article for quite some time yet, so it has the potential to cause irreparable damage to the public image of aromantics—there's no point to gaining visibility if it results in the masses considering their aromantic brethren to be sociopathic robots. 

 

That said, you probably do have a point regarding the overall tone of the article, as it is not at all shocking that a Cosmopolitan piece would be somewhat sensationalized.  It's something that we should nevertheless keep an eye on even despite our lackluster political power just to be ready to combat misinformation if we're ever given the chance.  This topic may gain social relevance in the near future, and we should be ready to capitalize on that before less altruistic groups can exploit it for economic gain.

I understand that. I acknowledge that. I just feel mostly positive about the article. I understand if some people still aren't happy with it.

[Apathetic Echidna]

damn..........

Finally got around to reading this. I actually read all the comments here before the article so I was prepared for some dodgy answers to dodgy questions

Quote

Do you prefer to date other aromantic people?

like whut? isn't this basically a double negative? date has so many romantic connotations, 'go out' would be better. 

Quote

If so, how do you find them?

Seriously, no one answered 'with difficulty'? plus none of those aros were particularly public with their orientations, what makes the question maker think most other aros are easily findable?

 

Woman B sounded fairly happy and stable, same with the man who was also very honest. But Woman A! I read her answers and could only feel pity. She could basically be a more confident older twin of me at 16/17. I was weighed down with frustration and other feels and it made me lash out. I was a horrible manipulator and mostly emotionally shutdown. I even know the steps for the public transport eye contact game because I played it a few times. That was so messed up. I hope she grows a sense of personal responsibility, at least she seems self aware, you can change if you are self aware. Yeah, not the best poster child for an article on aromantics, which will be an introduction for many people to the A-end of the romantic orientation spectrum.  

[Mark]

4 hours ago, Apathetic Echidna said:

like whut? isn't this basically a double negative? date has so man romantic connotations, 'go out' would be better. 

Maybe 'hang out', 'hook up', etc.
 

4 hours ago, Apathetic Echidna said:

Seriously, no one answered 'with difficulty'?

Exactly. I was genuinely surprised to see research showing more that 1% of people to be aro.
 

4 hours ago, Apathetic Echidna said:

 plus none of those aros were particularly public with their orientations, what makes the question maker think most other aros are easily findable?

I'm thinking "how could aros be findable?"
Dating sites/apps/events are specifically set up to cater for alloromantics.
Aro events/meetups are very rare. With those which do exist being primarily aimed at asexuals.