#addressing aromantic misconceptions

[heckling-hydrena]

I have a complicated relationship with the concept of microlabels and more specifically aspec microlabels, because on one hand I have nothing against people who want to use a term that more closely describes their experiences it's literally none of my business good for them etc. but on the other hand I do think that sometimes people feel pushed to use microlabels because there are sooo many misconceptions about what asexuality and aromanticism actually are. so for example people who are just discovering their identity will try to connect with other aspecs, realize their experiences don't fully match every other aspec's experiences and get insecure, and that leads to interactions like "is it normal that I'm aromantic but I like shipping and romcoms?" "that actually means you're aegoromantic!" like it doesn't have to! it literally doesn't have to you don't have to identify as aego you can just call yourself aromantic! I feel like it would be way more productive to put effort into dispelling the idea that there's a 'proper' way to be asexual/aromantic instead of creating a microlabel for every experience that doesn't match common stereotypes.

and I'm gonna talk about asexuality specifically here because asexuality is still talked about so much more often (sorry to the aroallo warriors out there) but we've, and I can only assume this is a consequence of the stupid fucking ace discourse, internalized this weird idea that anyone who doesn't 100% fit into the category of 'never felt sexual attraction ever + no libido + sex-repulsed + never even THINKS about sex' either needs to use a microlabel or maybe even isn't really asexual. I've genuinely seen people ask "can I be asexual if I masturbate" "can I be asexual if I think this fictional character is hot" like YES? YES OBVIOUSLY? who is making you feel like you can't call yourself asexual point them out in the crowd for me tell me their name and their home address.

not to mention the fringe group of idiots (and I'll be real it's mostly weirdo terfs saying this shit) who are like "ohhh I feel bad for the REAL asexuals IF they even EXIST because these STRAIGHT people who don't put out on the first date are HIJACKING their community" which pisses me off so bad every time I see it. who the fuck are you to speak for me? keep your forked tongue behind your teeth etc etc.

like idk! people are totally allowed to call themselves aceflux and quoiromantic and fray and litho and whatever they want, but they should never feel like they have to! and it's become abundantly clear that some are being made to feel like they have to.

[life-of-an-asexual]

Asexual Non-Fiction

Ace: What Asexuality Reveals About Desire, Society, and the Meaning of Sex by Angela Chen

An engaging exploration of what it means to be asexual in a world that's obsessed with sexual attraction, and what we can all learn about desire and identity by using an ace lens to see the world. Through interviews, cultural criticism, and memoir, ACE invites all readers to consider big-picture issues through the lens of asexuality, because every place that sexuality touches our world, asexuality does too.

The Invisible Orientation: An Introduction to Asexuality by Julie Sondra Decker

In The Invisible Orientation, Julie Sondra Decker outlines what asexuality is, counters misconceptions, provides resources, and puts asexual people's experiences in context as they move through a very sexualized world. It includes information for asexual people to help understand their orientation and what it means for their relationships, as well as tips and facts for those who want to understand their asexual friends and loved ones.

How to Be Ace: A Memoir of Growing Up Asexual by Rebecca Burgess

In this brave, hilarious and empowering graphic memoir, we follow Rebecca as they navigate a culture obsessed with sex—from being bullied at school and trying to fit in with friends, to forcing themself into relationships and experiencing anxiety and OCD—before coming to understand and embrace their asexual identity.

A Quick & Easy Guide to Asexuality by Molly Mulldoon and Will Hernandez

Writer Molly Muldoon and cartoonist Will Hernandez, both in the ace community, are here to shed light on society’s misconceptions of asexuality and what being ace is really like. This book is for anyone who wants to learn about asexuality, and for Ace people themselves, to validate their experiences. Asexuality is a real identity and it’s time the world recognizes it. Here’s to being invisible no more! 

Asexualities: Feminist and Queer Perspectives edited by Karli June Cerankowski and Megan Milks

As the first book-length collection of critical essays ever produced on the topic of asexuality, this book serves as a foundational text in a growing field of study. It also aims to reshape the directions of feminist and queer studies, and to radically alter popular conceptions of sex and desire. Including units addressing theories of asexual orientation; the politics of asexuality; asexuality in media culture; masculinity and asexuality; health, disability, and medicalization; and asexual literary theory, Asexualities will be of interest to scholars and students in sexuality, gender, sociology, cultural studies, disability studies, and media culture.

Refusing Compulsory Sexuality: A Black Asexual Lens on Our Sex-Obsessed Culture by Sherronda J. Brown

In this exploration of what it means to be Black and asexual in America today, Sherronda J. Brown offers new perspectives on asexuality. She takes an incisive look at how anti-Blackness, white supremacy, patriarchy, heteronormativity, and capitalism enact harm against asexual people, contextualizing acephobia within a racial framework in the first book of its kind. A necessary and unapologetic reclamation, Refusing Compulsory Sexuality is smart, timely, and an essential read for asexuals, aromantics, queer readers, and anyone looking to better understand sexual politics in America.

I Am Ace: Advice on Living Your Best Asexual Life by Cody Daigle-Orians

Within these pages lie all the advice you need as a questioning ace teen. Tackling everything from what asexuality is, the asexual spectrum and tips on coming out, to intimacy, relationships, acephobia and finding joy, this guide will help you better understand your asexual identity alongside deeply relatable anecdotes drawn from Cody's personal experience. Whether you are ace, demi, gray-ace or not sure yet, this book will give you the courage and confidence to embrace your authentic self and live your best ace life.

Ace Voices: What it Means to Be Asexual, Aromantic, Demi or Grey-Ace by Eris Young

Drawing upon interviews with a wide range of people across the asexual spectrum, Eris Young is here to take you on an empowering, enriching journey through the rich multitudes of asexual life. With chapters spanning everything from dating, relationships and sex, to mental and emotional health, family, community and joy, the inspirational stories and personal experiences within these pages speak to aces living and loving in unique ways. Find support amongst the diverse narratives of aces sex-repulsed and sex-favourable, alongside voices exploring what it means to be black and ace, to be queer and ace, or ace and multi-partnered - and use it as a springboard for your own ace growth.

Asexual Erotics: Intimate Readings of Compulsory Sexuality by Ela Przybylo

Through a wide-ranging analysis of pivotal queer, feminist, and anti-racist movements; television and film; art and photography; and fiction, nonfiction, and theoretical texts, each chapter explores asexual erotics and demonstrates how asexuality has been vital to the formulation of intimate ways of knowing and being. Asexual Erotics assembles a compendium of asexual possibilities that speaks against the centralization of sex and sexuality, asking that we consider the ways in which compulsory sexuality is detrimental not only to asexual and nonsexual people but to all.

Ace Notes by Michele Kirichanskaya

As an ace or questioning person in an oh-so-allo world, you're probably in desperate need of a cheat sheet. Covering everything from coming out, explaining asexuality and understanding different types of attraction, to marriage, relationships, sex, consent, gatekeeping, religion, ace culture and more, this is the ultimate arsenal for whatever the allo world throws at you.

Ace and Aro Journeys: A Guide to Embracing Your Asexual or Aromantic Identity by The Ace and Aro Advocacy Project

Join the The Ace and Aro Advocacy Project (TAAAP) for a deep dive into the process of discovering and embracing your ace and aro identities. Empower yourself to explore the nuances of your identity, find and develop support networks, explore different kinds of partnership, come out to your communities and find real joy within. Combining a rigorous exploration of identity and sexuality models with hundreds of candid and poignant testimonials - this companion vouches for your personal truth, wherever you lie on the aspec spectrum.

Sounds Fake But Okay: An Asexual and Aromantic Perspective on Love, Relationships, Sex, and Pretty Much Anything Else by Sarah Costello and Kayla Kaszyca

Drawing on Sarah and Kayla's personal stories, and those of aspec friends all over the world, prepare to explore your microlabels, investigate different models of partnership, delve into the intersection of gender norms and compulsory sexuality and reconsider the meaning of sex - when allosexual attraction is out of the equation.

[66sharkteeth]

Belated weekly thoughts-

Mostly because this was too big of an ep to completely skip and I really wanna clear up a few misconceptions I keep seeing in the comments. I know only a small percent of readers see these, but at least a few of you will have the canon facts:

First off, just some personal thoughts-

I get asked a lot of reader input has ever influenced the story and, aside from a few fan-servicey memes like Roof Blank, the answer is no for the vast majority of the comic. This episode was kind of the one exception. I definitely never intended to address Rex's ace identity in the comic (outside of his obliviousness), but the more people learned he was canonly ace, the more I realized how important that was to a lot of people, so I thought it'd be cool to actually canonly address it- of course in a way that's realistic. To be clear, Rex absolutely has no idea what asexuality is, and I doubt any other characters do either. This comic does not take place in the digital age, so Rex doesn't have resources like twitter and reddit to help him figure this stuff out lol. He just knows he's not experiencing attraction the same way everyone else seems to, and that's what this episode is addressing.

Now as far as misconceptions- He is not aromantic. I've seen a few people jump to that? And I'm not really sure where it comes from, because he is very much in love with Bell, as I thought (?) I made clear in this scene. I understand the demi assumption, but I don't think he's that either. Bell's just the first person he's felt romantic attraction to, but he does not have sexual attraction (towards her or anyone). However, he's not repulsed by the idea, and that was also important for me to depict, as someone who...basically identifies the same way haha.

Now, for the BIG misconception- Bell potentially taking Lyss' face. So let's clear some things up:

This would not kill Lyss. She got plastic surgery on her nose that Bell already stole, so she would have a way to breath if Bell took the rest of her face.

Lyss would be able to resume a completely normal life after some reconstructive surgery. Blank victims still have a mouth and eyes under their sealed flesh. She explained last season that the only reason she's missing her eye still is because her parents wouldn't pay for the surgery to fix it after she moved out. Basically, giving Bell the rest of her face would just result in a painful and expensive surgery, but she would be by all means fine.

Not so much a misconception I've seen in this episode but just in general when I bring up the reconstructive surgery point- No, this does not mean you can just keep having your face stolen over and over and over. Your face gets a little harder to rebuild each time, and it's very expensive and painful. Think like an acid burn victim getting facial reconstruction, but just smoother...then getting in the same accident and surgery over and over. Surgeons can only do so much.

Bell would not "lose herself" or "become Lyss" if she stole the rest of her face. At this point, Bell is practically a half-blank in the sense that she fully her own person with her own personality, and stealing the rest of a face wouldn't really change that beyond maybe some influence- Much like how when Rex stole Mikiah's face, he didn't stop being Rex. He still maintained the personality and preferences he had as Rex, but just now has knowledge and memory of all of Mikiah's personality and preferences. Bell is slightly different in the sense that she *started* as a copy of Lyss, so many of their preferences and identities are the same (i.e, if Lyss is a straight cis girl, Bell would be a straight cis girl. If Lyss hated cilantro, Bell would hate cilantro), but she's developed in such a different environment from Lyss, that she has very much adopted her own unique personality (though with traits from Lyss, like her fieriness), and taking the rest of Lyss' face wouldn't change that. She would just have memory and knowledge of the rest of Lyss' life. The only real consequence of taking her face might be...getting some unpleasant memories of Rex and Scion, but even then, Bell has grown into such an understanding and forgiving person, I don't think she'd hold those past actions against them (except maybe Scion for the whole attempted murder stuff).

[styrofauxm]

They aren't in agreement.

The original criticizes the idea that romantic love is the point of everything.

The new post criticizes the idea that love is the point of everything. It also criticizes the idea that love is in everything.

The issue with the original post is that it still places the concept of love on a pedestal. Romantic love should not be arbitrarily valued. But arbitrarily valuing non-romantic love just pushes the issue further down, it doesn't actually address it.

There are many people who don't experience any form of love. There are many people who don't find the same value in love that others do. There are many people who are uncomfortable with the concept of love for one reason or another. Those are the people who are hurt by statements like the original post.

The experience of love is neutral. There's nothing inherently good about love, nor is there anything inherently bad about a lack of love. OP's poetry points this out quite nicely.

It's my understanding that this post is specifically about loveless aromantics, and while I want to correct the misconception, I also want to be sure I'm not accidentally speaking over anyone (as I'm not loveless myself). So I've put together a few resources I hope can be helpful.

The definition of loveless aromantic is "a person on the aromantic spectrum who feels disconnected from the concept of love, does not experience love, or rejects the idea of personally experiencing love. Loveless aros may experience other attractions, but do not equate these attractions to love" (AUREA).

There's also an article here, from the person who coined the term, that goes in a bit more depth. You can also click around on these articles to see more written from the perspectives of other loveless people.

There's also quite a bit on the loveless aro tag, and that's where I started out learning about lovelessness so I highly suggest scrolling through there.

I hope this was helpful. I'm not upset at all, mistakes happen. I just don't want this to go unaddressed, especially since there are quite a few people who will see this from your blog first.

@fixing-bad-posts Here's one I made!

[acephantoms]

Warning: This post will contain spoilers for Netflix’s Wednesday - do tread carefully.

Why I Think Wednesday Addams (particularly this adaptation) is AroAce.

———

Quick Definitions of Terms I’ll Be Using:

AroAce: someone who is on both the Asexual and Aromantic spectrum.

Asexual: experiencing little to no sexual attraction.

Aromantic: experiencing little to no romantic attraction.

Demiromantic: does not experience romantic attraction until they have formed a deep emotional connection with someone.

Greyromantic: experiencing romantic attraction but very infrequently.

——— Now let’s begin:

So I recently watched Wednesday and absolutely loved it!! I noticed specific things about this Wednesday that made me think she was AroAce. Despite her having feelings for Tyler, the way she acted around these non-platonic relations felt very familiar. I will say though, Tyler and her romance felt very forced (personally), but i digress.

In the first episode, Wednesday expresses to her parents, specifically her mother how she will “never be like her” and wishes to “never marry, or have kids” etc. which already began to intrigue me. An attitude and notion I had from a young age as well (and still agree with). Secondly, while on the drive to the academy, we see Wednesday get increasingly uncomfortable by her parents affection for each other (yes in general it can be gross to see our parents this way, but the nauseous feeling she mentions is relatable).

A Brief Look at Tyler & Wednesday:

A lot of the ways that Wednesday would react to Tyler’s advances in trying to be more than friends, she didn’t really pick up on (such as his attempts to flirt or ask her out). An example being, Tyler outside of the police station talking with Wednesday, “i thought you liked me” - Wednesday has this familiar face of confusion (and realization) that some might call asexual obliviousness (can’t tell when someone’s flirting, thinks their just being nice). At least, it’s familiar to me haha. Even when they do start to consider being more than friends, we see Wednesday sort of still confused by this possible romantic feelings that she hadn’t really taken the time to notice. Since beginning at the academy - She firstly never really had friends until going to the academy, and secondly, upon making friends then began to develop a romantic attraction.

Personally with such evidence that I saw, I would headcanon her as Asexual Demiromantic OR as Asexual Greyromantic. Maybe bias as an Asexual Demiromantic myself, but her character just felt too familiar in her sense of exploring platonic and non-platonic feelings.

Addressing some Misconceptions:

I’ve seen some discourse on here about people either wanting:

1) Enid & Wednesday as a ship

OR 2) to be AroAce.

I think some folks forget that AroAce people can still be in romantic relationships (or sexual relationships) and engage in romantic/sexual activities. Aromanticism and Asexuality have a broad spectrum of identities under their umbrella terms.

Enid, Wednesday, Tyler (and Xavier) thoughts:

I honestly think Enid & Wednesday would make a cute couple!! Tyler & Wednesday were okay, but like i said it felt VERY forced. Not entirely sure if they are trying to set up Xavier and Wednesday but I would like to see more female - male platonic relationships too. Don’t need to always have them in a relationship ugh!! Final reminder: AroAce folk can still be in relationships!! Also you’re valid!! 💗

Anyways,

thanks for reading my little tangent!! /gen

Let me know what you think in the comments!! [Any form of aphobic comments will be removed!] - Using tone indicators would be appreciated!! <3

[coldhandsfinalproject]

Record: Day 4.

Today I have sketched some concepts and considered certain aspects of the story more. In particular, the falling-apart relationship that starts the plot. I do not particularly want to make a villain out of the mc's partner. He does not really get the situation and I wonder what would it mean for the story is he was just a person in love desperate for some affection. It just so happens that the mc is unable to fully provide that. It might be interesting to do this visually: drawing the partner as normal but then when he starts to initiate contact, he turns into something else, less welcome and sightly. I will probably need to research that with other aromantic folk (how they felt in romantic relationship) but in my case, physical contact felt fairly disembodied and foreign.

Then, there is some more research, a couple of books about the ace experience. How to Be Ace: A Memoir of Growing Up Asexual by Rebecca Burgess, a graphic novel depicting the experience of the author. I especially liked the interview regarding this work on a podcast Sounds Fake But Ok (transcript here), where the two hosts had discussed Rebecca Burgess' creative process.

This podcast also has an episode on Aromanticism and what it is. Along with that, the hosts also touch on the split model of attraction that is a fairly prevalent concept in the ace spec community. One of the hosts is also aromantic and she talks about her experience compared to the her co-host who does experience romantic attraction.

Then there is Ace: What Asexuality Reveals About Desire, Society, and the Meaning of Sex by Angela Chen. It is an investigation of the asexual experience, a collection of interviews of people on the ace spectrum collected by Angela Chen, who is a journalist and asexual herself:

What exactly is sexual attraction and what is it like to go through life not experiencing it? What does asexuality reveal about gender roles, about romance and consent, and the pressures of society? This accessible examination of asexuality shows that the issues that aces face—confusion around sexual activity, the intersection of sexuality and identity, navigating different needs in relationships—are the same conflicts that nearly all of us will experience. Through a blend of reporting, cultural criticism, and memoir, Ace addresses the misconceptions around the “A” of LGBTQIA and invites everyone to rethink pleasure and intimacy. Journalist Angela Chen creates her path to understanding her own asexuality with the perspectives of a diverse group of asexual people. Vulnerable and honest, these stories include a woman who had blood tests done because she was convinced that “not wanting sex” was a sign of serious illness, and a man who grew up in a religious household and did everything “right,” only to realize after marriage that his experience of sexuality had never been the same as that of others. Disabled aces, aces of color, gender-nonconforming aces, and aces who both do and don’t want romantic relationships all share their experiences navigating a society in which a lack of sexual attraction is considered abnormal. Chen’s careful cultural analysis explores how societal norms limit understanding of sex and relationships and celebrates the breadth of sexuality and queerness.

[violetemerald]

Carnival of Aros – November 2020 Call for Submissions: “Commitment”

The Carnival of Aros is a month-long recurring blogging festival where bloggers on different platforms all write (or vlog, or create content) on a specific theme. Submissions are typically posted on everyone’s own blog (or whatever platform they use, such as YouTube). Different bloggers typically host the carnival each month. For more information about the Carnival of Aros, please look here! And don’t be afraid to host the carnival yourself sometime soon. The only rules are that a) submissions are tied back to aromanticism in some way, and b) the theme inspires your submission in some way.

Feel free to ask me questions if you have any on WordPress in comments, in a reblog, in a tumblr message or Ask, or at my email address luvtheheaven5@gmail.com! This entire post has been cross-posted to WordPress.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

For November 2020, the theme I chose is “Commitment”. The prompts below are meant to help give you ideas of various directions you could take your submissions, but the topic is meant to be broad so anything that the word inspires, even if it has nothing to do with any of the prompts below, is welcome!

The dictionary of “commitment” that I was imagining would be most likely to be focused on:

n. The state of being emotionally or intellectually devoted, as to a belief, a course of action, or another person.

There are also other common definitions, such as:

n. A pledge or obligation, as to follow a certain course of action.

There are other definitions of the word, especially if you expand to the verb “commit”, such as “committing a crime”, which you are welcome to explore if you’re interested. However, the prompts I have below are mostly based on the first two definitions I just listed up above.

Prompts:

How do you, as a person who is aromantic or on the aromantic spectrum, feel about committed partnership or other kinds of commitments in interpersonal relationships? Do you have friendships that contain commitment? Do you make a conscious choice to have uncommitted dynamics, and prefer a lack of commitment?

Do you want more or less commitment in your life than you currently have?

Do you commit ideologically to anything? Do you commit to certain goals? Do you commit to any actions/behaviors?

If you are fluent in one or more languages that aren’t English, does that language/do those languages have different connotations around these ideas, or varied words that would reflect the ideas which we consider wrapped up in “commitment” in English?

Does commitment to a person evoke a sense of safety/security/comfort for you, or perhaps does it evoke a sense of being stifled/stuck/trapped? Are there other ways commitment feels that are quite different, like confusing/nonsensical?

Does a lack of commitment (of any kind) in your life, hypothetically or practically in the present, feel like “freedom”? Or what does it feel like?

If you’ve ever been interested in non-traditional relationship structures, such as friends-with-benefits (FWBs), queerplatonic relationships (QPRs), polyamorous or polyaffectionate dynamics, relationship anarchy, etc – how does or doesn’t “commitment” factor into your plans?

What do you think of the commitment aspect of queenieofaces’ “Five Factor Model of Relationships”? Do you consider any other aspects of the model relevant to the theme of commitment as well? Is there another model of relationships you find useful that might have a commitment component, either in name or in practice?

Are there things you might like to do that might be related to the aro community or aro activism, but which feel like “too much commitment” so you are not pursuing them? Or are there things you definitely don’t want to do and one of the reasons you know you don’t have interest in that is because of the commitment that would be involved? (I’m even thinking things like becoming a parent.)

Are there any things in your life which you realize now are actually commitments, but you never framed them as commitments before?

Are there prejudices against non-partnering aros and/or people of all orientations who choose to remain single that have to do with societal beliefs about commitment, and if so is there something to explore there, such as myths and misconceptions?

Hopefully some of these prompts help inspire you, but feel free to take the carnival topic into any direction you’d like!

The deadline for submissions is the end of the day Monday, November 30th. I will wait to post the round-up post till around 9:00 PM EST on Tuesday December 1st, and if you submit anything later that week, I can edit the post to also include it, but ideally you’ll get your posts in while it’s still November.

Good luck!

Please submit by posting a comment below to this WordPress post, emailing me at luvtheheaven5@gmail.com, or feel free to direct message luvtheheaven on twitter, luvtheheaven on tumblr, or luvtheheaven#8738 on Discord. I’m around at all these platforms. Within 24 hours of you sharing your submission, you should get a confirmation from me that I’ve received it. If you haven’t, feel free to reach out an additional time.

Good luck with your submissions! And like I said above, feel free to ask if you have any questions.

[vancos]

capping this anon so i can just block them, but just to address this: lesbianism is entirely exclusive of men. if you are genuinely attracted to men in any way, you cannot be lesbian. just because one part of your attraction is only towards women doesn't make you a lesbian, if other parts of your attraction include men.

the split attraction model was designed for and literally only works for aromantic and asexual identities, because they do not contradict the definitions of other identities. combining non a-spec identities with lesbian using this model contradicts the definition of lesbian. it literally does not work, nor was it ever meant to.

I'm not arguing that these people's experiences aren't real - i may have opinions on it, but honestly i don't feel like it's my place. i function as if they are; but this discussion has never been about the experiences, it's about the labels used to describe them. they can't just use these labels in "peace," because the misconceptions and redefinitons happening by them doing it are causing harm.

lesbian does not describe these experiences. these people are bi/bi with a preference (bc bi covers anyone with multiple attractions, even if how they experience it is different,) or sapphic, or wlw, or queer if they're comfortable with it, or even just a generalized, umbrella "gay." but by definition they are not, and cannot be, lesbian.

if you feel SO entitled to a label (that your experience literally contradicts) that you would try to force the whole community to change and redefine the word to include you, when you have a whole LIST of other applicable labels, you're a fucking asshole.

[nonbinaro]

[id: a screenshot of a privately-answered ask. the ask was sent by @arofili (my main blog), a user whose icon is an image of legolas from lord of the rings on a background of the aromantic flag. the ask reads “Look I appreciate y’all dispelling misconceptions about asexuality but could you not use arophobic language like “aces can still love” and implying romantic attraction is the definition of love. please and thank you.”

the response is from the prominent asexual blog @fuckyeahasexual, whose icon is an image of the asexual flag on its side with the words “fuck yeah asexual” over it. the response reads “Hi ! Im sorry if my wording came out that way but the screenshot the OP of that post used was from a post specifically talking about how not all aces might be aro too and might experience romantic attraction while also being asexual ! OPs points were only about alloromantic asexual people! I still edited the post to include “love romantically” btw ! Sorry again ! Have a nice day!” end id.]

the edited version of the post in question can be found HERE ; it originally used the word “love” in the final response where it now says “romantic attraction”. (cw: aphobia)

to the mod of @fuckyeahasexual who replied to me: thank you very much! i’m sorry to put you on blast by screenshotting and publicly replying to this privately answered ask - and i can delete this post if you’d like me to - but this is something that’s been talked about a lot recently in the aromantic community and i have some more to say about it that i think would benefit a wider audience.

the aro community has for months been discussing arophobia in the ace community, and most of our attempts to confront ace blogs have been met with silence, especially when the ace blog in question is as popular as yours. this is an ongoing problem; you can look through my “aromisia in the ace community” tag for examples and discussion. (aside: i am glad to see @acephobia-is-real , another prominent ace blog, just recently begin to address this issue as well.)

honestly getting this kind of explanation, apology, and most importantly action from you was a surprise! i expected nothing, especially from the response and content i’ve seen on the @fuckyeahasexual blog before. I wish you had responded to this publicly, because aro folks knowing our voices are heard is important.

if you’ve been doing this behind the scenes in other cases, thank you! sincerely! but being upfront about when you mess up and erase aros - upfront to the point of public acknowledgement - would truly benefit the aspec community. aros will know that our concerns are being heard, and not just the aros that write in to you. and allo aces will be exposed to the kind of aro erasure they are often implicit in and realize its effects as well as seeing an example of a blog like yours fixing the issue.

anyway - i just wanted to share for the sake of the aros following me that hey! this thing happened, and it got fixed, and that’s great! i wanted to publicly acknowledge @fuckyeahasexual for responding - though truly, this is such a low bar that it shouldn’t have to be praised - and i wanted to bolster aro folks who face shit like this every day. there are issues, and there will continue to be, but it doesn’t have to be this way and people will listen , even if it’s not as often as we’d like.

thanks.

[starstruckpurpledragon]

So earlier today I saw an ask on @fuckyeahasexual​ talking about there being articles on Vice about aromanticism and asexuality.  Well, mostly asexuality, but there was apparently one on aromanticism too.  I didn’t really have time to read it then, but I wasn’t super impressed by the tagline “They're never gonna fall in love—because they don't want to.”

A person’s orientation isn’t a choice, so I tend to be kind of wary of phrasing that implies the opposite.  So not a great start for the article.

It’s actually not bad.  It was written in 2014 and despite being 5 years old (well, in September it will be), its information hasn’t aged badly  (there’s still the 1% of the population is ace figure that’s outdated, but... 2014).  I really don’t like some of the author’s tendency towards flippant humor, but I’ll get to that some below the cut.  Overall, its a decent take on aromanticism from an outsider’s perspective and, better yet, the aromantics interviewed for the article aren’t all aroace, there’s a lesbian aro and straight aro who get quoted, and a few other aros who may or may not be ace mentioned throughout the article.  I also think it does a fairly good job of addressing common misconceptions like ‘aros are late bloomers’ and ‘it’s a tumblr thing’, though your mileage may vary on that one.

I particularly like the closing paragraph:

It’s clear that the human experience that sits under the label of “aromantic” is not simple. Aros may feel sexual attractions, they may not. They may want to be intimate, they may not. They might want relationships with one special person, or have squishes, they might not. Their ideal Christmas present might be a Blu-ray copy of The Notebook, or they might have taste. But all of this variation doesn’t make the label less valid. Why should minority sexual and romantic orientations have to fit into strict criteria? Straight, romantic people aren’t all easily defined either. Love is complicated, and humans are more so—and when you think in those terms, I guess the real question is why aren't there more labels for the way that we relate to each other?

Okay, so I do like some of the flippant humor because I’ll never not find taking potshots at The Notebook funny.

If you’re looking for some 101 resources to start explaining aromanticism to a non-aro friend, this would be a good article to toss their way.  Below the cut is a deeper look at the good and bad aspects of the article.

The Good:

While the article uses asexuality as a jumping off point for explaining aromanticism, the author makes it clear that asexual does not equal aromantic or vice versa.  She discusses sexuality as a spectrum then introduces the concept of romantic orientations as a spectrum too, moving from there into a deeper view of aromanticism. 

She debunks a lot of misconceptions about aromanticism:

Discusses how its not about disliking romantic gestures

Makes it clear that aromantics aren’t psychopaths (though this was one of the places her flippant humor irked me)

Touches on the concept that aromantics do feel all kinds of platonic love, just not romantic love

Tackles the idea that aromantics are just late bloomers, examining the reasoning behind that assumption and ultimately uses quotes from an interviewed aro to land firmly against the idea that aromantics are just late bloomers

Also tackles the idea that we’re just tumblr snowflakes, though this one is more of a mixed-bag of results and YMMV just how well she deals with it

Discusses how enjoying romance as a genre does not disqualify a person from being aromantic 

Confronts the idea that aromantics are all sex-fiends both with quotes from aros who explain why thats not true and from using her own logic skills to pick apart the fallacy

While she doesn’t discuss amatanormativity by name, she does tackle the concept to some degree.  There are quotes from aromantics discussing the harm society’s expectations regarding romance have made aros feel uncomfortable or even broken.

Describing squishes using AVEN’s definition was a good start -  “a desire for a strong platonic relationship with someone which is usually more emotionally intimate than a typical friendship.” - which makes it all the more annoying when her treatment of the term squish is immediately fumbled afterwards.  (More below in ‘The Bad’ section.)

She discusses what QPRs are and while the definition given isn’t the greatest - there’s no mention of alterous attractions and the standard ‘romantic relationship levels of commitment between intensely close friends’ description is given.  While some aros are okay with this type of description for QPRs and other aros are very intensely against it, this is definitely a spot where YMMV.  While I’m ultimately glad that QPRs were addressed at all and in a way that non-aros can start grasping the concept, I do find it frustrating that she implies that QPRs are sort of friendship+ since that’s not really what they are.

The Bad:

I admit, I really just don’t like the tagline.  In addition to my earlier complaints, it erases aromantics who do want to be in a romantic relationship.  There are a lot of valid reasons an aro might choose to be in a romantic relationship and I don’t think that ever really gets addressed in the article, which instead frames all aro relationships as either friendships or QPRs.

“Aromanticism is simply the fundamental desire to not be in a romantic relationship.” - That’s... not really a good explanation of what aromanticism is.  While it, thankfully, doesn’t imply that aromanticism is a choice, it doesn’t actually describe what aromanticism is - not experiencing romantic attraction - and equates aromanticism with behavior - not wanting to be in a romantic relationship.  This once again erases aromantics who are in romantic relationships for any number of valid reasons.  

“Unlike psychopaths or people who just don’t want to be in a romantic relationship with you (ugh, weirdos), aros are capable of love.” - While I’m glad she addresses both that aros aren’t psychopaths and that aros do feel love, I could do without the amatanormative joke in the middle there.  The idea that only weirdos wouldn’t be romantically attracted to a person is really entitled and creepy and gross and just jarring to have there.  The semi-flippant treatment of dismissing the psychopath misconception isn’t all that great either, but YMMV.  In this particular context its just very uncomfortable to me, perhaps largely because the person making the joke isn’t aro.

The dismissive attitude towards aro culture because we make jokes about auto-correct, discuss fandom headcanons, and create pride flags.  These are all things that pretty much every LGBT+ identity does and its insulting to single us out for being comfortable enough with our aromanticism to start having fun and taking pride in ourselves.  None of that is inherently childish and I really can’t tell if she’s being ignorant or indulging in ageism by classifying things she’s not interested in as things that adults don’t do.

The equally dismissive treatment of aromantic terms, like ‘squish’ and ‘zucchini’.  ‘Squish’ is no more childish than the term ‘crush’ and plenty of adults use the word ‘crush’ to describe their romantic feelings.  And while ‘zucchini’ may sound weird without knowing the history behind it (or even when you do) slang pretty much always sounds weird.  It’s even more frustrating because one of the quotes in this section are used to reinforce the author’s disdainful attitude towards the adequacy of our terminology.  Not every aro finds these words useful but its downright hurtful to see an aro quoted calling the word ‘squish’ juvenile or equate it with being ‘emotionally stunted’.  (Seriously, while I can understand wanting equivalent terms we can use that are less likely to be dismissed by non-aros, I hope everyone will try to remember that dismissing words like ‘squish’ is really hypocritical when similar slang terms are widely in use for conveying romantic emotions and are not treated as childish.  It’s just another form of aromisia and one that is very easily internalized.)

Overall, the author seemed extremely open to understanding what aromanticism really is and the parts of her writing that conveyed amatanormative and aromisic sentiments could be put down to her simply still being ignorant on the subject.  It’s definitely a good starting point for non-aros to learn some of the basics about aromanticism.  I don’t know if I’d recommend this to someone trying to figure out if they themselves are aro, though.

[just-aro]

a minor correction addition to the stated definition of amatonormativity - it particularly addresses the societal expectation of folks to have monogamous romantic relationships, and affects everyone, but especially aromantic rather than strictly asexual folks. There's often a misconception that aro folks are under the ace umbrella, when we are sister communities rather than nested.

to use this framework even, we've discussed a lot in the aromantic community how aro folks are expected to be asexual or to not talk about any other sexuality we might have because of the societal idea that sex without romance = BAD. so... aromantic folks experience SES that we should be asexual. the automatic assumptions other queer folks make is that if i'm aro, i must... specifically be a sex repulsed ace, and if not, I find that even other queer folks will uncomfortably and noticeably stop discussing my orientation outside of "queer" or "gay".

If you're saying "Spider, you can't just want us to stop talking about those social forces, we need the term comphet!" - well! You're right - I don't want us to stop talking about those social pressures.

I want us to talk about them better, more inclusively, and in a more nuanced fashion - and yes, I have a suggestion for a new term.

Someone asked in the notes of the prior post whether someone else had advanced the theory of comphet too, so it isn't just Adrienne Rich and all the TERFs who followed her can't be the only ones talking about this? (I'm summarizing so I hope I've managed it.)

Honestly? It doesn't really matter if someone else advanced a similar idea (though the answer is 'not really,' bc everyone keeps jumping in to talk about things with this term even though it's poisoned from the roots). What matters is that comphet as a term and a theory is rooted in biphobia, transphobia, political lesbianism, and the theory has led to incredible harm within our community in the past 40 years.

What we need is a more inclusive term (comphet as a theory only applies to lesbians, which means it's useless for discussing the pressures on anyone else, even though people try to apply it that way) which isn't dragging all that baggage along behind itself.

Socially-Enforced Sexuality (SES) covers allonormativity (pressure to engage in a sexual relationship as a marker of adulthood and success in adult life), amatonormativity (ditto but romantic), heteronormativity, mononormativity (anti-polyam pressures), pressures for relationships to "progress" into domestic partnerships or be thought a "failure," and so much more. It also permits us to talk about things like homonormativity or the pressures within queer communities to at least present as being "gay enough," and ... a lot of other things.

We literally cannot advance the conversations we're having about how social pressures enforce expression of sexuality and romantic orientation if we keep using the same bad theories from 40 years ago, and it's impossible to use the theory of comphet without dragging all that bad shit along with it.

[actuallyasexual]

Combating anti-asexual/anti-aromantic “discourse” is often fruitless, so what I would recommend is blocking the source of said “discourse” and addressing the misconception or misrepresentation they are making in a separate post. You do not have to mention where the inspiration for your post comes from, especially if you’re nervous about engaging in “debate” with a specific person. That way you are removing yourself from the source of your distress, while also fulfilling your need to defend against misinformation and to provide clarity on a given issue. 

If someone does not respect your boundaries enough to leave you alone, then that’s on them. It’s not on you. You’re not obligated to “debate” your identity with someone who is already adamantly against you. We as a community, however, must find ways to remain informative and open to critical discussion. Therefore, we can remove ourselves from a very toxic environment where no good outcomes exist (anti ace discourse), and shift our focus onto things that warrant discussion and sharing (inter- and intra- community issues)

[aroacefaq]

Arospec Awareness Week at AroAceFaq

We are very excited to reveal our topics for this year’s Arospec Awareness Week, which starts tomorrow, February 19th, and goes through February 25th! We have our submissions opened and would love to see your posts on these topics! Submissions can be made through our submissions tab (preferred) but also via asks, or by tagging us on your posts. 

This year’s themes are: 

Feb. 19th: Coming Out stories! Share your tips, experiences, and advice with others. Have questions on how to come out as arospec? Let us know! 

Feb. 20th: Things you want non-aros to know. Sometimes people get things from, or there are misconceptions about arospec identities and lives. This is your chance to address these! 

Feb. 21st:  Arts and Crafts. Show off your arospec themed arts and crafts- they can be any kind of medium.

Feb. 22nd: Humor. Its a well known fact that aspec people are the masters of puns and other humor. Tell us your favorite arospec joke here! 

Feb. 23rd: Types of love and identities. The aromantic spectrum is a diverse place, full of different experiences and identities, some of which get less attention than others. This day is for sharing those experiences, and bringing more light to them! 

Feb. 24th: Advice. Since arospec awareness is such a new thing, and irl communities can be hard to find, online advice is essential for many arospec individuals! This day is for giving advice on things you’ve experienced, or asking others for it. 

Feb. 25th: Affirmations day. You’re allowed to be proud of who you are. This is a day for all things positive, including selfies, text posts, etc. Be proud of your identity, and share it with others! 

[aromagni]

While I think there is an issue of tag policing, there is also an underlying issue for why it’s happening. I think the aro tag has generally been better recently since it’s started being addressed that there’s stuff there that shouldn’t be, and also there tend to be more problems of non-aro things in aro tags during times like pride month where posts will tag every queer identity while not actually including in any way. I think it stems from feeling erased/ignored in general such that it’s more upsetting when feel talked over in space where supposed to feel heard.

Also, while it can be difficult to separate out experiences, it does seem weird to explicitly mention ace without aro or a-spec and then tag it as aro? Like, if talking broadly about experiences but not explicitly mentioning either then makes sense to tag as both, but sometimes it seems like aro is tagged on as an afterthought? So I think part of frustration with things being tagged like that stems from aro historically being treated as a subset or afterthought of ace and wanting to push back against those misconceptions.

So, I think there has generally been a problem of stuff being mis-tagged as aro but it’s been getting better, and tag-policing causes more problems than it solves. Also, I generally recommend people use the tag “actually aromantic” for content more specifically aro.

K so a lot of yall dont get this so lemme make it clear:

Aro and Ace are NOT the same fucking thing

You can be both or only one of them but just cuz someone is ace doesn’t mean they’re aro

NOT EVERY ARO IS ACE. STOP PUTTING STRICTLY ACE SHIT IN THE ARO TAG FFS

[smoaki-the-witch-blog]

Asexuality: Yes Liz, I can be asexual and have a boyfriend

One of the biggest things about me that seems to confuse those around me is my sexuality. I identify as asexual, which tends to cause people to immediately ask the question “wait, then how do you have a boyfriend?” One of the biggest misconceptions about asexuality is that asexuals are not attracted to other people AT ALL in ANY WAY, which is simply untrue. Yes, it does mean that we do not want a sexual relationship with another person, but that does not mean that we all do not want romance in our lives at all. This want for a purely romantic relationship - filled completely by hand holding, movie going, rom-com type shit - is called romantic attraction. Most everyone feels romantic attraction, including some of us asexuals. 

Romantic attraction works the same basic way sexual attraction does in categorization; you can be heteroromantic, homoromantic, panromantic, biromantic, polyromantic, gray-romantic, demiromantic, or aromantic. The definitions of each of the romantic attractions aligns with those of the sexualities, so it makes it pretty easy to keep track of. Aromantic Asexuals are the people that most non-asexuals think of when addressing the entire asexuality as a whole, which is a bit unfair but understandable considering how asexuals are presented in media usually. Personally, I identify as a biromantic asexual, meaning i am romantically attracted to both men and women, but if you start wanting more than just kissing and hand holding, you might be in for an awkward time. In my personal experience most asexuals are actually romantically attracted to others in some way, and the concept itself isn’t terribly hard to understand once it’s explained, but somehow there’s always that one Liz in the crowd. {Liz is the person who tends to respond with something along the lines of “but that doesn’t make any sense, you’re asexual” when romantic attraction is explained. No offense to anyone named Liz, it’s an amazing name, I just picked a random name of a person I had to rant to one time}

I hope this has cleared up a few things for some of you out there, including you Liz, about asexuality. Yes, it is okay to want to have a romantic relationship if you identify as asexual! 

Also, to a certain boyfriend of mine, if the fact that you’re never going to “get this” bothers you, we should probably have a talk.

Until next time, 

Smoaki

[aroacepagans]

As I've addressed here befor, QPP's aren't actually aro specific. They originated from the aro community and are primarily used by aro people but allo people can and do use the term. Frequently allo people misuse the term because they haven't done the research neccisary to understand what it means, and because of this allo people should not use the term unless they've done exstensive research befor hand, but QPP's aren't exclusive to aro's.

As exspresed above QPP's are just a diffrent type of platonic relationship. This means that anyone can exsperiance them, it's not some form of aro exclusive attraction. "QPP" was coined by the aro community because many aro people focuse heavily on platonic relationships seeing as we don't feel romantic attraction. This means aro people were in a position to realized that the English language didn't have a term for a specific type of platonic relationship, however, it doesn't mean that only aro people ever exsperiance this type of relationship.

@definitly-not-a-spy it sounds like you have some misconceptions about what a qpp is. I would suggest researching the term on asexuality.org or aromantic wiki to get a better understanding.

 The whole “qpr’s are just friendships” thing is so baffling to me because it means that platonic somehow equals friendship in peoples minds, which just…doesn’t make sense?

 I mean there are all sorts of platonic relationships like parent/child, teacher/student or just being coworkers that are important but have very little to do with friendship. Aro people coming up with a new term because we didn’t have the vocabulary to describe the type of platonic relationship we were experiencing isn’t really any different from that and it’s kind of silly that people think it is.