#as someone who is ace and is questioning if they're aro

[stardink]

"I don't know if they understand that sometimes, I'd just like to stay the same."

[ltleflrt]

Figuring out I'm on the ace spectrum was so difficult because I have always been a horny bitch. I knew what sex was at a fairly young age, because I'd asked my mom and she's one of those good parents who'll answer questions like those, and as I grew older and would ask more complex questions, her answers would evolve along with my curiosity and understanding of the world. And I remember having fantasies as young as 9 or 10 years old, even if they were hella vague and nothing close to what sex actually is lol

So as I became a teenager, and all my friends' focus turned from playing with dolls to flirting with boys, I automatically thought I was attracted to boys. And I paid more attention to Cute Boys than I did to Cute Girls, because girls were just nice to look at while boys were People To Have Crushes On. Because of heteronormativity. Looking back on it now, I know there were girls I liked to stare at just as intently as boys, although less often because I wasn't trying to pay attention. And I certainly didn't fantasize about girls because I started reading romance novels in 5th grade, so I was fantasizing about male romantic partners because that was the fiction I was consuming. I didn't even realize fantasizing about girls was possible until I was 17, and I had a few "am I a lesbian" internal crises for years because of it.

So when I did start having sex, I had A LOT OF IT with SO MANY different guys, and eventually a couple of women once I started accepting that bisexuality was real. But it was never really fulfilling. Not like my fantasies were. Not like my books were. I was slutty because sex was fun, I was horny, there were plenty of options so I kept searching for that satisfaction I was craving.

Getting married was a relief (even though it turns out I'm aro-spec too lol) because I was tired of hunting, and even if sex with my husband was meh, at least I had someone around to scratch that itch if I had it, and he didn't mind if I occasionally took care of things on my own because I'd read an especially hot scene in a romance.

I learned about asexuality in my early 20s, but I brushed it off. Couldn't be me, I'm far too horny for that. But I think that comes from the fact that everything you hear about Aces is attached to sex-repulsion or sex-indifference. I wasn't either of those things. I was horny all the dang time. I was fantasizing about sex all the dang time. I figured actual sex was meh because my imagination was so vivid that real life could never match up. Which could be true to an extent, but I think not as much as popular opinion would have us believe. If fantasy was really that much better for everyone, then I think we'd have less incels and unplanned pregnancies than we do.

In my 30s I finally saw people talking about The Spectrum, and I started examining my past, and I figured out I wasn't really attracted to anyone I had sex with. I do occasionally find someone attractive; there are men and women and enbies who make my skin feel tight and give me a little wave of lightheadedness lol... but it's always always the fantasy that gets me really going. If given the opportunity I wouldn't have sex with any of those people. Thank you, but no thank you, I'd rather just imagine it than physically participate in the act with them.

(Ok I might go down on them, but that's less about wanting sex, and more about being able to add them to my Tally. Hell yeah I want to brag about making *insert hot person* have an orgasm. There's PRIDE in that kind of accomplishment lol)

I have a lot of respect for aces that are not horny. I understand it even if I don't share the sentiment. And I feel like most of them understand me even if they don't share the sentiment. There's a solidarity between us.

Until I go into a fandom tag for a character that the aces have glommed onto because they're canonically ace or headcanoned as ace. Good lord, the non-horny aces can turn into downright vicious bastards if a horny ace sexualizes their blorbo.

This post is for them.

Horny aces exist. Please look up "autochorissexual, lithosexual, and aegosexual."

Refer to those definitions in regards to romantic attraction as well as sexual attraction.

Some aces may not fall into one of those definitions, because asexuality is a spectrum, but they may still be horny.

Horny aces are not disrespecting you by enjoying being horny on main. We promise we'll wash the stickiness off our hands before we hold your hands in queer solidarity.

And most importantly: Your blorbo is fictional and does not need to be defended from icky sexuality. They exist in an infinite multiverse, so your blorbo and my blorbo are not the same, even if they appear to be on the surface.

AND:

This post is also for the people who are confused about themselves because they're horny but don't actually feel attraction. You're not crazy, you're not wishy washy, you're not "waiting for the right person to come along" (unless you are, in which case I hope you find them). You're just a thin strip of color on a massive rainbow that holds more unique shades than anyone can perceive at a glance.

You're valid. You're one of us too.

And don't be mean to the non-horny aces. Tag your smut so they can avoid it. (But actually so I can find it lol)

[genderqueerdykes]

my heart goes out to every bisexual who gets told they're "just straight" or "just gay". my heart goes out to every bisexual who gets told bisexuality isn't real. my heart goes out to every bisexual who has to pick between being viewed as all gay or all straight. my heart goes out to every bisexual who has to present as gay in order to be seen as queer. my heart goes out to every bisexual gay and every bisexual lesbian who gets told their identity isn't real. my heart goes out to every trans bisexual who has their orientation invalidated because they are trans. my heart goes out to every bisexual who is demonized for being sexually active for one reason or another.

my heart goes out to every closeted bisexual. my heart goes out to every bisexual who can't come out. my heart goes out to every aro and ace bisexual who get harassed by those around them for being sexually promiscuous because of their bisexuality when they don't have sex or partners. my heart goes out to every bisexual who ever has their bisexuality called into question. my heart goes out to every bisexual who gets told to not show up to pride or queer support groups because they're "in a heterosexual relationship." my heart goes out to every bisexual who views all of their modes of attraction as queer and those around them do not respect that.

my heart goes out to every bisexual. it is a challenge to be seen correctly as bi, and to not be harassed, mocked, or belittled for it. i see you for who you are- you are allowed to define your bisexuality. someone refusing to see you as bi doesn't mean you're not. you shouldn't have to prove your bisexuality or perform it for anyone. it's not up for debate. i hope things get a bit easier for you soon. you are bisexual no matter what anyone else says

[genderkoolaid]

yeah, but you do mean 'loveless' like 'romanceless' right? Just cause you're not interested in a romantic partnership, and you're never attracted to anyone romantically, that doesn't mean you can't love your family and your friends. Am I understanding wrong? I feel like it's a widely accepted concept that 'love' isn't just romantic, it's about caring about someone, no matter if they're your family or platonic friend or your pet.

No, "loveless" means love-less. Another anon also asked me to explain as well so:

"Lovelessness" in the aro context comes from the essay I Am Not Voldemort by K.A Cook. The essay confronts normative ideas on love, its inherent positivity and what it means to not love. From the introduction, which brings up the question of non-romantic love:

This June, I saw an increasing number of positivity and support posts for the aromantic and a-spec communities discussing the amatonormativity of “everyone falls in love”. I agree: the idea that romantic love is something everyone experiences, and is therefore a marker of human worth, needs deconstruction. Unfortunately, a majority of these posts are replacing the shackles of amatonormativity with restrictive lines like “everyone loves, just not always romantically”, referencing the importance of loving friends, QPPs, family members and pets. Sometimes it moves away from people to encompass love for hobbies, experiences, occupations and ourselves. The what and how tends to vary from post to post, but the idea that we do and must love someone or something, and this love redeems us as human and renders us undeserving of hatred, is being pushed to the point where I don’t feel safe or welcome in my own aromantic community. Even in the posts meant to be challenging the more obvious amatonormativity, it is presumed that aros must, in some way, love. I’ve spent weeks watching my a-spec and aro communities throw neurodiverse and survivor aros under the bus in order to do what the aromantic community oft accuses alloromantic aces of doing: using their ability to love as a defence of their humanity. Because I love, they say, I also don’t deserve to be a target of hatred, aggression and abuse. But what if I don’t love? What if love itself has been the mechanism of the hatred and violence I have endured? Why am I, an aro, neurodiverse survivor of abuse and bullying, still acceptable collateral damage?

The author criticizes the idea of "true love" that is incapable of harm. Ze questions why we construct love in that way, and how it ignores and simplifies the experiences of victims of abuse ("It’s comforting to think that a love that wounds isn’t real love, but it denies the complexity of experience and feeling had by survivors. It denies the complexity of experience and feeling that makes it harder for us to identify abuse and escape its claws. It denies the validity of survivors who look at love and feel an honest doubt about its worth, as a word or a concept, in our own interactions and experiences.") Ze talks about being forced to say "I love you" to transphobic, abusive parents whose feelings of love was the justification for their abuse.

The core of what "loveless" as an concept is about is summed up in this quote:

There is no substantial difference between saying “I’m human because I fall in love”, “I’m human because I love my friends” and “I’m human because I love calligraphy”. All three statements make human worth contingent on certain behaviours, feelings and experiences. Expanding the definition of what kinds of love make us human does nothing but save some aros from abuse and antagonism … while telling survivor and neurodiverse aros, who are more likely to have complex relationships to love as a concept or are unable to perform it in ways recognised by others, that we’re still not worthy.

Lovelessness is against any kind of statement which quantifies humanity (and implicitly, human worth) in the ability to feel or act or experience certain things. Humans are human by virtue of being human, and nothing else. And, it is socially constructed! "Love" has no natural definition! Some people are not comfortable using "love" to describe positive feelings and relationships, and some people do not feel those positive feelings in general. And those people deserve the right to define their own experiences and their own relationship to the social construct of love.

In essence, lovelessness is both a personal as well as (in my opinion) a political identity, born from aro and mad experiences that challenges not just amatonormativity but all ideas that associate personhood and worth with the ability to feel certain things.

& as a note, there is also the term "lovequeer" which describes using the term "love" in ways which contradict mainstream understandings of what it means to love, and which kinds of love are considered worthwhile.

[loveless-arobee]

Maybe I'm overreacting or w/e, but I think it's a tad bit weird that whenever someone online questions if they're aromantic, people always tell them they're AroAce specifically, even if they never mention sexuality or anything relating to their sexual attraction. Just like. "Hey I'm not interested in romance. What is that called?" - "Oh, you're AroAce!" And then they even often giving only half the definition by telling them "AroAce means experiencing little to no romantic attraction", without mention sexual attraction, which is, like, half the identity.

Even more weird when the questioning person does talk about sex and specifically enjoying sex (often with wording that actually does imply sexual attraction to be present) and then the answer is "you can be AroAce and still want sex!" which is true and all but basically nobody besides AlloAros themselves ever mention the possibility that you can be aromantic without being asexual. Nope. If you're aromantic, you must be asexual.

Which is then how you get these people who come online again to ask "Is it possible to be aro but not ace?" because all everyone ever told them the first time and all times after that was that if they're aromantic, they must be asexual. Which keeps them from finding out themselves for much longer (I know because that happened to me.)

Like. Sure, it could be that they're AroAce,and yes, even if they do enjoy sex. That is all true and fine. But why is everyone who isn't AlloAro or otherwise non-ace aro so unwilling to portray being aromantic but not asexual as just a mere possibility to questioning aros? Why not just mention both of these things so the questioning person knows what to look up?

[valtsv]

friendly question about ur aro identity—

are you ace as well? and if not, what is the line for you between romantic and sexual? like is kissing considered romantic to you?

and, do you date people? or does being aro mean you’re not interested in dating?

thank you 🫡

so this is all personal to me and definitely shouldn't be taken as a reflection on all aromantics/aromanticism in general, but no, i'm not asexual. things like sex and kissing aren't inherently romantic to me, and i tell people that much, and let them choose their boundaries in a relationship to me accordingly. if a friend wants to kiss or even have sex, i'm more than happy to do that, but i identify with aromanticism because i feel uncomfortable with the wider social expectations of the idea of "romance". that a romantic relationship is inherently more special than any other kind of loving relationship; that if you love someone romantically you should demonstrate it through actions that are reserved for that person alone and can't be extended to anyone else (and i don't necessarily mean sex; if someone i loved wanted me to be exclusive to them sexually that's a boundary i'd be willing to negotiate and agree to, but it wouldn't be a romantic gesture to me, just a gesture of love); that you should aspire to seek out a romantic relationship and find "the one" who, once you've found them, you should devote your life to and put before all else.

i guess it's not really romance itself that i have an issue with, but all the societal baggage attached to it. maybe that makes me not a "true" aromantic, but it's a label i identify with, and i find i have things in common with the community who fall under it, so as long as they're happy to have me, i think i'll stay here for now.

[batmanisagatewaydrug]

Hi sex witch! This isn’t exactly a sex Ed question but it is related to sex. I’m aro/ace, and I’ve noticed that a lot of other aro/aces say that allos see friendship as a stepping stone to sex or romance, and less important than romantic relationships. I guess it makes sense, but my best friend irl is a gay boy (im a girl) and he obviously isn’t interested in dating an aro/ace girl. I made a post saying this and people in the notes were saying that he’s either secretly bi and lying to make me feel safe, or I’m an egg. I don’t believe either of those things but it got me wondering, is it common for allos to use friendship as a way to get close to people for the purpose of dating or having sex with them? Personally I’ve never experienced that but enough aro/aces are saying it that I have to wonder

hi anon,

okay so we need to start with the part about your best friend, because it's really important to me that we take a minute to recognize anyone trying to convince you that a gay boy is only hanging out with you because he has secret romantic feelings is being a homophobe. I mean, listen, it's annoying and childish when people act like men and women can't be friends in general, okay? but in this case they're not just being heteronormative, they're being actively homophobic. block anyone who said that. jesus christ.

secondly: I don't know if you've ever, like, spent time with people, but yes, many folks find romantic partners amongst their circles of friends because that's who they spend a lot of time with and build meaningful connections with, which can develop into feelings of sexual or romantic attraction for people who experience those things. I'd say it's less often a a case of anyone "using" friendship as a means to an end and more often a case of people realizing that a friendship is taking an exciting new direction and deciding to pursue those feelings.

there's a long-lasting trope, especially prominent it sitcoms and romcoms, of someone (usually a sleezy man) acting friendly to get close to someone else (usually a woman) with the intent of seducing them, but a.) like most works of fiction, that's much less common in real life, and b.) there's a huge difference between lying to someone intentionally and just developing a crush on someone you already know and like, which I think is the MUCH more common scenario.

like, don't get me wrong here, it's absolutely true that we live in a society(TM) that pretty materially privileges romantic relationships - specifically monogamous, legally-binding relationships - over other types of relations, and that's a fucking doozy. that's a thing to work on, for sure. but it's also not weird or creepy that some people couple up with their buddies.

[foone]

(Sorry if this sounds mean) If you’re ace why are you looking for mind control erotica? This isn’t a bad faith question, as someone who’s aro but not ace I’m genuinely curious. Maybe expounding on it would help your followers point you at new things?

Also have you read Human Domestication Guide? It’s very mind controlly, though it does have pet stuff if you hate that or whatever.

Short answer: it's complicated.

So to answer in reverse order: I have read some HDG stories: not enough to remember what I read, but in general I like them. And petplay doesn't bother me. So I'll probably read more in future, it's just that it never triggered that "I should read all of this!" urge in me. Which isn't an indicator of how much I like it/the quality of it, that's just a thing that sometimes happens to my brain.

As for why I'm reading mind control erotica despite being asexual... It's complicated (as you might guess).

Basically I'm asexual in the "not attracted to men or women (or anything else/between)" sense. I don't experience sexual attraction, at all.

But that's only one part of sexuality. It may be the primary part for allosexuals, but it obviously can't be for me. I'm still interested in some sexual things, and I'm interested in them for sexual reasons, but it's just that those reasons are never "this person is hot" or "this sex is hot".

Like, not to give a complete listing of my kinks or anything, consider basic rope bondage as a fetish. You could look at the fetish from multiple angles:

It's sexy getting tied up, because of the physical sensation of being tied up.

It's sexy to be tied up, because you don't have control.

It's sexy to tie someone up, because of how they look tied up.

It's sexy to have someone tied up, because you have control and they don't.

It's sexy to have sex while tied up, because you can't resist it (in the scene. This is fantasy, there are safewords)

It's sexy to fuck someone tied up, because they can't resist (in the scene, fantasy, safewords)

And then in fiction you can do the last two minus the watsonian-bdsm: it's not a scene. (I won't discuss this further because discourse)

Only 5 and 6 really need sex itself to be a part of it. You can have the eroticism of bondage and no one has sex, or needs to be attracted to anybody.

I don't have a huge amount of experience here, but from what I've heard this isn't that uncommon in the bdsm community: there's plenty of people who show up at bdsm events solely for "non-sexual" tying/getting tied.

Anyway, once you understand that you can have a kink (even one that seems sexual) for reasons other than sexual attraction/sex* itself, you can probably see why an asexual person might still want to read about it.

Also there's elements of, like, exploration of personal impossibilities? As jms said:

So I cannot forgive. Which makes the notion of writing a character who CAN forgive momentarily attractive...because it allows me to explore in great detail something of which I am utterly incapable. I cannot fly, so I would write of birds and starships and kites; I cannot play an instrument, so I would write of composers and dancers; and I cannot forgive, so I would write of priests and monks and Minbari...

It can be interesting reading stories of people doing things you can't for reasons you never experience, obeying urges you don't have.

* "sex" is also a difficult thing to define, because especially in BDSM terms it gets very fuzzy. What things count as sex? Generally when I say like "they're spending too much time on the sex" or "the mind control is just an excuse to get to the sex", I'm defining sex as something like "some kind of insertion/licking/vibrating for sexual purposes", when many allosexuals (especially, uhh... What's the word for non-bdsm people? Them) would define it more narrowly, and many BDSM kinksters would define it more widely, including a lot of the things I'm not here: I've heard people call getting tied up or impact play as sex, for example.

Anyway you'd think this sort of perspective I've got on erotic fiction, where I'm here for the non-sex sexual fetish things, would be more common? After all, I'm talking about literature here. I tend to associate the allosexual attraction urge as a visual thing: this person looks sexy, so you experience sexual attraction towards them.

I can see how that'd work if you're talking about visual mediums: movies and photos of real people, even drawn images, but this is just words. I guess maybe people without aphantasia can imagine how someone looks from their description, and can experience some attraction based on that? I don't know. I've never really experienced attraction to written characters, so I can't say how it works. Feel free to enlighten me, anyone who does.

But you can definitely tell reading erotica which stories are "this is a sexy story because it has sexy people in it doing sexy things (sometimes kinkily)" and which are "this kink is the primary focus: any sex they have is in service of the kink, or is just a momentary distraction from the kink". I prefer the latter, by far.

Anyways, I think maybe I'm giving everyone a slightly misleading impression of how much I'm into mind control. It's more that I've found a few stories that actually were interesting to me for a couple reasons (first person submissive perspective, rules-based mind control, some worldbuilding) and then I've been looking for other stories that explore the same ideas as well (or better: the particular ones I liked had a little too much bimboification focus for me, which isn't one of my kinks) and failing. Thus I complain a lot about not being able to find the sort of stories I want.

Which, you know, makes sense? I'm an asexual reading through porn. Despite my explanation in this post, this is still not a great fit for me, so of course I'm disappointed. It'd be like if I was scrolling through a football site and not liking football, complaining about how much sports focus this site has. It's a little silly, you know?

But I'm a lot silly, so I continue.

[lovelessrage]

Every month there's a new resurgence of some variant of "aroallos just hate aces!", or random post about how aroallos are simply spiteful and irrational with no attempt made to bridge the gap of understanding, and it's getting old, I'll be honest. If you're not willing to listen, and you assume we're hostile by default, then how can you ever be convinced otherwise? It's genuinely a shame how common it is in aro communities to refuse to hear people out before jumping to assumption, and not just in regards to aroallos either [arospecs and both of the tail ends of the romance enjoyment slider come to mind as other common targets, as well as atertiary aros of all stripes].

I think, as much as I dislike getting preachy, of you actually want to put effort into solving the issue, if you are genuinely concerned about that rift and you have this energy in you to do something, use it to try to bridge the gap. I'm tired, I'll admit it, but I know there's people who aren't and they're worried. Put that worry to action. Come at it as an ally, not on the offense; people are more likely to hear you out and talk about it when they aren't coming into it having to defend themselves and their community.

Please, please listen and ask questions before you assume bad faith, before you assume an attack. We all have biases to look at [that includes why you assume someone is immediately an aggressor, or why you assume someone else is more worth listening to], and clearing the air might do some good.

[prince-liest]

Don't mind me getting on my soapbox for a moment... a lot of this musing is admittedly for the sake of my own processing of this topic, re: aroaceness. Read at your own peril! <3

I'm generally a very "ship and let ship" kind of person, but I think I would definitely append a little caveat of, like, "As long as you're not being actively invalidating and detrimental to others" to that. Which is a delightfully vague statement that can be interpreted practically any way, I know, hahaha.

In the case of this particular post I've just been thinking about how, like... seeing an aroace character like Alastor get written into dozens upon dozens of PWPs (including ones that don't even touch on the subject of his aceness at all) is really not something that I personally find to be hurtful or offensive. It's just smut for the sake of smut, of a character people want to see awful, sexy things done to (or doing). Valid! I vibe with you! More people should just write the PWPs they want to see in the world!

But on the other hand, I've several times seen this very particular type of art (usually it's a comic, but admittedly I haven't been reading very many Hazbin Hotel fics so maybe it's there, too) where Alastor is slotted into the "methinks the lady doth protest too much" trope. As in, he's expressing strong feelings about a character (usually Vox or Lucifer, sometimes Angel Dust) to someone, probably Rosie, and the person he's confiding to is some variant of, "Oh, silly Alastor, you're obviously in love!" And then he denies it, says that the very idea disgusts him, and the character titters to themselves about how he's so naive in the matters of romance or whatever.

And it's, like.

The "strong feelings" in question are almost always frustration/annoyance/disgust, and him being like, "Nnnno, I just hate his person" is treated like a silly and naive misunderstanding of his own feelings because obviously he's in love. Please imagine that Alastor was a female character who was established to be a lesbian. Now examine how that suddenly makes this scene feel.

(Also, Rosie being the go-to for this is a little frustrating when she's the one who, in canon, explicitly says that she wouldn't make that assumption of him.)

There's such a chasm of difference between how I see people wanting to ship Alastor for reasons of "I just want to!" vs folks who engage with him being aroace in ways that are infantilizing and invalidating. There are so many people out there - not just aro/ace people, but anyone who's not exclusively into the standard type of person they should be into at the time society deems they should be into them, which is most queer people and even many cishet folks - that have been told that exact kind of thing in real life. It reads like something out of a compulsory heterosexuality guidebook, and it actively makes it harder to leave the closet or even realize that you're in one at all.

So I guess it just feels frustrating to see it get made into a punchline, especially by folks who are shipping queer ships. I genuinely can't wait until fandom society advances to the point of consistently treating aro/acespec folks as queer instead of Queer Lite (TM), because let me tell you, ime the comphet experience and the amato/allonormativity experience are in fact nigh-identical except for how they're treated within online communities. There's a reason the pan -> gay -> ace pipeline is a thing.

But, hey! We're already doing way better than we were in 2012!

[bloggingboutburgers]

cw: discussions of bullying and aphobia

Hearing aroace peoples' existential crises over their friends discussing crushes, as someone who was socially isolated and severly bullied for their whole childhood and most of their adolescence so had NO friendgroup until adulthood and NO community or inclusion in literally anything (and when it came to sex and romance the other kids explicitly considered my potential involvement in either to be impossible / laughible because of how "weird" they found me (my autistic traits before I even realised I'm autistic)), felt like starving while listening to someone else complain about the food they're actively eating.

Food intolerances and dislike of different foods (as metaphor for being aro/ace) ARE important and difficult to grapple with when you're expected to eat specific foods in specific proportions at different times - but man did it sting until I realised why I felt that way and gave myself a talking to since my trauma doesn't justify belittling the very real struggles of aroace people.

I guess since the choice between 'stay alone or conform' was never really a choice because I was rejected no matter how cis straight or allo I was it taught me to go "fuck it" and accept myself regardless of what other people do or say (which ironically has lead to me becoming dramatically popular all of a sudden at uni, which has been weird to get used to since I have literally no experience with any of this - platonic or otherwise - which did lead to some advantage being taken of me but f*ck it we ball ^^'). And I guess it's just been difficult understanding why anyone would care so much about whether they're "normal" or not? You really have nothing to gain from that, safety is not guaranteed in conformity so best to live aroace and damn all aphobes to hell if they have a problem with that.

It's a mindset I'll never understand and that's only ok now insofar as that lack of understanding no longer results in misplaced anger at people who, for a time, I had once considered spoilt, ungrateful and out of touch. Basically, I'm full of sh*t and to every aroace person reading this you deserve good friends that actually respect you for who you are and do not even TRY to get you to change your mind about sex or romance. Have a lovely day x

Sincerely,

An aggressive emotional support anon

I'm genuinely sorry for all the hardships you went through. I don't mean to equate at all, truthfully from reading you and considering I WAS asked some of those questions as a kid regardless (the "who's your crush" bullshit and whatnot), it definitely sounds like I had it less hard than you did, but... I was bullied in elementary school and middle school, also not necessarily because I was aroace (I don't know why it happened really, I don't know if anyone ever knows, I boil it down to... me being me and there being something fundamentally wrong with me ig), and I definitely also get some of those feelings of "oh boo hoo you call that struggle" boiling in me when people discuss their own past struggles sometimes, so... Yeah, every one person's experience is unique, but I can at the very least very much sympathize.

I think a way it manifests in me is that I now have that compulsive, debilitating fear of being "othered" in any way, shape, or form, so I guess being aroace doesn't help my case. But at the same time... Well, like you brilliantly put it, when you're in a situation like that, no matter what you do, you won't be accepted anyway, and having that knowledge back then is probably also what lead me to figure myself out as aroace so early in life. Because I was treated as this much of an outsider, I ironically had that much room in my own head to form my own identity, far apart from others and the need to conform. Yeah, that identity may include a "piece of shit that doesn't deserve to be supported of part of a group" side that's been forced in, buried deep down and can't be erased, but... It also includes asexual and aromantic, and it's been cemented so hard from so early with such self-affirmation that later down the line, it saved me from a lot of stuff. I never had to force myself into a romantic or sexual relationship because I was undoubtably aroace – and people saw me as an outsider and an eyesore anyway. I spent years of being scared to go to school or out in the street every day, but later down the line, somehow, I feel it saved me from doing so many things I wouldn't have wanted to do.

...Bleh, sorry, didn't mean to turn this into me-me-me crap when you had the courage and sincerity of not only showing your experience, but finding the strength to show more love, understanding and support than a lot of people probably cared to give you for so long, despite all the pain you felt for so long. I guess I just wanna say... This take is definitely inspiring, so thank you on behalf of myself and others I'm sure, but also... I hope that, for yourself, you're also managing to own what you lived through in a way that allowed you to affirm yourself more strongly (it sounds like you are, I hope it IS the case), and most importantly, I hope you're in a much better place in your life now and you'll never have to return to that level of loneliness again.

[genderqueerdykes]

In a weird way, it feels like this is the only blog I can ask this and know that I'll get a 100% honest answer to my question, without having to worry about reading subtext. (Thank you for that) you've mentioned you don't want man hating lesbians here (valid) and if that applies here I'll back off 100% but like.

What if I specifically hate Cishet men. What if I don't take issue with queer men at all, just the cishets? Geunine question, just in case, because I know this could read as like trolling or something, and I do understand that basic language dictates yes it'd apply but I'm stupid & not sure, and I know that even if it's a harsh or brutal reply, you'll still give it to me straight. (Thank you for that too, my autistic ass struggles with subtext a lot.)

While I have reasons for feeling the way I do, I'm not sure they matter in this context. And that's okay.

i'm glad that you want to have a genuine conversation about it, i really appreciate that! the only way to learn and figure things out is to ask questions

at the end of the day, this behavior still affects queer men. cishet men can be queer- they can be intersex, aromantic, asexual, genderqueer, gender non conforming, drag artists... "cishet man" does not inherently mean someone who is not queer. there are many ways to be queer outside of being gay, bisexual, and/or trans. and even then, this behavior gets dangerous fast because strangers you perceive to be cishet men very well can be anything but that. someone you clock to be a cishet man may be a closeted trans girl, a trans man, a non binary person, a butch lesbian, and so on. you treating that person like they're an inherent danger causes a whole host of issues

this attitude is also why trans men, trans women, and non binary people are being forcefully removed from queer communities. if a queer person reads or passes as a "cishet man," they are treated with hostility and asked to leave in a lot of cases. we cannot allow the concept of manhood and perceived manhood to be viewed as something to be avoided and cast out, because it affects so much more than just cishet men. this attitude affects a LOT of closeted and non-passing trans women. honestly, that's who this hurts the most. it hurts trans men and enbies, but it really hurts trans women. it creates a standard where they have to overperform femininity and womanhood in order to be seen as "safe", and it's not okay.

projecting your issues with a small handful of people on to an entire group does not help. you have not been harmed by the concept of cishet men- you have been harmed by specific cishet men. in permanently labeling cishet men as bad people, this creates an ultimatum where they can never improve. hating them by virtue of them being cishet men creates a standard that cishet men will ALWAYS be terrible, and that they can't improve or learn. this creates an environment where no one challenges these behaviors and it makes the cycle even more toxic and abusive

it's okay to not want to spend time with cishet men, but saying that you hate all cishet men really isn't a good look. it's not the way to go about living a happy life. assuming that every single cishet man on this planet will hurt you or be a bad person strictly by virtue of being a cishet man is exactly what cishets do to us. this is how queerphobic cishet people look at trans women. there's no reason to do it back. we have to learn not to stereotype entire groups of people, no matter who they are

the concept of cishet men has never hurt you, and it never will. cishet men are not your enemy- patriarchy is. not every single cishet man benefits from patriarchy, either. intersex men, men of color, gender non conforming men, ace men and aro men are treated like absolute shit for not conforming to the toxic masculinity that patriarchy pushes. patriarchy also harms men- we must stand alongside men who are being chewed up and spat out by this machine. cishet men are not inherently bad people- we are grooming boys and men to be hostile, emotionally closed off, and violent. this is not an inherent trait of cishet men, but rather a societal issue

i hope that makes sense! in general it just really sucks to stereotype an entire group of people. it doesn't help anyone. the concept of cishet manhood hasn't hurt you and it never will. cishet men can still be allies. i've had lots of cishet male friends who weren't transphobic or even homophobic. the first person in my irl life to switch to using my proper pronouns at the time was a cishet man. he never screwed up my pronouns once, he never questioned my gender identity. cishet man does not mean inherently violent, dangerous, and evil. the more we teach men that they don't have to be this way, the more they will follow.

hope that helps! take care!

[queerlyvictorian]

I'm really not trying wade into discourse when I don't know how deep it is, but some things I'm thinking I want us to consider when it comes to Francesca. They are things that I take for granted, as someone who's dissected my bisexuality to hell and back.

One person is capable of different types of love (romantic and sexual) for different people. Having one type of attraction for a new person does not automatically invalidate any feelings you genuinely had for an old person.

I will grant that Francesca is probably not the nuanced ace- or aro-spec rep a lot of us were hoping for. But as I've seen some people say, as a bi person, her story makes total sense.

I love John, and I believe that Francesca loves him. They've kissed like once, and for a lot of bi people, attraction to some people only builds the more physical intimacy you have with them. And then the same person could have someone that they're immediately physically attracted to, apropos of nothing but seeing them. (See: responsive vs. spontaneous desire).

Francesca might have fumbled over her words, but I don't think Michaela was a case of love at first sight. I think Francesca is bi, and her brain malfunctioned when she saw a cute girl. Checks out. John is a love that is formed from deep friendship, a genuine life partner and loving companion. Michaela has the makings of a love that is totally different from John, but one that is no more or less honest and real and true.

I'm not a book reader, but I have rewatched every Julia Cudney video about Bridgerton S1 many, many times. My understanding is that Francesca's story is unique among the books for proving that you can have multiple loves, and that every time you fall in love, it's going to feel at least a little different than it did the last time.

Francesca says herself that she's finding out who she is. She's questioning. So let's let her do that??

... Please?

[sandpapersnowman]

actually I will say it. poly is not inherently lgbt+ and I'm tired of cis het women with two cis het boyfriends acting like explaining this at work is the equivalent of outing her as a lesbian and people nodding and clapping and calling her so brave

edit: I made this post while trying to express my frustration with a friend reblogging a post about someone who asks 'which one?' when a coworker mentions her boyfriend so she has to explain she has more than one to their boss, and someone reblogging it saying that that's as bad as if she had said 'partner' and they made her clarify she has a girlfriend/is a lesbian to their boss

I don't think these two scenarios can be equated and, more personally, I don't think poly counts as lgbt+, because you can be cis het non-aro non-ace and be poly. I feel that being poly, as in choosing to date multiple people, is not automatically equivalent to having a gender/sex/romantic orientation that goes against the default/norm

so I suppose whether poly people can call themselves queer is a different question than if they can call themselves lgbt+ and I feel differently about both terms. I'm not going to reach out and STOP someone cis het non-aro non-ace poly who is calling themselves queer, but I would definitely want them to think twice about like if they're considering that lgbt+

[web-novel-polls]

I know it's been, like, over half a year, and I probably shouldn't be concerned with it anymore, but I think what bugs me so badly about people being so self-righteous about Jiang Cheng "being homophobic" in the Aroace Spec Character Tournament is that directly correlates to actual experiences and interactions I see within the LGBTQIA+ community. It's so close to the fear and shame that leads to the question of, "how much of comfortability and well-being do I have to give up to live within an amatonormative world? At what point do I speak up about my own repulsion? Do I ever?Why am I the always the one who has to change?"

I can't help but come back to that AITA about an aro and/or ace GSA member who was shamed and called homophobic by what should be their own community for the simple crime of looking away from PDA. Their club advisor who acted like they were the problem because it's "supposed to be a safe space for the other kids" but not really answering whether it's also supposed to be a safe space for the submitter. How aroace people are "included" until they're uncomfortable or don't want to talk about sex or romance. How sex and romance repulsed aroaces are never allowed to show repulsion, or they're prudes, homophobic, ruining the fun. Why is someone being uneasy something THEY have to apologize for? Why is it an attack, if not to protect the amatonormative idea that anyone who is personally unsatisfied, uncomfortable, rejecting of love and sex is somehow lesser or hostile to love and sex itself? How aroace are we allowed to be before we become "problematic"?

[I'm aware this is an emotional reaction for this specific instance. Don't be weird. Don't be a dick. Don't be aroace-phobic. Do be gay and aro and ace and trans and-]

[aromanticmina]

master-list of arospec labels and microlabels

I like collecting knowledge of a lot of queer labels,arospec ones being no exception,so I'm doing a big post with all the ones I know, for fun and because it could be helpful for questioning folks out there!

all under the cut!

Aromantic: someone who experiences little to no romantic attraction, experiences it very rarely/vaguely, or otherwise has a significantly different/complicated experience with romantic attraction than most (alloromantic) people. It is a spectrum and anyone on it can simply call themselves aro if they want.

Greyromantic: someone who experiences (or has experienced) romantic attraction, but vaguely and/or rarely.

Demiromantic: someone who experiences romantic attraction only in the specific circumstance that they're really close with that person (or people), they do not experience "love at first sight."

Frayromantic: the opposite of demiromantic, someone who only experiences romantic attraction towards someone they're not close with, and if they ever get to know that person (or people) better,the attraction eventually fades.

Lithromantic: someone who can experience romantic attraction,but if that attraction is ever reciprocated, then the feeling abruptly (or slowly) stops.

Aroflux: someone whose romantic attraction can fluctuate, and is never really static, meaning their (romantic) feelings for someone may change every now and then, fading and intensifying over time.

Cupioromantic: someone who doesn't experience romantic relationship, but wants or has a romantic relationship.

Aegoromantic: someone who doesn't experience romantic attraction,but likes things that are "romantic" (movies,books,aesthetics,etc)

Non-sam aro: An aromantic person who doesn't use the split attraction model, they are "just aro"

AlloAro: an aromantic person who experiences sexual attraction.

Aroace/Arose: an aromantic person who is also asexual/in the ace spectrum.

Apothiromantic: someone who doesn't experience romantic attraction and is repulsed by romantic things and/or acts.

Quoiromantic: someone who doesn't understand what romantic attraction is,doesn't think the term "romantic attraction" is applicable to their experiences at all,or someone who doesn't think defining whether or not they experience romantic attraction is useful or important for them.

Bellusromantic: someone who doesn't experience romantic attraction but enjoys things that are typically seen as romantic acts (kissing,cuddling,etc)

Arospike: someone who usually doesn't experience romantic attraction, but occasionally experiences a sudden rise of attraction, before it eventually fades again.

Nebularomantic: someone who is aromantic because of their neurodivergency or their neurodivergency plays a big role in how they experience their aromanticism.

Reciproromantic: someone who doesn't experience romantic attraction unless the person falls in love with them first.

Alicoromantic: someone who knows they're on the aromantic spectrum but doesn't think any other label fits their experience.

Orchidromantic: the opposite of cupioromantic, someone who experiences romantic attraction but doesn't want a romantic relationship.

Myrromantic: someone who identifies with multiple aromantic spectrum labels at the same time.

Uniromantic: someone who only experiences romantic attraction to one (1) person for a long period of time, and this attraction is never felt for anyone else.

Platoniromantic: someone who can't distinguish between romantic and platonic attraction, therefore can't really say if what they're feeling for someone is romantic or platonic.

Caedromantic: someone who is aromantic because of their trauma.

Idemromantic: someone who doesn't experience romantic and platonic attraction differently, but can distinguish between their "platonic" and "romantic" relationships based on external factors.

Romo aro: an aromantic person whose attraction,experiences,or feeling may be considered romantic in some sort of way.

Loveless aro: an aromantic person who doesn't label any of their feelings as "love", sometimes because the word "love" is usually used to indicate romance and they want to avoid that, because the word doesn't have any meaning to them,as an act of rebellion against amatonormativity,etc.

Lovequeer aro: an aromantic person who chooses to center other types of love who are often seen as "less" than romantic love and/or their unique personal experience with these other types of love.