#tldr aromantic rights!!!

[captainschaos]

still catching up with @mcyt-aro-week ! hoping to double up tomorrow to be back on schedule <3 day 2 - loveless / au

some aro tangtho writing from an old 3l/traffic au of mine ^_^ I will note that tango is referred to as a he/it phoenix, etho a he/she fae !

words: 681

-/-/-

Tango was angry at a lot of people, but he wasn't angry at Etho. For a simple reason, because at least it'd been able to get back at the fae for the firing range. But for more complicated reasons, too. Etho was trustworthy, is all. When Tango had been unfairly shoved into the line of fire, Etho'd had the decency to look sorry, at least. And when the phoenix's arrow had been able to find her heart, something was forgiven in that moment. But the others?

Tango was wondering how long it'd be until it found itself in the Crastle's line of fire again, but by his own choice.

It couldn't leave Etho though. It wouldn't. And other people might make whatever conclusions they wanted about that, but it couldn't be explained away in other people's words. They just trusted each other. They were on the fringes of things, but they were there together, they understood. The fae understood the phoenix's fires, and Tango trusted him with it.

At the moment, Tango was standing alone in its solitary, hidden base. Secret, except for Etho. It made it feel less lonely. It was easy, knowing he and Etho were the same in this kind of thing, in solitude and in easy expectations. Never betray the other. Never ask unnecessary questions. So often, they would only have to look at each other to know what the next course of action was. It was so easy.

So if Etho trusted the king, well... Tango knew Etho would never force it into the Army. But maybe the phoenix wanted to join the fae.

---

"Are you sure about him, Etho?"

Their postures were casual, but the fae knew better than to slip around the Red King.

"I'm positive Ren."

Martyn shifted with a frown nearby, but neither Ren nor Etho paid attention. This was between them, and really wasn't a situation where Etho would use all the "highness"s and "your majesty"s. It wasn't her style, anyway. And it was important to stay consistent.

The dog-king crossed his arms and gazed off into the distance, in thought, as he mumbled. "The phoenix would be a powerful ally indeed..."

"We can trust it. Tango's wanting a change anyway, he and Bdubs are..." Etho faltered, but quickly picked it back up. "There's an opportunity, if we let it in now and don't leave him high and dry."

Ren considered, and then chuckled. "You and the firebird a thing or something?"

Etho's stomach pinched, just a bit. Ah.

"Er, well not--"

"Yeah, you're real eager to trust that guy!" Martyn chimed in from his leaning against the wall. "Got a crush, Etho?"

"No, ah, I don't do that. Neither of us do that, we just--" Etho reached back and rubbed the back of her neck, his eyes flicking down to the floor to a moment. "We're not the romance types, I'll put it that way. It's just..."

What is it? He and Tango, they weren't easy to describe. They weren't romantic, and never would be, and weren't really anything else in particular either. After romance people were likely to assume queerplatonics like Bdubs and Cleo, but they weren't like that either. There was something other than friendships that were simple though, it just... evaded description. Etho knew Tango. Tango knew Etho. That was all.

"I trust him. I'm willing to put my head on the line for it, it's a good ally. We should invite it to the Red Army."

The king eyed the fae for a long moment, then nodded understandingly. Decisively.

"Then offer him a banner, Sir Etho. The phoenix shall fly red!"

Under the mask, Etho grinned in a way he knew would only get more prodding from the highly romantic king and hand if they could see. But they couldn't, and who could blame her for being excited? The fae wanted the phoenix to join. Etho would never force Tango to join the Army, but he knew it was too enticing to have the two of them together again.

Free, unkempt and indescribable, and fighting side-by-side.

[mossy-aro]

ultimately i think my insistence on aro positivity honestly is as much a political stance as a personal one.

when i say aro positivity is crucial and that i dislike doomer-ist posts that express sentiments like 'I hate being aro so much I wish I was dead instead’ it's not because I don’t think there can and should be a space for negativity and acknowledging self-hate, or the many ways being aromantic can really suck sometimes. i find that to be very important!

that being said. there is smth here about how self-hate posts are sometimes just arophobia that we inflict on ourselves. and when we put that out into the ether it (intentionally or not) can become arophobia that we inflict on other members of the community. i think there absolutely needs to be a place for negativity and the expression of anger and frustration and self loathing even - these are all good things to talk about because these are things that we experience. that being said, it can also be genuinely upsetting and triggering to people to have what is essentially arophobia shown to them and then have that be validated by other aspec people. your personal thoughts can affect your wider community on a level you may not anticipate. and i understand it i truly do! it took me so long to be able to recover from accepting being aroace - it threw my entire world off kilter and made me question everything about my place in the world.

but my insistence on aro joy and positivity is because ultimately i do believe that building is at the core essence of it all. that ultimately discussions and the purpose of community should be about construction, not destruction. and this is both a personal and a political stance. talking about how much you hate yourself and cultivating online discussions/spaces where negativity about aspec identity is the main and only theme is destructive - if that’s where we let the conversation end. these thoughts can and should be used as a vehicle to look for a path forward!

joy and positivity create a space where the focus can become on forging a path forward, on construction, on community building instead of tearing ourselves and others down with negative thoughts. it’s not productive or healthy when it stops at a place of negativity - it becomes actively destructive to the essence of community.

and i do think that this is especially poignant considering the fact that being any kind of queer, but especially aromantic (and/or asexual) means forging a path for yourself and making your own happiness where there is no obvious way forward. our communities exist mostly online (right now, anyway), there is little recognition of our existence in the real world, the effects of amatonormativity are both pervasive and actively dehumanising, and there are legal, economic and social structures in place actively making our lives more difficult. yes that all sucks! it’s good to acknowledge that. we need to in order to change it. but more importantly, that’s not the end. we are still here and our happiness, our future is for us to determine. even if we can’t change the laws or society, loving yourself and understanding aromanticism as a political identity (as well as personal), as a radical worldview, and as a protest against amatonormativity is essential for both community and personal well being. the personal is political.

tldr. i guess my point is that as a community, we should focus on building, improving, and nurturing ourselves and each other (construction) as opposed to destruction. we should recognise aromanticism and asexuality as political identities as well as personal ones and rely on community and self-love in the absence of anything else as a form of protest and political power. destruction (the recognition of everything that is wrong) is essential as a starting point - but where do we go from there? we rebuild.

[aroallo-corvid]

Aroallo is not an "adult" sexuality

[plain text: Aroallo is not an "adult" sexuality]

I am aromantic and allosexual. I am also (as of writing this) a minor. TLDR at the end because I rambled on a bit.

There's a view in society that sexuality and sex are topics that are entirely irrelevant to children and should not be discussed around/with children because it is inappropriate/predatory. And to an extent, there is a point to that, and any discussions of sex and sexuality should be age-appropriate (e.g. an eleven year old would not receive the same sex ed as a sixteen year old because there is a vast difference in experience)

However, thinking like this leads to teenagers not being given proper sex education because they are "too young", which is wildly ignorant of the fact that a decent proportion of teenagers older than sixteen are sexually active. I live in the UK where the age of consent is 16, and I know plenty of people who were in relationships aged 14/15 were having sex. (Whether they weer mature enough to is another matter, but it's important to acknowledge that it does happen so there is no point ignoring this).

This rhetoric also leads to the belief that teens (and younger kids) shouldn't be coming out as gay/lesbian/bisexual/asexual/aromantic/etc. because they are too young to be thinking about sexuality and sexual attractiveness, which just.... isn't true. Many young people have crushes, and as the majority of people are allosexual, this does often involve sexual attraction as people mature through puberty.

Within the queer community, people have said that it is perfectly fine and normal and common for teenagers to come out as gay, lesbian, bisexual, asexual - Because if a teen can be straight, they can also be queer. These arguments are all set out beautifully and the points well made.

Yet.

Some people exclude aroallo people from that. They say that teens can be asexual, because they can know they aren't experience sexual attraction like their peers, and teens can be aromantic as well as asexual because they can realise they also aren't experiencing romantic attraction. But when a teenager says they are on the aromantic spectrum but still allosexual, often the same people who defend teens' rights to be (for example) bisexual turn around and say "you're too young for that".

Why?

Honestly, it comes down to sex-negative views that sex is inherently impure/disgusting, and of course children are the perfect example of purity and innocence, so they shouldn't be thinking about such "dirty" topics.

Of course a teenager can be asexual, that distances them from icky gross sex & means they would likely to be only engaging in chaste, pure, wonderful romance. Of course a teenager can be aroace, that makes them little cinnamon infantile babies, safe from all sexuality. (/sarcasm) (Also completely ignores the existence of sex-favourable aces and aroaces)

It comes off as very hypocritical though, because a teenager identifying as bisexual but not aromantic (so biromantic, but that distinction isn't typically made) is seen as acceptable, when they are expressing the same sexual desires as a teenager who is bisexual and aromantic. The only difference is that the first teenagers' sexuality is seen to be "balanced out" by the presence of nice wholesome romance.

tldr: if teenagers can identify as bisexual/gay/lesbian/pansexual/etc. whilst being alloromantic, it is hypocritical to say a teenager cannot identify as one of the above sexualities whilst being aromantic, because romance is not inherently more pure than sex and sex is not inherently impure.

[icedrawssomestuff]

Hi hello I (an aroace) have been thinking about aromantic representation (or lack there of) in media and fanfiction and all the things I wish I could see out of what little we have so here goes.

I want to see the wider spectrum, and the fact that it's a spectrum in the first place. I want to see both the struggles and joys of aromantic. I want to see relationships that aren't bound to the societal norms of platonic and romantic relationships

I want to see characters who struggle to tell the difference between platonic and romantic attraction.

I want to see them be comfortable and happy being aro and having close friends.

Lets have characters who do experience romantic attraction, but have no desire to be in a romantic relationship, and have that be okay.

Lets have the reverse, where characters don't experience romantic attraction but do want to be in a romantic relationship.

Lets have characters who's experience of romantic attraction fluctuates.

I want to see aro/allo and aro/aro and aro/ace stuff

I want to see stories of family and friends struggling to understand non traditional or romantic partnerships, and sometimes they come around and sometimes they don't, but you are never alone because your partner and your friends and your family who care are there for you

There should be stories about the struggle of the societal expectation/normalization of putting romantic partners over friendships, and the people who get left behind because of that

There should be stories of people who are in a romantic relationship, and realize that one or both of them is aro, but love their partner in a platonic sense or Secret Third Way and who work through it together

Let there be cute little domestic slice of life fics about platonic life partners or qprs

Let QPR representation be different in every iteration, it's a queer relationship that isn't defined by anything other than the people in it. Let them resemble platonic relationships or romantic relationships or both or neither

Give me characters who love their person deeply and violently and intrinsically but it's a little to the left of platonic and a little to the right of romantic

Give me characters who are greyromantic and demiromantic and aroflux (ect.) navigating the struggles and highs and lows of being those identites

Give me relationships that are a mix of platonic and romantic but not necessarily either one

Give me platonic life partners who love each other and live their lives together

Give me non-traditional relationships in general TLDR; there are so many options for representation of aromantistim and non traditional relationships and I want to see them all

The way I crave more aromantic tropes will never be satiated, these were just off the top of my head while word-vomiting, there are so many more ways to do this kind of representation, so don't be afraid to add on your own thoughts in the reblogs and comments! I just wanted to share some of the silly little thoughts rattling around in my skull. Hell I might come back with more in a week, who knows lol

[strawberryradiodemon]

Even if you do add asexual, ace or aromantic to the search there's gonna be those "no fictional thing should ever have to present anything accurately or respectfully ever" people like "as an asexual you have my permission to do whatever you want with alastor's asexuality!" like... who tf asked them? they have an agenda they're trying to push, they do not speak for the ace community as a whole 🙄

Yeahh, even with the aro and / or ace tags we're not entirely safe unfortunately.

Such things do annoy me, I'm not gonna lie. I can understand that romance positive aros, sex positive aces or those who still have sex / are in relationships/ etc use the "aro/ace people can still date / have sex" or remind people that it's a spectrum and some still feel these type of attraction because yes, that's true.

But what annoys me is that saying that to people annoyed about the constant sexualisation/ shipping of Alastor is basically siding with the non aroace spectrum people using that "aroace people can still feel that/ do these things!" who saw that and ran with it purely to be able to continue with what they want to do.

Yes, asexuality and aromanticism are spectrums. Yes, some feel the attraction. Yes, some don't but still engage in these activities. And if you're on the aroace spectrum and it's your case obviously I'm not going to shame you for putting alastor in such scenarii because you're using a character like you to relate, and still acknowledging his aroace identity. The problem is that most people putting him in these situations totally disregard his aroaceness. And when as an aroace (spectrum) person, you say "people can still ship him, I do! Aroace people can feel these things or do them!"... You're basically enabling their erasure of his identity. Deep down you're right, but non aroace people don't care about that, and don't do these things the same way you do.

That's why, to non aroace people shipping alastor, I will remind them that he's aroace. And clearly not on the part of the spectrum where he still feels those things, nor is he interested in pursuing them.

And to the people on the aroace spectrum, I will just say, please, don't mistaken their words for a reel need to showcase the variety of our identity, because most of the time that's not what they want. You don't forget his aroaceness in the way your ship him, they do. Ship him all you want, because I know your heart is in the right place. But please don't defend the others.

As a loveless aroace, it pains me to see him constantly shipped and sexualised by everyone (even though that's clearly not what he'd want), and these things being defended.

I thought I had found a character I could relate to, that I could search stuff about him peacefully without seeing all kind of romantic and sexual stuff. I've been proven wrong, and it hurts. And the excuse they use hurt even more, because it feels like we're only palatable or interesting if we can still feel these attractions sometimes or engage in those things. As if alastor being a loveless aroace is a disappointment, that they *need* to ship him to be satisfied, for him to be enough.

Sorry for the rant, I definitely repeated myself, but I wanted to take the opportunity this ask gave me to give a bit of my opinion on this.

Tldr: I have no problem with aroace spectrum shipping him because I know they keep his aroaceness in mind. I have, however, a problem with non aroace spectrum people doing that because they erase his aroace identity completely AND use the diversity of it as an excuse to continue doing so. And it pains me to see fellow aroace people defending that, because I feel like they don't realise how those people ship him.

[zetathedraconequus]

Sup everypony I got a question.

What clarifies as like romantic love/attraction.

I understand sexual attraction. You look at someone and your brain does monkey neuron activation.

Romantic attraction tho? Like do you do look at someone and think "Ah yes I want to take them on a candlelit dinner in the finest of olive gardens and then give them a chocolate rose." Because like...I'll do that anyways just for my friends. You want to wear a dress and feel like a princess? Sure we can do that.

Like I got a partner right? They're aroace so we never really done romantic shit but what exactly is romantic shit? I'll tell my friends I love them. Tell my dog I love them. A friend asked If we could date I said "sure" but I mean I don't feel/or do anything different.

Should clarify I identify as fictosexual here. All my sexual attraction is just towards 1 guy. But does this mean I'm also aromantic towards like humans?

Like I've had crushes? Like I think someone is pretty/hot/cute but again that's going back to ficto. I Want to kiss my homies but not like sexually.

TLDR: what does romantic attraction feel like. What are romantic things. Why is it romantic. Would this make me aromantic.

[stelliestell]

Over the years (pretty much since middle school), I've been questioning if I was asexual/aromantic. I'm pretty sure I one time said aloud "maybe I'm asexual?" or something along those lines only for my mom to outright say i wasn't. I haven't really told people I'm aromantic for multiple reasons, but one of them is that I don't really want to come out. I don't want to be wrong about what I am, y'know? Not that people CAN'T be wrong, I just have these weird standards for myself. I think people know, even my parents, but I've never said the words "I'm aromantic" to them. They know I have a pride flag, they've asked what the flag and pins I have mean and I've answered honestly, hell, even my mom one time showed me an agender and aromantic pride pin and said "you're one of these, right?", but I've never said "I'm aromantic". At this point, I don't even feel like I need to. I'm now nearly sure that I'm asexual too, but I'm not sure. Yes, I've been questioning being both aromantic and asexual for like 7 years, but I'm still not 100% sure. Makes perfect sense, I know. Anyway, I think I'm the most sure I've ever been in my life. And honestly? The acceptance of those terms make me feel pretty content. It's like it answered the questions in my head, even if I still question if I really am aroace. I might embrace the asexual term now too. I only started saying I was aromantic because I figured nothing wrong would come from it, and I think I'm finally ready to call myself aroace. I'm still not 100% sure if this is what I really am, but I'm willing to accept any potential changes that may come in the future.

TLDR: I'm calling myself aroace now. Yeah.

[spacelazarwolf]

prompted by a reply on another post, abt the aromantic manifesto. the more i think about it, the more it seems like the authors' definition of "the queer community" and "the queer rights movement" is not in line with the actually queer community and queer rights movement. it seems like they are using "queer" as a stand-in for "all lgb cis people" which is just definitionally not what the queer community is. the queer liberation movement goes back decades and has always been championed by trans people, particularly trans people of color. so for the authors to assert things like "the queer rights movement prioritizes gay marriage over everything else" seems to betray a lack of experience and knowledge about the actual queer community and the actual queer rights movement. also the only time trans people were really mentioned was to paint cis (allo) lgb people as overwhelmingly transphobic (which is a whole other can of worms.)

and like. on one hand i think there is an issue with marriage equality for cis gay people being considered Thee Most Important Thing by mainstream lgbt advocacy groups (though i really need younger people to think about why people older than us considered it to be so important - hint: it has to do with surviving the aids crisis). but also i feel like responding "yes, but" legitimizes their assertion that their uninformed and incorrect definition of the "queer community" and the "queer rights movement." and then we just get stuck in this feedback loop of "well y'all only care about gay marriage" "who is y'all" "you know. queers" "lgbt advocacy groups?" "yeah. queers." "actually this is what the queer liberation movement is about." "yeah but these groups only advocate for marriage equality." "right but those are lgbt advocacy groups, not queer liberation groups." "yeah. queers."

and then even outside of that is the whole point of why i started this ramble in the first place, which is: why does this manifesto structure queerness only around lgb identities? why does it not include transness? does this framework assert that transness is not inherently queer? i think it does, which is another point against them actually understanding what the queer community and queer liberation movement is. so by asserting that the "queer community" is overwhelmingly transphobic, only cares about marriage equality, and does not inherently include transness, you are essentially giving ownership of queerness to cis people, which only seeks to reinforce the hierarchies in queer spaces the manifesto claims to condemn.

so yeah like tldr i think this manifesto sucked for all the reasons i already talked abt in the other post, but also because it tries to assert its fundamental misunderstanding of what and who the queer community is as True Fact, and then uses that misconception to be homophobic. it's just very weird and i think the people who wrote it need to talk to more trans ppl.

[chiffonperiwinkle]

My Story with Amatonormativity

I personally know an individual who might just embody humanity’s brilliance itself. He is kind, insightful, enlightening, proactive, and passionate. He doesn’t hesitate to show the world what they love and their love and care for others. Literally when I first met him he was like “no one needs to bottle up their feelings and I’m here to listen” and he showed everyone smth about a scientific study on the effects of emotional suppression or smth. He had been humorous and extremely altruistic to me and it just happens that we share similar interests. I guess its only natural that I am beyond grateful for this person (as someone who's through years of bullying trauma and grew up in a family that I couldn't show negative emotions in) right?

But amatonormativity makes people think no. He's vastly different from me physically(diff gender I present fem he presents masc), even though we often dress similarly because we both love that timeless style. (we love to slay cook and eat and dont y'all deny that) There’s also one interesting person lets call him A who keeps insulting me for showing my gratitude and platonic affection to him as well as labeling the individual as a weirdo. I can't imagine what A’s reaction would be like if he knows that we matched for a day. He'd go crazy be like “omg are you guys dating? Couples matching?” eugh no. since when is matching for romantic couples? like SHUT THE FUCK UP. LITERALLY GO FCK YOURSELF. I tried to explain what being aromantic is like and what platonic love is and just how similar I am to the individual and he refuses to listen and keeps berating me for it. Like fuck you, as if I care.

There's no doubt that the other person is having fun as well. They enjoy my company, we constantly care for and help each other whenever we can. We show mutuality. He trusts me and I trust him, and we just love sharing each other about the characters we make, the franchises we love, the life lessons and experiences we gain that are invaluable. He knows me well and I know him well. We are literally kindred spirits just being silly and having fun together. There is literally NOTHING romantic between us. And bc of amatonormativity, we are subjected to judgment, weird looks, baseless assumptions and more even if we don't experience it now.

It saddens me that people fail to understand the nuances behind my genuine care, gratitude and platonic affection towards the individual. Or maybe there wasn't any nuance—its simply just companionship, simple, pure love between people who know each other. Amatonormativity complicates that. It labels simple prosocial behaviors like helping and compliments as “hidden romantic love” “crush” and “more than friends/acquaintances”. Like no. There's more to humanity than just romance. Amatonormativity is undermining the tapestry of experiences of being human. How dare it make people assume and reduce my gratitude and platonic connection to another person as just romance and subject us to judgments. Amatonormativity taints our intentions and interactions towards others and I'm SO done with it.

Thanks for reading my yapping.

tldr: platonically connected with an altruistic and loving individual who's of different gender and physical traits from me, get called “romantic” despite the obvious signs that we just have many similarities and i see them as a kindred spirit who i want to reciprocate the love they gave to everyone. how amatonormativity complicates and undermines the platonic human experience.

ps: to the individual if you see this and somehow figure out who i am: i hope you understand my intentions now. I feel like the luckiest person in the world by meeting you and I feel so connected to you as if we are soul twins. I hope you'd let me declare each other as formally best friends when the time is right.

[marudeinusa]

@uraynuke I am glad to see you bring this book up, because it's the very book I read excerpts from two days ago, and since I wanted to reply to you, I picked up where I left and finished it.

I really did approach it with the best of intentions - I was especially glad to see prof. Brake bring up gender and race right at the beginning of her study, for I truly held hope that the many amatonormativity preachers on tumblr may have simply misread the point of the concept which Brake may have envisioned the same way I did - as an intersection of preexisting axes of power. However, I found myself severely disappointed the moment I ran into this segment

I can see that Brake is, at the very least through reading, aware of patriarchal, racial amd colonial dynamics as well as statistics on LGBT discrimination. However, she insists on presenting the discrimination of non-partnering (and non-monogamous people, which is a separate can of worms but I began to find the amount of times she brings polyamory and urban tribes up tedious) individuals as an entity separate from misogyny, racism and classism and so on. The like race class and sex is incredibly jarring that she fails to see her precious "amatonormativity" where it rightfully stands within the causality of oppression. I found myself yawning as she went on for dozens of paragraphs explaining that marriage is a faulty, falsely celebrated and highly mystified institution that holds no inherent value - we know this! It becomes incredibly apparent here that Brake is a self-identified political liberal. Any leftist, no matter how mild, is clearly aware that marriage is as it is, and was essentially established in order to be so; a way to control women, a way to curry favor and wealth, a tool of control. It retains today many of the insidious characteristics it held at its conception. Brake does mention that there existed and still do exist non-white societies that viewed partnering vastly differently from the western lens, but in the typical way of a liberal philosopher she does not pause to consider that this is tied to how different societies perceived women, and the amount of colonial power they held. She does not pause to confess that the form of marriage prevalent in the world today is a white christian's marriage - naturally dyed in ugly patriarchal, racist, capitalist colors. She continues to write as though society's insistence on exclusive romantic coupling exists in a near-vacuum, even though she admits it does not. I essentially agree that marriage ought to be demoralized, deconstructed and potentially reconstructed. However, I don't particularly intend to fight for its reconstruction for the sake of throuples, urban tribes, asexuals and aromantics. I wish for its reconstruction to be centered primarily on the autonomy of women (because they continue to disproportionately suffer marital abuse), gay, bisexual and transgender people, people of color and especially Black people, mentally and physically disabled people (who still largely cannot afford to marry). When this is established, I assure you that one half of aromantics' and polyamorous people's issues will have already been alleviated, and should those people contribute to the fight of our society's most oppressed, they will surely have a voice in building a new model of partnering.

TLDR, a well-intentioned but very frivolous book. I find Brake to be a very moderate liberal who does not particularly look farther than her own discomfort...

I will reply to you in the same vein you did to me: though I didn't glean much, this was a fun read! Thank you.

[our-arospec-experience]

Tw I think there's a hint of aphobia somewhere down this ask

But tldr :Hello arospec gang. I found specific orientations within the aro spectrum and they are on point. I like to use multiple of them, is that normal or okay?

Lo and behold below is the unabridged version:

Anyways. I, on the most unfortunate of fates, realized I was aromantic right after I got into a romantic relationship. It's very recent, but the identity clicked with me almost instantly. The more I read and dig about it, the more I find myself thinking, wow, this is so me.

Eventually, after doing more digging I came across different orientations under the wide range of the arospectrum. And I relate with more than one of these.

The problem though is that when I did come across some sort of info graphic thingy that included the most flags in it, the comments (reddit) were kinda dismissive of these labels. Anyway some comments (and the comments are coming from aros and aces alike) are complaining about the micro labels being too specific and unnecessary. I think they're wrong because, for me, finding these specific orientations and learning how my experience isn't an isolated case is definitely a necessity. If not for these specific arospec orientations, I'd probably still think that I'm alone.

Anyways the question though, is that am I the only one who could relate to multiple of these arospec identities? Like I could specifically relate to, alloaro/aroallo, frayromantic, lithromantic. So that's three. And counting.

While I do identify as those, I still use the term aromantic as a catch-all term to explain myself to my friends (much like in a defensive fashion, because they think I'm monstrous for having limited romantic attraction). Then it dawned on me that I behaved just like the redditors who were roasting the specific aromantic orientations. So I'm rethinking my life decisions now and I guess I should, next time, use these terms even if most of my friends are proudly homophobic. Welcome to the brogrammer industry boys this place fucken sucks

Anyways sorry for the extremely looooonglonglong text thank you so much for your service

Ps the relationship that served as my aromantic awakening is a frozen dumpster fire. I literally can't do romance. Being affectionate with her under the friends label and role-playing as her favorite fictional men was way easier than when she admitted to having feelings for me instead of the fictional men. Like. Wait. That's illegal.

Of course you can use multiple microlabels!!! For example, I am aromantic, fictoromantic, and cupioromantic. It’s definitely normal and valid. microlabels are great for people who want to define how they feel more specifically, and don’t feel like the generic term quite fits them properly. I’m sorry to hear your relationship didn’t work out (unless you are happy about that, in which case, congratulations). Sometimes it’s best to ignore what other people think and just do what is right for you. remember you are valid, and no one should make you feel stupid for who you are :)

[localplaguenurse]

Okay I'm thinking about Neuvillette being ace again and like, hear me out.

Neuvillette not being interested in physical relationships, aside from when it's mating season for dragons. Even then, he doesn't want to partake in such activities because, well, that's just his instincts talking for him. He's not denying that he has sexual urges, and it's not even that he hates the idea of being intimate. It's just that the only time he has these urges is when his body just starts releasing the hormones that make him want to mate, and that's it. He's only ever truly in the mood a few times a year because that's just how his body works, and he's not the type of man to just use someone to find his own release. He can manage on his own.

Still, it's not as if he doesn't want connection. He's just not in any rush to find it. Humans and their emotions are complicated, so he'd rather not rush in before knowing what he's in for. He has a job to do, and the friends and family he's met along his journey give him enough love as is. Sure, romantic love sounds nice, but he's fine with the platonic and familial love he gets right now, and isn't that enough? Love is love, regardless of how it is presented or perceived.

Because Neuvillette struggles to understand people, he figures that's just him. It makes sense, seeing as he's not human, so naturally he doesn't crave things the same way humans do. Imagine his surprise, though, when he finds out that not only are there people who have the same feelings he does, but that there are enough people like him that they have words for them. Asexual, demisexual, graysexual, aromantic, just a plethora of phrases that can apply to how he feels, not to mention how these people express and experience these feelings. It's eye opening to him to say the least.

Tldr: it's my asexuality and I can project it on whichever fictional character I want to

[aro-culture-is]

Yo so I am confused. I can't tell if I'm aromantic or of I'm just terrified of other people. Like I love sex, big ole slut 10 out of 10, and my friendships are deep and expansive. But when someone wants to hold my hand or does I become physically nauseous. I've been like this since I was 17. I have had long term relationships where I was comfortable holding hands but that hasn't happened in 5 years. Non sexual affectionate touch makes me so uncomfortable and claustrophobic.

And in my past relationships where I did finally feel comfortable holding hands and cuddling, I have been cheated on, sa, given a sexual transmitted infection because my partner was cheating on me, promises never fulfilled, taken advantage of financially, ect.

How do I tell if I'm like this cause I don't trust people or because I'm aromantic? Do I need to heal more or is this not a changeable thing? How do people tell?

hi!

i think this is a fairly complex question, and the answer is going to be similarly complex. to start with, I'm glad that you are comfortable with your sexuality and know yourself so well! I am also so incredibly sorry that you have experienced the trauma of a bad relationship.

As far as your questions go: I think it's restrictive to phrase it as two options,

I am aromantic and not traumatized by other people

I am traumatized by other people and not aromantic.

I'd strongly encourage you to consider that it is not only possible, but entirely normal to be both aromantic and to have experienced trauma around other people, even to have become aromantic due to trauma, and that whether or not one "stops" being aromantic during trauma healing is generally a question as complex as the trauma itself.

I think the only way to know if trauma has influenced your orientation is to allow yourself the time and space to heal. If it is at all reasonable for you, find a therapist. The majority of individuals have had some level of traumatic histories, and it's really important to have a neutral 3rd party that can help you untangle your thoughts the way a therapist is trained to. If you find that you don't click with something about your therapist, practice articulating that to them. It's normal and expected that not every patient and therapist click, and you can absolutely ask to try something different, and failing that, transfer to a different individual.

Due to the complexity of trauma therapy, we can't offer you a simple answer, or a simple question to ask yourself. We grew up in an emotionally abusive family, and as we've learned to heal, we've become more and more certain in our aromantic identity. Others find themselves able to let others be closer, and may find themselves experiencing attraction in circumstances similar to or different from before their trauma. Others still will find themselves feeling stronger attraction than before their trauma, and may even accept that they may have repressed more attraction before the trauma they knew of. I can't tell you where you'll fall - only time, space, and patience will tell.

However it goes, I think it's valuable to enter therapy knowing it is normal to experience worries around trauma and its impacts on you, and it is likewise hard to admit that perhaps you've never really learned how to heal. Your therapist will likely ask your goal in therapy; don't worry about having a perfect answer. You can just as easily say "I am struggling with my identity due to past relationships, and I'd like to explore my identity without feeling so weighed down" as "Some thoughts have been weighing me down, and I don't know how to handle them. I'm hoping for help, and I don't know what that looks like yet." This isn't graded - this is just an initial chance to understand why you came in, and how you think.

the tldr really comes down to, "right now, you are probably aromantic and have trauma. With a therapist, you can work through that trauma and explore yourself without trauma weighing you down."

I hope this helps! this will be filed under both "am i aro" and "advice".

[vinewoodclassics]

do u have more to say on aro michael cuz i’ve ALSO considered this for him before it’s like ur reading my mind w these posts

me and you.. 🤞🏽 this made me smile evilly actually because i do in fact have more to say. it’s a little hard for me to coherently group my thoughts together though so walk with me here

this may be a sliight reach but my one of my main basis’ for it is that one conversation he has with franklin where he says that his marriage happened purely based off physical attraction, meanwhile it’s very clear after reuniting the family (and even after did somebody say yoga. that man was tweaking out without his family) that he does have feelings for amanda that aren’t sexual. they just aren’t your “typical” super strong romantic feelings that you see other people talking about

michael is a movie guy and bases most aspects of life off what he sees on the screen. and in every movie where there’s a love interest there’s always some big expression of love. yknow. butterflies, sparkles in your vision, intense longing and super lengthy speeches. now i don’t think michael is incapable of romantic attraction, i just personally believe that his version of it is a lot more muted than the type you see in movie couples. there are no sparkles in his vision, what the hell. and of course to him, that means the attraction isn’t there at all, because vinewood told him that that’s what love is supposed to be like and vinewood is always right

again very hard for me to word (so sorry. really hope this isn’t too confusing to read) but tldr i think he visibly expresses aromantic tendencies and whatnot, except it’s somewhat overshadowed (? if that’s the right word) by the fact that he’s the one expressing it, because he doesn’t know what those tendencies stem from. he loves his wife just not in a purely allosexual way and that makes him immensely conflicted because, again, it’s There. just not in the way he thinks it should be

[st-ivangeline]

EDIT: ACTIVE AGAIN

i’m going inactive on this account for awhile on here i’ll be deleting app off my phone, i’ve come to a place in my life where i don’t really feel like i have anything else to add to the conversation around being aromantic, i’m just really content at the moment with being aromantic and that’s expressing itself by not having much to say about it, i’ve tried branching out and talking about my BPD but i’m really in a place in my life where i’m the in the healthiest mindset i’ve ever been in in my whole life and while i relate related to the symptoms people talk about on here but i’m doing better right now, my meds are working atm and i’m just more at peace (which is crazy because i wouldn’t generally label my life as peaceful)

i guess the tldr is that i’m just in a really different place than i have been and it’s a good place and for me that expresses itself in not having much to talk about or add to my page, i’m not deleting my account at least right now, about i’ll be going inactive immediately

[plazmafields]

Alright, since the discourse has started, let me restate a section from my "Thoughts on Kerry" post a while ago so everyone knows where I stand on the debate:

Tldr at the end

"I do support the idea that Kerry should have been bisexual like in the source material. I absolutely get that bi erasure is a big problem, ESPECIALLY with male characters. However, I respect that in the game you can only romance him with a masc V; I'm not going to mod him to he bi, I'm not gonna ship him with women. I see it the same way I see Cullen from DAI: he is canonically bisexual, just not attracted to my male Inquisitor (in Kerry's case, fem V). Maybe Kerry had such a traumatic divorce from his ex-wife that women just kinda scare him right now. We can see high heels and bras and blush littering his house, so we can assume that at the very least women are still getting naked for some reason or another at his parties. Maybe he prefers men romantically, or maybe he's just not ready to date women again, and we as players should respect that just like we would a real person."

Adding to that, I'm not saying you can't ship Kerry with a femV, but I myself don't.

So let's talk about how attraction can work IRL: Bisexuality is NOT always a 50/50 split. I always just assumed this was the case with Kerry. We see women's clothes and underwear scattered around his house, and I took that to mean he was still having sex with women, just not interested in dating them. That could be due to his unresolved trauma from his divorce, or the unresolved trauma from never processing Johnny's death. Both of those things could make him more inclined toward men.

I feel like the romantic attraction angle is something most people have been overlooking thus far. Just like how there are asexual people who aren't aromantic, there are bisexual people who aren't biromantic. Even if he wanted to have sex with femV, he doesn't want to date women at the moment, for whatever personal reasons. At the same time, he seems to want something more than casual sex.

So, it stands to reason that if Kerry is sexually attracted to either gender, but only wants to date men at that time, and is looking to have sex with someone with the goal of forming a romantic connection, Kerry would only have sex with a man.

Kerry has been with women before, so I'm not saying he never wants to date women. What I'm saying is that DURING THE TIME FRAME THAT THE GAME TAKES PLACE Kerry doesn't want to date women. So, if femV met him before the time of Cyberpunk 2077, then yes they could reasonably end up together.

TLDR: It's not about IF Kerry is sexually attracted to women, we know canonically he is. It's about respecting that he's not looking to date a women romantically at the time of Cyberpunk 2077.