#yes aroace people can be in a relationship

[smolbeanie1221]

I’m aroace, I don’t experience sexual or romantic attraction at all, as best as I can tell. In a book about asexuality, Ace: What Asexuality Reveals about Desire, Society, and the Meaning of Sex, the author talks about how people who don’t experience sexual attraction have to explain that by trying to explain exactly what it is that they lack, and how can you explain something or be sure you don’t experience it if it’s something you lack? Anyways that’s partly what I mean when I said “as best as I can tell” because I honestly have no idea what sexual or romantic attraction actually feels like. I am almost certain I’ve never experienced sexual attraction, and I’m fairly sure I’ve never experienced romantic attraction. I would say that I’ve experienced romantic yearning, a desire for romantic feelings and a romantic relationship, but I can’t say for sure that I’ve ever actually experienced romantic attraction.

The way I experience attraction to people that I want to date or have some type of committed relationship, partnership, whatever you want to call it, the type of attraction I have to those people is what I consider alterous. Alterous attraction is commonly described as being something in between romantic and platonic, and I would agree and say for me, that it is also between sexual. I can’t describe an attraction I don’t consciously experience, I can’t describe sexual or romantic attraction, and while I know what platonic attraction and queerplatonic attraction both feel like because I have felt those, trying to describe those attractions is difficult. For me, alterous attraction is somewhere between all those types of attraction, and I would say the attraction I could most clearly name and describe for my partners or people I wanted to be my partners would be queerplatonic. But it’s more than just queerplatonic for me, exactly what it feels like alters depending on the person, the situation, unknown factors. But it never reaches anything I could actually name as truly romantic or truly sexual, and it rarely seems to alter into purely platonic attraction, and if it does change into purely platonic, it would be how I feel towards an ex that I’m on good terms with or have fond memories of.

Another way I could describe alterous attraction, without using the pre-existing terms of other forms of attraction, is say that it’s an attraction to the feeling of intimacy from that person. I haven’t figured out a good way to phrase that yet, but basically it’s being attracted to a person because of the sense of intimacy you feel with and from them. And yes, this might sound very similar to demi- types of attraction, where emotional connection is necessary. And someone could easily describe demi- types of attraction the same way I just described alterous. I did used to identify as demi-rose, demiromantic and demisexual, because of the emotional connection and intimacy that I needed in order to form an attraction to someone. But there was still that missing element. There was an attraction, yes, but it still wasn’t either those elusive romantic butterflies-in-the-stomach or the spark and heat of sexual attraction. My attraction to those people, whom I had an emotional connection and sense of intimacy with, my attraction to them still remained distinctly other. And that’s why I started identifying my attraction as alterous and dropping the demi-rose label, because I never quite got the rose part.

And this is only talking about my alterous attraction, my attraction specifically to people I would want to “date” in some sense of the word.

There’s aesthetic attraction, sensual attraction, and other types of attraction that I might feel.

Towards literally anyone, regardless of their gender, I might feel basically any type of attraction other than romantic or sexual.

Aesthetic attraction is probably the one I feel most often and usually the only type of attraction I might feel towards a complete stranger. Sensual attraction, which I would say for me is an appreciation of their body (rather than just their appearance which I personally say is aesthetic attraction), sensual attraction is much more rare and I think it’s only been a couple actors I felt that towards. And sensual attraction, for me it has nothing to do with sex or desire, although it is probably the closest I’ve gotten to understanding sexual attraction.

My point in all this, aroace literally only has to do with two types of attraction, romantic and sexual. There are so many other kinds of attraction, but allo people typically experience them at the same time as they experience sexual and/or romantic attraction, so they aren’t always aware of them.

If you’re aroace, how can you be pan/bi/les/gay etc…?

YOU JUST DON’T GET IT OKAY?

[agentoffangirling]

I think there would be world peace if people could stop shipping aroace characters

[triangular-static]

look i understand if people just don't like the idea of billford, i think we have a different internal concept of what shipping means (they're not good for each other at all but i need to dissect their dynamic like a bug. you understand. it's fun) but it's fine to avoid things you don't like, good for you genuinely

however people saying they like. don't see it. like. i'm not saying there's no platonic way to read it, i'm aroace spec myself i'm all for reading things in different ways. but i do think saying they weren't partners in any queer sense at all is trying too hard to go against what the narrative is trying to say, or missing it. somehow

anyway media literacy time if a character makes a joke like this

and the previous context of that joke within the show is that it's about an ex wife. what connection do you think the text is trying to get you to make.

and that's just from a writing point of view. not even noting that from an in universe perspective ford likely knows the joke from the same source as stan. and is therefore. placing himself in that role of the joke are you seeing where i'm coming from

(not to mention bill's side of this text which is. extremely manipulative but also does not read very platonic. again, it can technically be read as platonic! bill literally can manipulate ford's feelings. but the specific wording used is very much meant to look like possessive ex partner wording whether the character means it that way or not. it's coding. look again i'm not saying it was good for them i'm just saying there was something there.)

and then there's also the divorce/break up/rock bottom input on the website. like. how else is that supposed to be read. and the corresponding page in the book itself.

the language being used here. like yes he's saying it in a joking way but then there's the other side that isn't joking which is him crying at the bar. it's the both sides (the very coded language on top of the very genuine emotions and dynamic beneath)

i know most of us are on the same page with this i've just seen a couple people saying they don't see it when this is some of the most clear cut coding i've ever seen. and these are just the things that explicitly reference a relationship off the top of my head i'm not even including the general vibes of Everything

tl;dr it's barely even subtext anymore it's all but straight up text. what's not clicking have we forgotten what coding is (lighthearted i just enjoy the phrase what's not clicking. what's not clicking)

[lilyrosegold]

To those who counter any general discomfort people have with aro and/or ace characters being shipped romantically or sexually with “but aro and aces can still date/have sex/be in relationships”- that’s is true but, do you actually care about the complexities and nuance of navigating romance and/or sex as someone who falls on the aroace spectrum or are you just looking for an easy way to not get hate for blatantly ignoring a character’s identity in favor of your shipping?

[zaebeecee]

Aroace individual: [writes a fanfic with a ship that includes a canonically aroace character, using their own experience to explore different avenues of how aroace relationships function]

Some allosexual, bursting through the wall and knocking over the potted plants: Oh so you’re aphobic? You’re ignoring that this character is ace by having them *** nasty style? You’re making them *** with their *** *** and *** in a *** for *** *** to ***?? Bending over with *** in their *** until *** *** *** and *** *** *** ***?!?

Aroace individual: they’re queerplatonic here actually

Some allosexual, now tracking potted plant soil all over the living room: BUT IT SAYS SHIP RIGHT THERE, HOW COULD IT POSSIBLY BE A SHIP IF THEY AREN’T CONSTANTLY BANGING

Aroace individual: why are you in my house

[paging-possum]

Like I don’t want to sound like a Little Hater™️ ESPECIALLY about something that is definitely useful and beneficial to people especially other queer people. But if I pick up a book and they have a scene where two characters basically start dictionary definitioning identity labels at each other in casual conversation I am returning the book immediately. My biggest pet peeve that is not actually a problem it just gets on my nerves

[kiwisandpearls]

the statements “platonic relationships should not be undervalued” and “it’s ok to ship wlw ships and mlm ships even if the characters involved have no canonical romantic interest in each other” are not mutual exclusive.

[caramel-cream50]

Controversial opinion but I find it weird as fuck that the character that seems to be shipped the most in the hazbin Hotel fandom is aroace..

[number1villainstan]

"do you ship them as friends or do you ship them romantically" i ship them as It's Fucking Complicated

[unagrancantidaddepanes]

"allo people ship aroace characters in QPRs as an excuse for aroace erasure by still shipping them with other characters" is the most mind numbing take ive ever heard in my life. I cant believe I have to say that respecting aroace identities isnt aphobic 💀

[infizero]

i think interpreting dynamics that dont have any canon basis to be familial as familial is totally fine but a) you cannot act like this is canon fact and, in tandem with that, b) you cannot attack people for interpreting it differently. believe me i am all for killing people who sexualize ACTUAL familial/familial-coded dynamics with knives but you have got to understand that just bcuz these two characters are friends does not mean they are siblings and it does not mean you get to get mad at others when they inevitably ship them

[judas-not-that-one]

“this is the least stressful weekend i’ve had in two years. and it’s not hard to find what’s different. the absence of family. the addition of him”

“the addition of him” she says

god i love her. and i really really look forward to seeing what else happens with this

[vamptwinklover]

as someone on the aroace spectrum i dont give a damn if you write smut about aroace characters

[wildshadowtamer]

“i hc this character as asexual, bc of that i cant give them a romantic partner” “i hc this other character as aromantic, so they cant have bio kids” 

no! thats the wrong way around! ace and aro are two seperate identities, aroace is both of them, you are looking for the word aroace. asexuals can have romantic partners, aromantics can have children and sex. also asexuals can have bio kids too we’re not incapable of having sex we just dont have the drive for it. please god research identities you are not apart of before you put them on a character i beg of you.

[stillgeekingout]

#it's very strange #because i often feel like the culmination of those characters arcs #like if the point is they're ace great but like... #the option of lesbianism just *never* occurs #which--and again not to discredit any ace people or ace readings of her work--is such a common lesbian experience! #like myself and a bunch of other lesbians i know had that journey #of going 'hmm i don't like men... guess I'm asexual! (do not ask me about women i will combust)' #like lady bird... whatever #little women... alright i suppose if you wanted to make a comentary on how lma was forced to add the heterosexual romance at the end #and not suggest anything about a real person and also not deviate from the source material #but barbie was insane #the coding was next level #like c'mon birkenstocks??? #and i argue that barbies acceptance of genitalia could be read as an acceptance of sexuality or the very least exploring it #so why isn't she a dyke??? (other than mattel probably giving a hard no on that)

I don’t know, the thing that really bothers me about Greta Gerwig’s films is that there is just this gaping hole where gay women should be. Like, when you’re making these movies about the trap of heterosexual marriage, breaking free of that, and the only concrete answer is to be a single woman over and over and over again, it feels like an intentional absence. You can watch the movie with a queer lens, but it is egregious that you may only consider homosexuality in her movies in this way. It ought to be in them. There is no reason for it not to be there. Women don’t fuck women in Greta Gerwig’s feminist liberations. Often, they don’t have sex at all.

[bitchliteraria1906]

Listen, I'm a shipper. Shipping is fun. Exploring relationships between the silly characters I like is fun, and to me, that includes shipping.

HOWEVER, as an aroace person who started valuing both my friendships and my ability to be alone without feeling like shit even more as I learnt about amatonormativity, I just need to say:

Can we please stop throwing around phrases like "There's no platonic explanation for this" or "They're too close, they can't be just friends" when talking about ships we like and analyzing the reasons why we think they should have been canon?

Can we please stop acting as if romance is some sort of "end goal" and that if two characters who have some form of chemistry don't get in a canon romantic relationship, then their potential was wasted?

Can we stop assuming that characters who end up single will automatically feel alone and miserable?

Like, can we stop normalizing amatonormativity in fandoms? I know it's difficult because those phrases and thought processes are very normalized, but can we try?

Also, some people will find this controversial, but yes, this includes not screaming "Are you homophobic???" At anyone who doesn't like a popular, implied or even canon queer ship. Yes, some people who don't like the ship will be homophobic, but some of us really just want more representation of single main characters who actually stay single, as well as representation of qprs, strong platonic bonds, people who live well by themselves/in solitude and so much other stuff that we often don’t get due to the world kind of being obsessed with romance (and sex tbh, but that's not the point of this post).