#also don't suggest im aromantic or asexual im not

[branmer]

saw a good thread about being perpetually single on twitter and it got me thinking

ive come to the conclusion, over time, that im not destined for romantic love. i was in love once in my twenties. it didn't work out, and at this point in my life im just coming to accept that im probably never going to find a partner. i thought i had accepted that already (and was enjoying my single life!) but i guess since i turned thirty the realisation of just how much harder a lot of things are (especially financially) when you are single is hitting me and ive been struggling with it more. it's knowing that you only have yourself to depend on the majority of the time and that whatever the future holds; happiness or disaster (the latter gives me so much anxiety about the future), you will endure alone. and then there's the social weirdness of living in a world that idealises romantic love above all others and looks down on singledom as a sad, lesser state. and it makes you feel bad about yourself and like there's something wrong with you. but, you know what, i am no longer interested in indulging in bad date after bad date just to make other people feel less weird about the fact that i am single and have been for a long time and will be for a long time in the future, likely the rest of my life. i am done. im making peace with it. i'd rather focus on the things in my life that are good, build the life that i want, independent and happy. i find value in my life and i enjoy it, and i'd rather embrace the benefits of my independence than dwell on the drawbacks

granted saying that is easier said than done, and probably i will live my entire life with a bit of longing in my heart (and fuck me if the last couple of years haven't been hard. there've been days where i've been so depressed about it i haven't been able to stomach shippy fanfic because romance upset me so much), but i want to enjoy the time i have on this earth and not spend it making myself miserable, and that's what im gonna try and do and maybe one day ill drown that cruel hope in a life that's good

idk probably none of this makes sense, im just rambling, but anyway this is the thread, it's really good. she articulates.... fucking everything ive been feeling, it's an incredible thread:

[genderkoolaid]

actually fuck it im gonna deconstruct this carrds shitty argument about bi dykes and stereotypes

"Every woman is attracted to men in some capacity, even lesbians." The implication is that lesbians can be attracted to men, which is LESBOPHOBIC.

Again: bisexual women who used to identify as lesbians until they found themselves attracted to a man can also be used to say that all lesbians are attracted to men.

"It's possible for lesbians to be in a healthy romantic or sexual relationship with men." This is blatantly LESBOPHOBIC, as lesbians are often pressured to enter relationships with men (compulsory heterosexuality).

This one is just fucking ridiculous. It is not up to you to define what a healthy relationship is for other people. To suggest that any relationship between a self-identified relationship and a man must be unhealthy deprives the lesbian of the autonomy to decide how they feel about their relationships. Even if the lesbian ends up not wanting to date or fuck men- there are lesbians who dated men and have nothing but fondness for the relationship, they just realized it wasn't for them. This is like saying its impossible for an asexual to have a healthy sexual relationship or for an aromantic to have a healthy romantic one.

"Bisexuality is a phase. Bi people always end up picking a side." The implication is that bisexuality does not really exist and that the bisexual label is just a temporary placeholder until they find their real identity, which is blatantly BIPHOBIC.

See the first statement but in reverse. This would suggest that lesbians who used to identify as bisexual- perhaps because of that compulsory heterosexuality that exclus love to throw around as the answer anytime a dyke does something they don't agree with- are being biphobic because they can be used as "proof" that bisexuals will always "pick a side." If we are judging the worth of person's identity based on how it can be used by queerphobes, we have already fucking lost.

"Bisexuality means that you're equally attracted to men and women." The implication is that you're no longer bisexual if you have a preference for one gender is BIPHOBIC. "You cannot be bisexual unless you date both men and women." The implication is that you're not bisexual anymore if you don't have dating history to "prove it", which is BIPHOBIC. "Bisexuality means that you're half-gay half-straight / part-gay part-straight." By supporting bi lesbians (and bi gay men or bi straight people) you're treating bisexuality as a modifier rather than a full identity, which is BIPHOBIC

grouping all these together because they are essentially the same argument: "bi lesbian meaning this which means that "bisexual" must mean that!!!!" which is not true. Bi lesbians existing do not mean anything for other bisexuals' definition of their identities, & the same applies for lesbians.

Some trans men define their manhood as being just like a cis man, but in a female body. They may transition and no longer identify as trans. Meanwhile, other trans men feel like their manhood is fundamentally trans, and while they and cis men may both be equally male, their manhood is fundamentally different to cis man's.

By the above logic, the second group is TRANSPHOBIC because they "say" that trans men can't be the same as cis men. Unless.... just maybe........ we consider that one label can be used to describe a multitude of experiences........

Of course, the creator of this carrd couldn't stand for that idea. Since their second argument as to why bi dykes are bad is:

"We have created these labels to understand ourselves and each other and to effectively communicate with one another. Once you abstract it to the point where it is impossible to communicate an idea to another person without them having to ask for further clarification, those labels lose their functionality and become useless."

Which is funny, because there are plenty of bi lesbians who are active in both their local bisexual and lesbian communities without issue. Because they can still effectively communicate; people, surprisingly, have the ability to understand abstract concepts and nuanced identities.

Not every asexual never wants sex; there are asexuals who enjoy sex. The fact that you can't assume every asexual is nonsexual does not pose this great, existential threat to asexuals who don't fuck. The fact that you have to ask people things about them & can't just assume based off of a single label is not the end of communication itself, actually. If "lesbian" tells you that someone is attracted to women, either in a WLW way or in a way that is rooted in lesbian culture, then all you have to fucking do is not assume that they never fuck or date men.

The problem is, of course, that most of these people are "anti-TERF" radfems who don't realize it, and they have gotten in their brains that if there is no special "women only" term then the entire fucking world will collapse into a blighted misogynistic hellscape. And of course they don't need to think critically about why they feel this way, they just know its bad... but they think trans women can be lesbians so it has nothing to do with TERFs and how dare you imply it does!!!!!

[aromantic-diaries]

J!!!! im asexual i think!! i know you're more the aromanticism expert but i remember you talking a lot about the distinction between the two identities and i could use some help navigating the divide as it were :o

i figured out i am aromantic pretty quickly after discovering your blog, and i think that's the identity im resonate more with- but last week i made the connection that not getting crushes is kinda an ace thing? i think sex is cool but i dont think im sexually/physically attracted to other ppl at all

how do you personally differentiate the two identities? did you adopt them at different times? it might not be the same for everyone but id like your perspective :)

-pteren 💚🪽

Hi! Even though I personally view my aromanticism and asexuality as two different things, I don't think everyone feels about it that way and a lot of aroace people actually don't make a distinction between the two, the aroace flag for example was meant to represent people for whom it's just one thing, at least that's what I heard. But as someone who does see it as two separate things, I'd say aromanticism is about the emotional aspect of it and asexuality is the physical part. I don't know what romantic attraction is supposed to feel like, all I know is that I don't feel whatever you're supposed to feel. As for the sexual part, I was actually confused about it for a while because sex does sound like a good time, it's just that there's no one I'd actually want to do it with.

I did figure these things out separately. It's hard to tell which one I figured out first because putting the pieces together was a lenghty process. I definetly showed signs of aromanticism very early on (i'd say as far back as early childhood) and it was pretty much obvious by the time I reached my teens, but there was a good amount of denial thrown into the mix which really dragged the whole process out. As for my asexuality, it kind of became clear when I was 14-15 but I swept that under the rug for a while. The one I admitted to myself first was aromanticism though, and not long after that I also came around to admitting I was asexual. I would say that they go hand in hand but the process of figuring it out kind of happened separately.

At the end of the day, I see them as two different things because that's what makes the most sense to me. I suggest taking some time to learn about yourself and understand your own identity and the experiences relating to it, so you can figure out what works best for you. You can just say you're aroace and not separate the two, that type of distinction exists mostly to bring awareness to the fact that aromanticism and asexuality aren't neccessarily a package deal and a lot of people are one but not the other, or they have different experiences with different aspects of their identity, it's okay if that's not the case for you

[knifearo]

hi, i’m having a really hard time rn and i found a post of yours randomly on my dash, so i’m not sure if you’ve already answered a thing like this. if you have, feel free to just ignore this! if you haven’t though, how did you know you were asexual? i feel like romance is just a hypothetical for me, but i crave it so badly. it just feels like the second i try to put anything into action, im suddenly repulsed. but it also makes me so sad that i respond this way. am i just socially anxious, or does this sound like an aromantic who has fallen victim to societal standards?

hi hiiiii!!! first of all: i love you and you're doing great. second of all: being aroace, my discovery of aspec stuff kind of went hand in hand. i was lucky enough to have terminology available to me, and figured it out pretty young; i had a lot of the same stuff going on, though. when someone first suggested i might be ace, i (not really knowing enough about what that meant) said "sure, but i want a partner. someone who's always there with me and supporting me." later that year/the year after, i looked a little more into it and went, "oh, that's what it is!" and then it felt super natural from there to pick up the aromantic label too. to me, they've always been intertwined.

the actual things that helped me Figure It Out were definitely shared experiences (hearing people describe squishes was an aha moment for sure, and hearing someone say that they had thought sexual attraction was a joke and then realizing that it. wasn't an elaborate inside joke. very jarring lmao) but i definitely had the same hesitations when it came to romance. six or seven years after coming out, i've since realized that what i wanted wasn't actually a partner; i was craving intimacy and the feeling of being special and prioritized by someone, and the way i'd been programmed to want that was through a partner. i'm super strong about being non-partnering now, and i feel that all my needs in that direction are met by my close personal relationships, cause what i actually wanted was never romance; at least personally, it never occurred to me that you would probably want to like. kiss a partner. maybe share a bed or smth. not a single thought in my head about that lmao

if you're feeling repulsed, my instinct is to say that it's probably not something that you want. my advice here is to really examine what you're looking for. do you want romance because you want romance, or because amatonormativity has gotten it into your head that romance is the only way that you can have certain things?

another thing to consider is that amatonormativity can and will kind of like. program you to want romance. and it can be really hard to let go of that, even if romance is something that actively repulses/stresses you out. remember that you have a lifetime behind you of being told that romance is the greatest thing on earth, that it completes you, that it's life's ultimate goal, and that that stuff can be hard to overcome. i know a lot of people feel a fair bit of grief over losing the chance at romance, even if the reason is that they don't actually want romance. it's a strange place to be in. your prerogative here is to figure out your own personal relationship with romance, and however it ends up, that's fine.

it's also totally possible that you're aromantic and you just want romance. that's totally fine! wanting romantic interactions does not constitute romantic attraction, which is the core thing here. you can be aromantic and be in a romantic relationship. the external things are not as important as how you feel on the inside.

so much more that i could say, but i'll try and pause myself here for now. to quote one of my own posts: you can literally just be aromantic. it's free and nobody's stopping you. as long as that label is useful to you, it's yours. look more into amatonormativity, think a lot about things, and spend some time in community spaces; you have all the time in the world, and all the support you could ever want from me and the rest of the community <3 stop by in the ask box or the dms anytime! absolute best of luck to you. kisses <3

[donttouchtheneednoggle]

33 andd... 50?

33. Come up with the best way to ask someone out, right now!

.....yeah i got nothing 🤣

50. Any arospec headcanons?

*SLAMS heavy folder down on table* RIGHT

1. Dani from Sense8 - Aroace

daniela my babyyyyy i have literally no words problematic fave she is an aroace person who is VERY sex favourable and she’s in a straight up qpr with lito and hernando in canon and she’s so fucking important <333

2. Sir Leon from BBC Merlin - Aroace

literally what is there to say... that is a man. he is aroace. i’ve seen him be called straight before even tho he’s literally the only knight where attraction/relationship to a woman or anyone else is not even slightly suggested ik he’s boring but that’s entirely separate to his orientation xx

Tahani Al Jamil from the good place - Grayromantic Bisexual

my ICON the way her romantic relationships are usually a way for her to feel valued and she recognises this and works on it and she has a happy ending that does not involve a partner in any capacity and it’s so SUBVERSIVE whether she’s arospec or not but i gotta project xx

Kala Dandekar from Sense8 - Demiromantic Demisexual

kala didin’t want to get married bless her. kala went on several long rants about amatonormativtiy and was EXTRMELY salty about the notion of giving up a career to marry and have children. girl fell for wolfgang fairly quickly bc of their instant deep emotional connection thank you sensateness then the finale is her realising she’s actually in love with her husband too and having a massive poly demi crisis darling im so sorry i love you but it is fucking HILARIOUS 🤣

The Doctor - Aromantic Asexual Aplatonic spectrums (also genderkdsfklglhl) (but none of it bc they are an alien!!!!)

I HAVE DECIDED. mayyybe they are varying degrees of each depending on regeneration or maybe it's just how they show it but just... the way they experience relationships and how they will leave people behind and not think to pop back.... they like having company and spending time with friends and depending on regeneration are very affectionate and some people they do bond more deeply with and they don't like being left (it's the rsd) and they NOT do well on their own but... they just need someone? idk they tend to move on quickly and not look back and as long as they've got the tardis and the freedom to travel and at least one nice person to run with them show them the sights, they're all good <3

Morgana Pendragon from BBC Merlin - Aromantic Lesbian

it feels so wrong to hc her like this when she’s the literal embodiment of the aromantic stereotype - cold, beautiful, suggestive demeanour, her lack of capacity for love emphasizing her evilness- but at the same time i can’t leave her off this list, and she’s very much an aromantic lesbian before she ‘turns evil’. i can’t see s1 or any other season her being interested in romance, even if she’d stayed ‘good’ she just wanted to be able to be herself and for her friends to be safe.

Samantha Carter from Stargate SG1 - Aromantic... Heterosexual? maybe??

this is a recent one i galaxy brained the other night and the reason why samjack always felt a bit beyond just ‘they’re in love’ finally fell into place *checks notes* ten years after they became my first otp. n e way yeah she’s aro and doesn’t know it and ends up with an increasingly shitty series of men when she already has a perfectly good qpr she’s very happy with and i will make a full post about this bc she deserves it <3

All the female royalty in BBC Merlin bc they deserve an aro club <3

SORRY but this mithian quote in particular just... SCREAMS pining aro struggling to accept themselves under amatonormativity <3

Michael from The Good Place- Aroace (+Agender!!)

which is GROSS 🤢 by the way, kissing is GROSS 🤢🤢You just mAsH yOUr foOd hOLeS tOGeTheR, they're not 🙅‍♂️ for that!!

he makes me feel seen 🤣💚🤍🖤

[iamnotaware]

on ur description it says u are aroace and idk if this is somehow rude or insensitive but would u pls tell me what exactly being asexual means cuz i think im somewhat of that but idrk what it means or what qualifies

also dont need to answer if ur not okay or comfortable :)

Hiii anon!

Yes, in my blog description, I wrote that I identify as aroace which is short for aromantic and asexual. Also, don't worry, it's not rude or insensitive, you just wanna know what it means and that's completely alright :D

So asexual, what does it mean and what qualifies:

People who identify as asexual can feel little to no sexual attraction. It's an umbrella term for people who identify as asexual and/or other labels under the umbrella. One thing to remember is that love does not equal sex and that's why people who identify as asexual aren't necessarily aromantic (aromantic people are those who feel little to no romantic attraction).

This was the basic meaning of asexuality, but if you are questioning, I can suggest you some websites which can help in better understanding since I'm not an expert :))

This website explains some misconceptions and basically, your question about 'what qualifies' can be answered here.

This website has a lot of experiences in shorter answers.

This website has a lot of identities under the ace umbrella that you can check out.

These are some websites that one of my aroace friends recommended to me. I hope they can help you understand as well :D

I didn't go into the aromantic label since you asked about asexuality but I'd be more than happy to oblige if you want to know about aromanticism as well but probably not right now since you already have the asexual label to explore :)

[gettin-bi-bi-bi]

ok so i am in a aro polyam relationship (kinda qpr) with two friends and and one of them (he/she pronouns) is going to the psychologist bc he struggles with anxiety and he told the psychologist he is aro and the psychologist tried to find ~a reason~ for her being aro and i told him that the psychologist was being arophobic, but she says that the psychologist is just finding reasons about things in his life to help him, im very uncomfy with this situation bc im aro too and i struggle a lot to accept myself and I don't like psychologists trying to find a trauma that explains why aromantic people are aromantic, if this happened to a lesbian this would have been super lesbophobic, maybe there's a reason why psychologists do this kind of things but it makes me seriously upset and i am very upset that my bf is ok with a psychologist telling her that her identity is caused by some event in his life that made him "lose" his romantic attraction

This is a really tricky situation. Personally I would probably feel the same as you do and if this were my psychologist and they tried to find a "traumatic reason" for my bisexuality (or if I was aro and they tried to find a reason for that) I would be very upset and would probably look for a new therapist. This is simply not up to a modern day understanding of sexual and romantic orientations but unfortunately asexuality and aromanticism are still very heavily pathologised. I'm sure I don't have to tell you that but just saying it for anyone else reading along.

The fact that your partner doesn't mind though is her business. If he was the one messaging me and saying he was upset about what the psychologist said I would 100% recommend finding a new one, preferably one who has queer-sensitivity training and/or is queer themselves and/or has been vouched for by other aro people.

I think you should definitely be able to have an open conversation with her about why this upsets you so much, mention your own insecurities about your aromanticism, explain the implications regarding trauma and all that if you haven't done already. But you cannot expect him to have the same emotions about this as you. If he doesn't mind and otherwise finds the psychologist to be helpful and a good fit for him, then that's her prerogative. And as far as I know there are some ace and aro people who do actually consider themselves to be that way because of trauma - maybe your partner is one of them. Maybe it would be an important conversation to ask her if she thinks that about herself, and try to be open-minded. Of course this doesn't mean that all aromantic people are aromantic because of trauma and I get how it can be hurtful to be told there must be a traumatic background and that you couldn't possibly be aromantic for no reason. But maybe that's not what your partner is suggesting here. Maybe he's simply looking for a reason within himself because that's what he feels without saying this also has to apply to you.

Like... I agree with you that this psychologist seems a bit sketchy, at least from the way you tell the story. But unless they literally suggest some kind of conversion therapy I don't think an intervention would be appropriate. All you can do is voice your concerns but if your partner doesn't share these concerns then there's nothing really that you can do. All you then have to decide is how to reconcile this difference of opinion with your relationship and whether that is a deal-breaker for you or not.

Maddie

[aro-aceplace]

[1] hi! im asexual and recently ive been wondering if im aromantic. i can't tell if i feel romantic attraction or not but i don't think i do. i really don't understand romance in general because i don't get why some things are considered romantic other than the fact they just are called that. i also like things that people call romantic such as kissing (though id only ever kiss someone im close to and in a committed relationship with) but i don't exactly want to kiss anyone specific just in

[2] general because i think it’d feel nice. also i wouldn’t oppose to a romantic relationship though when ive been in them in the past ive felt trapped and idk why i felt that way. i have no idea what romantic attraction feels like so idk what itd feel it or not. sorry my ask is a mess i don’t know how to word it especially since it’s all in one big block.

I’m aromantic myself, so I can’t exactly tell you what romantic attraction feels like since I don’t experience it, but my understanding is that romantic attraction is sort of the “butterflies in your stomach feeling” in association with one person and is usually paired with a strong desire to be around and with said person all the time.

But since I’ve never experienced romantic attraction and don’t know how accurate that is, I’m going to point you more in the direction of something I do know. The experience of being aromantic.

Between my own experiences and the experiences of some of my aromantic friends, I’ve discovered that there are two common indicators of whether or not a person is aro and you can turn these two indicators into tests. I call them the “I love you” test and the “I chose you” test. 

The I love you test is basically just asking the question “How do I feel when I say I love you”.  We don’t really differentiate between types of love in the English language, but there are different types and they do feel different. When you say I love you to a romantic partner does it feel like saying I love you to a friend or family member? Or is it a totally separate emotion that’s promoting you to say that? If it feels the same as saying I love you to a friend you might be aro-spec. 

The I chose your test requires a little more reflection on your personal history. Think about all of the people you’ve ever had a crush on. Did you pick those people? Did you think, “yeah, this person is good enough, I guess I’ll have a crush on them,”? Or did you just sort of end up attracted to them without any forethought. If you picked out who your crushes were then you might be aro-spec. (Side note: if those crushes have only ever been on people of the ‘opposite gender’ then the  "I chose you" test can also be an indicator that you’re gay/lesbian.)

These clearly aren’t the only ways to figure out if you’re aro and they don’t work for everyone, but they might be of some help to you.

I would also recommend looking into the term quoiromantic, which is usually defined as when someone experiences romantic attraction in a way that is not typical of alloromantic individuals but doesn’t know where they fit on the aro spectrum. It is also sometimes defined as feeling that concept of romance is inapplicable or nonsensical to one’s self. Based on your ask this sounds like it’s a label that might fit you so I would suggest researching it.

Hope that helps!

-mod Yarrow 

[arojughead]

"so don’t you dare try and erase his sexuality just to fit your own dumb ass headcanons" wow… uh calling gay & bi people headcanoning him as gay a "dumb ass headcanon" sounds pretty damn homophobic to me. Also to say that we should find another character is laughable, how about you go find another character? Why must you constantly take gay-coded characters and insist they're aroace because they don't display attraction to the "opposite" gender? It's unbelievably heteronormative to insist (1/2)

(2/2) that because they aren’t attracted to the “opposite” gender they must not be attracted to anyone at all

aight dude,,,, you seem to have some Strong Opinions so i guess im gonna have to finally engage in this Damn Discourse

“calling gay & bi people headcanoning him as gay a ‘dumb ass headcanon’ sounds pretty damn homophobic to me” nice job taking my words out of context! i described your headcanons as dumb bc they erase his identity just so they can fit into whatever idea you have of who jughead jones is as a person! also nice job assuming i was talking about gay and bi people when i never once targeted any specific group within the LGBTQIA+ but rather, everyone in general! this applies to straight people too tryna make him hetace! it’s just not okay to erase his identity in any context no matter what sexuality you’re trying to make him other than his own :-)

“also you say that we should find another character is laughable, how about you go find another character?” we’ve been over this already my dude, jug is openly asexual (and likely aromantic, as he’s always expressed a distaste for romance and the chip zdarsky described him as “asexual with aromantic leanings”, but more on his aromanticism later in your next comment) and he’s literally the only character we have. how fucking ridiculous would it be for us, as the aspec community, to try and find a different character when there literally are no other characters? as someone sex-repulsed, do you have any idea how hard it is to find a character that isn’t either oversexualized by the fandom or doesn’t have some typa drama concerning their sex lives in canon lmao??? you want a character to represent the gay community so bad, kevin is literally RIGHT. THERE. not happy with him? if you want a bi character so bad, reggie has literally shown interest in both women AND men? beronica have literally kissed and while there are issues w queerbaiting there, veronica is clearly interested in betty? you have options, we don’t. jughead is literally the only aromantic asexual representation in pop culture and to suggest we “find another character” is bullshit.

“why must you constantly take gay-coded characters and insist they’re aroace because they don’t display attraction to the “opposite” gender? it’s unbelievably heteronormative to insist that because they aren’t attracted to the “opposite” gender they must not be attracted to anyone at all” for the love that is good and holy, please explain to me how jughead is gay-coded. in the entire seventy-five year run, jughead has shown TIME and TIME again that he is not interested in romantic relationships as as whole. he has had romantic encounters in the past, though the majority of them he was incredibly against or uninterested in (ethel, wendy weatherbee, trula twyst to name a few). while all those examples are women jug has literally….. never shown any sign….. of being gay either????? like, the whole point here is that he only has one great love, which is his food. because he literally could not give a damn about any other human being in a romantic or sexual context regardless of their gender. interesting that you point him out as being gay-coded when the reality is that since his creation all the signs point to him being aromantic-coded. (which, by the way, is not heteronormative of me to assume since he is not heteroromantic or heterosexual to begin with and i am not considering his relationship with just the opposite gender but his relationship with romance and sexuality as a whole instead)

tl;dr: jughead is aromantic asexual, it’s not nice to erase that just so you can imagine him in romantic or sexual contexts without feeling like an ass. thank you and goodbye.