#im using asexuality as an umbrella term for both asexuality and aromanticism because typing both out takes too long

[chillichats]

i wonder whether this is a product of my intrusive thoughts or if it’s a byproduct of romance and sexuality being shoved in my face everywhere i go. i suspect it’s a mixture of both.

I am, as far as i know, fairly high up on the scale of asexuality. i dont- understand the idea of.. looking at someone and thinking about them in a sexualising way. it doesn’t click. believe me, ive made my sister try to explain it to me many times.

but sometimes, my brain recognises times where people who DO feel sexual or romantic or WHATEVER attraction might... do something. think something. and then it would recite the lines it’s supposed to say in the script.

during work where i serve all manners of people, my brain notices people my age and thinks ‘am i supposed to think something about them? think they’re cute?’ and then it immediately comes up with a script where i mentally read off a ‘normal’ thought about them. i usually blink in bemusement to myself at that internal non-sequitur and move on from it, because it feels like im reading something from the script of a lukewarm play im not particularly invested in

if im walking behind someone and they have a good fashion sense or they’re wearing something revealing, my brain starts wondering, ‘im supposed to be looking at their butt or something, right?’ and so, almost to check if some switch will be turned on in my brain on this one occasion, my eyes look down. and then im staring confusedly at the butt of a stranger wondering idly whether this is an activity people really cant help themselves from doing or if, maybe, everyone has that voice in their head telling them this is what they’re supposed to do. I get uncomfortable looking because people around us might think im doing this genuinely, and i return back to staring at my phone, which is 100 times more interesting.

i talk with my coworkers and they say something that could  be misconstrued as an innuendo and my brain which is trying desperately to socialise well perks up and goes ‘oh!!! making jokes about sex is supposed to be funny for some reason, right??’ and the next thing you know i’ve said the cringy line of ‘that’s what she said’ or some other such baffling thing and i wonder to myself why people find the idea of sex funny or entertaining at all. it holds no interest to me. similar instances happen when i recognise instances to flirt with people.

i don’t know if i have a point to this, i mainly want to know if it’s just me. i really hope it’s not just me

[aspecpplarebeautiful]

i read the faq, but i didnt see it there, so asking directly. im just confused about Why ace/aro are also umbrella terms when aspec/arospec exist. why would someone aspec call themselves ace and be mistaken for someone who experiences 0 sexual attraction whatsoever when they do experience it? when did they start being used as umbrella terms as well? i never heard of that until from this blog recently tbh so i'm curious when people started using it like one.

So the idea of ace as an umbrella term for the entire asexual spectrum community has been around since at least 2011 because people weren't sure if asexual umbrella was working well enough (source). (Aro can be used similarly, but at this time the two communities were very intertwined.)

Interestingly enough while the terms asexual spectrum and aromantic spectrum have both been around since at least 2006, when people have gone searching for when acespec and arospec started to emerge the earliest examples people have been able to find are from 2014-2016. But just going by my own experiences having been in this community since around 2009, even asexual spectrum and aromantic spectrum weren't terms I heard a lot until after acespec and arospec became more widespread.

So yeah, there's a lot of history there. And you can do even deeper dives into this history, and find a lot of debates. The definition of asexual especially has a really long complicated history and there has always been different definitions around.

So moving back into the present while 'no sexual attraction' is used a lot in outreach and awareness, asexuality itself has always covered a lot more experiences than that.

The Asexual page on the LGBTA Wiki for example defines asexuality as:

a sexual orientation defined by a lack of sexual attraction. Asexual experiences may also include: not wanting to have sex, not being interested in sex, not experiencing a sex drive/libido, or being repulsed by sex. Sexual attraction is defined as the desire to have sex with, or otherwise perform sexual acts with, another specific individual.

So even that is a bit broader than just not experiencing sexual attraction.

When it comes to experiencing some sexual attraction, it can definitely get a bit more complicated. And there are definitely people (all over the ace-spectrum, not just people who experience some sexual attraction, but not the full range allosexuals experience), who do find asexual and/or ace to be too limiting a label for them, and do prefer either something like gray-ace or acespec, or may even prefer to use a specific ace community label, like demisexual or fraysexual.

Aromanticism is similar, and if anything even more complicated because of how hard it is to define and conceptualize romantic attraction in the first place. If we were to do a strong divide between aromantic and not aromantic but still arospec based on attraction where does that leave people who aren't sure if they are experiencing romantic attraction or not? Or people who can't tell the difference between romantic and platonic feelings? Or the people who experience types of attraction like alterous which can have some romantic elements to it but isn't technically romantic attraction?

But again, there are arospec and gray-aro people who do not like aro and/aro aromantic as labels because they just don't fit their experiences or definitions.

So this is just a lot of words to say attraction and orientation are just really complex. And it's very hard to fit people and experiences into neat little boxes, and there's a certain point where instead of trying to follow strict definitions it just makes a lot more sense to tell people to go with the label that resonates the most for them. Or is the most useful way for them to identify.

This is a pretty long response, but I hope that all makes sense, Anon. But if you have more questions, want anything clarified or talked more about, please feel free. Otherwise I hope this helps.

All the best!