Jump to content

can aromantics fall in love?


Recommended Posts

as per the strict definition I suppose it should be no

however what is a definition and what is real life sometimes differs greatly

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, seeing as the words "falling in love" are normally used to refer to romantic love, then I suppose an aromantic would per definition not "fall in love" since they do not experience romantic attraction. But feeling other forms of love and other forms of "falling for someone" in a non-romantic way? I don't see why not.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that under the strictest definition, the answer would have to be "no." But there are a lot of shades of "aromantic."

I identify as aromantic because I have no desire for romantic gestures (cuddling, kissing, verbal affection, etc.) But just as asexuals believe that sex is not necessary for love, I believe that romantic gestures are not necessary, either. I suppose some people would say that my idea of love really isn't love at all, and I'd be okay with that. But I consider love to be the highest emotional connection I am capable of experiencing.

I suppose it would be impossible to distinguish between my idea of love and just being super best friends for life. That's why I prefer to call myself aromatic instead of grayromantic, even though I know the label isn't a perfect fit.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If by "in love" you mean romantically, I think there are some aromantic aces that *could* fall in love if they come to meet a very special person. A bit like one's own sexual orientation, romantic orientation can be fluid, but it's a rather uncommon case.

If you mean not romantically, it's entirely possible. Some aromantics may be hermits, but most of them feel affectionate towards friends, family, and at times even platonic significant others.

So I'd say they are equally capable of love than any other person. They just love differently.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Aromantics surely can't fall in romantic love?

A previously aromantic asexual opened a topic just a few days ago saying he had fallen for a girl and even felt sexual attraction for her... :P

Generally speaking what you said is true. However, I would agree that a vast majority of aromantics doesn't fall in romantic love, not properly all of them - just like there could be a minority of asexuals who turn sexual later on in life, for no apparent reason. Once again, it's a matter of fluidity for some, either (or both) in sexual or/and romantic attraction.

The fact that aromantics don't experience romantic attraction... doesn't strictly mean they can't experience it, I guess. But I wouldn't know how to explain this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it possible for aromantic asexuals to fall in love?

Yes. You don't have to be attracted to someone to fall in love with them. Love does not necessarily equal attraction and attraction does not necessarily equal love.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was reading an article about gender issues the other day and they mentioned how women who form friendships often form romantic relationships with their other female friends, not sexually or in the stereotypical romantic way, but in a way different from male friendships. I don't necessarily agree with that description (though I'm not doing my best to explain), but it made me realize that you can have deep emotional connections with people that are very similar to romantic relationships, minus the sex and valentines day type stuff. Just a thought anyway. It's funny how once you try to define something you realize just how fluid it is.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Aromantics surely can't fall in romantic love?

A previously aromantic asexual opened a topic just a few days ago saying he had fallen for a girl and even felt sexual attraction for her... :P

Generally speaking what you said is true. However, I would agree that a vast majority of aromantics doesn't fall in romantic love, not properly all of them - just like there could be a minority of asexuals who turn sexual later on in life, for no apparent reason. Once again, it's a matter of fluidity for some, either (or both) in sexual or/and romantic attraction.

The fact that aromantics don't experience romantic attraction... doesn't strictly mean they can't experience it, I guess. But I wouldn't know how to explain this.

Aye, the whole fluidity thing is interesting. Of course, if someone's sexuality changes over time, the use of labels is mostly one of convenience. As soon as one experiences sexual attraction, for example, one is patently no longer asexual (leaving aside demisexuality for a moment). Of course, that whole idea loops back on itself.

Is it possible for aromantic asexuals to fall in love?

Yes. You don't have to be attracted to someone to fall in love with them. Love does not necessarily equal attraction and attraction does not necessarily equal love.

This is making me find it really hard to understand the idea of "romantic attraction." The AVEN wiki describes it as "a feeling that causes people to desire a romantic relationship with a specific other person". A very vague description, but if that is not love, what is? If an aromantic feels love, in what way is it not such a feeling?

I'm asking because I really want to know.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It depends on the definitions. To fall in love, does it without fail denote romantic love? For some it does, for others it does not. I identify as aromantic because I fit the definition of aromantic, "a person who does not experience romantic attraction". However, I also feel that I am capable of falling in love, since I think there are lots of different types of love. In my opinion, love is an umbrella term for intense connection in general. I can love objects, my surroundings, my property, myself, other people or basically anything under the sun, but just not in a romantic sense.

I think this explaining resembles explaining the difference between sexual and romantic attraction. For many, "falling in love" inherently hosts a romantic component, just like for many experiencing "attraction" towards another person in general includes sexual attraction. As is evident, in reality love does not always include a romantic component, just like attraction does not always include a sexual component.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it possible for aromantic asexuals to fall in love?

Yes. You don't have to be attracted to someone to fall in love with them. Love does not necessarily equal attraction and attraction does not necessarily equal love.

This is making me find it really hard to understand the idea of "romantic attraction." The AVEN wiki describes it as "a feeling that causes people to desire a romantic relationship with a specific other person". A very vague description, but if that is not love, what is? If an aromantic feels love, in what way is it not such a feeling?

I'm asking because I really want to know.

Love, in my opinion, is a strong emotional connection to someone. And you don't have to be attracted to someone to forge that kind of bond with them.

I would define romantic attraction as being "drawn" to someone else in a non-sexual way (since that's apparently what attraction feels like according to my friends who've felt it).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, yes, I agree absolutely. There's love for parents, siblings, relatives, friends, close friends, teachers... any relationship you can think of.

It's just that "falling in love" tends to universally denote actual romantic love, the kind one usually has for a partner. And I can't help but find it completely paradoxical that an aromantic can experience this.

So the question I'm asking is, given that aromantic people can form strong, emotional bonds with people, is it possible for those bonds to be romantic, and passionate?

It's difficult because we're here dealing with subjective feelings, of course.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, yes, I agree absolutely. There's love for parents, siblings, relatives, friends, close friends, teachers... any relationship you can think of.

It's just that "falling in love" tends to universally denote actual romantic love, the kind one usually has for a partner. And I can't help but find it completely paradoxical that an aromantic can experience this.

So the question I'm asking is, given that aromantic people can form strong, emotional bonds with people, is it possible for those bonds to be romantic, and passionate?

It's difficult because we're here dealing with subjective feelings, of course.

Why not? Attraction is just one component of romantic love, and I don't think it's an absolutely necessary component.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don´t know how much aromantic I am, but probably something about 80%...? I don´t feel a need to search for romantic relationship but I´m capable of falling in love - madly, deadly... I don´t want to but it just happens sometimes. And when it happens, this special person is to me like a muse to a poet, like a mysterious power which can awake the best part of me. And suddenly all those ridiculous romantic matters are not so ridiculous to me anymore. :wub:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Aromantics surely can't fall in romantic love?

A previously aromantic asexual opened a topic just a few days ago saying he had fallen for a girl and even felt sexual attraction for her... :P

Generally speaking what you said is true. However, I would agree that a vast majority of aromantics doesn't fall in romantic love, not properly all of them - just like there could be a minority of asexuals who turn sexual later on in life, for no apparent reason. Once again, it's a matter of fluidity for some, either (or both) in sexual or/and romantic attraction.

The fact that aromantics don't experience romantic attraction... doesn't strictly mean they can't experience it, I guess. But I wouldn't know how to explain this.

I don't believe an aromantic can fall in (romantic) love - if they do, like in the thread mentioned above, then they are no longer aromantic. They feel romantic love for someone, which is counter to aromanticism (is that a word?). Technically, the definition of an aromantic is a person who does not feel romantic attraction, but without romantic attraction, how do you have romantic love?

Yes, yes, I agree absolutely. There's love for parents, siblings, relatives, friends, close friends, teachers... any relationship you can think of.

It's just that "falling in love" tends to universally denote actual romantic love, the kind one usually has for a partner. And I can't help but find it completely paradoxical that an aromantic can experience this.

So the question I'm asking is, given that aromantic people can form strong, emotional bonds with people, is it possible for those bonds to be romantic, and passionate?

It's difficult because we're here dealing with subjective feelings, of course.

Why not? Attraction is just one component of romantic love, and I don't think it's an absolutely necessary component.

In my mind, love without attraction is platonic love. Can you describe romantic love without romantic attraction? Maybe I'm missing something.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I made a very recent topic asking what romantic attraction is...

Personally, I no longer care whether or not my experiences are capable of fitting into boxes. "Falling in love" or not, it doesn't matter. Whatever experience arises simply is, and should be embraced as such. It's too tiring otherwise...

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest member25959

It's already been said, multiple times now. It depends on your definition of love :lol:

If we look at the definition(s):

noun

[mass noun]

1 a strong feeling of affection:

-babies fill parents with intense feelings of love

-their love for their country

*A strong feeling of affection and sexual attraction for someone:

-they were both in love with her

-we were slowly falling in love

*Affectionate greetings conveyed to someone on one’s behalf:

-give her my love

[*]a formula for ending an affectionate letter:

-take care, lots of love, Judy

2 a great interest and pleasure in something:

-his love for football

-we share a love of music

3 [count noun] a person or thing that one loves:

-she was the love of his life

-their two great loves are tobacco and whisky

*British informal a friendly form of address:

-it’s all right, love

-(a love) informal used in affectionate requests:don’t fret, there’s a love

4 (in tennis, squash, and some other sports) a score of zero; nil:

-love fifteen

[apparently from the phrase play for love (i.e. the love of the game, not for money); folk etymology has connected the word with French l'oeuf 'egg', from the resemblance in shape between an egg and a zero]

verb

[with object]

- feel deep affection or sexual love for (someone):

do you love me?

*like or enjoy very much:

-I’d love a cup of tea

-I just love dancing

But for the sake of this post, I'm going to assume you meant:

- feel deep affection or sexual love for (someone):

do you love me?

And let the AVENwiki article answer this.....

An aromantic is a person who experiences little or no romantic attraction to others - where romantic people have an emotional need to be with another person in a romantic relationship, aromantics are often satisfied with friendships and other non-romantic relationships.

http://www.asexuality.org/wiki/Aromantic

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it depends on if that aromantic get squishes or not (though that also depends on your definition of "squish" & if it differs from "friend crush"). Personally, I think I can. If I look at someone I'm squishing on, I'm pretty sure I get the typical romantic [nonsexual] feelings (dreamy swept off your feet sensation, super shy when eyes meet, etc). The only thing that's lacking is the desire for a relationship.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In my mind, love without attraction is platonic love.

Platonic love just means non-sexual love. Which is what a romantic relationship will have if there's no sex.

Can you describe romantic love without romantic attraction? Maybe I'm missing something.

I cannot. I've never felt love (of any kind--long story). What I've said is all in theory based on my observations of other people. And I've noticed that people often confuse attraction and love when in fact they are not synonymous and the presence of one does not necessarily mean the other is present as well.

In my observations, the usual situation is that Person A is attracted to Person B, and A proclaims that they subsequently "love" B even though they also say that they hate B for a myriad of reasons (personality, actions, etc.). So here we have the misguided assumption that attraction means love. Why not flip it? Why is there this idea that love means attraction? Why is attraction treated as a necessary component of a romantic relationship?

But for the sake of this post, I'm going to assume you meant:

- feel deep affection or sexual love for (someone):

do you love me?

And let the AVENwiki article answer this.....

An aromantic is a person who experiences little or no romantic attraction to others - where romantic people have an emotional need to be with another person in a romantic relationship, aromantics are often satisfied with friendships and other non-romantic relationships.

http://www.asexuality.org/wiki/Aromantic

Which does not preclude the possibility of an aromantic falling in love/being in a romantic relationship. It's just not a common occurrence is all. ^_^

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't use the term "falling in love," personally, because that calls up connotations of like Disney princesses meeting price charming and swooning in their arms.

It's possible for aromantics to love people, but I just wouldn't say "fall in love" with people, because of the association wihh romantic love.

I don't believe an aromantic can fall in (romantic) love - if they do, like in the thread mentioned above, then they are no longer aromantic.

this.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest member25959

But for the sake of this post, I'm going to assume you meant:

- feel deep affection or sexual love for (someone):

do you love me?

And let the AVENwiki article answer this.....

An aromantic is a person who experiences little or no romantic attraction to others - where romantic people have an emotional need to be with another person in a romantic relationship, aromantics are often satisfied with friendships and other non-romantic relationships.

http://www.asexuality.org/wiki/Aromantic

Which does not preclude the possibility of an aromantic falling in love/being in a romantic relationship. It's just not a common occurrence is all. ^_^

I wouldn't have said that they were Aromantic if they fell in love. They may have been Aromantic previously, but once they have fallen in love, they no longer fit the description aromantic.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Which does not preclude the possibility of an aromantic falling in love/being in a romantic relationship. It's just not a common occurrence is all. ^_^

I doubt that if someone fell in love/had a romantic relationship, they would call themselves "aromantic", just like I doubt that a sexual would call themselves "asexual". There's no reason to.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hell yes Arca, exactly what I meant. I think aromantics can fall in love precisely for that reason - they could be aromantic up to a certain date, then turn romantic.

That's not the only case though. They may as well fall in love in spite of not wanting a romantic relationship (maybe that'd be more of a gray-romantic, but I'll say it nevertheless).

Ugh, it's so damn hard to get my point across.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Love is an unfortunate affliction that can strike anyone, even those who don't want it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Gah, I feel like I'm not getting my point across here. Okay. Aromantic = lack of romantic attraction. It has nothing to do with love, romantic relationships, etc. To say that it does is like saying asexuality is about not wanting sex when it's actually just the lack of sexual attraction.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My whole problem here is that, from where I'm standing, romantic attraction is love. (Let's discard the other kinds of love; I'm talking solely about romantic love, not love for football or one's family or whatever.)

If romantic attraction is not love, what on earth is it? What, you look at someone and you're like "Ooh yeah, I'd so fall in love with that person!"?

Even you delve into the notion of "primary" and "secondary" romantic attraction, it doesn't get clearer. We can situate the two on a cline representing how long you've known someone and how well you know them; primary attraction is at the "not well known" end of the spectrum and secondary toward the other end. Two hypothetical scenarios unfold:

1) You meet someone, and are instantly or soon infatuated with them to some degree. This can die quickly, or grow stronger or whatever.

2) Not incompatible with the first scenario, over time you develop romantic feelings toward someone. Call it love, whatever.

My question is this: how is that feeling distinguished from being "attracted" to someone? This whole thing sounds like nothing more than a matter of semantics that is spiralling toward the reification of romantic attraction as distinct from love. "The creation, through discourse, of an object which does not exist."

Seriously, I just really want to understand all of this.

To say that it does is like saying asexuality is about not wanting sex when it's actually just the lack of sexual attraction.

Actually I was thinking about this yesterday. If I can doctor your statement a little, and change "not wanting sex" into "not wanting sex with a specific, corporeal person", then what distinguishes this from not being sexually attracted to them?

Edit: And by "wanting to have sex with them" I don't mean solely in order to please them, to procreate or to profit.

Seriously curious, here.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest member25959

Gah, I feel like I'm not getting my point across here. Okay. Aromantic = lack of romantic attraction. It has nothing to do with love, romantic relationships, etc. To say that it does is like saying asexuality is about not wanting sex when it's actually just the lack of sexual attraction.

Uh, love is pretty much romantic attraction, what else would it be? Even considering the Oxford Dictionary's definition: ''Feel deep affection or sexual love for (someone)'', you could say that affection differs from romantic attraction, I'd say that it depends on the affection and the type of ''love''. Looking at that word, ''affection'' brings a point to mind, it could be an affection for a family member, in which case, you love your family member. But again, that's an entirely different kind of love, but you still love them.

Now, in the point that we are trying to argue here (I think?) are you arguing that an Aromantic can fall in love with a partner? In this case, I'd have called that a platonic attraction, definitely not love.

And your example, I'd agree, using my example that I just used. You can love people, like family members, but yoiu can't 'love love' someone, like a partner, in which case they are not a partner, they are a friend.

And I can see this going only one way, dicing up an already unofficial definition of aromantic and more labels.

My whole problem here is that, from where I'm standing, romantic attraction is love. (Let's discard the other kinds of love; I'm talking solely about romantic love, not love for football or one's family or whatever.)

If romantic attraction is not love, what on earth is it? What, you look at someone and you're like "Ooh yeah, I'd so fall in love with that person!"?

Or this ^

Link to post
Share on other sites

*sigh* Fine, forget it. I've created a semantic black hole (again). Apparently I'm the only one who sees a distinction between romantic love and romantic attraction. :(

Link to post
Share on other sites

I associate "love" with the kind of dynamic that exists between old couples who have spent an entire life together. In the sense that the deep intimacy is not characterized by romance, romantic attraction, or passion. Love is just love. I have issues with the idea of a distinction between different kinds of love. Each person I am able to profess love for, I love equally. This is not a word that I use lightly at all; I am only able to see it being used in cases where a commitment and degree of intimacy has been achieved, ie. relationships, life companionships

Does that help?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...