The distinction between Love and Romance

[Ortac]

Greetings everyone.

I have been musing in my mind over asexuality, romanticism and aromanticism. Knowing that I am asexual for me was the easy part. The term ‘asexual’ has a pretty straightforward, clear definition and I know definitively that I do not experience any sort of sexual attraction towards anyone.

However when it comes to romantic attraction, knowing what it even is and whether I am capable of it is a completely different matter. I never have felt it, but the idea that I might be aromantic and not capable of feeling it, even if I met the right person and became really fond of them, is something that perturbs me somewhat.

I am thinking about romantic attraction and romantic feelings here, not romantic behavior – just as asexuals are physically capable of engaging in sexual behavior if they so choose, anyone can presumably engage in romantic behavior by cuddling, kissing, buying gifts et cetera, et cetera, even if it is not backed up by genuine feelings.

For most of us asexuals, the notions of love and sexual attraction are completely separate things with no connection, but among today’s sexual society the definition of love seems to include a sexual element. I am sure many of us who look at other internet discussions outside AVEN have heard or read somewhere that irritating phrase: “My husband / boyfriend doesn’t want to have sex with me! That means he can’t love me anymore!” or “My wife / girlfriend doesn’t want to have sex with me! That means she can’t love me anymore!”

My ideal of love is feeling emotionally attached to someone, where you feel a great feeling of contentment when they are present, you feel sad if you are separated for any length of time, and where you care deeply about that person’s happiness, to the extent that if they are happy, you feel happy, and if they are sad, you feed sad because they are sad. I have experienced such feelings, but only towards some children with whom I have formed a friendship, and towards my pets! Never towards anyone from my peer group.

So when you remove sex from the equation, is there any difference between the sort of love that an asexual person might feel towards a pet, son, daughter or parent, and that which you feel towards a boyfriend, girlfriend or partner? Or should the romance element add something more to it?

If in time I feel love towards someone in the manner that I have described above (for someone who is not a child or an animal but an adult!), and engage in what would be considered romantic behavior, such as buying chocolates, flowers, having a candlelit dinner or whatever, is that genuine romance? Or is it just romantic behavior? Whilst I hope that my notion of love is sound, I think I must be missing something because most people would probably agree that feeling or being romantic is not something that would be directed towards children or pets!

So are love and romance intrinsically linked? Or are they separate things altogether?

Can you be aromantic but still love someone? Conversely, can you not love someone but still feel romantic towards them?

Have I even got the right idea about what love is!?

I would welcome your comments, opinions and experiences on this.

[Guest]

I don't think love and romance are linked. In my opinion romance is more connected with sexual desire and love can also be a pure one.

I think aromantic people can feel aesthetical affection or sth like that. I'm not sure.

[Copper]

There are many types of love. So love can be separate from romance, but there is such a thing as a romantic love as well. Being aromantic myself I can't describe the feeling to you. Being aromantic has nothing to do with your ability to love, as there are so many types of love that can exist without romance. Some people form deep platonic relationships that are considered as emotionally intimate as a romantic relationship. Only you can determine whether or not you're aromantic, but I wouldn't worry about your ability to love or be loved.

[Rising Sun]

@ Hayley, if romance was sexual, then there wouldn't be any romantic asexuals.

So are love and romance intrinsically linked? Or are they separate things altogether?

They are separate things. IMO, there are 3 kinds of love : friendship, family love and romantic love. All 3 can be combined, or not.

Can you be aromantic but still love someone?

Yes, totally, with friendship or family love (try a research with "queerplatonic relationships"). You can value your best friend or brother / sister of heart's life and happiness a million times more than you value your own life.

Conversely, can you not love someone but still feel romantic towards them?

Certainly, and a good example in romantic relationships is "love at first sight" : these relationships tend to end very badly, because these two persons don't even really know each other and are just physically attracted by each other. In many cases, romance is just attraction, not love (but people still think wrongly that they experienced "true love", because simple attraction can be extremely intense and sometimes even very long-lasting). "Puppy love" is a perfect example of that.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limerence

Have I even got the right idea about what love is!?

http://www.asexuality.org/en/topic/106763-what-is-love/

If you want my opinion about it, it's when somebody else's life and happiness are so important for you that they have become more important than your own life.

[Fire & Rain]

However when it comes to romantic attraction, knowing what it even is and whether I am capable of it is a completely different matter. I never have felt it, but the idea that I might be aromantic and not capable of feeling it, even if I met the right person and became really fond of them, is something that perturbs me somewhat.

- You can still get into a romantic relationship without feeling the romantic attraction. I have although none of them worked out. If you aren't romance repulsed or your partner is fine with it, it could work out.

I am thinking about romantic attraction and romantic feelings here, not romantic behavior – just as asexuals are physically capable of engaging in sexual behavior if they so choose, anyone can presumably engage in romantic behavior by cuddling, kissing, buying gifts et cetera, et cetera, even if it is not backed up by genuine feelings.

- I'm almost completely aromantic and occasionally repulsed by romantic gestures but I find myself enjoying some aspects of what can be considered romance. It's very contradictory lol So how come I enjoy some of it? This is my theory. The things you described can be interpreted as platonic affection too. I don't view them as particularly romantic. When I'm engaging myself in the behaviors you mentioned, I meant it to be affectionate but platonically. What I am saying is you can give and receive the level of emotional and physical intimacy in a non-traditional friendships or queer platonic relationships if you can find the people who are up for it.

So, yeah. Totally! My feelings are genuine. They are just not romantic.

For most of us asexuals, the notions of love and sexual attraction are completely separate things with no connection, but among today’s sexual society the definition of love seems to include a sexual element. I am sure many of us who look at other internet discussions outside AVEN have heard or read somewhere that irritating phrase: “My husband / boyfriend doesn’t want to have sex with me! That means he can’t love me anymore!” or “My wife / girlfriend doesn’t want to have sex with me! That means she can’t love me anymore!”

- Not every allosexual thinks that way. I've met a few who thinks outside the box. Don't worry :) They exist!

My ideal of love is feeling emotionally attached to someone, where you feel a great feeling of contentment when they are present, you feel sad if you are separated for any length of time, and where you care deeply about that person’s happiness, to the extent that if they are happy, you feel happy, and if they are sad, you feed sad because they are sad. I have experienced such feelings, but only towards some children with whom I have formed a friendship, and towards my pets! Never towards anyone from my peer group.

- That's what I always use, "emotional connection", when I describe "love" to other people. I've felt it towards my family and my squishes. It's more than enough for me. Feeling "love" towards a closer age group doesn't make it greater or less. The level of love we feel for each loved one might not be the same.

So when you remove sex from the equation, is there any difference between the sort of love that an asexual person might feel towards a pet, son, daughter or parent, and that which you feel towards a boyfriend, girlfriend or partner? Or should the romance element add something more to it?

- That's subjective. Some might say there's no difference. Others beg to differ. The real question is what do you think? Do you think there's a difference? Romantic behavior and element is also very subjective. It's cultural, personal and media influenced. As I mentioned above some of the things I do with my squishes can be interpreted as romance but I don't see it that way. Love itself is a very basic and pure feeling. If you want to add more stuff to it, you can but it might not make it stronger.

If in time I feel love towards someone in the manner that I have described above (for someone who is not a child or an animal but an adult!), and engage in what would be considered romantic behavior, such as buying chocolates, flowers, having a candlelit dinner or whatever, is that genuine romance? Or is it just romantic behavior?

- Those things are not love. They are just ways to show affection. Even alloromantics are not into all of that stuff. Some do it to please their partners. When I do romantic things even though I don't consider them as romantic, I meant all of it. Whether you have romantic feelings or not is irrelevant. If you meant it, it's genuine.

So are love and romance intrinsically linked? Or are they separate things altogether?

- Romance itself is not love. Forcing yourself to do romantic things will not bring you love.

Can you be aromantic but still love someone? Conversely, can you not love someone but still feel romantic towards them?

- Yes, you can. And yes, you don't need to love someone to have romantic feelings for them.

[The Wreyck]

For the longest time I've gone by aromantic, not understanding what romantic love fully was or how it was supposed to feel, I figured I wasn't capable of it and moved on, looking for other types of intimate relationships that in my mind seemed lacking that "romantic" quality of feelings on my part. Considering that when people did like me romantically, even asexuals, they seemed to desire something different from what I was desiring.

Now, recently I discovered what may or may not be romantic love. I initially took it to be the strongest squish of my lifetime, but after discussing the feelings with my closest human whom I tell everything, she determined it to most likely have switched into romantic attraction somewhere along the way of my friendship with this guy. It DEFINITELY feels different than my friendships and even my QPR, it's odd in a way, how I just get lost in his world, in his voice, in his presence, in everything about him. My mind clears and stops working on overdrive (which at first scared me because NOTHING has ever been able to do that, absolutely NOTHING). I just, relax. The ability to relax is a miracle for me. I choose to believe that this is romantic love, though I'm still unsure. Because though this is distinctly not like any other love I've felt, it doesn't seem to be quite the same as what he feels for me. I know I feel unconditional love far higher than this romantic love for sure, and so maybe my love priorities are different than his, I dunno. And maybe some of the difference is that he is sexual, and I am not. But I get the feeling there are more differences than that. Like I said, romantic love is confusing, and it means different things to different people. Because it is something in our own heart that we decide for ourselves.

I would like to point out that romantic love is not automatically the stronger love. I dislike the term "more than friends" because it implies that romantic love is somehow stronger than platonic love, and I do not believe that to automatically be true. I think different people put higher priority in different forms of love. Example, the phrases "sisters before misters" and "bros before hoes" signify that the friendship is more important than the SO at times. You see? Really, in general love is a confusing thing, though.

[Ortac]

Thanks everyone, it is amazing to get so many replies so quickly. I am coming around to thinking that I am probably aromantic. I have never had so much as a squish or a crush in all my life, let alone a close relationship or the urge to seek one... so far.

[WhenSummersGone]

I think love could mean anything, like the love you have for your pets, a job, friends, family, partner, or whatever. I see love as meaning anything really.

Romantic love is hard to explain but I'll explain how I feel. I feel roses are romantic, fancy dinners, holding hands, kissing, cuddling, falling in love and companionship. I don't mean companionship like what you have with a pet. I feel romantic shows make sense to me and I feel what is happening. Also I understand the desire for marriage but marriage doesn't have much to do with a feeling.

Platonic love is something I have felt for a friend. Just someone I enjoy hanging out with even though I'm not in love with them. I wouldn't want to be affectionate with them and I definitely wouldn't marry them.

I'm not sure if that helped but that's how I feel.

[passionatefriend61]

Romance and romantic attraction are not love. Love exists outside of and apart from romance. There are romantic relationships that do not include love. So, yes, aromantic-spectrum people can love others in all kinds of ways; there are more nonromantic forms of love than romantic, after all. Aromantics can also feel love for someone who is their partner, albeit a nonromantic partner.

Romance and romantic attraction are whatever you personally define it as. There's no universal set of rules or definition. Stereotypical romantic behavior is romantic to many people, but there are romantic people who have no interest in using those expressions and aromantic people who do use them nonromantically. It really is all about your own personal feelings/intentions/perception. When you take sex out of the equation and compare notes between romantic and aromantic asexuals, one person's idea of a "romantic" relationship or "romantic" love is someone else's nonromantic relationship/love.

I like to think of love as flour and relationships as baked goods: a loving romantic relationship could be a cake, a loving/nonromantic but queerplatonic/passionate/primary friendship + partnership could be bread--both have flour in them but they are two different things and the flour itself is the same in both, it's only the other ingredients that make the difference.

[WhenSummersGone]

Some romantic relationships are love and romance can be love, but I'm not going to get into a Hot Box debate about this. I'm just saying it depends on the relationship.