sindi Posted January 16, 2017 Share Posted January 16, 2017 I've faced a lot of confusion what comes to my romantic orientation - being confused myself, but maybe even more so confusing others, particularly here on AVEN - because I feel romantic attraction, but don't want a relationship. Some have said, that I should identify as aromatic, or close to that, but I don't feel that way at all. So, maybe it would help me and others in the same boat to put it this way: I'm romantic, but I've chosen to be "celibate" from romances and relationships for personal reasons. Does that make things any more clear? Link to post Share on other sites
Tainted Posted January 18, 2017 Share Posted January 18, 2017 I think romantic celibate is open to misinterpretation, people may assume that you are choosing asexuality as celibate outright relates to sex and nothing else. Would suggest that romance abstinent would perhaps be a less confusing phrase? Link to post Share on other sites
sindi Posted January 18, 2017 Author Share Posted January 18, 2017 34 minutes ago, Tainted said: I think romantic celibate is open to misinterpretation, people may assume that you are choosing asexuality as celibate outright relates to sex and nothing else. Would suggest that romance abstinent would perhaps be a less confusing phrase? Maybe... or maybe I won't use any specific word, but start saying that I'm romantic, but refrain from relationships... or something like that. I just considered the word "celibate" because it could highlight how me refraining from romance doesn't define my orientation, in the same way as for someone who is sexual, being celibate doesn't define their sexual orientation. Link to post Share on other sites
Éadweard Posted January 18, 2017 Share Posted January 18, 2017 There's always the question of why do you have to identify as anything if it's confusing to you? What's wrong with just saying you don't want a relationship? Link to post Share on other sites
sindi Posted January 18, 2017 Author Share Posted January 18, 2017 3 hours ago, Just like Jughead said: There's always the question of why do you have to identify as anything if it's confusing to you? What's wrong with just saying you don't want a relationship? Well, in real life it's plenty enough, but on AVEN when we are discussing these very things in detail, saying that I don't want a relationship has led to some people questioning whether I can be romantic at all. Oh, or do you mean that I should in fact not identify as a romantic because I'm "confused"? But I don't even feel confused about that part anymore, I want to and do identify as romantic, because it feels right. Link to post Share on other sites
borkfork Posted January 18, 2017 Share Posted January 18, 2017 You might find this helpful. There are some additional terms like nonamory. Link to post Share on other sites
sindi Posted January 19, 2017 Author Share Posted January 19, 2017 11 hours ago, borkfork said: You might find this helpful. There are some additional terms like nonamory. I have read through the list but... are you too telling me, that I shouldn't identify as romantic? well, I guess I dould check the list again if there possibly could be some useful addition to my identity as biromantic, but I do't really think that my non-desire for relationships has to do with my actual orientation. It stems purely from personal issues (if you want to call them that), such as commitment-phobia, difficulty to connect to people, being extremely introverted (in fact, having schizoid personality disorder). Link to post Share on other sites
sindi Posted January 19, 2017 Author Share Posted January 19, 2017 Actually, "nonamory" was a helpful term, so thanks! But should I say that I'm a nonamorous biromantic, or have does that word work? Link to post Share on other sites
banana monkey Posted January 20, 2017 Share Posted January 20, 2017 On 18/01/2017 at 8:44 PM, sindi said: , saying that I don't want a relationship has led to some people questioning whether I can be romantic at all. I want to and do identify as romantic, because it feels right. On 19/01/2017 at 8:34 AM, sindi said: I have read through the list but... are you too telling me, that I shouldn't identify as romantic? well, I guess I dould check the list again if there possibly could be some useful addition to my identity as biromantic, but I do't really think that my non-desire for relationships has to do with my actual orientation. It stems purely from personal issues (if you want to call them that), such as commitment-phobia, difficulty to connect to people, being extremely introverted (in fact, having schizoid personality disorder). Its just difficult for some people (me included) to understand because romantic attraction tends to be defined as "attraction towards a person you want to have a (romantic) relationship with. or "the feeling that makes you want to be in a (romantic) relationship with a person. Applying this to What you first said, made it difficult to understand how you were experiencing romantic attraction when you didnt want a relationship, but the above post explains better, it seems that you can because if all these "personal issues" were removed you would want a relationship with the person. Is that correct? If so, thankyou for helpng me understand romantic attraction better. Link to post Share on other sites
sindi Posted January 21, 2017 Author Share Posted January 21, 2017 19 hours ago, banana monkey said: if all these "personal issues" were removed you would want a relationship with the person. Is that correct? Possibly, but I don't agree about the definition of romantic attraction being a desire to form a relationship anyway. To me, it's simply a feeling - a crush on someone - and what I want or don't want to do with it, is a different matter altogether. Think about it - sexual attraction is also not defined as a desire to have a sexual relationship with someone, it's rather a desire to have sex (well, one could argue that it's not that simple, but that's beyond the point). In the same way as a sexual can have one night's stands without a relationship, couldn't a romantic have fleeting "romances", maybe in the form of some flirting or just enjoying the feeling of the crush? Link to post Share on other sites
DreamsAreImportant Posted January 22, 2017 Share Posted January 22, 2017 On 1/16/2017 at 1:38 AM, sindi said: I've faced a lot of confusion what comes to my romantic orientation - being confused myself, but maybe even more so confusing others, particularly here on AVEN - because I feel romantic attraction, but don't want a relationship. Some have said, that I should identify as aromatic, or close to that, but I don't feel that way at all. So, maybe it would help me and others in the same boat to put it this way: I'm romantic, but I've chosen to be "celibate" from romances and relationships for personal reasons. Does that make things any more clear? I totally relate to ya. I like romantic attention like maybe hitting on someone or getting hit back on, but you don't want a relationship. Rather you want someone throughout life to be with you as a friend, but nothing more? Link to post Share on other sites
sindi Posted January 22, 2017 Author Share Posted January 22, 2017 1 minute ago, DreamsAreImportant said: I totally relate to ya. I like romantic attention like maybe hitting on someone or getting hit back on, but you don't want a relationship. Rather you want someone throughout life to be with you as a friend, but nothing more? Yeah, and not even necessarily "throughout life". Well, of course the best case scenario in friendship is, that it lasts throughout life, but I mean, that I don't really want a committed queer-platonic partnership either. Of course, if I'm fully head over heels in love with someone, I might feel that I want to be with them forever and always, but that has only happened once in my life this far, and those feelings were towards a heterosexual girl, so... Link to post Share on other sites
DreamsAreImportant Posted January 22, 2017 Share Posted January 22, 2017 10 minutes ago, sindi said: Yeah, and not even necessarily "throughout life". Well, of course the best case scenario in friendship is, that it lasts throughout life, but I mean, that I don't really want a committed queer-platonic partnership either. Of course, if I'm fully head over heels in love with someone, I might feel that I want to be with them forever and always, but that has only happened once in my life this far, and those feelings were towards a heterosexual girl, so... oh wow and Im assuming she didn't reciprocate back. I don't know how to feel to be head over heel in love though. Sometimes I walk through life feeling like I'm flowing through the hyperspace of time just to go to the end. Link to post Share on other sites
sindi Posted January 22, 2017 Author Share Posted January 22, 2017 20 minutes ago, DreamsAreImportant said: oh wow and Im assuming she didn't reciprocate back. I don't know how to feel to be head over heel in love though. Sometimes I walk through life feeling like I'm flowing through the hyperspace of time just to go to the end. Nope... I tried to explain my feelings to her, but downplayed them a little to not appear creepy, because it was obvious, that she was (and is) straight. Besides, we had been friends for ages, and it had been quite clear, that I wasn't even as important to her as a friend as she was to me. I definitely often feel that I just float through life, without goals or anything to look forwards to. Thankfully I have my imagination, that makes life worth living (without it, I'd see no point at all). Link to post Share on other sites
banana monkey Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 On 21/01/2017 at 7:27 PM, sindi said: Possibly, but I don't agree about the definition of romantic attraction being a desire to form a relationship anyway. To me, it's simply a feeling - a crush on someone - and what I want or don't want to do with it, is a different matter altogether. Think about it - sexual attraction is also not defined as a desire to have a sexual relationship with someone, it's rather a desire to have sex (well, one could argue that it's not that simple, but that's beyond the point). In the same way as a sexual can have one night's stands without a relationship, couldn't a romantic have fleeting "romances", maybe in the form of some flirting or just enjoying the feeling of the crush? Yeah, now you explain it that way i kinda get what you mean. You want romance but not a relationship? I suppose if you use my (likely incorrect) definition Cupioromantism would not exist. (There is a very active debate about whether cupioromantics are romantic or aromantic but thats a different topic) It seems you want the opposite but I dont know if there is a word for that. Link to post Share on other sites
banana monkey Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 To go back to the original post, if that is correct,following the same logic , given that if one is sexually celibate they dont have sex at all (ie no one night stands) even with sexual attraction. a romance celibate would have no fleeting romances, flirting etc either, I dont think, dont really know though this is a new area for me. Link to post Share on other sites
sindi Posted January 23, 2017 Author Share Posted January 23, 2017 5 minutes ago, banana monkey said: To go back to the original post, if that is correct,following the same logic , given that if one is sexually celibate they dont have sex at all (ie no one night stands) even with sexual attraction. a romance celibate would have no fleeting romances, flirting etc either, I dont think, dont really know though this is a new area for me. Well, true... and I actually don't do those kinds of things, because I don't want to lead people on But I gave them as examples of things that a romantic person could enjoy even if they don't desire an actual relationship. I think it might actually be a part of "anatonormativity" (or maybe there's a different word for the normativity of seeking out relationships) that everything is supposed to lead to a relationship. Link to post Share on other sites
banana monkey Posted January 27, 2017 Share Posted January 27, 2017 On 23/01/2017 at 10:12 AM, sindi said: Well, true... and I actually don't do those kinds of things, because I don't want to lead people on But I gave them as examples of things that a romantic person could enjoy even if they don't desire an actual relationship. I think it might actually be a part of "anatonormativity" (or maybe there's a different word for the normativity of seeking out relationships) that everything is supposed to lead to a relationship. enjoy and desire are different things though. An asexual can (rarely) enjoy sex with a partner but they don't desire it. It is the not desiring it that makes them asexual. So, people can enjoy the things you mentioned regardless of being romantic or aromantic. Are you saying that a romantic can desire the things you mentioned, without desiring a relationship. ie they (and possibly you) desire romance. It is difficult to understand how you can desire romance without having an object/person of affection towards. Anyway, are you saying you desire romance (not in a relationship but as fleeting romances) but choose not to act on those desires for fleeting romance at all (because you dont want to lead people on) and as such are celibate because you choose not to act on your desires at all. Link to post Share on other sites
sindi Posted January 28, 2017 Author Share Posted January 28, 2017 8 hours ago, banana monkey said: It is difficult to understand how you can desire romance without having an object/person of affection towards. Of course there is a person that those feelings are directed at... 8 hours ago, banana monkey said: Anyway, are you saying you desire romance (not in a relationship but as fleeting romances) but choose not to act on those desires for fleeting romance at all (because you dont want to lead people on) and as such are celibate because you choose not to act on your desires at all. Yeah, sounds about right. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.