Jump to content

So I learned that I am quioromantic... HELP!


BrownHat22

Recommended Posts

Hello everyone,

 

After talking with other members on this site, I figured out that I have a very hard time discerning between romanic and platonic emotion (see also quioromantic). That being said, I HATE not knowing something, and I like to be able to analyze and deduce exactly what it is that I am feeling, so if possible could the non-aros of this site describe what romantic attraction feels like? To me, I've always valued the emotional and mental qualities of a potential partner over their looks (e.g. do we get along well, do I enjoy spending time with this person). However, those are also the same qualities that I look for in a potential friend. For context, I have never been in a serious relationship before, but I have attempted to flirt with others. Any help on this would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

First off I'd like to say I love your avy! ^_^

 

Now...for me romantic attraction feels like a sort of giddy nervousness. Like butterflies in my chest and stomach. It can honestly border on unpleasant or annoying at times. :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I tried to figure this out for years and years.  

 

What I've discovered is that "romance" has quite a few definitions, and some of them are wildly different from one another.  That seems pretty arbitrary to me, and so I've had to accept that some people might consider all my relationships romantic, and others might consider zero of them romantic.  I used to try and define myself as one thing or another based on the various definitions I encountered, but no matter what I did, I was inaccurately presenting myself to others, which would result in broken expectations and conflicted relationships.

 

I also hate "not knowing" something, but in this particular case, I'm not sure there is anything to know, except what you are looking for in a relationship and what others are.  Getting a feel for how other people define the "romance" label is useful, but ultimately if you have a potential serious relationship on the horizon, trying to sum up where you stand with one word that has too many definitions probably won't cut it.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
swirl_of_blue

There's a test I've figured out that is pretty foolproof for me. I'm not sure if it would work for anyone else, and it certainly does not work for touch-averse and non-sensual people. I imagine kissing the person, and if my reaction is "eww, no", I'm feeling platonic attraction. On the very, very rare case it's actually romantic attraction (maybe two or three cases during my whole life, and I'm 26) my reaction is somewhere along the lines of ".....mmmaybe?". In place (or in addition) to the kissing I can also imagine other things: telling someone the person is my partner, having them touch me in somewhat intimate manner (skin to skin around the waist is a very good indicator for me), touching their face or having them touch mine, and touching my face to their neck. I've used this method to realise what I thought had been a crush is actually a squish and I can apply it "retroactively" to earlier interests I used to think were romantic attraction. I don't use many of the very traditional signs of romance, as I don't like going on dates, would be embarrassed if someone confessed their love to me and certainly don't want to be "pampered" without a very good reason.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Retrobot said:

First off I'd like to say I love your avy! ^_^

 

Now...for me romantic attraction feels like a sort of giddy nervousness. Like butterflies in my chest and stomach. It can honestly border on unpleasant or annoying at times. :lol:

Thank you! Sorry if this is an obvious question, but what is an avy?

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, BrownHat22 said:

Thank you! Sorry if this is an obvious question, but what is an avy?

Oh! It's short for avatar, the picture that appears under your name when you post. ^_^

Link to post
Share on other sites

You know, having thought about your post a bit, I almost think that the definition currently presented for quioromantic could be extended or even rephrased a bit.  It's an approximation of course, because it's a tough concept to explain.  

 

I would amend that those who are quioromantic either cannot distinguish or simply do not distinguish between platonic and romantic attraction or relationships.

 

Because there is no single definition of romance, it does not necessarily come down to not knowing the difference between platonic and romantic--it may simply be that in our cases, there is no difference.  Those who experience romance as a distinct situation have developed a personal definition for it, and it is one that doesn't leave many or any fuzzy gray areas.  In my case, I simply don't have that concept in my head, so developing a distinction between types of relationships is unnecessary for me.  It could be like that for you too.  Of course, it helps if we can try to create a cognitive map to understand the distinctions that others perceive, but those vary quite a lot from person to person.  But it isn't necessary to artificially impose a concept in your own head that doesn't fit what you feel, think and experience.  For me, distinctions in relationships come from the unique nuances of the individual relationships I share with individuals persons--not from a set of categories.  Every person I care for stands in a class that is utterly their own, defined by their uniqueness and their special connection with me, not a label.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, litanies said:

Of course, it helps if we can try to create a cognitive map to understand the distinctions that others perceive, but those vary quite a lot from person to person.  But it isn't necessary to artificially impose a concept in your own head that doesn't fit what you feel, think and experience.  For me, distinctions in relationships come from the unique nuances of the individual relationships I share with individuals persons--not from a set of categories.  Every person I care for stands in a class that is utterly their own, defined by their uniqueness and their special connection with me, not a label.

Thank you! This does help a lot, by the way. I guess I was stereotyping a bit when I assumed that if everyone else experienced the emotion, that it must be similar in some shape or form, but I completely overlooked the inherently chemical aspect of romantic love's effect on the brain, thus making it a unique experience for each individual. I guess this is simply something that I have to go out and experience before I can truly grasp it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, BrownHat22 said:

Thank you! This does help a lot, by the way. I guess I was stereotyping a bit when I assumed that if everyone else experienced the emotion, that it must be similar in some shape or form, but I completely overlooked the inherently chemical aspect of romantic love's effect on the brain, thus making it a unique experience for each individual. I guess this is simply something that I have to go out and experience before I can truly grasp it.

If it makes you feel better, plenty of definitely-romantic people stereotype too.  I think it's a common mistake to generalize our experiences.  Even a word like "love" can mean incredibly different things to different people.  So a concept like romance is going to be very divergent as well.  

 

I mean, just as some examples:

  • Yesterday someone explained her concept of "romantic" involves kissing and making out, but doing so is not necessarily sexual.  I can't relate to that, because for me those things just fall under "sexual."  On that note, you'll find romantic aces who enjoy those same activities, and other romantic aces who are indifferent to them, and still others who are repulsed by them.  Obviously in each situation, you'd have a different definition of romance.  Someone who dislikes the same exact activities and experiences which define "romantic" for one person may still identify as "romantic" in a different way.
  • I have heard many poetic descriptions of romantic love as butterflies-in-your-stomach head-over-heels emotional "falling" and so forth.  I've rarely had that experience of "falling", but I'm pretty flat emotionally and pragmatic in selection.  But I'd argue that what I experience is just as intense--it's just more cerebral and steady.  But is it the same thing?  Doesn't seem like it.  That may come back to your mention of a chemical aspect.  To whatever extent I have experienced those chemical reactions before, I haven't valued them much, and to me they feel like infatuation only.  I mean, I can love a person, but I need a reason, and for me, chemicals aren't one.  I derive value elsewhere.  But for some people, they are the end-all-be-all.
  • Google tells me that romance may be defined as "excitement and mystery" surrounding love.  If that is true, I am always romantic.  I mean, if I don't find a relationship exciting and do not appreciate the depths and mystery in another person, I probably am quite bored with that person and unlikely to have a strong bond of any sort.  Then again, Google tells me it may also involve "idealizing" a relationship (separate definition), and past a certain point, I never do that.  
  • I've heard romance defined as when your interest in a relationship revolves around the other person, not simply a shared interest.  By that definition, all my most important relationships are romantic.  People with whom I simply share interests are correspondents and activity partners (and valued accordingly), but they are not necessarily friends.
  • Some people also define a romantic relationship as an exclusive one.  But that doesn't even apply in my case since I am poly.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...