Cupioromantic vs aromantic- and what is "wanting a romantic relationship"

[gray-a girl]

I think I definitely identify as cupiosexual...even though I'm not fond of the name. But I'm not sure if I'm cupioromantic or just aromantic.

I definitely don't have a romantic attraction to people. But, what counts as wanting to have a romantic relationship? I want to fall in love (I fell in love accidentally and its amazing). But I don't connect that love to things like romantic dinners, or kissing, or any of the typical "romantic" things. Its in no way a romantic type of love, not at all. But the intensity of it is the same, I think, as a typical allosexual and how they feel about their partner. It definitely goes way beyond platonic or friendship and I would definitely call it love.

So does simply wanting to be in love make me cupioromantic? Even though its not really a romantic type of love?

[TheAP]

Moved from Questions about Asexuality to Romantic and Aromantic Orientations.

 

TheAP

Questions about Asexuality co-mod

[StormySky]

Define "cupioromantic"; I've never heard that term before.

[KendraPM]

32 minutes ago, StormySky said:

Define "cupioromantic"; I've never heard that term before.

Cupioromantic: an aromantic who desires a romantic relationship.

[StormySky]

Just now, KendraPM said:

Cupioromantic: an aromantic who desires a romantic relationship.

So basically not feeling "romantic attraction" but wanting to love someone?

 

Makes sense. Thank you!!

[KendraPM]

1 minute ago, StormySky said:

So basically not feeling "romantic attraction" but wanting to love someone?

 

Makes sense. Thank you!!

No problem.  

Some cupioromantics describe it that way, some say it's the relationship they want, not the loving someone.

There's cupiosexual as well, which is an asexual who wants a sexual relationship.

[KendraPM]

1 hour ago, gray-a girl said:

I think I definitely identify as cupiosexual...even though I'm not fond of the name. But I'm not sure if I'm cupioromantic or just aromantic.

I definitely don't have a romantic attraction to people. But, what counts as wanting to have a romantic relationship? I want to fall in love (I fell in love accidentally and its amazing). But I don't connect that love to things like romantic dinners, or kissing, or any of the typical "romantic" things. Its in no way a romantic type of love, not at all. But the intensity of it is the same, I think, as a typical allosexual and how they feel about their partner. It definitely goes way beyond platonic or friendship and I would definitely call it love.

So does simply wanting to be in love make me cupioromantic? Even though its not really a romantic type of love?

Some cupioromantics would say that is what it is, other's might say it's the desire for the relationship, not the feelings, that define the term for them.

[Star Bit]

1 hour ago, KendraPM said:

Cupioromantic: an aromantic who desires a romantic relationship.

 

1 hour ago, StormySky said:

So basically not feeling "romantic attraction" but wanting to love someone?

That's not aromantic! Cuprioromantics aren't Aro just like Cupiosexuals aren't Ace!! Cupiosexuals are average allosexual people consisting of half the population, but Cupioromantics are Gray-romantic because its not a known norm.

But yes, they are people who do not feel romantically yet desire to be in (and typically pursue) a relationship.

[Star Bit]

3 hours ago, gray-a girl said:

I definitely don't have a romantic attraction to people. But, what counts as wanting to have a romantic relationship? I want to fall in love (I fell in love accidentally and its amazing).

The underlined contradicts itself, elaborate.

 

3 hours ago, gray-a girl said:

But I don't connect that love to things like romantic dinners, or kissing, or any of the typical "romantic" things. Its in no way a romantic type of love, not at all. But the intensity of it is the same, I think, as a typical allosexual and how they feel about their partner. It definitely goes way beyond platonic or friendship and I would definitely call it love.

You not having typical relationship desires has nothing to do with not feeling romantic attraction or desiring a relationship. Romantic attraction comes in all shapes and sizes. It's just an emotion and doesn't require anything else; no actions or romantic words; nothin'. Romantic attraction is an emotion; so it doesn't translate well into words, but it can be inadequately put as soft/warm/fuzzy feelings with some degree of fixation (at least in comparison to one's normality with others). This is the base requirement, but some people also have a physical reaction to the feeling and others don’t (i.e. butterflies in their stomach, heart rate increase, blushing, etc. [though those can also be symptoms of platonic nervousness]). Others may react mentally with a dreamy mindset, anxious euphoria, infatuation, romantic fantasies, etc. And others may feel it light enough (compared to the norm) that there is no clear line between crushes and wanting emotional closeness (so if a squish aka friend crush doesn’t go away after the desired bond is reached or sexual/non-platonic desires are present it’s a crush). Romantic attraction isn't about being head-over-heels either; being in-love comes later in relationships.

 

To the underlined in the quote, that's romantic attraction.

[Alejandrogynous]

Romantic feelings are entirely subjective and personal, they're different for everyone. For one person, candlelit dinners and roses is the ultimate romantic gesture - for another, it might be spray-painting their name on a building, or taking them to a monster truck rally, or letting them pick the restaurant, or lazy days watching movies together, or literally anything that makes that particular person feel special and loved in a romantic way.

You can identify as whatever you want, obviously, but disliking cliche romantic stereotypes doesn't mean you're not experiencing romantic feelings. The "falling in love" feeling is pretty much the antithesis of aromanticism.

[KendraPM]

I should probably have warned you that there is a lot of debate as to the validity of the cupio orientation, regardless of it's romantic or sexual.

The definition of cupioromantic is "someone who does not feel romantic attraction (aromantic) but who desires a romantic relationships." For cupiosexual "someone who does not feel sexual attraction (asexual) but who desires a sexual relationship." Whether or not that is included under the aro and ace umbrellas is still greatly debated by many here on aven.

 

(I personally feel that cupios are aro/ace as they do not experience romantic/sexual attraction. I refuse to get into a debate with anyone about that.)

[gray-a girl]

Well the cupios are relevant because some people don't experience attraction to other people and don't get into relationships because of it. For me, I've been very confused about my orientation for years. I don't think cupiosexual (or cupioromantic) falls under allosexual, because if it did I wouldn't have been as uninterested in dating for so long, and I wouldn't have felt so different from the norm. I know that I don't experience attraction like most other people. Whatever you call my orientation, its definitely not typical. To lump cupiosexuals together with allosexuals simply says they don't exist. I don't see demisexuals getting that treatment, and probably half the allosexual population is demisexual. Its very common.

I guess functionally, though, it doesn't differ from an allosexual. (Though demisexuals don't differ much either, especially if you're a woman). But I've broken off relationships because I thought there was something wrong with me, something I was missing. When I was younger I thought I must be gay because I don't experience attraction to guys, so what's left? So knowing that I just don't experience attraction like typical people really helps me. I can say to myself "ok, thats not there...that doesn't mean I can't be with this person though because its not there for anyone".

[KendraPM]

13 hours ago, gray-a girl said:

I guess functionally, though, it doesn't differ from an allosexual. (Though demisexuals don't differ much either, especially if you're a woman). But I've broken off relationships because I thought there was something wrong with me, something I was missing. When I was younger I thought I must be gay because I don't experience attraction to guys, so what's left? So knowing that I just don't experience attraction like typical people really helps me. I can say to myself "ok, thats not there...that doesn't mean I can't be with this person though because its not there for anyone".

They can function differently for much the same reason you found it difficult to date. Wanting a sexual relationship is not the same as wanting sex/to sleep with someone. Cupiosexuals want a sexual relationship, but since not everyone feels comfortable having sex with people they aren't attracted to, some end up in a state of limbo. Wanting something they'll never be able to have.

[quasarshift]

@gray-a girl

You've fallen in love before but it's not romantic love? I'm not sure if this is the term, but is it alterous love? That's the only thing I can think of when you say beyond platonic but not romantic. Otherwise it sounds like you experienced romantic attraction.

 

A romantic relationship doesn't have to include fancy dinners and kissing, as long as the people in the relationship are connected in a romantic way, showing each other that they are loved whatever the expression may be. Do you want that?

[FlyingFree]

On 10/12/2017 at 6:50 AM, gray-a girl said:

Well the cupios are relevant because some people don't experience attraction to other people and don't get into relationships because of it. For me, I've been very confused about my orientation for years. I don't think cupiosexual (or cupioromantic) falls under allosexual, because if it did I wouldn't have been as uninterested in dating for so long, and I wouldn't have felt so different from the norm. I know that I don't experience attraction like most other people. Whatever you call my orientation, its definitely not typical. To lump cupiosexuals together with allosexuals simply says they don't exist. I don't see demisexuals getting that treatment, and probably half the allosexual population is demisexual. Its very common.

I guess functionally, though, it doesn't differ from an allosexual. (Though demisexuals don't differ much either, especially if you're a woman). But I've broken off relationships because I thought there was something wrong with me, something I was missing. When I was younger I thought I must be gay because I don't experience attraction to guys, so what's left? So knowing that I just don't experience attraction like typical people really helps me. I can say to myself "ok, thats not there...that doesn't mean I can't be with this person though because its not there for anyone".

Yes and no. I feel the same way in that I have been confused and felt maybe I wasn't with the right person because I don't feel in love or chemistry or any of that stuff we're told we should feel when we're with the right person. But in my own experience, the difference between "half the allosexual" people who want sex only within a relationship is that they are still turned on by people, they just choose not to engage in sex until they are in a relationship. This can be for religious reasons, trust, or just preference. I have lots of friends who believe in waiting until marriage for sex who talk about being attracted, having chemistry, falling in love, and finding someone hot.

 

On the other hand there is me. I have never been turned on by someone. Never fallen in love with the typical chemistry and infatuation and giddiness and such. I find certain people pleasant visually and emotionally but I suspect it's a very different feeling than the typical finding someone hot, just going by reactions that don't match what I feel. So my everyday life may LOOK the same as an allosexual who is waiting until marriage/relationship for sex, but I FEEL so different than an allosexual (as far as I can tell). I have never fully understood the normal crushes and experiences shown in my friends' lives and especially not the exaggeration that I see on TV. That's all aside from whether or not they choose to actually have sex. As for that, the idea of being so desperate for sex that you're panting and ripping their clothes off, etc, is amazingly foreign to me. But I'm interested in quietly, calmly, and perhaps gradually over days of getting closer...trying sex with my fiance once we're married.

 

All that to say that I feel that cupiosexual is within the ace/gray community. From my own experience in a subculture where waiting for marriage to have sex is the norm--I do not fit within even that subculture norm.

[Mercat21]

I have never had a crush and always felt left out. 

[Rynn]

This thread has not been active for a long time and is now being locked. If anyone would like to discuss this topic further, feel free to start a new thread about it.

Laurann, 

moderator