Homoromantic heterosexuals?

[Parth]

We have established that a person can experience romantic attraction to a certain gender without sexual attraction; there are lots of people on AVEN that reflect this.

But are there sexuals that have a romantic drive toward the gender to which they are not attracted? Such as, a homoromantic heterosexual, or a heterosexual homoromantic? Could these people perhaps be attracted to pre-op transsexuals?

Just a question I woke up wondering about. Not really something that matters that much to me, but it did spike my curiosity.

[Hayley]

I do believe I made a similiar post last year some time. I believe it is possible to be romantically attracted to a gender that is contrary to your sexual attraction, and seem to recall that people replied who knew of this happening.

It does depend on how you look at romantic and sexual attractions though, really. I experience romantic attraction but have no sexual attractions, as a result of this I consider the two to be very seperate feelings.

[Parth]

It does depend on how you look at romantic and sexual attractions though, really. I experience romantic attraction but have no sexual attractions, as a result of this I consider the two to be very seperate feelings.

I agree. I view them as two very separate things too. To me, sexual attraction doesn't happen, period. Romantic desire can form for me after forming a deep friendship with someone; however romantic attraction itself doesn't exactly happen.

[AntiBubble]

My perception of attraction is a little(!) more complicated than sexual/romantic,and as such it potentially leaves room for situations like this. I see attraction as being composed of five different types of specific attraction, which are:

Romantic - i.e. wanting to have a romantic relationship with that person

Emotional - NOT the same as romantic attraction, more a deep emotional connection with, or attachment to, another person, which can occur without romantic attraction

Sexual - fairly self-explantory. I don't experience it, but I include it anyway, just in case I ever do.

Physical - NOT the same as sexual, more about finding someone physically attractive in a non-sexual way, possibly with a desire to be physically close to or intimate with with them.

Intellectual - pretty much exactly what it sounds like. A deep connection with or attraction to someone based on intellect and so on.

Combinations of the above can make for very confusing feelings, which is why I separated them all out in the first place. My biggest downfall is confusing intellectual, physical or emotional attraction with romantic attraction, which thankfully I've learned the signs of, and it happens a lot less these days. The one I feel most often is probably physical attraction because I'm generally a very tactile person, and there are certain body types that make me seriously weak at the knees with cuddlelust :lol: (google 'matias kupiainen' and that's pretty much it, right there :redface:).

But yeah, having separated attraction like that, I can see how you could have homoromantic heterosexuals and vice versa - some of them are gender specific with me anyway. I rarely experience intellectual or physical attraction towards women for example, and experiencing emotional attraction to men is equally rare. True romantic attraction, I've realised is very rare for me across both genders, but can grow from emotional attraction.

[SlightlyMetaphysical]

I've often wondered if sexual people would be less confused with their own identity if they had our asexy labels, so they could realise that sexual orientation isn't the same as romantic orientation. So yes, I think it is. I'm sure there's many people who are at least bi one and homo/hetero the other one.

[Penumbra]

I'd say it's very plausible. It follows, really, once you separate sex from romance.

An example that's often cited is of women in the 19th and/or early 20th century. It was normal back then for friendships between girls to be passionate to the point of romance, without undermining expectations of marriage at all. I found it interesting to see, in the few novels of the period I've read, to see how the love between the heroine and her "girl friend" completely eclipses the heroine's relationship with the male love interest.

[Lunacy]

I was thinking of making a similar thread not so long ago. I'm certain that it's possible to be a 'homoromantic heterosexual' or 'heterosexual homoromantic'. It totally makes sense.

I was also wondering....if you're romantically attracted to some people, sexually attracted to other people, and sometimes you experience both sexual and romantic attraction for a person, regardless of gender, what word do you use to define this? I think I might be a bit like that, so it's really confusing to explain it to anyone.

Also, is there a word to define attraction to androgynous people? Or attraction to transsexuals?

Sorry for all the questions... I've seen so many new definitions since I arrived on AVEN, it makes me a bit confused sometimes.

[Amcan]

I;d say yeah it's possible.

[Penumbra]

I was also wondering....if you're romantically attracted to some people, sexually attracted to other people, and sometimes you experience both sexual and romantic attraction for a person, regardless of gender, what word do you use to define this? I think I might be a bit like that, so it's really confusing to explain it to anyone.

Pansexual and/or panromantic? Or perhaps bisexual and/or biromantic? ('Biromantic' ... hmmm ... I suddenly have the urge to coin the term 'biromancy' as the sorcery of the ballpoint pen. But enough fantasy geekiness for now.)

[

Also, is there a word to define attraction to androgynous people? Or attraction to transsexuals?

I think we're getting beyond the pale of concise defining terms now ... Perhaps it would be simpler to say "I'm attracted to androgynes and/or transexuals" rather than invent another word. ;)

[vits3k]

'Biromantic' ... hmmm ... I suddenly have the urge to coin the term 'biromancy' as the sorcery of the ballpoint pen.

Gasp! The penultimate evil!

:lol:

Then there are people, like Dracula, who are turned on by necks... I guess he, at least, would qualify as a neck-romantic.

* Runs *

[GarboFour]

There must be. I can imagine homoromantic heterosexuals and heteromantic homosexuals.

Let's see... a/homo/hetero/bi-romantic a/homo/hetero/bi-sexual, there can be 4x4=16 different kinds theoretically...

[SlightlyMetaphysical]

I've just had a massive conversation with my best friend, who's pretty much the definition of a heteroromantic homosexual.

QED.

[Penumbra]

'Biromantic' ... hmmm ... I suddenly have the urge to coin the term 'biromancy' as the sorcery of the ballpoint pen.

Gasp! The penultimate evil!

:lol:

Then there are people, like Dracula, who are turned on by necks... I guess he, at least, would qualify as a neck-romantic.

* Runs *

:P You crack me up.

*runs after vits flourishing a biro*

[LittleTommy]

I registered just to post on this thread. I hope that isn't tacky.

I am familiar with notions of romantic orientation that are divergent from sexual orientation because I have a dear friend who certainly had romantic attraction to men, but experienced a failed first marriage due to her complete lack of interest in physical union with her husband.

I just had the thought yesterday while driving that I might be a homoromantic heterosexual.

I can fall for a man very quickly, but it takes me much longer to fall for a woman. In point of fact, I think that I just fell for a woman for the first time when I was 35. I have fallen for four men, two of whom I had no chance with and knew it.

At the same time, while I have a profound interest in sex with women, my interest in sex with men is minimal. It's there, but only for men who are either very, very attractive (and out of my league at this point in my life), or deeply attached to.

I'm interested in women's bodies to the point that (when single) I'd gladly have sex with strange women, in fact probably 80% of women above 18 and under age 45 would work for me.

At the same time, men I don't know... very little to no interest.

While that's technically bisexual, it's a pretty serious slant.

I have also been, for the vast majority of my life, really, really HORRIBLE to women. I didn't fall, didn't love them (including a wife of seven years) and was generally a bad guy.

Half a year ago, I fell in love with a wonderful woman, who shares a number of life experiences that I've never been able to talk to anyone about before, and a healthy number of shared interests.

I'm thinking I'm not generally romantically interested in women, and my ability to attach to my current fiancee is an oddity born from our shared (very unique) experiences and interests.

So, yes, homoromantic heterosexuals seem to exist. Even if I'm misidentifying myself, if I'm this close, then they have to exist.

I'm wondering if they don't avoid discussing their orientations publicly because they (we) would come across as being horrible to both straight women and gay men....

[Larien]

This thread has been moved to the A/Romantic Identities forum.

Larien, Off-A mod

[ItsComplicated&Great]

I wanted to chime in on this--OF COURSE someone can be homoromantic and heterosexual (or some other combo). It's fantastic!

And OF COURSE it can be more complex than that. I loved someone's suggestion about androgynous people attraction--I dig that, that's totally me.

[crucis]

i would say there most certainly can be. I am a predominantly heteroromantic heterosexual, but have experienced homoromantic sentiments in the past. I have never had any homosexual inclinations though - I have no doubt about this even though I am hyposexual. The way I see it, romantic and sexual orientation can be completely separate, mutually exclusive things even in a conventionally sexual individual. That said, I'm sure biromantic heterosexuals like me are a far greater statistical likelihood than (exclusively) homoromantic heterosexuals.

[Xrenity]

I may indeed be a homoromantic heterosexual. Not sure about it, but it seems accurate. Still monogamous with a person who is now the same sex as I am. There isn't really any word to accurately conceptualize the marriage within the bounds of anything society would understand.

You're not doomed. Homoromantic heterosexual relationships can "work" and "be fulfilling" and all of that. Not that much different from any other committed relationship. You're people. Just people. Always were, always will be. So say you (whoever "you" means, general or specific) marry* a person of the opposite gender, and being sexually attracted to them but not romantically, you have your sexual needs fulfilled but not your emotional needs. This is relatively easy to fulfill in a heteronormative society--it's called "bromance" and is platonic, but can often cross over into the territory of romantic love, but without the assumption of sexual activity and subject to less homophobia than otherwise. (I know this is crappy, but society was made by dumb people, for dumb people. By all means, fight homophobia--but it's easier to do and still save face if you're perceived as acceptably heterosexual. You are likely to be perceived as acceptably hetero, if you are married to a woman and are schtupping her happily, regardless of whether you're romantically attracted to her or to your best male friend instead. Society makes excuses for straightness like that.)

But then, if you marry a person of the same gender--i.e, romantic attraction without sexual attraction, you have your emotional need fulfilled but not your sexual need--there are different issues, and different ways of solving them. Watching the same pornos? Circle jerking? Buying inflatable girlfriends and putting each other's clothes on them? If you've got the economic means, having a "vegas budget" for strippers and/or hookers and so on? Threesoming with a girl you're both physically attracted to? Most of the problems with these solutions, though, are due to external judgment. Being seen as both objectifying misogynist scumbags and "homos" is a double whammy of prejudiced knee-jerk labeling, laden with a ton of nasty cultural backwash leftover stereotype barf. Watch out for the chunks of cornflake. Even though you are probably NOT "objectifying misogynist scumbags" or "homos" at all, (too attracted to men to be straight, too attracted to women to be gay, which a lot of people have trouble wrapping their minds around,) there are many stereotypes and stereotypical attitudes that are all to easy for other people to use and then get blindsided by, which are then far too easy to internalize--and could completely mess up a good thing once internalized. So, a person in a same-sex homoromantic heterosexual relationship would have to be VERY vigilant about stereotypes and resist internalizing them with utmost diligence.

Might seem impossible or difficult, but mostly it's cultural dynamics that create the perception of impossibility and difficulty.

(I dunno, sometimes I just don't get it why I can't just be with Him and not have to worry about zombie idiots telling Him and me who we are, though He's not into guys and I'm not into guys either, but we are into each other, more than anyone else. Because He's Him and I'm me and that's what has mattered over all this time and all these years.)

*I'm not using the term "marriage" in the legal sense, but in the conceptual sense.

[Maigo]

Thank you for this thread. I'm not any less confused, but I am comforted. This is what I get for watching too much Layd Gaga. :redface:

Its also nice to be able to google something and just show up on AVEN.

[Feiergeist]

Perhaps I am homoromantic heterosexual.
However I treat any relationships for sex as a waste of time. I don't want anything to interfere with my scientific career.
I feel sexual desire to some of men but I deeply disgust both oral and anal sex so can't have sex with men so I'm not bisexual.
Sex isn't something very important for me. I experience romantic feelings to girls sometimes but this way of romantic is less interesting.

The most important thing for me is to have a friend (or friends) who struggles to be the best of the best in some field which I respect.
It's really awesome to be friends while simultaneously be the best of the best (or at least be mad in desire and undertaken efforts for that).
"Three musketeers" by Alexandre Dumas is a good example of such "best of the best" friends.
The best pleasure for me is admiration of my achievements, knowledge, physical force and abilities etc by both girls and men.
When I have it enough I don't need any romantic or sexual relationships usually.
It's very hard to find such friends who go mad in their desire to be the best but I can really respect and friend only such people.
Usually I feel something much more than just a friendship and respect for such people.
I haven't seen girls who can be such friends and whom I can respect and love for such reasons.

Also I disgust kisses for it is a disgusting interchange of saliva! (((
However I don't find disgusting to kiss somebody whom I really both love and deeply respect.
So it's easier to kiss a man than a girl for I don't usually respect girls that much.

[KJ!]

It's called cross orientation or mixed orientation. Read more here. And yes, it is totally a thing. I consider myself to have a mixed-orientation as bi on the romantic side but gay on the sexual side. I would date a man but not sleep with one. So either I'd have to date an man who was ace, happy to be celibate, or non-monogamist and could have sex elsewhere. I feel like it would be an awkward conversation to have though... "you'll have sex with her but not me?" "pretty much. go have sex with other girls! (or boys, or non-binary, or whatever!) it'll be fun! we can both have other girlfriends! or FWB! or... I don't know, you have your own life and stuff..."

[KJ!]

Perhaps I am homoromantic heterosexual.

However I treat any relationships for sex as a waste of time. I don't want anything to interfere with my scientific career.

I feel sexual desire to some of men but I deeply disgust both oral and anal sex so can't have sex with men so I'm not bisexual.

Sex isn't something very important for me. I experience romantic feelings to girls sometimes but this way of romantic is less interesting.

The most important thing for me is to have a friend (or friends) who struggles to be the best of the best in some field which I respect.

It's really awesome to be friends while simultaneously be the best of the best (or at least be mad in desire and undertaken efforts for that).

"Three musketeers" by Alexandre Dumas is a good example of such "best of the best" friends.

The best pleasure for me is admiration of my achievements, knowledge, physical force and abilities etc by both girls and men.

When I have it enough I don't need any romantic or sexual relationships usually.

It's very hard to find such friends who go mad in their desire to be the best but I can really respect and friend only such people.

Usually I feel something much more than just a friendship and respect for such people.

I haven't seen girls who can be such friends and whom I can respect and love for such reasons.

Also I disgust kisses for it is a disgusting interchange of saliva! (((

However I don't find disgusting to kiss somebody whom I really both love and deeply respect.

So it's easier to kiss a man than a girl for I don't usually respect girls that much.

I... realise that English may not be your first language. However calling females "girls" and males "men" and then saying "I don't usually respect girls that much" makes you sound SUPER sexist. Or, makes you sound sexist to me, anyway. Saying 'girl' implies childishness and infantilising, while "men" as adult, mature, more capable, etc. Which is both stereotyping and supporting thousands of years of oppressing women. I realise you probably meant that you haven't found/met any women you have great personal respect for, but saying you "don't usually respect girls" makes it sound like you don't see women as people and don't respect their autonomy as individuals (which comes off as "do you have ovaries? they you are less of a human than I am and therefore don't deserve to be treated fairly or with respect as a person and I can do whatever I want to/with you")

Also, sex between men can be more than oral and/or anal. Despite what the media makes it seem.

[iamphoenixfire]

I have a friend who is a heteroromantic homosexual, so it makes perfect sense that the opposite would be true.

[Snusmumriken]

I am a male, and I like the female body. The male body just says nothing to me by itself.

But I have a big tendency to 'connect' with males, much more than in the female case. Am I homoromantic heterosexual? I don't know. I am just what I am. If a male loves me and I love him... why not? I only want to be happy and love someone.

[JohnReed]

Hi, I'm John. I am a homoromantic heterosexual i.e. I love men emotionally but am sexually attracted to women.

I am very butch on the outside. I have a thick beard, I talk loud, and I take up lots of space. I am also very femme on the inside. I watch Bridesmaids and listen to Ingrid Michaelson and Vanessa Carlton. I like women who are pretty of the outside but masculine on the inside. I also like pre-op transsexual men who are pretty of the outside but tough on the inside. I am a homoromantic heterosexual.

[AshenPhoenix]

his topic is being closed due to the amount of time that has passed since it's last active conversation. Please do not revive threads that have been inactive for too long. If you wish to discuss this topic further, feel free to create a new thread about it

​AshenPhoenix, Romantic and Aromantic orientations Moderator