Romance vs Romantic Identities

[AlineDaryen]

Great post.

I've been in a relationship where we were kinda primary partners to each other mostly out of necessity. We were close friends even before, shared a great deal, liked each other a great deal, chose the same profession. Then her relationship of four years crashed badly, she had nowhere to live, so we moved in together. And from the start we were like a married couple of twenty years, spending time together, talking for hours every evening, cooking together or for each other, taking care of each other in illness, having fights and making up. There was no physical connection, as I dislike physical contact altogether and she dislikes it outside of romantic relationships. Yet from the start, we made it clear that though it's comfortable, it's just for the time before she heals from the emotional crash and we'll be both able to afford to live separately. After we "split up" after three years, it was surprisingly uncomfortable for a while, because we were used to the company and way of life and amount of sharing, but then she found a serious boyfriend and I found out that I truly enjoy living on my own when I can afford it. We're great friends still, work together on projects and go to each other when we're in trouble or need to share something, but not exclusively, we're not each other's number one, have other close friends too and separate lives.

Still, theoretically, if she decided to diregard her romantic and heterosexual orientation at the time and stayed with me, I would probably be content to live with her forever after either without any "relationship" label or with it, as we saw fit. Now I have something to compare it with, it was not significantly more or less comfortable and fulfilling than living alone, but it was much more comfortable and fulfilling than living with other flatmates I had or my family. But I'm quite sure I would feel the same with any other person who was such a great flatmate and friend, even with more such people in some kind of poly relationship. Also, I never felt romantic attraction and don't desire a monogamous romantic relationship, though I'm not averse to sharing my life with someone if it's practical.

Would you say this could be called being aromantic? I do call it aromantic, but I'm curious if others would :)

[byanyotherusername]

When people would list criteria for what constitutes 'romance' I would think; "But I feel that way about all my friends. It would be awesome to share my life experiences with them and get free cuddles...wait, does that make me poly? But I might be aromatic because I don't 'get' romance?" Very confusing.

This reads very true to me...

It's basically like my default "romantic" desire is for something like simply being close and cuddly friends with girls I get to like. If it does progress to sex eventually (and this can take AGES - I'm demisexual) - then great. If not, that's no big deal too - we can still remain close and cuddly friends. So it's all very fluid, fuzzy, and hopelessly breaks all the rules and boundaries of what people normally consider to be friendship vs romance, in the mainstream. And in fact - it downright irritates me how most other people seem to play some kind of internal script to rules and boundaries of different relationship types, which I've completely lost all grasp of now (not sure I ever truly had it - it always felt a bit forced and conditioned to me really).

You could say that I want to have polyamorous romantic friendships. Or you could say that I just want to make close female friends to cuddle with. Or you could say that I'm more or less "normal", but just very slow and disjointed on the sexual and exclusivity aspects of mainstream "romance".

But the most honest way to put it (and this is what my OkCupid profile now says) is that I essentially have no predetermined definition of what relationships should be to me. Boundaries feel like too much stress. Not having to care about them feels liberating. :lol:

I relate to both these posts so much. I get so tired of trying to label myself/my relationships. People ask how I feel about X and if we're "dating," and I go: "No, we just like to hang out a lot, sometimes see movies and go out to eat and other date-like activities, and we hold hands and cuddle and engage in other fairly sensual behaviors, and I absolutely love and adore him/her. But I feel that way about other friends of mine as well, and don't feel any less connected to friends I'm equally emotionally close to but am not as physically involved with, and if any of those friends date other people it doesn't bother me."

Except, I usually just say "No." :P

Still, theoretically, if she decided to diregard her romantic and heterosexual orientation at the time and stayed with me, I would probably be content to live with her forever after either without any "relationship" label or with it, as we saw fit. Now I have something to compare it with, it was not significantly more or less comfortable and fulfilling than living alone, but it was much more comfortable and fulfilling than living with other flatmates I had or my family. But I'm quite sure I would feel the same with any other person who was such a great flatmate and friend, even with more such people in some kind of poly relationship. Also, I never felt romantic attraction and don't desire a monogamous romantic relationship, though I'm not averse to sharing my life with someone if it's practical.

Would you say this could be called being aromantic? I do call it aromantic, but I'm curious if others would :)

I think this would typically be referred to as aromantic. You don't feel romantic attraction, you simply form emotional connections with others and are open to those connections manifesting in your life in different ways, including ways that potentially resemble romantic relationships. At least, that's how it sounds to me.

[Carsonspire]

I loathe nearly every cultural signifier of romance. And yet I do love my partner, and I do want to share my life with her. Not in a "hey, it'd be cheaper if we split the bills" kinda way, or in a "hey, it'd be nice to avoid the cats eating me after I die, so maybe we should live together" kinda way, but in a "you are a very special person to me and I want to see you and be near you, and when I experience things in my life I want to share them with you, and I want you to share your experiences with me" kinda way. It is a genuine desire to merge and share our thoughts and experiences in a meaningful way.

This sums it up for me.

As an aside, I always forget the term "romantic friendship" and it's such a useful term. Thanks for the reminder.

[WhenSummersGone]

I agree with the OP 100%! I believe I have fallen in love, I think, I'm not sure. I know I can care deeply for someone and want to be with them badly in a romantic way. I've had my heart broken and it hurts a lot, more than just ending a friendship for me (I have lost contact with a lot of friends in my life). The only things I'm really interested in physically are cuddling, holding hands, light/passionate kissing and hugging, that's all. I wouldn't mind gifts on special days like birthdays and stuff but otherwise I don't really care. I'm not a fan of a guy spending a thousand dollars on a date including dinner and whatever else society says is romance. I think that if you are with someone you care about then it doesn't matter what you do, as long as you are with the one you love.

[devotedlila]

I am still kind of in flux since as some of you know I made a rapid brain-disease-assisted switch from sexual to asexual aromantic. Currently I am repulsed by both sex and romance, although the one thing I would like is more cuddles. (I'm a little frustrated with my two roomies at the mo- they are both very cuddly and have cuddled me in the past, but since they got engaged.. apparently cuddles are sexual now? Pooh.)

You could describe what I'm looking for as a cuddle buddy or friends with "benefits", but zero possibility of it going romantic. As I said, I'm in a transitional phase- but I'm happy the way I am. I don't want any hint of romance or commitment or whathaveyou. Although at this point I would take a fourth roomie/friend who would sleep in my bed and give me lots of hugs. I like touch. But not sexy touch or hand-kissing- in fact no kissing at all.

God I feel like such a potential user. Cuddles or GTFO. But I'm a good friend, really!

[Deja Vu]

I'm new to AVEN. I'm here because I've spent decades trying to understand myself with regards to relationships. FINALLY something (this site) that resonates with me, and explains me to myself! I'm not weird. I wasn't molested as a child and then repressed the memories. I'm not a lesbian who doesn't know it (as my ex thought). I'm not incapable of "feeling" things. YIPPEE for all of this!

But, I'm far from ready to put labels on myself, or even understand the labels. As I read, and re-read, all of your posts on this thread I found myself nodding many times. I also found myself scratching my head many times. So if everything is true and nothing is true, then what is true? Some of the above, probably not all of the above, and why does it matter?

Seriously... the closest I can come right now is to say there have been times in my life I've felt most of the things you all talk about, including romantic feelings. But even though I know I felt a certain way once before, I also know that's not my truth right now. So, the best I can say is "it depends" but I'm not quite sure what it depends on. I have thought the cumulative effect of all of my relationships have cured me of romance. Living in the moment, that feels true.

I think I'm in the zone right now... feeling an unexpected sense of harmony and wellbeing, but unable to explain it.

[Yvelysse]

Here on my thoughts in the subject. I'm sure some of you will disagree, so please, have at it! Let's see how we all differentiate these concepts.

Romance: Romance is cultural. Romance is a concept that varies from society to society and roughly implies some sort of courtship behavior. An act is considered romantic if it fits the culturally prescribed criteria for eliciting a feeling of romantic affection in another person. A person is considered romantic if they tend toward behavior that fits the culturally prescribed criteria for wooing. As an example, in heteronormative United States culture, it is considered romantic to surprise your partner with a candlelit dinner. Whether or not the recipient actually likes candlelit dinners is more or less beside the point, because romance is determined on a macro level. It is certainly possible, but unlikely, that a person would be held out as a "hopeless romantic" if they didn't subscribe to the cultural trappings of romance.

Romance can also occur on a micro level. Let's say Patty and John are anarchist punks who just started dating. Patty has been angry with Taco Bell for some time because they misrepresent where their produce comes from, and Patty prefers local food. So, in an effort to be romantic, John vandalizes Taco Bell in Patty's name. This makes Patty swoon. Now, in one sense we'd call John romantic because he did something specifically intended to elicit romantic feelings from Patty. In another sense, however, John is not romantic, because vandalizing a restaurant does not fit into our culturally identified concept of love and wooing. So while on a micro level, John may be romantic, on a macro level, John is not going to be held out to the public as a "hopeless romantic".

Romantic Identity: Romantic Identity refers to the emotional connection you forge with others. There are so many different ways to look at this, and I think there's a fairly wide divergence in people's definitions of what actually constitutes romantic identities. Some people say that if you fall "in love", you are romantic. I'd agree with that (with a caveat that I will explore more fully below). Some say it has to do with the type of relationship you want. I'd agree with that as well. If you want an emotionally monogamous partnership, you love them and feel they are a part of you, your family, or your identity, I'd say you're in a romantic relationship. Let's all keep in mind that physical affection is but one (very common) manifestation of romantic feelings, but it is not the same thing as romantic feelings. The mere fact that you don't want to cuddle or have sex with your partner doesn't tell me whether or not you are aromantic, but it does tell me something about your preferences in regard to physical touch.

So, if you fall in love, you are romantic. If you want a primary relationship with someone where extreme mutual affection is demonstrated (either verbally, physically, or thru other behaviors), then I'd say you are romantic. I know many people who have romantic friendships... the fact that they aren't in a romantic relationship doesn't mean that the people are aromantic, but rather that they'd prefer not to have a romantic relationship. If you are capable of romantic love but prefer not to participate in it, you are not aromantic. You just don't want a relationship, and that's totally fine.

As I said above, the "in love" definition of romantic identity is troublesome because it raises a whole other problem, which is... what the hell is "in love"?! I'm the wrong person to ask, because I don't think "in love" is a real thing. I do identify as romantic, but I do not identify with the concept of "in love". I'm honestly not even sure if I can say that I love my partner differently from the way I love my best friends. The major difference between the two is that I feel a desire to be near my partner, and I feel a desire to share my life with her.

There are many different ways to express a romantic identity. You can hate candy, flowers, candlelit dinners, greeting cards, rose petals, poetry, love notes, cuddling, hand holding, etc, and still be a romantic. Why? Because you have the ability to fall in love, or you have the ability to feel the desire to share your life with someone. Personally, I'm romantic. I think romance is stupid. I HATE when people cook for me because I find it intolerably awkward, I hate pithy gifts, I don't respond well to surprises, holding hands makes me feel like my hand is burning off... in other words, I loathe nearly every cultural signifier of romance. And yet I do love my partner, and I do want to share my life with her. Not in a "hey, it'd be cheaper if we split the bills" kinda way, or in a "hey, it'd be nice to avoid the cats eating me after I die, so maybe we should live together" kinda way, but in a "you are a very special person to me and I want to see you and be near you, and when I experience things in my life I want to share them with you, and I want you to share your experiences with me" kinda way. It is a genuine desire to merge and share our thoughts and experiences in a meaningful way. I want her to feel, think, and learn all the things I feel, think, and learn, and she wants the same. That is a romantic relationship. It doesn't matter if you have sex, or hold hands, or give each other flowers. It doesn't matter if you hate the word love or would rather burn down Hallmark than buy a card. Those are all cultural trappings and are not the same as the innate desire to partner up.

AND... that's my long-winded rant on the subject. How do ya'll separate the two concepts?

I am at a point in my life where I would enjoy a romantic relationship. I think guys are hot, but I'm never one to act on my biological responses. I prefer to be seen as an "airhead" and "don't take her serious" type of person because of wounds in my past. I had a GREAT sexual relationship with my ex husband. That was all we really had going for each other. I lasted over 30 years that way. No flowers, no romantic dinners nothing that would indicate 'wow he really loves her'.

I want closeness, sex is an after thought. I am a hugger, I enjoy touch and being properly touched by a caring individual. I want someone who will be there in my life. Like you and your partner, I want to establish a lasting partnership with someone who is emotionally involved in me as must as I am in him. But I realistically don't see that happening unless I am willing to be someones sexual dirty rag. I refuse to become a slut, whore or "easy woman" as I was once classified by my husband when I left him to a woman's shelter.

My sadness is magnified with a FWB relationship with a roommate who wants no commitment. Obviously I am confused, but I think your point is right on. What is sex with out the sharing? What good is living with someone who cares for you but can't share with you?

I took a test on OKCupid that said I am a romantic, cool! However I have guys who are offering to sex me up and I am loathe to do it. I am really scared if I have another sexual encounter I will lose myself.

I have never fit any 'traditional' concepts. Romantically, sexually or even in my personal life and space. I am culturally mixed up because I grew up with a multicultural family. Hard core puritan/catholic background with a stoic mother and a drunken stepfather. She encouraged openness and being happy with who one is. He was just a dirty old man who couldn't keep his zipper closed.

To her a woman who wore makeup was expressing her identity, to him a woman who wore makeup was a whore to be exploited. These opinions were culturally based. Mom was old school American puritanical, My step father was a womanizing catholic who misused his masculinity terribly and abusively.

Any other opinions?

[Kavos]

Thank's for the well written article.

It was quite a fascinating read, even if I don't believe I'm the same. I think deep down I'm really quite a sappy romantic, although I think I'm more quirky romantic? lol I don't get as you said the candle light dinners, or the long walks on the beach. For me I think romance is more sensual? The smile someone give's you, the slight brush of their hand as they walk past, even their body ode (depending on ripeness ) But for me all of this is speculative seeing as I've never been in a romantic relationship. Although one thing that I found interesting which I kind of realised while reading your post is I think I don't much care for other relationships. I think I kinda wan't one person to 'call my own.' to put it rather ineptly, some who I 'love, and they 'love' me back.

I've always struggled with friendships, people tend to just ignore me no matter how hard I try. (read: walk up to people and they scatter like the wind because they suddenly had something really important to do... every time...) so I think that has lead me to develop a real desire for a single close romantic friend/partner. Admittedly I have one friend, who when I was a teenager I would have dived at a chance to be in a relationship with, but he was never interested and so we're just great friends. (well we kind of behave like the old married couple that never touch.) but eventually he'll get married and I kinda hope by then I'll have found someone else who does actually want to cuddle with me.

But I'm rambling but no I just wanted to say thank you, you've given me a lot to think of and helped me realise a few more things about myself.

Have some ^_^

[mindlife]

First of all, I agree that romance, like beauty, is culturally determined and diverse across geographical, ethnic, religious, all sorts of lines.

There are many relationship dynamics other people might characterize as "romantic" that I would not characterize as such.

As for a romantic identity, I do differentiate it from romance itself.

My own romantic identity is quite chivalrous, jealous at times, protective, desiring to heal where there is pain, and to see joy in the spirit of the beloved.

[Michal2012]

I really like the concept. Thanks for describe the Romance and Romantic Identity.

[candicemon]

I definitely agree! Personally I do enjoy the cliche romantic things, and when I start to fall for someone I get pretty sappy and enjoy trying to 'woo' them. I prefer the macro level romance at that point - finding out exactly what my partner likes and finds romantic and then doing those things for them makes me incredibly happy. Those romantic actions don't define my romantic identity, however. I find myself doing similar things for other people that I'm in close relationships with, such as close friends and family. The way that I express love is indicative of my personality, not my identity.

[Anhamirak]

An act is considered romantic if it fits the culturally prescribed criteria for eliciting a feeling of romantic affection in another person. A person is considered romantic if they tend toward behavior that fits the culturally prescribed criteria for wooing.

The mere fact that you don't want to cuddle or have sex with your partner doesn't tell me whether or not you are aromantic, but it does tell me something about your preferences in regard to physical touch.

You can hate candy, flowers, candlelit dinners, greeting cards, rose petals, poetry, love notes, cuddling, hand holding, etc, and still be a romantic. Why? Because you have the ability to fall in love, or you have the ability to feel the desire to share your life with someone. Personally, I'm romantic. I think romance is stupid. I HATE when people cook for me because I find it intolerably awkward, I hate pithy gifts, I don't respond well to surprises, holding hands makes me feel like my hand is burning off... in other words, I loathe nearly every cultural signifier of romance. And yet I do love my partner, and I do want to share my life with her.

Those are all cultural trappings and are not the same as the innate desire to partner up.

I like the way you put things here, because I think it makes a good distinction. Acting "romantic" doesn't make you romantic any more than having sex makes you sexual (and isn't that a point that's been made here over and over again?). Orientation and behavior are different things. They are often linked, certainly, but are still not synonymous.

Of course, this leaves us with the question of what romance is if it's not the cultural signifiers we've attached to it. General consensus seems to be that it's a feeling, which explains why defining it is so tricky: feelings are entirely subjective. So, until we can get in each other's heads and empathize with our fellow human beings in the most literal way possible, the line between romantic and other types of love will continue to be quite relativistic, I think.

[Pepipanda]

I've kind of struggled with placing myself as aromantic or romantic because, if we define it by attraction, then I would be aromantic as I don't think I've ever been romantically attracted to anyone, but I don't feel I really fit in there because I do want a life partner to share my life with (which by the original post would put me as romantic). At the moment, as much as I don't like it (I like things to fit nicely in boxes), I identify as gray-romantic. I guess my ideal would be to have a close romantic friendship sometime down the line.

[Guest]

I've kind of struggled with placing myself as aromantic or romantic because, if we define it by attraction, then I would be aromantic as I don't think I've ever been romantically attracted to anyone, but I don't feel I really fit in there because I do want a life partner to share my life with (which by the original post would put me as romantic).

There are aromantic life partners, too. Being aromantic doesn't mean you're incapable or unwilling to be in a relationship.

[Lambda Corvus]

So much to think about in this thread. The distinction between romantic activities and romantic attraction is quite thought provoking. It really helps me in attempting to clear up my own romantic identity.

I used to identify as heteroromantic, but that label no longer seems to fit well, given several recent self-realisations. I find myself fluctuating between desiring romance with a very limited set of people and not desiring romance at all (I wouldn't be devastated to know that I will live alone forever). Or maybe I am attracted to people in exclusively non-romantic ways, which I misconstrue as romance. I really wouldn't know, as I have never truly experienced things like friendship on a deep level.

[Algorithmus]

I used to wonder about this myself as well when I found out there was a distinction between sexuality and romantic identity--you can love people and not want to have sex with them. Or you can want to have sex with someone and not love them. Odd to society perhaps, but entirely possible. If that's the case, then what separates a romantic relationship from a regular one? I had to read through a lot of articles to arrive at my viewpoint, including a few pages on the wiki site, but they always just say it's just a romantic relationship without bothering to explain the romance part. So I had to read about that, and then it turns out they mean that the romance bit is those feelings you have for other people--the stronger feelings you have for someone that you don't apply to other people that makes you do certain things for them that you would not do for others, even if they are your friends.

I bothered to read all that because I wanted to know if I should consider myself aromantic or not, and it's been really hard because I can't remember having those romantic feelings for any particular person, and don't know if I'll ever have those feelings and just haven't met someone that could trigger them. I've considered all the friends I know to be just friends, and never considered anyone special enough that I'd want to share my life with them or do something special for them.

[tinycatsays]

Thinking on this, because on /r/asexuality, I started to get the idea that maybe I'm aromantic. I definitely get friend-love, though, where I just want company. But I'm not a stereotypical ("macro") romantic. I don't really go for the big gestures--I don't think of giving them, and I'm extremely awkward receiving them (especially if they're a surprise). I've often been called "the guy in the relationship," just because I don't have a head for dates!

Anyway, I like your definition. It makes sense to me.

[SilentlyA76]

I haven't officially decided my romantic inclination, I;m stuck between heteroromantic and aromantic. This thread has been really help ful in my understanding of the identification. I'm definitely not a fan of romance in the cultural sense. A friend asked me if I would want someone to send me candy and flowers on valentines day. First of all I think valentines day is a joke, it just a commercial holiday. If people really love each other why don't they show it everyday, not just once a year because the stores tell you to. Also i think candy and flowers are a cop out. Everyone buys those, to me it seems they put no thought into the gift at all. While I like free candy and chocolate if someone was attempting to express some feeling using them I would not be impressed.

At the same time I could see the appeal of wanting to be close to someone, committing to them and sharing your life with them. Not sure that i'm interested in that so much for my self but I definitely see the appeal, maybe i'd be more of a demiromantic who might want the commitment after i had gotten to know a person and formed an emotional connection to them.

[Kelly]

I ran across this today:

[Pepipanda]

My only issue with the original post is that it doesn't fully separate wanting to have a strongly emotional and exclusive relationship from romantic attraction. It does in the sense of being able to be attracted but not interested in a relationship, but you can also be aromantic in the sense of not attracted, but still wanting the relationship. This is why I've considered identifying as gray-romantic. Not because I actually have experienced anything that I think might be romantic attraction, but rather because people seem to equate "aromantic" with "would be happy alone".

[LuneNoir]

I'm not very comfortable with the term romantic identity because I know it is derived from romance and when I think of romance I think of cliche Hollywood bs. When I think of romance I think of things that really have nothing to do with a persons inner self and I think romance can actually be a barrier to intimacy. I wish another word could be used to describe the desire to build a spiritual emotional intimate connection with someone that isn't associated with romance because romance for me pales in comparison to what I desire in my more intimate relationships with anyone

[LordTardis]

I almost think love and romance have gotten all mixed up in my head because sharing my life with him (the way Skulls describes doing) now seems really romantic to me, including the dorky goofy way he acts with me sometimes, putting up with me and my emotions, and just really being there for me. So yeah...

I can definitely relate to this!

Last night (as you know, Lady), my partner and I had another sex talk, and during the talk we discussed my abundance of emotions. She said it's weird that I'm full of feelings and she's pretty low on feelings, but we still work together. I said, that's why we work, she gets to serve as my abundant feelings landfill of sorts... she's good at taking them, neutralizing them, and disposing of them (in a good way!)

Skullery, that sounds a lot like me and one of my friends. She has borderline so she gets a lot of feeling overloads, while on an emotional level I'm normally pretty near a flat line, so I think it's really helpful that I can kind of take her emotions in and just kind of recycle them and get them out of the way I guess. I'm having a lot of trouble with romantic orientation right now because I'm not sure what in god's name I identify as.

On the one hand, I can't think of anyone I've had any desire to have romantically coded interactions with, like kissing, hand-holding, etc. I did them with my ex but I never cared to initiate, just like with sex. I have a couple female friends, however, that I like to cuddle with, wouldn't mind spending a lot of time or maybe my life with, and with whom I can talk about virtually anything, and I don't know if that's romantic or not. I don't want any kind of exclusive relationship though, and since they're both sexual I wouldn't dream of insisting on monogamy, it would probably be unpleasant for all of us.

So if anyone has ideas that could help me figure out what the heck my romantic orientation is that'd be appreciated :) otherwise, you know, hope this was interesting.

[LordTardis]

When people would list criteria for what constitutes 'romance' I would think; "But I feel that way about all my friends. It would be awesome to share my life experiences with them and get free cuddles...wait, does that make me poly? But I might be aromatic because I don't 'get' romance?" Very confusing.

This reads very true to me...

It's basically like my default "romantic" desire is for something like simply being close and cuddly friends with girls I get to like. If it does progress to sex eventually (and this can take AGES - I'm demisexual) - then great. If not, that's no big deal too - we can still remain close and cuddly friends. So it's all very fluid, fuzzy, and hopelessly breaks all the rules and boundaries of what people normally consider to be friendship vs romance, in the mainstream. And in fact - it downright irritates me how most other people seem to play some kind of internal script to rules and boundaries of different relationship types, which I've completely lost all grasp of now (not sure I ever truly had it - it always felt a bit forced and conditioned to me really).

You could say that I want to have polyamorous romantic friendships. Or you could say that I just want to make close female friends to cuddle with. Or you could say that I'm more or less "normal", but just very slow and disjointed on the sexual and exclusivity aspects of mainstream "romance".

But the most honest way to put it (and this is what my OkCupid profile now says) is that I essentially have no predetermined definition of what relationships should be to me. Boundaries feel like too much stress. Not having to care about them feels liberating.

Kitty, this sounds almost exactly like what I would want. I'm asexual though, so sex would preferably not enter into it at all. So does that mean I'm polyromantic? Or an aromantic who just likes cuddle buddies? Or should I just stick to having no clue and just wandering through a various sort of explanation depending on who I'm talking to?

[SheeBee]

Oh my I'm. Totally confused about myself! My brains are steaming towards the ability to figure me and what I like out! I feel. The freedom to ponder and set a self portal for this topic, alone is amazing. All the you have to be this, that and how, can now take a ride on the next wind storm and disappate into the ocean. I'm feeling a little normal after reading this.

[TechnoEA]

I'm still trying to figure it out.

The issue I'm having is:

I like being intimate and physical

I just don't feel love or romantic attraction towards that person.

At least I don't think. I can't feel the difference between strong platonic and romantic attraction.

[MusicAce]

As a heteroromantic, I like the idea of 'romancing' a partner with the kind of things Skullery Maid mentioned (holding hands, giving flowers, cuddling etc). I haven't really fallen in love yet, but I'm fairly young and I'm sure I'm capable of it. That being said, I was wondering about romantic identity.

If identity was defined as wanting to share your experience or your life with someone as you guys have mentioned, then how do you separate close friends or family from a partner? The only thing I can think of is the level of desire you have in wanting to share your life with your partner, compared to a friend. Because I have some close friends who I want to share my experiences with and want to be with constantly, but I don't love them in a romantic way. How do you guys distinguish the difference?

[JaidaKai]

I don't really have an idea of romance...I didn't like it when my ex-boyfriend bought me little gifts, because it made me feel awkward. I didn't want to do anything for our anniversary, because I didn't really see the point. And our dates also turned out to be awkward because he insisted on hugging and cuddling and attempting-to-stare-into-my-freakin'-eyes in public, which I do NOT do.

But I love cuddling on the couch at home, and watching movies. I don't really like talking about personal things, either. But I am capable of having crushes and falling in love, so...

I don't really know, I guess.

[foreignrainbow]

This was so helpful in helping me identify my current feelings.

[butterfree]

I like the idea of romance. Getting flowers, moonlit walks, candlelit dinners. And I agree it is cultural. I see it as ways to show people you love them. But I don't need that. People can show they love me by spending time with me, talking. An occasional I love you or hugging. I am not a touchy-feely person honestly. Sometimes hugging is a bit much for me but I always felt that was a sensory thing.

So I got out the op's post is that having a romantic orientation is wanting to partner up for the rest of your life? And showing affecction? Then what are squishes for aromantics. The line seems really blurry. and maybe there is no line just a continuum.

[Exosk]

...

So I got out the op's post is that having a romantic orientation is wanting to partner up for the rest of your life? And showing affecction? Then what are squishes for aromantics. The line seems really blurry. and maybe there is no line just a continuum.

There has been some discussion on that:

"For Aromantics: How do you explain squishes to other people who do not get them?" by CheshireCheeseSoulKitty

http://www.asexuality.org/en/topic/102463-for-aromantics-how-do-you-explain-squishes-to-other-people-who-do-not-get-them/

This one aims to further discuss the difference between 'crush' and romantic attraction:

"What is the difference between a crush and having romantic attraction?" by Vincisomething

http://www.asexuality.org/en/topic/100344-what-is-the-difference-between-a-crush-and-having-romantic-attraction/

Yeah it's all very shady, but to me that is sorta disappointing because it is harder to find people that 'get what you mean' exactly.