Aromantic, I'm still confused about it

[ArtieBun]

Still wibbling back and forth on where I stand personally with regards to being romantic, aromantic, or polyamorous. (polyromantic?) I've been reading some topics on here that say some aromantics still like affectionate gestures such as kissing and cuddling, but are simply not interested in a typical "boyfriend/girlfriend" relationship.

So I looked up the definition of romance, and got alot of different things, but this one stuck out the most to me;

b. Ardent emotional attachment or involvement between people; love

Ardent being enthusiastic, passionate. And to me this definition boils romance down to something as simple as having a strong emotional attachment to another person or persons, or feeling love for them. The difference between romantic and aromantic confuses me further, because by this definition aromantic would be a lack of 'emotional attraction' or strong emotional feelings for others.

But maybe I'm having a weird ace moment here, because I sort of view romance as just that; a strong emotional bond between people. (Like the term 'bromance' for example. A really close bond between two guys, that's totally platonic. How many times have I used the word 'strong'? Ergh.)

And hopefully I don't offend any aromantics here with my misunderstandings, but for me, declaring myself aromantic would be like declaring that I have no desire to form (here's that word again) strong emotional bonds with other people. Which, could never be true because my friends are basically my life.

If we treat romance as simply being that intense level of emotional attachment, then someone who has a few bestest buds could technically be considered asexual-polamorous? (If they're asexual) Hrrrmmm, thoughts?

[Pandoren]

I don't consider platonic and romantic affection to be the same thing, or that romantic affection is a stronger platonic affection. I had a friend before who was my entire world, but I didn't want to be in a relationship with him, it wasn't that kind of feeling. I've rarely experienced romantic attraction and the strongest of that I felt was to someone I didn't particularly know well. Certainly what I'd felt for my friend was a lot stronger than I felt for this person. If you don't know what romantic attraction feels like, you probably don't feel it.

[Member 35376]

If we treat romance as simply being that intense level of emotional attachment, then someone who has a few bestest buds could technically be considered asexual-polamorous? (If they're asexual) Hrrrmmm, thoughts?

Absolutely! I have one (among several relationships in my life) distinct relationship in my life that is of non sexual character.. with a hypersexual! What could we possibly share as sex is not the case.. well.. if you seek eternal love and confirmation beyond all limits there obviously is such a state possible between two or more persons and sex is not required for it to work as mentioned other person is hypersexual to say the least, lol. I would guess that religion is in the same "emotional spectrum" and/or relationship as this I am trying to describe. Though not in the same emotional spectrum.. there is the feeling of having accomplished something great with others.. some huge project finally ending in success.. what could possible be more binding at that moment.. and isn't that.. romance. People DO look back in time with nostalgia, don't they.

I am often really confused by "romance" too in the "world out there" and actually the word and concept of "love". For me it seems that the language many times is a barrier for reality (which through history has been mentioned and even studied by many philosophers and others).. because you will have to think very hard before formulating something of emotional value that also WILL have emotional value FOR the intended person(s).. but it can take 0.5 seconds to know that you are loved or to express it.. by a look.. by a hand in your hand.. or by simply doing something of powerful value with someone.

[Vampyremage]

For me, romantic attraction encompasses two different things and both of those things are necessary in order for me to consider it to be romantic attraction. The first is the strong emotional connection mentioned above. Of course, it is possible to have a platonic relationship that also has a strong romantic attraction which is why I think that a second thing needs to be present in order to differentiate. For me, that second thing is a desire for physical closeness. I'm not talking about sexual closeness, but rather things like cuddling, kissing, holding hands, that sort of thing. Of course, the exact nature of both these might differ from person to person. For example, there are certainly people out there that don't have much of a desire for physical contact.

The line between romantic and aromantic has caused me some confusion in the past as well, based in large part upon the fact that I don't strongly need a relationship like others seem to and because even when I'm in a relationship I require a lot of my own time. The connections I feel are, perhaps, not as strong as the connections others feel. However, I still desire and enjoy being in a relationship, and have thus decided to identify as grey-romantic.

I look at the concept of polyamoury as something slightly apart from the romantic/aromantic continuam. I do consider myself polyamorous or maybe polyamrous curios since I don't actually have first hand experience with it? Romantic attraction and love, to my mind, can certainly happen to more than one person simultaneously and I am inclined to think that I would almost say an ideal relationship would be a polyamorous one, for me personally. With that said, that might just be fantasy since I haven't actually experienced it first hand to know if/how it would play out differently than it does inside my own head.

[clarity262]

I don't consider platonic and romantic affection to be the same thing, or that romantic affection is a stronger platonic affection. I had a friend before who was my entire world, but I didn't want to be in a relationship with him, it wasn't that kind of feeling.

I am in complete agreement with this statement! Platonic love ≠ Romantic love. Like, I have a deep emotional connection with my dog, but I by no means want to have a romantic relationship with her. Just like I don't want a romantic relationship with my friends or my parents, my sister, my cousins. I consider myself aromantic because I don't want to form romantic relationships, but I do enjoy my deep emotional connections with the people in my life.

One more thing: The term you were looking for was polyamory. Polyromanticism is where you can be romantically attracted to multiple genders.

Hope this helps!

[the Lady Ashuko]

Mental "Illness" Warning: I consider myself Aromantic. I also have Schizoid Personality Disorder. This most likely affects my aromanticism.

I am capable of becoming very close to a friend. I can feel that I can't imagine my life without them but once I no longer see them on a regular basis I stop caring. I have actually seen friends from high school at places like restaurants and wanted to hide so they wouldn't see me. I can't handle seeing a person outside of my mental context for them.

I've had relationships in the past which I ended because I got annoyed with how much affection they were giving me. I never regretted or had to recover, for lack of a better word, from these breakups. If anything I was relieved to have my space again.

After a very messy breakup I decided I wasn't going to pursue a relationship because it wasn't worth the trouble. I was surprised to find that not only was my general mood better, it wasn't work. I still experienced a feeling of being drawn to certain people, I just realized that all this time that was me wanting to be their friend.

[ArtieBun]

For me, romantic attraction encompasses two different things and both of those things are necessary in order for me to consider it to be romantic attraction. The first is the strong emotional connection mentioned above. Of course, it is possible to have a platonic relationship that also has a strong romantic attraction which is why I think that a second thing needs to be present in order to differentiate. For me, that second thing is a desire for physical closeness. I'm not talking about sexual closeness, but rather things like cuddling, kissing, holding hands, that sort of thing. Of course, the exact nature of both these might differ from person to person. For example, there are certainly people out there that don't have much of a desire for physical contact.

The line between romantic and aromantic has caused me some confusion in the past as well, based in large part upon the fact that I don't strongly need a relationship like others seem to and because even when I'm in a relationship I require a lot of my own time.

This is me quite a bit, except that I am naturally a very affectionate person and have in the past engaged in things like cuddling, holding hands, and maybe a kiss on the cheek with people I consider to be 'just friends'. Under normal circumstances, the line would be drawn at sexual relationship versus non-sexual relationship, but since I'm asexual I don't have that as an extra qualification to separate romantic from non-romantic.

When I look at my friends I think; "I would really like to be able to be this close to this person 10, 20, 30 years down the line." Which makes it even more confusing, because a desire to share your life with someone is also usually a romantic marker.

I know what it feels like to have a crush on someone, but I'm not sure that is really romantic either. If it is, then I'm certainly polyamorous, even though I have still considered alot of those crushes friends. Bluh.

[Vampyremage]

For me, romantic attraction encompasses two different things and both of those things are necessary in order for me to consider it to be romantic attraction. The first is the strong emotional connection mentioned above. Of course, it is possible to have a platonic relationship that also has a strong romantic attraction which is why I think that a second thing needs to be present in order to differentiate. For me, that second thing is a desire for physical closeness. I'm not talking about sexual closeness, but rather things like cuddling, kissing, holding hands, that sort of thing. Of course, the exact nature of both these might differ from person to person. For example, there are certainly people out there that don't have much of a desire for physical contact.

The line between romantic and aromantic has caused me some confusion in the past as well, based in large part upon the fact that I don't strongly need a relationship like others seem to and because even when I'm in a relationship I require a lot of my own time.

This is me quite a bit, except that I am naturally a very affectionate person and have in the past engaged in things like cuddling, holding hands, and maybe a kiss on the cheek with people I consider to be 'just friends'. Under normal circumstances, the line would be drawn at sexual relationship versus non-sexual relationship, but since I'm asexual I don't have that as an extra qualification to separate romantic from non-romantic.

When I look at my friends I think; "I would really like to be able to be this close to this person 10, 20, 30 years down the line." Which makes it even more confusing, because a desire to share your life with someone is also usually a romantic marker.

I know what it feels like to have a crush on someone, but I'm not sure that is really romantic either. If it is, then I'm certainly polyamorous, even though I have still considered alot of those crushes friends. Bluh.

I think that perhaps the quality of the emotional connection is also different between a romantic interest and a platonic one. Its difficult to put into words exactly what that difference is, really, but I think its certainly there. Maybe it has to do with an extra sense of commitment, of wanting them there more often and on a deeper level than a close platonic friend. For some it might be the idea that they want that person there for the rest of their lives, although I'm unable to use that particular marker because I don't view any relationship as likely to last forever. When you really think about it, it certainly can get to be a little on the confusing side, especially for the grey-romantics out there, because the lines are more hazy then they would be, I think, with full romantics.

[eamonn]

I think the quality of the connection certainly is different. The problem is that many of the things self-confessed aromantics say they want are what romantics also want - cuddling, companionship and so on. Maybe romantic people just feel something that aromantics don't, and can't fully understand.

'Course, I can't speak for them.

[horseshoe]

Ardent being enthusiastic, passionate. And to me this definition boils romance down to something as simple as having a strong emotional attachment to another person or persons, or feeling love for them. The difference between romantic and aromantic confuses me further, because by this definition aromantic would be a lack of 'emotional attraction' or strong emotional feelings for others.

I basically accept Data's definition of friendship. "Our neural pathways have become accustomed to your sensory input patterns."

Friendships are, for me, about familiarity and acceptance. I do not form deep emotional bonds with many people, and those bonds literally take decades to form. I met my first best friend in 3rd grade, and we stayed close for 15 years. My current best friend is at 23 years, and running. But, there's no real emotional bond, on my part. It's more a matter of familiarity and shared interests, than anything else.

Thinking about it, there is no real emotional attachment, coming from my side.

And hopefully I don't offend any aromantics here with my misunderstandings, but for me, declaring myself aromantic would be like declaring that I have no desire to form (here's that word again) strong emotional bonds with other people. Which, could never be true because my friends are basically my life.

By many definitions, I might be described as emotionally stunted or numb, in fact. Heck, I'd likely make a decent Vulcan.

A friendship (not an acquaintance) to me, is primarily defined by the commitment, the mutual acceptance of each other, for better or worse, over the long haul. I have exceedingly few friends, by that definition. Tons of acquaintances, though.

Other than basic general human caring, I really don't have a deep *emotional* connection to any of my friends. Your query implies that this is unusual. I've never considered it to be that unusual, but this is the first time I've ever examined it in such detail.

What is it that friendships mean to other people?

Finally, romantic relationships would seem to be a variation on this theme of commitment, but I have yet to find anyone whom I could describe in a romantic manner.

P.S. The one other time this did occur to me, I questioned whether I am a functional psychopath. Would LOVE to undergo an FMRI just to find out, definitively.

[the Lady Ashuko]

@horseshoe My best friend and I joke that I'm basically a Vulcan. :D I'm a loyal friend, but I make no effort to maintain most friendships once they are no longer convenient. She also prefers to talk to me about her problems even if I can't help, just because it never occurs to me to judge her for them.

[horseshoe]

@horseshoe My best friend and I joke that I'm basically a Vulcan. :D I'm a loyal friend, but I make no effort to maintain most friendships once they are no longer convenient. She also prefers to talk to me about her problems even if I can't help, just because it never occurs to me to judge her for them.

Well, that description is certainly familiar to me. Maybe not so unusual?

[Kelsea]

I think the difference between platonic and romantic is whether you have any desire for physical closeness - cuddling, kissing, holding hands, etc.

There are people that I want to form a lifelong friendship with, in a completely platonic way... I want to be close friends with them forever, but I don't want to cuddle or kiss them!

[eamonn]

Don't lots of aromantic people like physical closeness of that kind?

[Kelsea]

Don't lots of aromantic people like physical closeness of that kind?

Gah, I have no idea... Clearly I'm confused about it too!

[maven]

I think the difference between platonic and romantic is whether you have any desire for physical closeness - cuddling, kissing, holding hands, etc.

There are people that I want to form a lifelong friendship with, in a completely platonic way... I want to be close friends with them forever, but I don't want to cuddle or kiss them!

By that definition I've had several romantic relationships. And I'm aromantic. ^_^

I'm aromantic because I've never felt the need to enter a romantic relationship. I have several friends who I am close to, who I would like to be lifelong friends with, who I have also hugged and cuddled... but I do not consider them romantic relationships. I feel the same way towards them that I do towards close family members (my brother, cousins, etc.). I always assumed there was something extra that other people felt that made them want to be in a relationship with another person because it appears most people desire a relationship, even if they are asexual. I've never felt the need to spend copious amounts of time with one specific person, to only shower one person with hugs and my form of affection, I've never felt jealousy towards someone else because "he was meant for me!"

[Sax]

Personally I'm still trying to figure out the whole romantic aspect myself. It's a weird thing to put under a microscope after years of simply "going out" with people. I've been in relationships but I can't recall wanting to spend more time with them than the rest of my friends, nor can I remember a time I absolutely needed to talk to THEM and no one else could do. This is what I'm thinking might be why I may be aromantic? I don't know if I'm thinking about this wrong.

Maven, you sound like me in that sense, I think. With thinking of everyone as on the same level. Even when I was alone with my boyfriend it had a sense of intimacy but I never felt any impulse to do anything. The only times I've ever felt like I wanted to have any physical contact was more or less when I was bored or sitting close to someone, I will lean my head on them. :/ So physical intimacy is not always a signifier of being romantic? <--I guess my long-awaited point to this.