Sometimes I really wish I could be aromantic...

[Lia]

I'm always hurt by those who I develop romantic feelings for, even when those feelings are returned...at first. I know that some gripe that they'd like to be "normal" just once, but I wish I could just not have the ability to form romantic attachments to anyone, because that would just be easier. I'm perfectly happy on my own. I don't NEED a romantic relationship to be happy with myself and my life, so wouldn't it just be easier if I didn't have to worry about forming those attachments? Maybe I'll work on teaching myself to be aromantic. Perhaps those feelings will still be present within my head and heart, but I can learn to ignore them...right? Wouldn't that just be easier and less painful???

[JJCat]

You said it yourself-you don't need romantic relationships. Perhaps work on being happy being by yourself for a while? Then see where life takes you.

I'm not sure it's healthy to ignore your feelings of wanting to be with someone. It's one thing to not feel them at all, it's another to just ignore them for fear of getting hurt.

Do what's best for you, but don't expect to make any drastic life changes by choosing to ignore certain feelings and desires.

(Hope my message is coming across properly-don't want to give out any negative advice to anyone)

-JJ

[Lia]

I think I misrepresented myself. I let things happen naturally, always. I'm not the girl who always NEEDS to be in a relationship, and in fact I'm rarely ever in a relationship for whatever reason, even when we both have romantic feelings for each other. Which is likely how I wind up hurt =/

[TG-G]

I want you to know that being aromantic, at least in my experience, isn't any easier. There is still love & loss. I recently realized that I loved someone I know & consider a friend, & I still want to be in a relationship with him. Yet, I know it isn't going to happen. & I have to force myself to let go of all of it.

[Nogitsune]

I want you to know that being aromantic, at least in my experience, isn't any easier. There is still love & loss.

Yeah, very much this.

[Guest]

I want you to know that being aromantic, at least in my experience, isn't any easier. There is still love & loss.

Yeah, very much this.

If that's true, what's the difference between romantic and aromantic? If two people both want relationships, both people are asexual and don't want to cuddle, hug, kiss, etc... what quality does person 1 have to have in order to make them romantic compared to person 2?

[The Great WTF]

I agree that being aromantic isn't necesarily easier. It makes it very awkward when friends develop romantic feelings for me, worse yet misinterpret my actions and feelings as being romantic towards them. I've lost good friends because they become romantically attached to me and cannot accept that I don't feel the same.

Beingle single, even though it's by choice, when the rest of my friends were dating was hard, too. I got excluded from a lot of things because of it and had to endure constant matchmaking efforts from friends. I got tired of hurting people, of being left out, and especially of being pitied.

[maven]

I want you to know that being aromantic, at least in my experience, isn't any easier. There is still love & loss.

Yeah, very much this.

If that's true, what's the difference between romantic and aromantic? If two people both want relationships, both people are asexual and don't want to cuddle, hug, kiss, etc... what quality does person 1 have to have in order to make them romantic compared to person 2?

It's what they want out of the relationship. A romantic is looking for someone who loves them romantically. An aromantic can't give them that, all they can do is love them platonically. Like in a relationship between a sexual and an asexual who are having sex - the asexual is never going to want their partner sexually. They're never going to see their partner in a sexual light or re-affirm their sexual desirability. The same way that a sexual often associates sex with love, romantics associate romantic gestures (holding hands, candlelit dinners, etc) with love. Aromantics can walk through the motions of any of the previously mentioned actions, but it doesn't mean they feel the same emotions from it that their romantic counterparts do. The same sort of feeling that "something is missing" when a sexual is in a relationship with an asexual would probably appear in a romantic/aromantic relationship.

[JJCat]

I agree that being aromantic isn't necesarily easier. It makes it very awkward when friends develop romantic feelings for me, worse yet misinterpret my actions and feelings as being romantic towards them. I've lost good friends because they become romantically attached to me and cannot accept that I don't feel the same.

Beingle single, even though it's by choice, when the rest of my friends were dating was hard, too. I got excluded from a lot of things because of it and had to endure constant matchmaking efforts from friends. I got tired of hurting people, of being left out, and especially of being pitied.

Ahh, yes this is very true. Countless times have I lost good platonic friends because they wanted more from me, they thought they could change me somehow. They didn't understand that I am an aromatic asexual (a term I didn't know at the time) and they just thought I was leading them on. Or that I was a closeted gay.

People pity me because I have been single for so long. People constantly try to set me up on dates. People always think my friendliness is flirtation. People think I am some sort of weirdo or that I have some kind of weird closeted fetish because I am single/don't date/don't talk about sex/etc. You know, because it can't just be that I am not attracted to anyone. And that yes on the weekends I am likely to be alone, reading a book, going for a solo run, lifting weights, learning a language on my own etc. and being perfectly content in my solitude. Many people will never believe that though.

I would always get unwanted sympathy on say Valentines Day when in reality I was more concerned with the fact that the day after all chocolates will be on sale! (Who doesn't love dark chocolate on sale???)

I avoid parties because as soon as people find out I am single I get unwanted advances and everything I say to anyone is misinterpreted as flirtation.

I don't desire romance. Nor do I care for it.

Yes being an aromatic asexual has it's perks, don't have to worry about "finding the one" or anything like that, but it also has it's downfalls, just like every other orientation.

[TG-G]

I want you to know that being aromantic, at least in my experience, isn't any easier. There is still love & loss.

Yeah, very much this.

If that's true, what's the difference between romantic and aromantic? If two people both want relationships, both people are asexual and don't want to cuddle, hug, kiss, etc... what quality does person 1 have to have in order to make them romantic compared to person 2?

It's what they want out of the relationship. A romantic is looking for someone who loves them romantically. An aromantic can't give them that, all they can do is love them platonically. Like in a relationship between a sexual and an asexual who are having sex - the asexual is never going to want their partner sexually. They're never going to see their partner in a sexual light or re-affirm their sexual desirability. The same way that a sexual often associates sex with love, romantics associate romantic gestures (holding hands, candlelit dinners, etc) with love. Aromantics can walk through the motions of any of the previously mentioned actions, but it doesn't mean they feel the same emotions from it that their romantic counterparts do. The same sort of feeling that "something is missing" when a sexual is in a relationship with an asexual would probably appear in a romantic/aromantic relationship.

Yeah, that's what it's like for me pretty much. Except, what I feel is this tremendous amount of love that is more than simply platonic friendship. Maybe some people could consider it like a squish+. My ideas of what a relationship are & my fantasies of a relationship are not radically different from other people - I think about being with someone, taking care of each other, being there for each other, being each other's cheerleader, being there for the bad times as well as the good. & I do enjoy physical affection, I do love hugging, snuggling, etc. But my reasons for needing it & expressing it are different. Like my idea of the perfect scenario is spooning/snuggling with someone & just talking all night - experiencing a deep level of emotional intimacy with someone. Feeling & expressing this deep level of love & trust, & knowing that you can depend on this person.

[Lia]

I suppose the grass is always greener type of thing is going on for me right now. I sympathize with the downfalls of being aromantic, so I hope that no one took this thread in a light that portrayed me as not. Maybe in a perfect world we could all turn our emotions on and off as we needed/saw fit/wanted? Bleh. One can dream, right?

Thank you all for your input and insight :)

[Mr. Shuttershy]

I want you to know that being aromantic, at least in my experience, isn't any easier. There is still love & loss.

Yeah, very much this.

If that's true, what's the difference between romantic and aromantic? If two people both want relationships, both people are asexual and don't want to cuddle, hug, kiss, etc... what quality does person 1 have to have in order to make them romantic compared to person 2?

It's what they want out of the relationship. A romantic is looking for someone who loves them romantically. An aromantic can't give them that, all they can do is love them platonically. Like in a relationship between a sexual and an asexual who are having sex - the asexual is never going to want their partner sexually. They're never going to see their partner in a sexual light or re-affirm their sexual desirability. The same way that a sexual often associates sex with love, romantics associate romantic gestures (holding hands, candlelit dinners, etc) with love. Aromantics can walk through the motions of any of the previously mentioned actions, but it doesn't mean they feel the same emotions from it that their romantic counterparts do. The same sort of feeling that "something is missing" when a sexual is in a relationship with an asexual would probably appear in a romantic/aromantic relationship.

I'm romantic and I don't like any physical gestures.

[Guest]

I'm romantic and I hate romantic gestures (stupid same word for two different things). I hate candlelit dinners and holding hands (feels like my hand is burning off!)... I've learned to give cards but I think cards are stupid. I'm logic-oriented, so romance seems really stupid to me. But that doesn't make me aromantic, it just makes me logical. I still pursue relationships with people, its just that my relationships don't contain stupid hollywood-esque trappings of "romance". That's actually true of a lot of people... typical old fashioned romance is pretty much out the window already, and what's remaining will be tossed by the following couple generations. Cultural norms, such as candlelit dinners, have nothing to do with one's orientation/ predisposition toward emotionally intimate relationships.

Yeah, that's what it's like for me pretty much. Except, what I feel is this tremendous amount of love that is more than simply platonic friendship. Maybe some people could consider it like a squish+. My ideas of what a relationship are & my fantasies of a relationship are not radically different from other people - I think about being with someone, taking care of each other, being there for each other, being each other's cheerleader, being there for the bad times as well as the good. & I do enjoy physical affection, I do love hugging, snuggling, etc. But my reasons for needing it & expressing it are different. Like my idea of the perfect scenario is spooning/snuggling with someone & just talking all night - experiencing a deep level of emotional intimacy with someone. Feeling & expressing this deep level of love & trust, & knowing that you can depend on this person.

Why do you think this is different than how romantic asexuals feel? It looks exactly the same to me.

[TG-G]

I'm romantic and I hate romantic gestures (stupid same word for two different things). I hate candlelit dinners and holding hands (feels like my hand is burning off!)... I've learned to give cards but I think cards are stupid. I'm logic-oriented, so romance seems really stupid to me. But that doesn't make me aromantic, it just makes me logical. I still pursue relationships with people, its just that my relationships don't contain stupid hollywood-esque trappings of "romance". That's actually true of a lot of people... typical old fashioned romance is pretty much out the window already, and what's remaining will be tossed by the following couple generations. Cultural norms, such as candlelit dinners, have nothing to do with one's orientation/ predisposition toward emotionally intimate relationships.

Yeah, that's what it's like for me pretty much. Except, what I feel is this tremendous amount of love that is more than simply platonic friendship. Maybe some people could consider it like a squish+. My ideas of what a relationship are & my fantasies of a relationship are not radically different from other people - I think about being with someone, taking care of each other, being there for each other, being each other's cheerleader, being there for the bad times as well as the good. & I do enjoy physical affection, I do love hugging, snuggling, etc. But my reasons for needing it & expressing it are different. Like my idea of the perfect scenario is spooning/snuggling with someone & just talking all night - experiencing a deep level of emotional intimacy with someone. Feeling & expressing this deep level of love & trust, & knowing that you can depend on this person.

Why do you think this is different than how romantic asexuals feel? It looks exactly the same to me.

I can't explain why it feels different for me. It just does. I know people are just going to say that I don't know my labels, or that I'm just confused, or that I'm just plain f'ing idiotic.

[Guest]

I'm romantic and I hate romantic gestures (stupid same word for two different things). I hate candlelit dinners and holding hands (feels like my hand is burning off!)... I've learned to give cards but I think cards are stupid. I'm logic-oriented, so romance seems really stupid to me. But that doesn't make me aromantic, it just makes me logical. I still pursue relationships with people, its just that my relationships don't contain stupid hollywood-esque trappings of "romance". That's actually true of a lot of people... typical old fashioned romance is pretty much out the window already, and what's remaining will be tossed by the following couple generations. Cultural norms, such as candlelit dinners, have nothing to do with one's orientation/ predisposition toward emotionally intimate relationships.

Yeah, that's what it's like for me pretty much. Except, what I feel is this tremendous amount of love that is more than simply platonic friendship. Maybe some people could consider it like a squish+. My ideas of what a relationship are & my fantasies of a relationship are not radically different from other people - I think about being with someone, taking care of each other, being there for each other, being each other's cheerleader, being there for the bad times as well as the good. & I do enjoy physical affection, I do love hugging, snuggling, etc. But my reasons for needing it & expressing it are different. Like my idea of the perfect scenario is spooning/snuggling with someone & just talking all night - experiencing a deep level of emotional intimacy with someone. Feeling & expressing this deep level of love & trust, & knowing that you can depend on this person.

Why do you think this is different than how romantic asexuals feel? It looks exactly the same to me.

I can't explain why it feels different for me. It just does. I know people are just going to say that I don't know my labels, or that I'm just confused, or that I'm just plain f'ing idiotic.

Let's approach it a different way, then. What do you think would be present if you felt romantically toward this person that you're missing now?

[TG-G]

I'm romantic and I hate romantic gestures (stupid same word for two different things). I hate candlelit dinners and holding hands (feels like my hand is burning off!)... I've learned to give cards but I think cards are stupid. I'm logic-oriented, so romance seems really stupid to me. But that doesn't make me aromantic, it just makes me logical. I still pursue relationships with people, its just that my relationships don't contain stupid hollywood-esque trappings of "romance". That's actually true of a lot of people... typical old fashioned romance is pretty much out the window already, and what's remaining will be tossed by the following couple generations. Cultural norms, such as candlelit dinners, have nothing to do with one's orientation/ predisposition toward emotionally intimate relationships.

Yeah, that's what it's like for me pretty much. Except, what I feel is this tremendoOus amount of love that is more than simply platonic friendship. Maybe some people could consider it like a squish+. My ideas of what a relationship are & my fantasies of a relationship are not radically different from other people - I think about being with someone, taking care of each other, being there for each other, being each other's cheerleader, being there for the bad times as well as the good. & I do enjoy physical affection, I do love hugging, snuggling, etc. But my reasons for needing it & expressing it are different. Like my idea of the perfect scenario is spooning/snuggling with someone & just talking all night - experiencing a deep level of emotional intimacy with someone. Feeling & expressing this deep level of love & trust, & knowing that you can depend on this person.

Why do you think this is different than how romantic asexuals feel? It looks exactly the same to me.

I can't explain why it feels different for me. It just does. I know people are just going to say that I don't know my labels, or that I'm just confused, or that I'm just plain f'ing idiotic.

Let's approach it a different way, then. What do you think would be present if you felt romantically toward this person that you're missing now?

IDK butterflies & lightheadedness, I guess. The stuff people talk about when they're in love, the feelings they feel.

I'm thinking about something right now, from when I was a young kid. The boy next door, I just wanted his approval, & to have him let me hang out with him. I just thought he was so awesome & cool. I realize now he was my first squish.

This last guy I have been interested in, I really do feel te same way about him, except very serious & grown up like. I want his friendship & respect more than anything in the world. The way I feel when I'm around him is the exact opposite of butterflies. I feel this calmness & stillness, & I feel like I can be myself around him. I don't have to fake a damn thing. I have had to trust this person with so much, & he didn't let me down like I was afraid he would.

Also, I feel the same exact way about my best friend. & told him, 'I love you, & we should be together,' & he, being a romantic sexual, said that it wasn't enough. We fought, & I said some very horrible things to him, & it was very difficult, but we got through it.

[Kitty Spoon Train]

Wow, this thread has me horribly confused. I thought I was quite romantic, but now I'm wondering if I actually fit into certain interpretations of aromantic that I see in this thread...

My idea of the ideal relationship is something like a cuddle buddy/romantic friendship. Definitely different and more cozy feelings than what I have for certain totally hands-off platonic friends, but it's not really quite the awkward Hollywoodesque stuff either. I can't stand having to pull contrived romantic gestures. It feels more natural to me to basically be like super close friends, but who also have a certain "spark" and an attraction to cuddling, kissing, holding hands, sharing a bed, and generally being cutesy and "romantic", in a tender nonsexual way.

I also don't have much of a pair-bonding instinct. I can easily have feelings like the above for multiple people, and absolutely feel no possessiveness or jealousy at the idea that they have other relationships either (because the foundation of the feelings is essentially "friendship", even though it's cuddly and close).

Hmmmm, I guess it comes back to the difference between "friendship" and "romance". It's always felt fluid and artificial to me. So maybe this is where it comes from. Maybe I naturally sit somewhere between romantic and aromantic - so my approach to it is too fluid to actually nail down my feelings as romantic vs platonic, by the usual societal categories anyway.

[Guest]

Hmmmm, I guess it comes back to the difference between "friendship" and "romance". It's always felt fluid and artificial to me. So maybe this is where it comes from. Maybe I naturally sit somewhere between romantic and aromantic - so my approach to it is too fluid to actually nail down my feelings as romantic vs platonic, by the usual societal categories anyway. :/

Or maybe the definition of "aromantic" is spread too thin on AVEN. Most people with half a brain think the line between friendship and romance is artificial... we marry our best friends, not knights in shining armor.

What is the purpose of having a label that doesn't distinguish anything? What would be the benefit of calling oneself aromantic if what you actually mean is "I'd like to have a sensible and egalitarian relationship with someone I consider my best friend"? That's the description of most mature relationships that I know, and I'm pretty sure we're not all aromantic. And even if we are (we're not), there would be no benefit to adopting the label.

[TG-G]

Wow, this thread has me horribly confused. I thought I was quite romantic, but now I'm wondering if I actually fit into certain interpretations of aromantic that I see in this thread...

My idea of the ideal relationship is something like a cuddle buddy/romantic friendship. Definitely different and more cozy feelings than what I have for certain totally hands-off platonic friends, but it's not really quite the awkward Hollywoodesque stuff either. I can't stand having to pull contrived romantic gestures. It feels more natural to me to basically be like super close friends, but who also have a certain "spark" and an attraction to cuddling, kissing, holding hands, sharing a bed, and generally being cutesy and "romantic", in a tender nonsexual way.

I also don't have much of a pair-bonding instinct. I can easily have feelings like the above for multiple people, and absolutely feel no possessiveness or jealousy at the idea that they have other relationships either (because the foundation of the feelings is essentially "friendship", even though it's cuddly and close).

Hmmmm, I guess it comes back to the difference between "friendship" and "romance". It's always felt fluid and artificial to me. So maybe this is where it comes from. Maybe I naturally sit somewhere between romantic and aromantic - so my approach to it is too fluid to actually nail down my feelings as romantic vs platonic, by the usual societal categories anyway.

Yeah, I don't have a jealous bone in my body. I wouldn't know how to feel that way.

As for that 'spark' - I don't feel it. I just feel the love.

& as for labels - Yes, they annoy me.

[Kitty Spoon Train]

What is the purpose of having a label that doesn't distinguish anything? What would be the benefit of calling oneself aromantic if what you actually mean is "I'd like to have a sensible and egalitarian relationship with someone I consider my best friend"? That's the description of most mature relationships that I know, and I'm pretty sure we're not all aromantic. And even if we are (we're not), there would be no benefit to adopting the label.

Yep. Good point. I'll just forget about it...

What I have definitely qualifies what would be seen as "romantic" cravings by 99% of the population, even if I can't stand the overly contrived stuff. So it's just overkill to try to apply "aromantic" to myself at all just for that.

[Calligraphette_Coe]

If there is an afterlife and I could wish for a better world there more of my own making, it would be a world where I could feel free to hug and hold hands with friends of any gender and/or sexual orientation. I just bleed emotion sometimes when I think of all the pain and misunderstanding that not being able to ever have felt comfortable with romantic sexual love caused. Of being spurned for being androgynous, or when honestly expressing this seemingly forbidden desire to keep things platonic.

Sex often ruins good, lasting friendships that are mutually beneficial to both. It ruins it when the platonic bond is dissolved by relenting reluctantly and it's more often broken when one of the friends finds a fierce new romantic relationship with someone-- when, as the opposite sexed friend, 'Three's a crowd' and one's presence becomes unwelcome at worse, or barely tolerated at best.

Knowing how to become a living ghost is almost a requirement if one is an aromantic asexual androgyne wanting to swim in Ocean Platonica. And if one is also a Social Being, it burns, there, too. :(

On stage, I make love to 25,000 people-- then I go home alone. -Janis Joplin

[maven]

I'm romantic and I don't like any physical gestures.

I'm romantic and I hate romantic gestures (stupid same word for two different things). I hate candlelit dinners and holding hands (feels like my hand is burning off!)... I've learned to give cards but I think cards are stupid. I'm logic-oriented, so romance seems really stupid to me. But that doesn't make me aromantic, it just makes me logical. I still pursue relationships with people, its just that my relationships don't contain stupid hollywood-esque trappings of "romance". That's actually true of a lot of people... typical old fashioned romance is pretty much out the window already, and what's remaining will be tossed by the following couple generations. Cultural norms, such as candlelit dinners, have nothing to do with one's orientation/ predisposition toward emotionally intimate relationships.

Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that romantic gestures were the crux of romantic relationships. I was trying to describe a relationship where one person is romantic and the other is not - basically unrequited love (or the "I love you as a friend," in which case I assume people mean they feel platonic love instead of romantic love). One person (the romantic) wants things the other person (aromantic) may not care about - exclusivity, spending lots of time together with just each other, placing them above all other friends, only showering them with affection, etc.

[Kaniner]

Yeah, I think the terms "romantic" and "aromantic" don't really have set boundaries, so it's hard to decide what they mean or what qualifies as them. I think having just the two terms really is a false dichotomy. I don't like snuggling/holding hands/ect. but I love spending time with people I care about and showing affection in other ways. I'm not really aromantic, since I love the idea of romance, and a good, sad song can leave me feeling moved. Yet at the same time I don't feel comfortable with romance when it happens, and I just don't quite know what that would really be called.

On the original post, I agree with you completely. I really wish I had no desire for affection at all.

[Kitty Spoon Train]

Yeah, I think the terms "romantic" and "aromantic" don't really have set boundaries, so it's hard to decide what they mean or what qualifies as them. I think having just the two terms really is a false dichotomy.

Yes. Here is my problem, in a nutshell: when I meet girls I get to like, I get drawn to them in a very affectionate way. Think cuddle buddy / romantic friendship: Spending a lot of time together, cuddling, kissing, holding hands, staying over and sharing a bed, travelling together - but somehow it's not internalised to me that this has to progress to a "serious" pair-bond thing, a "romantic partner" as usually defined by society. It's more like a friendship in the sense that I feel no need to exclusively possess it, and it doesn't feel like it has to "progress" - to either sex or to something "more" on a practical life sharing level. I'm demisexual and not fully ace, so this can complicate things eventually - but that takes a long time and might not come up at all depending on the person and connection.

So yes, my natural draw is to something that falls between "friendship" and "romance" - which makes the usual societal categories of the two very difficult to deal with in dating, and in friendships even. I don't want to lie and pretend that I'm up for a serious pair-bond thing, but I also don't want to be totally dismissed and friendzoned by girls that I do get close to - and who I want something like the above with.

In my ideal world, this third category would be more formalised and acceptable. Now it basically doesn't exist at all as a respectable relationship in our culture. Everything either has to either be a totally hands-off platonic friendship, or else a full-on romantic relationship. Anything in-between is seen either as a transition, or as something unrespectable and sleazy (such as FWBs, etc).

[TG-G]

Well, I realized what my problem is. I genuinely want a relationship, but I'm trying to convince everyone that my reasons for wanting to be in one, especially with certain specific individuals, are as valid as anyone else's reasons for wanting to be in a relationship, especially people who are romantic or romantic-sexual. Of course, people aren't going to believe that my reasons are valid enough; that my feelings are enough. I guess they aren't.

[Kaniner]

Of course, people aren't going to believe that my reasons are valid enough; that my feelings are enough. I guess they aren't.

Not really sure if it's that they're really not, or if people are just not accustomed to any sort of middle ground between 100% friend-zone and 100% relationship?

[TG-G]

Of course, people aren't going to believe that my reasons are valid enough; that my feelings are enough. I guess they aren't.

Not really sure if it's that they're really not, or if people are just not accustomed to any sort of middle ground between 100% friend-zone and 100% relationship?

I'm slowly realizing that they mostly aren't, & if they are it's of the f-buddy variety.

At the age I am, I'm ready to just give up.

[Mr. Shuttershy]

Yeah, I think the terms "romantic" and "aromantic" don't really have set boundaries, so it's hard to decide what they mean or what qualifies as them. I think having just the two terms really is a false dichotomy. I don't like snuggling/holding hands/ect. but I love spending time with people I care about and showing affection in other ways. I'm not really aromantic, since I love the idea of romance, and a good, sad song can leave me feeling moved. Yet at the same time I don't feel comfortable with romance when it happens, and I just don't quite know what that would really be called.

On the original post, I agree with you completely. I really wish I had no desire for affection at all.

I... have never agreed more.

I don't see much difference really...

[Kai99]

Yeah, I thought aromantic means that a person can't love someone in a romantic way. They can have friendships and those type of relationships, but they have no desire for "romance." If not then why the terms "romantic" and "aromantic" asexual?

[Guest]

Yeah, I thought aromantic means that a person can't love someone in a romantic way. They can have friendships and those type of relationships, but they have no desire for "romance." If not then why the terms "romantic" and "aromantic" asexual?

But that's the stickler right there. "Romance" is a purely cultural thing... it's flowers and chocolates, it's candlelit dinners and walks on the beach. Romantic attraction isn't actually related to the term "romance"... instead, romantic attraction is that which pulls us toward special relationships... whether or not those special relationships include the culturally-flavored "romance" is quite beside the point. In other words, you can have a romantic orientation AND hate romance at the same time.