Jump to content

"but it's okay, asexual doesn't mean they can't fall in love"


Jea

Recommended Posts

So I often find something like that in otherwise-awesome educative pictures, articles, or videos.

It's great to introduce people to the idea of romantic attraction separated from sexual attraction, and to make people aware that some asexuals can fall in love.

BUT I don't like the concession there. Like, being asexual is okay if you're not aro. I know it's not what is meant here, but it makes it more difficult to come out as aromantic once people have seen one of these things.

It's okay to be ace, it's okay to be aro, and it's okay to be one of those, or both.

I often feel like visibility projects should spend a few lines/seconds on the concept of not falling in love.

Perhaps this post should go in 'visibility & ed projects? I wasn't sure.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah. I think it has to do with some societies being overly obsessive about that romantic relationships is the only way to be happy. It's very common to see love only as something expressed through relationships between (preferably) a young man and woman, who meet, fall in love, kisses and then have sex. But I believe that all (or most) people like give and receive love, but they have different ways to do it.

So I think it would be better if we began talking more about different types of love, not only love as in romantic or sexual relationships but the ones between friends and family, for the people near to you, or your pet, or whatever passion one might have. I also think many people who aren't that familiar with asexuality (and believe in/has been fed the "romantic relationships = happiness") are concerned that being asexual or aromantic (or both) mean that they hate people, which isn't the case.
So it feels more like they're trying to say "It's ok, guys. Asexual doesn't mean "hating people!" when they write things like that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good point, thanks for sharing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I think that's a good point! They almost make it sound like being asexual is something that is okay only if you can make up for it in another way, such as romance. "Oh my, you're asexual?! But it's okay because you can still be in love, right?"

I kind of had a moment of that when I came out to my boyfriend. He said he was perfectly fine with that and and accepted it "because I know you can still love me romantically just as much as I do you, right?!" And there I was (and still am) questioning where I actually sit on the (a)romantic spectrum. Sigh.

Link to post
Share on other sites

aromantism should just be clearly seperated in the talk of asexuality. I heard too much of the terms being mixed together with the agument that "its just more easy that way" but no.. its not it makes things more confussing.

People could simple say "asexuals can have many types of romantic orientations,(hetro,bi,homo..) some are also aromantic but not all aromantic are asexual as romantic and sexual orientation arn't the same." <- why is that so hard?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Anthracite_Impreza

Yep, it's ok if you're different, as long as you're not too different. I assume it's because in popular culture aromantic non-asexuals are portrayed as jerks who just take their "prize" and bugger off without so much as a kiss goodnight - ergo, romance is seen as preferred. Aromantic visibility is important not just for us, but these people as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, it's ok if you're different, as long as you're not too different. I assume it's because in popular culture aromantic non-asexuals are portrayed as jerks who just take their "prize" and bugger off without so much as a kiss goodnight - ergo, romance is seen as preferred. Aromantic visibility is important not just for us, but these people as well.

Part of it, but I think its bigger than that. i feel romance is often more easy to sell than sex and it does often replace it when sex dosent sell, which is dosent for many asexuals.

So if you cant sell the idea or asexuals with sex you have ti sell it with ronance insteed, leaving out aro/ace people.

Sure you cant sell aro-allosexual very well either because sex doesnt sell well when its considered taboo (which everything non straight is, most of lgbt fight focus on romantic love, not sex)

Also the general amatonomative idea that romantic love makes us human is hard to escape.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

So I think it would be better if we began talking more about different types of love, not only love as in romantic or sexual relationships but the ones between friends and family, for the people near to you, or your pet, or whatever passion one might have. I also think many people who aren't that familiar with asexuality (and believe in/has been fed the "romantic relationships = happiness") are concerned that being asexual or aromantic (or both) mean that they hate people, which isn't the case.

So it feels more like they're trying to say "It's ok, guys. Asexual doesn't mean "hating people!" when they write things like that.

And, most importantly, the difference between "to fall in love" and "to love".

Link to post
Share on other sites

The reason the concession is made is because too many people will take it a step further and assume that an asexual person doesn't want relationships at all (to the point of being baffled as to why someone would want to pursue a nonsexual relationship), which isn't necessarily the case.

From my point of view, the idea that someone might just not want relationships period, whether asexual or sexual, is practically implicit. Most of us have run into people of this type at some point in our lives, I would think.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...