Aesthetic vs. Romantic vs. Sensual Attraction

[Korintha]

So, I've been reading the definitions of the different types of attraction on the FAQ page, and I'm still a little confused. I know that I don't feel sexual attraction, and I understand what that comprises. However, what differentiates the other three? If we refer to someone's attraction as --romantic --sexual (for example, homoromantic asexual), and that is a way of saying that someone's feelings toward another stop at desire for sex, can the other two terms used to describe something akin to romantic attraction as well?

[a-very-clever-idiot]

These might help. :)

[deltaX]

The infographics posted above do a pretty good job of explaining it! I'll post some of my own thoughts and experiences as well though in case you find it helpful :)

Basically, I see romantic attraction as an attraction or desire to have a romantic relationship with a certain person. It's hard for me to give much more detail than that, because I don't think I've ever experienced romantic attraction myself.

I see sensual attraction as an attraction or desire to touch someone in a non-sexual way. When I feel sensual attraction I'll usually want to hug a person or cuddle them, even though I wouldn't want to do anything romantic or sexual with them. Sensual attraction can encompass a lot of different things though.

I see aesthetic attraction as being attracted to how someone looks. Out of the attractions you've mentioned, I think aesthetic attraction is the one I feel most strongly. When I feel aesthetic attraction, I am just really attracted to how a person looks, usually because they are good-looking or somehow look interesting. I won't necessarily want to do anything with a person am aesthetically attracted to, except maybe look at them to appreciate their appearance.

[Peachyy]

---

[Shovels]

1) Aesthetic attraction: when you find someone or something alluring, pretty or beautiful as in sight or movement and you feel drawn to it.

There is this old Victorian house that I love, it's absolutely beautiful. Every time I see it I wish I lived there. I could sit and look at it for hours.

I find the way ballerinas move beautiful I can't stop myself from watching.

2) Sensual attraction: Finding yourself drawn or pulled to someone of something due to smell, sound, or the need to feel or be touched by ....

3) Romantic attraction: It means a lot of different things to different people. But I would say one of it's key components is an idealistic view of the object of attention. An attraction that often needs other attractions to be involved before hand. Like Sensual, Emotional, & Aesthetic. Or at the very least coincides with one or more of them.

For me Aesthetic and Sensual attraction are not akin to Romantic attraction. Essentially 1 & 2 are stand alone attractions. They do not need any other attraction to be involved to be in play. And by them selves have nothing to do with anything romantic. It would kind of be like saying butter and sugar are akin to cake. Butter and sugar go into the cake but they them selves are not the cake.

[Siimo van der fietspad]

Thanks for introducing me to the idea of 'sensual attraction' as distinct from sexual. It has been something that's been slightly problematic to reconcile with being ace, because I get almost 'aroused' by the prospect of cuddles and kisses from an attractive other, even though I really, really, don't want sex.

'Romantic' is a really difficult idea to pin down. I want to approach it in the context of the artistic movement, which was all about individual expression, the elevation of nature and drama and most importantly strong emotions being allowed freedom. This translates to the emotional, perhaps irrational feelings of strong attachment we experience for somebody.

[Korintha]

Thanks very much for the responses, everyone! It makes a lot more sense now. :D

[Velma]

Why does the aesthetically attracted "couple" look so sad? Those puppy eyes staring up at the despondent man. It's a whole novel right there!

I'm glad to see stuff on the sensuous attraction. I love skin contact, but not in a sexual way. Though sometimes people have confused my sensual touching to be foreplay to sex. They don't get that a neck rub is my grand finale and not the opening act.

The pictures made sense to me. I was totally confused about romance. But the pictures made it very clear. Thanks.

[Guest]

Attraction is attraction. If you want to hug someone, that's not sensual attraction. That's wanting to hug someone. If you're compelled toward someone, you're attracted to them. What you want to do with them... that, IMO, is largely based on other things, like personality, orientation, etc. But, attraction is attraction...

[Velma]

So there's no difference between the asthetic and the sexual attraction? One shows a sad puppy face girl staring at a depressed guy. The other one shows two naked people getting their cartoon freak on. There's a big difference right there.

If there's no differences in the attractions, why bother having asexual and aromantic two different categories? Are asexuals who feel romantic attraction not truly asexual because they feel romantically attracted to someone? Because if attraction is attraction, that's kind of what you're saying. So perhaps it's wise to clear that up. Just offering a suggestion.

[Guest]

This thread has been moved from Asexual Q&A to Romantic and Aromantic Orientations.

Nai

Asexual Q&A Co-Moderator

[Fjording]

Attraction is an evoker of your interest or liking for someone. It’s highly subjective and depending on all kinds of factors like person, circumstance and of course your orientations - which is why it’s very popular to square it away as to category. Sexual, romantic, sensual, aesthetic, list goes on probably. If it works for you, bless.

[aihpen]

This actually helped A LOT :)

[Shovels]

So there's no difference between the asthetic and the sexual attraction? One shows a sad puppy face girl staring at a depressed guy. The other one shows two naked people getting their cartoon freak on. There's a big difference right there.

If there's no differences in the attractions, why bother having asexual and aromantic two different categories? Are asexuals who feel romantic attraction not truly asexual because they feel romantically attracted to someone? Because if attraction is attraction, that's kind of what you're saying. So perhaps it's wise to clear that up. Just offering a suggestion.

I think she said that because she is neither asexual or aromantic and because of that has no personal reason or need to differentiate types of attraction. (Also I could be wrong but I think I read in a different thread she just dislikes the term "sensual attraction" like in general)

For an allosexual person all the types of attractions are kind of just attraction. They very often don't find it useful to make distinctions. So I guess that gets translated as it can't be useful for anybody.

But yah, the distinctions are very useful for us and important.

[Starlit Sky]

Attraction is attraction. If you want to hug someone, that's not sensual attraction. That's wanting to hug someone. If you're compelled toward someone, you're attracted to them. What you want to do with them... that, IMO, is largely based on other things, like personality, orientation, etc. But, attraction is attraction...

For those of us who are asexual, the reason we like the term sensual attraction is because many are very confused as to why they might want to touch someone (from hugging to snuggling up next to someone naked). One of my big things is cuddling, but there are sooooo many times where guys'll be like, "Well, we know where that ends up!" If I didn't know any better, that would make everything a lot more confusing.

I personally don't really think much of sensual attraction being an "actual" attraction, either, but there's no doubt it has a huge use for many aces just discovering asexuality.

[Velma]

Exactly.-- I agree. For sensual people, there's a world of difference between sensual and sexual attraction, and almost everyone gets the wrong idea, so we might...well I am kind of sensitive about it. It's bad enough when partners don't get it, but strangers on the Internet....damn can't get a break anywhere!

I had no idea that there are people who don't differentiate between different kinds of attraction. I hope to god most of them are aro. I think things would get very awkward otherwise.

Seriously? It's all the same? I will try to get empathy and wrap my head around it, but it's the exact opposite of how my brain operates. Sometimes I feel like I have a special unique attraction for every person I know. Even when I dislike them, I can find something attractive in some people.

I thought she was just being flippant and condescending, but I guess not. Still... I will have a really hard time relating to that. I'll try though.

[Starlit Sky]

Well, most of the world (sexuals) don't actually need to differentiate between the attractions like we do. When a heterosexual guy tells another guy that a woman is smoking hot, they both know what he means; when a woman tells her friend that she is madly in love with her boyfriend, they both know that she means he's sexy, a great romantic partner (or, hopefully he is!!!), looks good no matter what, and is great to the touch. Most people experience all of the attractions, so what would be the point of labeling?

There are, of course, some sexuals who try to get into a relationship when they aren't sexually attracted to one another, but they are romantically. When this happens they know what's going on, but they tend to say something like, "I love them, but I'm not attracted to them." This is pretty rare in comparison, however.

Because basically ninety-nine percent of the world feels like if you want to be someone romantically then that means you think they're sexy, nice to look at, great to the touch, and a wonderful partner (or, hopefully they are!!!), it is the most common reason that I've observed why people think that they may not be asexual in the first place, even if they don't experience sexual attraction.

"But, I mean, I think guys are cute!"

"I really, really love romance!"

"I absolutely cannot LIVE without touching, but I don't want it to be sexual!"

The definitions of the attractions are arguably first and foremost to help asexuals who haven't quite realized their orientation figure themselves out. There's only so much they do for sexuals (but there are sexuals who have found all of the definitions to be helpful when I'm explaining asexuality, so it's not like it's totally useless to them).

[Velma]

OK, so it's me that's freaky. I had no idea.

Seriously people don't think that there are people that they find aesthetically attractive but not in any other way? Aren't there just some people most people would describe as really astoundingly good looking but had no sexual or any other interest in? I don't just mean that you like their looks -- it's like, wow. You could just sit and look at them all day.

[Starlit Sky]

You and me both. XD

I feel like that would be more likely to happen if the person was a member of the gender that they weren't attracted to. For example, I've heard of straight men talking about their "man-crushes." They're totally talking about aesthetic attraction at that point, even if they don't feel the need to label it as such. ^_^

[Velma]

Ahh I like gender queer folk that people look at and think..What is THAT? But I'm agender, so maybe my opposite gender is "little bit of everything" I'd say pan, but straight up CIS vanilla never appeals to my asthetics. Extremely naturally androgynous, or just a confusing amalgamation -- love them.

I once had a crush on a boy at school that I only saw in the hallways. Their name turned out to be Becky. All the better. I don't think I ever spoke to Becky. We were in a totally different track. But my hallway crush.. I miss them!

[Holy Ghost]

I'm so aesthetically and romantically attracted to the moon.

[Starlit Sky]

Ahh I like gender queer folk that people look at and think..What is THAT? But I'm agender, so maybe my opposite gender is "little bit of everything" I'd say pan, but straight up CIS vanilla never appeals to my asthetics. Extremely naturally androgynous, or just a confusing amalgamation -- love them.

I once had a crush on a boy at school that I only saw in the hallways. Their name turned out to be Becky. All the better. I don't think I ever spoke to Becky. We were in a totally different track. But my hallway crush.. I miss them!

Oh, I can kind of relate to that a bit. When I was younger I had a lot of crushes on fictional characters, but I don't seem to be able to develop that anymore. :3 Oh well haha

Anyway, I'm tired and don't make sense! I like hearing from people who aren't necessarily attracted to the definite males and definite females. I've never been romantically attracted to anyone who wasn't either cis-male or trans-male, but I find freaking everybody aesthetically pleasing.

[Fjording]

Definitions for types of attraction can indeed be useful to sexuals, as much as they are to asexuals; and any variation of either. For some people they’re very important, both for the person’s own sake and for explaining to others how they feel. Similarly, there are also plenty of asexuals, aromantic and otherwise, who do not use them at all.

As an example, I am a panromantic asexual. These are my orientations based on who I’m attracted to. In light of this thread I suppose it should rather be pan-everything asexual, since I’m making this argument now. Labels are helpful but insufficient. Anyway, I have never felt sexual attraction in my life. Apart from this exception, which I'm aware of because it is a constant, what attraction does is kindling a pattern of responses. This is subject to changes, overlaps, and generally depends on a number of factors. Naturally, it’s different with different people. So take this concept of “sensual attraction”. While I understand what it means, I just don’t find it useful to make this distinction.

Felt this side of the matter should be mentioned for the sake of Korintha's original question.

[Lightning Blue Ray]

Why does the aesthetically attracted "couple" look so sad? Those puppy eyes staring up at the despondent man. It's a whole novel right there!

I'm glad to see stuff on the sensuous attraction. I love skin contact, but not in a sexual way. Though sometimes people have confused my sensual touching to be foreplay to sex. They don't get that a neck rub is my grand finale and not the opening act.

The pictures made sense to me. I was totally confused about romance. But the pictures made it very clear. Thanks.

I love your phrasing! :D

I experience aesthetic attraction occasionally, more towards girls than guys. It's almost always the face, hair or clothes (including shoes). But even then, my friends can often find some girl/guy to be very good-looking and I don't.

Romantic attraction...I think I may have felt it once. Key words: may have. Not sure if it was a squish towards a guy, or very weak romantic attraction since I knew it was unlikely I'd see him again. (Yep, it's that Cebu guy I'm talking about.) It did spring up when we chatted on Facebook, but most of the time, I was effectively aromantic. So I'm not quite sure on this one.

I don't feel sensual attraction. Yeah, I lean on my friends' shoulders all the time, I put my arms around their shoulders, but I don't feel an attraction leading to the act. It's just an action, a way of telling my friends I appreciate them.

[AcePrincess]

Since I've defined my orientation I've identified as Panromantic Asexual, but upon learning about the different types of attraction I realized I mostly felt romantic attraction to people AMAB, but have a stronger aesthetic attraction to cis females and MTF transgender folks, but a feel sensual attraction torwards all types of people. I don't feel strictly heteroromantic, but don't know how to put my attraction into words.