Is there a term for being halfway through (or switching between) aromantic and alloromantic?

[Kaicaterra]

Basically what I'm wondering is if there's a term out there for being halfway through (or switching between) Aromantic and Alloromantic. Or would you just refer to that as Aroflux?

Thanks.

[Kitteη χ]

Aroflux seems to be right! According to the aromantic wiki, it can mean either fluctuating within the aro-spectrum, or fluctuating between alloromantic and aromantic as you describe.

[Kaicaterra]

1 minute ago, Kraken X said:

Aroflux seems to be right! According to the aromantic wiki, it can mean either fluctuating within the aro-spectrum, or fluctuating between alloromantic and aromantic as you describe.

Thank you. I wasn't completely sure. I'm sort of new to the ace world, so I'm not entirely sure about all of the terms and stuff just yet. Thanks again.

[Alejandrogynous]

Yep, it's called alloromantic. (Or just romantic, since a lot of us don't use 'allo'.)

 

Nobody experiences romantic feelings every second of every day of their life. That would be crazy, how would those people focus on anything else? It's normal and expected for people to go through phases of not being interested in dating, or having other priorities, or just not feeling it for a while. It doesn't mean they're 'part aromantic', it means they're having a normal, average human experience. And the same goes for sexuality too. Not being interested in sex all the time doesn't make someone asexual, and not being interested in romance all the time doesn't make someone aromantic. 

[Kaicaterra]

 

2 minutes ago, Alejandrogynous said:

Yep, it's called alloromantic. (Or just romantic, since a lot of us don't use 'allo'.)

 

Nobody experiences romantic feelings every second of every day of their life. That would be crazy, how would those people focus on anything else? It's normal and expected for people to go through phases of not being interested in dating, or having other priorities, or just not feeling it for a while. It doesn't mean they're 'part aromantic', it means they're having a normal, average human experience. And the same goes for sexuality too. Not being interested in sex all the time doesn't make someone asexual, and not being interested in romance all the time doesn't make someone aromantic. 

Actually, that makes a lot of sense. That was like the most perfect explanation ever. Thank you. Wow.

[Alejandrogynous]

1 minute ago, Kaicaterra said:

 

Actually, that makes a lot of sense. That was like the most perfect explanation ever. Thank you. Wow.

Happy to help!  

[Kitteη χ]

13 minutes ago, Alejandrogynous said:

Yep, it's called alloromantic. (Or just romantic, since a lot of us don't use 'allo'.)

 

Nobody experiences romantic feelings every second of every day of their life. That would be crazy, how would those people focus on anything else? It's normal and expected for people to go through phases of not being interested in dating, or having other priorities, or just not feeling it for a while. It doesn't mean they're 'part aromantic', it means they're having a normal, average human experience. And the same goes for sexuality too. Not being interested in sex all the time doesn't make someone asexual, and not being interested in romance all the time doesn't make someone aromantic. 

Eh, it probably depends somewhat on the specifics of someone's personal situation to say if it it differs enough from what's "normal" to warrant the use of the term aroflux. I guess I should say that as aro/ace, I don't know what is "normal" when it comes to attraction. But to me it seems that if the fluctuations are drastic enough then aroflux could be a more appropriate description.

[Alejandrogynous]

21 minutes ago, Kraken X said:

Eh, it probably depends somewhat on the specifics of someone's personal situation to say if it it differs enough from what's "normal" to warrant the use of the term aroflux. I guess I should say that as aro/ace, I don't know what is "normal" when it comes to attraction. But to me it seems that if the fluctuations are drastic enough then aroflux could be a more appropriate description.

What would you consider drastic enough though?

 

I mean, if someone wants to call themselves flux and finds the label to be useful in understanding themselves and communicating to other people, go for it. That's what labels are for. I personally don't see flux to be useful, and rather think it promotes misunderstandings of what "normal" is by making it seem like any shift in feelings is somehow abnormal and needs to be categorized differently, when really... almost everyone experiences that on some level. People are always changing, going through phases, etc. But that's my view. Like, if I'm heterosexual but currently don't have sexual feelings for anyone, that doesn't mean I'm not still heterosexual. It just means that when I do have sexual feelings, they're of a hetero nature.

 

Or if I said, "I think hot tea is delicious but only when it's cold out, otherwise no thanks, which means I'm 'teaflux'." No... that means I like hot tea the way most people do: in certain circumstances. Or, "I like hot tea but sometimes I'm not in the mood." That doesn't mean I don't still like hot tea. If someone is (allo)romantic but not currently in a mood to feel romantic feelings, that doesn't mean they're not still romantic.

[Kitteη χ]

2 hours ago, Alejandrogynous said:

What would you consider drastic enough though?

 

I mean, if someone wants to call themselves flux and finds the label to be useful in understanding themselves and communicating to other people, go for it. That's what labels are for. I personally don't see flux to be useful, and rather think it promotes misunderstandings of what "normal" is by making it seem like any shift in feelings is somehow abnormal and needs to be categorized differently, when really... almost everyone experiences that on some level. People are always changing, going through phases, etc. But that's my view. Like, if I'm heterosexual but currently don't have sexual feelings for anyone, that doesn't mean I'm not still heterosexual. It just means that when I do have sexual feelings, they're of a hetero nature.

 

Or if I said, "I think hot tea is delicious but only when it's cold out, otherwise no thanks, which means I'm 'teaflux'." No... that means I like hot tea the way most people do: in certain circumstances. Or, "I like hot tea but sometimes I'm not in the mood." That doesn't mean I don't still like hot tea. If someone is (allo)romantic but not currently in a mood to feel romantic feelings, that doesn't mean they're not still romantic.

Well, I have almost no clue what attraction is really like, so I wouldn't be able to give a definite answer to what I would personally consider "drastic". Maybe if it's more than just not being "in the mood" but also becoming romance-repulsed? I don't know.

 

A better answer I could give would be going along the lines of you supporting others who want to call themselves flux. What's "drastic enough" depends on the individual. Basically, if they feel that the label of flux is more comfortable for them, and is more useful for understanding and describing themselves.

[gner0]

I say don't worry about it so much! Romance is really affection and showing it for someone. Sometimes it comes in the form of going on a date or other times it can be as simple as making your partner some coffee. If you are worried about kissing and cuddles, unless there's sexual intention, it doesn't have to be classified! I give my cat kisses and cuddles all the time. I sing to her and dance around with her. Awful romantic, right?