is it possible to be asexual, aromantic and gay?

[Megan Howie]

So just to simplify this I identify as asexual and Aromantic but i would prefer to have a QPP with someone who is the same gender as me i have no interest at all in the opposite sex (except for friends I'm ok with). I feel I'm attracted to females platonically and a long term relationship with a female sounds better for me. So what I mean by that is I'm somewhat - platonically attracted to females but no a traction to males at all. So is it possible to be gay ace and aro? Sorry for the bad grammar and spalling I'm literally just home from college and tired.

[Ortac]

I can relate very well to what you are saying, albeit in my case, I feel asexual, aromantic, yet "straight" or "not gay". The thought of me having a platonic relationship with someone of the same gender as me just doesn't appeal or feel right, but I feel I could possibly have a platonic relationship with a woman.

[letusdeleteouraccounts]

Sort of. They call us “oriented aro aces” where we still take on a label of gay, bi, straight, or pan despite being aro ace so that we can describe other feelings that are significant to us. I don’t advise going around in public telling people “I’m gay” though because you’re technically not

[NickyTannock]

Yes. In this case, you'd be a Homoplatonic Aromantic Asexual.

 

P.S. I've removed that giant blank space under your comment.

[everywhere and nowhere]

33 minutes ago, Star Lion said:

I don’t advise going around in public telling people “I’m gay” though because you’re technically not

I just can't see a fundamental difference between "romantic" and "queerplatonic" relationships - I think that it's rather an issue of personal preferences. So, therefore, I see nothing wrong with calling oneself an "asexual lesbian" or "asexual gay". It's not the same as being homosexual, but still close enough to, for example, provoke homophobic reactions.

[letusdeleteouraccounts]

6 minutes ago, Nowhere Girl said:

I just can't see a fundamental difference between "romantic" and "queerplatonic" relationships - I think that it's rather an issue of personal preferences. So, therefore, I see nothing wrong with calling oneself an "asexual lesbian" or "asexual gay". It's not the same as being homosexual, but still close enough to, for example, provoke homophobic reactions.

The issue is that we don’t really relate all too much to actual gay people. A gay person outside the ace community would likely see me as a trender if I told them “I’m gay but I don’t feel sexual attraction or fall in love”

[Just Somebody]

Homoqueerplatonic,  homoplatonic and homoalterous are a thing.

 

 

But as for the gay part, one can be gay as homoromantic and ace,  or gay as homosexual and aro. 

 

 

Or be homoromantic or homosexual but also gray-aro or gray-ace, respectively, in a fluid zone of rarely feeling or feeling very little attraction under certain circumstances.

[Finn.]

2 hours ago, Star Lion said:

Sort of. They call us “oriented aro aces” where we still take on a label of gay, bi, straight, or pan despite being aro ace so that we can describe other feelings that are significant to us. I don’t advise going around in public telling people “I’m gay” though because you’re technically not

Oh do they? I have never heard of it haha.

 

I more so identify as bisexual and less so as aroace. I feel like my *whatever kind* attraction matters to me more than the fact that I don't act on it. I feel a strong identity with my non-straight-ness that I want to tell my coworkers about so they don't presume me to be straight-by-default. At my last job I was out as bisexual and just single/not looking. I also out of fairness wanted to let my (female) coworkers know I'm gay/bi. 

Now I have a new workplace, I'm not out but I also don't know if people assume me to be straight (the place is more diverse). So if the topic come up I will come out as bisexual/gay and not looking again. It feels the most right to me, and I don't want to talk about my sex life anyways, it's none of their business.

 

I personally don't do the split attraction model literally anymore. I feel *meh* about the whole definitions and variations of attraction etc. Also it doesn't leave enough space for my genderfluidity imo. So I just go by identifying with multiple labels as I feel like they apply to me, gender and sexuality wise.

 

side note: with other lgbtq+ people I id as queer primarily, and with the other labels secondary. But so far I haven't come out as "queer" to straight people. (But mayybe at my new workplace after all, we'll see)

[Basrive]

2 hours ago, Star Lion said:

The issue is that we don’t really relate all too much to actual gay people. A gay person outside the ace community would likely see me as a trender if I told them “I’m gay but I don’t feel sexual attraction or fall in love”

I really wanted to disagree with you, but I don’t think I can. I identified as gay for so long that I find myself clinging to it for some reason. Gay people don’t think that i’m gay, and identifying as homo-aesthetic and homo-sensual seems a bit...  needless? 

 

In the end though, I’m far more concerned with what makes me happy than the gay community (such as it is) at large. If you (the op) want to identify as gay ace aro, I do not see anything wrong with that. Just expect some confusion down the line. If someone asked, i’d personally just tell them that I think guys are cute and nice to be around.

[Sally]

Aromantic = not romantically oriented to anyone.

Asexual = not sexually oriented to anyone. 

 

So where does the gay come in, if there's no romantic or sexual orientation?  

 

[Basrive]

13 minutes ago, Sally said:

Aromantic = not romantically oriented to anyone.

Asexual = not sexually oriented to anyone. 

 

So where does the gay come in, if there's no romantic or sexual orientation?  

 

There are other significant attractions that people can experience, and sometimes those are to a specific gender. We sorta discussed it already. 

 

It’s a shortcut to a really long winded identity that may or may not be useful to ace aros. 

 

Edit: I only get squishes on men, and having to explain the whole thing every time is exhausting. I’m probably not going to identify as gay, but i’m not going to let someone tell me that I can’t. 

[MLJ]

I know what you mean. I'm basically aro-ace, and yet I would say I'm also straight. I have never had a sex drive, and the vast majority of the time I have no interest in a romantic or sexual relationship. But I have been in love and I have had (very infrequent) experiences of what I'd consider romantic or sexual attraction. To the extent that I have any sort of interest, it's always directed towards men.

 

And I was married - I am capable of being in a long-term "romantic" relationship with a man. Even though I have no desire for partnered sex, I was able to do the going-along-with-sex thing because that's what you're supposed to do when you're involved with someone. I could "compromise" and have sex and try to enjoy it because that was what he wanted to do. But there is no way I could have that sort of romantic or sexual relationship with a woman.

 

So I don't have any desire for a romantic or sexual relationship. But there is still an orientation - a spark of something - that makes it so I could actually imagine being with a man and go through the motions of being involved with a man in a way that I couldn't with a woman.

[Megan Howie]

11 hours ago, Sally said:

Aromantic = not romantically oriented to anyone.

Asexual = not sexually oriented to anyone. 

 

So where does the gay come in, if there's no romantic or sexual orientation?  

 

like i only experience "platonic squishes" on other females. In the future i can see my long term partner (platonic bestie i guess) being another female. Never a guy I'm aesthetically attracted to other females. Never aesthetically attracted to guys   

[Firefly8]

Yes, I think so if worded and explained carefully like Star Lion was saying. I definitely think oriented aroaces are a thing because I am one. I'm aroace, pan-aesthetic, pan-sensual, and open to pan sex/romance/QPR. I'm neutral, not averse to sex or relationships, but I don't have a drive or innate desire to seek them out and have never experienced them. In this way I feel part pan, but mostly aroace. Aroace and "pan oriented" or "pan open" are how I would describe it fully. I'm not that open about myself, though, so I've never explained this outside of the online community. I like "queer", or if I were just labeled as "ace" I think that would be fitting enough, and the rest can be explained if needed.
Edit for clarification: Explanation is important. Not everyone fits into one easy label, so use the most appropriate one and explain the rest would be my advice.

[Basrive]

8 hours ago, CBC said:

I'm with @Sally on this one. I don't see what's gay about preferring platonic relationships with the same sex. Orientation is about sexual and romantic desire/attraction, not who you want to be friends with. Even if we're talking really close friends. What's next, orientation based on whether we like our mum or dad better?

I look forward to the day where aro awareness hits a point that I would never see a response like this. 

 

If I had known about aro orientations, I probably would have avoided some very confusing relationships and mistakes. Since I have no idea what sexual attraction or romantic attraction feels like, my preferences are all I experience, and those are intense feelings for me. 

 

I’m in my 30s, i’ve had more sexual and romantic experiences with other men than some allos or aces here. Was I only gay when I was dating men for a total of 12 years? Everyone else thought I was.

 

To me, users here express the same harmful, gatekeepy, and dismissive sentiments that we see directed to aro or ace people elsewhere. It’s just hidden under better language. I hope that someone can point out where I am wrong.

Edited May 18, 2019 by Basrive
Grammar x2

[Firefly8]

On 5/17/2019 at 11:46 AM, Nowhere Girl said:

I just can't see a fundamental difference between "romantic" and "queerplatonic" relationships - I think that it's rather an issue of personal preferences. So, therefore, I see nothing wrong with calling oneself an "asexual lesbian" or "asexual gay". It's not the same as being homosexual, but still close enough to, for example, provoke homophobic reactions.

Right. What's the difference between a romantic relationship and QPR with sensual attraction and activities? Maybe IDK because I'm a confused aro, but I don't SEE a difference and I don't think any stranger watching a couple (or more, not judging) would arrive at a different conclusion than they were romantically together. A same-gendered QPR couple could trigger homophobes. The same QPR couple wanting to marry would be indistinguishable from a homosexual couple wanting to marry. 

[Guest]

So the vast majority of straight women are also gay because they all prefer female platonic friends? Somehow... somehow... gay now means preferring anyone of the same gender for anything?

 

All them straight dudes who only hunt with other men are gonna be bummed to learn that makes them gay. 

 

Homoplatonic is the opposite of gay imo. 

[Firefly8]

Can someone please explain the difference between a romantic couple and a sensual QPR couple? I don't get the distinction.

[MLJ]

I'm not talking about an "orientation" that indicates who you want to be friends with. I think even aromantic and asexual people can have a "romantic" and/or "sexual" orientation.

 

Plenty of aromantic and asexual people - and I assume aro-ace people - still end up in romantic and sexual relationships. Maybe it's because being in a relationship is what is "expected" or they want to experiment or they feel lonely or whatever - but they still do end up in these sorts of relationships. And I think there's a basic orientation that determines what kinds of relationships they can get into.

 

At least for me - I have no sex drive and no interest in making romantic or sexual connections with anyone. And yet, I have gotten in those kinds of relationships in the past and they've always been with men. My lack of interest in sex always caused a problem - but I did have some sort of fundamental ability to attempt a romantic/sexual relationship with a man. And I absolutely do not have that fundamental ability with a woman. 

[Firefly8]

42 minutes ago, OptimisticPessimist said:

The main thing is romantic attraction. QPR's are primarily platonic, but QPR'S may be sensual in that they are okay and enjoy hugs, cuddles etc. Sensual and romantic attraction are separate.

Kissing is sensual too. I get how I can want to kiss and hug someone but not be in a relationship with them, but I still don't see how sensual QPR couple is different from a romantic couple. 

[Basrive]

34 minutes ago, MLJ said:

I'm not talking about an "orientation" that indicates who you want to be friends with. I think even aromantic and asexual people can have a "romantic" and/or "sexual" orientation.

 

Plenty of aromantic and asexual people - and I assume aro-ace people - still end up in romantic and sexual relationships. Maybe it's because being in a relationship is what is "expected" or they want to experiment or they feel lonely or whatever - but they still do end up in these sorts of relationships. And I think there's a basic orientation that determines what kinds of relationships they can get into.

 

At least for me - I have no sex drive and no interest in making romantic or sexual connections with anyone. And yet, I have gotten in those kinds of relationships in the past and they've always been with men. My lack of interest in sex always caused a problem - but I did have some sort of fundamental ability to attempt a romantic/sexual relationship with a man. And I absolutely do not have that fundamental ability with a woman. 

I am this close to done with AVEN and the thought police, but I wanted to express to you publicly that your experiences are valid. I have been in gay relationships, and as I stated earlier, I do not identify as gay at this time. I think that the discussion about orientation & preferences is very interesting.

 

This might just not be the place for it. Feel free to pm me if you would like.

 

Edit: I endured a lot coming out as gay in a conservative household when I was younger, so these dismissive conversations are very harmful. I hope that people can be more respectful in the future. 

 

[letusdeleteouraccounts]

11 hours ago, Skullery Maid said:

So the vast majority of straight women are also gay because they all prefer female platonic friends? Somehow... somehow... gay now means preferring anyone of the same gender for anything?

 

All them straight dudes who only hunt with other men are gonna be bummed to learn that makes them gay. 

 

Homoplatonic is the opposite of gay imo. 

That’s not the point though. The point is that we are aro ace, we lack sexual and romantic attraction so all our other attractions such as aesthetic and sensual appear to us a lot clearer and are a lot more important to who we are than someone caught up in sexual and/or romantic feelings

[Janus the Fox]

I'm like this, if even the bi and/or gay feelings Ive had with other and current BF is more or less, next to nothing in particular in any way.

[Snao Cone]

If you're aro ace but want to identify as gay to everyone around you, what are you trying to get them to understand about you?

[letusdeleteouraccounts]

1 hour ago, CBC said:

And? That doesn't make you gay...

 

Gay = romantic/sexual attraction to people of the same sex.

It’s complicated, I’m not exactly saying I’m gay (as stated in my first post). It’s more like if I were to ever in my life start feeling romantic/sexual attraction, it would I’m pretty certain be towards the same sex. I’m also saying that the feelings I do have unrelated to aro/aceness make me feel like I could understand a gay person on some type of level while I couldn’t exactly understand a straight person that same way

[Firefly8]

1 hour ago, Snao Cone said:

If you're aro ace but want to identify as gay to everyone around you, what are you trying to get them to understand about you?

I would speculate that it would be that they want potential partners to know they are open to being a partner with them despite their other labels. Or being honest about one's orientation in general for any other reason people are open about their orientation.

[Snao Cone]

"I'm aro/ace, but if I were to be in a relationship it would be with someone of the same gender." Simple to say, doesn't conflate meaning, doesn't appropriate words that have meant something different for decades. It's also something I've said in conversations a number of times (or something to that effect) and it's come across pretty clear.

[Sally]

11 hours ago, Star Lion said:

The point is that we are aro ace, we lack sexual and romantic attraction so all our other attractions such as aesthetic and sensual appear to us a lot clearer and are a lot more important to who we are than someone caught up in sexual and/or romantic feelings

So your attractions are more important to who you are than my attractions are important to who I am?     

[Guest]

11 hours ago, Star Lion said:

That’s not the point though. The point is that we are aro ace, we lack sexual and romantic attraction so all our other attractions such as aesthetic and sensual appear to us a lot clearer and are a lot more important to who we are than someone caught up in sexual and/or romantic feelings

Strongly disagree! Sexual people are still hella aware of their friend preferences. And I need to tell you, I was not kicked out of my house as a teenager because I wanted to be friends with girls. 

[BeakLove]

22 hours ago, Firefly8 said:

Can someone please explain the difference between a romantic couple and a sensual QPR couple? I don't get the distinction.

The distinction is apparently "romantic attraction". But almost every disagreement on this site comes back down to the fact that "romantic attraction" hasn't been defined coherently. It is merely verbal dispute - an argument created by ambiguity in terms. 

 

Much of what people on here describe as indicators of romance are really just lightly sexual activities (sensual). So if a QPR couple resembles an asexual couple in all but name and includes that bucket of "romantic" activities then no external observer is going to perceive any difference. Because, frankly, there isn't one, unless someone can explain what "romantic attraction" actually is. You either are in a couple or you aren't. Nobody is going to draw a distinction between, say, a married "queerplatonic" couple and a married "romantic" couple. Further, I think romantic orientation and sexual orientation are really just expressions of the same underlying orientation and it becomes messy and confusing trying to completely decouple them. Therefore, yes, it is acceptable to call yourself gay if you find yourself oriented exclusively towards the same sex in a relationship sense even if that relationship does not comprehend sex or "romance".