Jump to content
Wondertrampe

Aromantic or not?

Recommended Posts

Wondertrampe

I am a 25 year old non-binary male. Beginning a little over a year ago, I’ve begun coming to terms with being asexual. I’ve talked to my mom about it, who said she actually feels the same way. I’ve also expressed it to my friends, some of which say the usual like, “you just haven’t had GOOD sex yet.” I’ve had plenty of sex and I have even explored kinks/fetishes with my highschool sweetheart of 8 years (now ex). I thought that if I didn’t really enjoy regular sex, perhaps vanilla was just boring. I’ve always thought all sex does is complicates relationships... and in HS before really knowing what Asexuality was, I tried to tell her I wanted to abstain until marriage (even though we had already screwed a few times). While it can feel good, it’s usually very cringy for me... and I would rather just go down on her to get it over with.

 

While we could and did have good sex (I think), my ex and I had conversations about inadequacy on more occasions than not... such as why I couldn’t get hard if there was a beautiful naked girl in front of me... that as a man I’m supposed to just want her... she wondered if she was doing something wrong... that maybe I should take some pills... and when I finally realized I’m Ace and told her, she just said, “no you aren’t.” :(

 

It’s hard to feel accepted in this hyper-sexualized world. My best friend says he is obsessed with sex, and that he needs it. I can’t help but feel that he, and many other men who express this, are just victims of a culture that forces men to desire masculinity which is tied to a carnal sex drive.

 

But the aspects of my Asexuality that I struggle with the most, is how do I know what something feels like if I’m not even sure I’ve ever experienced it?

 

What do crushes feel like—and can you have crushes with no sexual desire? Or are crushes inherently without sexual desire? (which is what I’ve always thought until my sexual friend specified otherwise.)

 

I seem to have a strong aesthetic attraction, and can even shake like a scared chihuahua in the presence of someone I find very attractive. Even before I discovered I was ace, I would tell my friends “just because a painting is beautiful doesn’t mean I want to screw it.” Or “just because a cake looks delicious doesn’t mean I want to gorge myself.” Even still... it’s often difficult for me to internalize the differences between aesthetic and sexual attraction. Almost like I really wish I could enjoy sex... and maybe I should just try one more time with this really pretty person.

 

Honestly, having a hot lesbian or ace best friend that I live with seems like the best possible relationship I could dream of. And thinking back, the closest people I’ve ever been with were all more-than-friendships but less-than-relationships... and all ended when they started to express a desire for something more romantic or more sexual.

 

Which brings me to my final inner conflict. While I’ve come to terms (kinda) with my Asexuality... I’m now starting to wonder if I’m aromantic as well. Which is absolutely frightening because I love romance. I love big gestures. I love cheesy rom-coms. I grew up adoring The Notebook. As I got older I began emulating these movies. I thought everyone who did romantic gestures was just emulating them... That they did these gestures to make the recipient feel something—not because you yourself were feeling something.

 

As terrible of a person I was, the first two years of highschool I would play a “game” where I tried to be romantic and get as many girls as I could to like me at the same time. While I never slept with them, nor did I like them, I was known as a huge flirt. In all my relationships I’ve been in, every romantic gesture is calculated based on what I think I should do—if I’m walking with my girlfriend and our arms bump, that means to hold her hand. I like to plan big trips or surprises, make my own gifts, cook romantic dinners... and yet every relationship I’ve been in has felt empty. All those gestures feel empty. I can really like the person... but something is just missing. The last person I tried to be with, I described it as two black holes where our hearts should be, desperately pulling towards each other.

 

TL;DR

I don’t know if my lack of feelings/emptiness points to something wrong with me. If I just haven’t found the right person yet. If I’m just scared of commitment. Or if I’m actually aromantic... and if I am aromantic, why do I seem to love the idea of love so much 😔

 

Sorry for the long post... I don’t know what I’m looking for, if anything... but I’d give you a potato if I could.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MichaelTannock

I've moved this thread from "Questions about Asexuality" to "Romantic and Aromantic Orientation".
 
Michael Tannock,
Open Mic moderator and Questions about Asexuality Co-moderator.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MichaelTannock

Welcome to AVEN!

 

You could be Aromantic.

Aromanticism is a lack of Romantic Attraction, which I define as leading to the desire to have a romantic relationship.

It also sounds like you might want a QPR (Queerplatonic Relationship): http://wiki.asexuality.org/Queerplatonic

 

Incidentally, it is a tradition here to welcome new members by offering cake, and here's my favourite cake (all edible),

http://chocolateartcake.blogspot.com/

ZWughhv.jpg

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wondertrampe

@MichaelTannock Thanks for putting my vent in the right forum, and for the cake! It looks absolutely, mouth-wateringly delectable.

 

A QPR does sound a lot like what I crave. Of course, developing a friendship to that point is a completely different issue 😂

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
aces&eights
3 hours ago, Wondertrampe said:

how do I know what something feels like if I’m not even sure I’ve ever experienced it?

So true!! This is one of the hardest things, I think, when it comes to ace/aro stuff. I wish I could help you out but I'm just as lost. But perhaps these romance movies like The Notebook have overhyped and put unreasonable expectations of what are romantic gestures and what people should be feeling. So maybe part of your emptiness is because you're not living up to these Hollywood expectations? Idk just some food for thought.

 

3 hours ago, Wondertrampe said:

The last person I tried to be with, I described it as two black holes where our hearts should be, desperately pulling towards each other.

This is a really powerful description wow...I wish I could help you out, but in the end only you can figure out who you are/what you want :) 

And welcome to Aven!

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Galactic Turtle

First off I think it's helpful to stop viewing friendship as "less than" and romance as "more than" and rather just simply view them as different. Relationship hierarchies can be very distracting and presumptuous.

 

Secondly, I think it could be helpful to figure out why you are seemingly obsessed with theatrical "romantic" displays of affection. It's fine if your love language is gift giving or event planning, but for most people it isn't and you'll just need to get more in touch with yourself to figure out your preferred ways of communicating affection for people you care about.

 

Thirdly if you want a partner it might be helpful to ignore accompanying terminology for a bit. Any partnership that exists looks like what the people involved in it want it to look like - not the Notebook, not random TV dramas. That's where compatibility comes in. Mismatching sex habits, misunderstood love language, misaligned life trajectories, conflicting values, and clashing personalities are all reasons any given partnership won't work out. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wondertrampe

Thank you for your response @Galacticat42. Also great name! BSG is my favourite SciFI and 42 is not only one of my favourite numbers, but of course the answer to the question of life, the universe, and everything.

 

I like your idea of viewing relationships and friendships as different as opposed to being on a hierarchy. Who says relationships––and sexual relationships at that––have to be the epitome expressions of love. Strangely enough, my primary love languages for both giving and receiving is Quality Time and then Physical Touch... and the language I'm worst at is Gift Giving and then Words of Affirmation. Being half-Japanese, "I love you" is just not something we say in my culture. I possibly just do those romantic displays of affections because, while I don't feel anything myself, I desire to be seen as the romantic type. Society has ingrained in me the belief that to be a good partner I must be incredibly romantic, despite striving to be romantic bringing me nothing but stress. Going back to The Notebook, even as a child I remember my mother lamenting on how "Guys likes Noah don't exist in the real world." So I sought to be like Noah––even though that relationship has a host of problems which would need its own forum. I guess it put the idea in my head that if you aren't romantically expressive then you must be a lazy dick. Needless to say, engaging in relationships without being fully truthful to them or myself is what really made me a dick.

 

6 hours ago, Galactic Turtle said:

Thirdly if you want a partner it might be helpful to ignore accompanying terminology for a bit.

Which leads me to your last advice. This is actually my preferred way of forming all human relationships. I hate labels. Rather than placing a label which has pressures from all sides in how we should behave, I'd rather our actions speak for themselves. I've actually tried this quite a lot, but it always leads to them wanting more and me either unable to provide or just flat our running away... Even when I express beforehand that I don't want labels and that I'm okay if they see other people, they just assume I have commitment issues and eventually want more. I've found the easiest way to form non-labeled human relationships are when I don't intentionally seek them––friendships that blossom into something incredibly deep (yet missing the physical touch since it's usually with straight males...which is where their pets come in). Perhaps I should learn to be happy with this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sarah-Sylvia

Hi ;)

Seems like a hard case. You might be aromantic... or you might be trying to pressure yourself into being romantic and cutting off the natural flow of it. It's definitely something that can happen.

The best solution? Being true to yourself :) Just doing what feels right to you, and being open to feelings but not pressuring by thinking you should have them. You should find out much more about yourself that way too. It can be harder when someone has expectations (like, that you're with), but this is normal and we all have to learn to be ourselves and talk about these things and come to understand each other.

I watch anime and I'm pretty sure
aishiteru is used quite often when someone loves one another. In whatever case, love is a great thing ❤️

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wondertrampe
7 minutes ago, Sarah-Sylvia said:

Seems like a hard case. You might be aromantic... or you might be trying to pressure yourself into being romantic and cutting off the natural flow of it. It's definitely something that can happen.

Thanks for the response! This is quite possible, though I'm never sure lol Looking back I don't think I've never felt "chemistry" with any of my romantic partners. I'm not even sure what having "good chemistry" is. 

 

12 minutes ago, Sarah-Sylvia said:

I watch anime and I'm pretty sure aishiteru is used quite often when someone loves one another. In whatever case, love is a great thing ❤️

Anime often exaggerates qualities (much like how the boisterous character in any anime is always speaking in Kansai Dialect even if they are foreign and not from the Kansai region in Japan––I look like a gaijin and speak in Kansai-ben so it always makes people laugh in shock). Aishiteru is a VERY intense word which nobody uses in day to day life. It's reserved for only the most important moments––like my mom only telling my grandfather "aishiteru" on his deathbed. While still rare, a more common way to tell someone you love them is to say "daisuki" which really would directly translate to "big like" 😂 And more common still is for couples to use "anata" as a term of endearment. But saying I love you to friends or family pretty much never happens and just makes everyone feel awkward if done so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
thyristor
14 hours ago, Wondertrampe said:

It’s hard to feel accepted in this hyper-sexualized world. My best friend says he is obsessed with sex, and that he needs it. I can’t help but feel that he, and many other men who express this, are just victims of a culture that forces men to desire masculinity which is tied to a carnal sex drive.

Spoiler

Yea, it's like smoking. You know it's bad, it tastes bad the first time, but pretty soon you get addicted and can't stop. I'm pretty sure that if I hadn't been exposed to certain things and if these things hadn't been described as being great, I never would have missed them.

 

For the larger part of my life I was convinced that I would love the respective one I currently had a crush on, so deeply that no one else could feel deeper love on this whole planet. I found out it was teenage confusion. I had always figured that I'd move mountains to love that person. I never figured, that love (in a non-naive way, or on an everyday-basis) is not about moving mountains. It's about being consistent, getting your priorities right, making yourself one piece of many in a puzzle, and you can't choose where you are put or in what direction, you have to be in the place and direction where you are needed.

 

Maybe you also tried to think of youself as the best loving person ever because you move mountains everytime you instantiate romance as an extra thing, something shining bright on top of everything else, not realizing that romance also is much more invisible and much less glorifying, but rather robust. ?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sarah-Sylvia
30 minutes ago, Wondertrampe said:

Thanks for the response! This is quite possible, though I'm never sure lol Looking back I don't think I've never felt "chemistry" with any of my romantic partners. I'm not even sure what having "good chemistry" is. 

 

Anime often exaggerates qualities (much like how the boisterous character in any anime is always speaking in Kansai Dialect even if they are foreign and not from the Kansai region in Japan––I look like a gaijin and speak in Kansai-ben so it always makes people laugh in shock). Aishiteru is a VERY intense word which nobody uses in day to day life. It's reserved for only the most important moments––like my mom only telling my grandfather "aishiteru" on his deathbed. While still rare, a more common way to tell someone you love them is to say "daisuki" which really would directly translate to "big like" 😂 And more common still is for couples to use "anata" as a term of endearment. But saying I love you to friends or family pretty much never happens and just makes everyone feel awkward if done so.


Too bad people don't convey love as much, love is good :)

And as for chemistry, I mean it's as simple as if you get along with someone or not lol. Some people you get so well along, it goes further than that, you like each other, you like to spend time together. And then if it goes further, well it turns into loving that person, wanting to be with them and care for them, want to connect with their heart, and more. It's just different stages of what 'chemistry' can reach. Being demiromantic simply means needing to find someone who you do connect with deeper than friendship before you feel like you want to show your love, share affection and more.
It's normal that it can take a long time to find someone who fits right and that you can love deeper. I'm romantic and have romantic attraction but I often find that most people aren't actually right, I wouldn't feel comfortable with them enough, so the attraction isn't enough to really find chemistry. I just don't think it's worth ruling out relationships, when they can be so awesome. You just have to respect yourself enough to know when someone is right nor not, and not force it. And certainly not go from pressure.

Anyway, whatever the case is, just go with what feels good to you. And live and learn :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wondertrampe
1 hour ago, elisabeth_II said:
  Reveal hidden contents

Yea, it's like smoking. You know it's bad, it tastes bad the first time, but pretty soon you get addicted and can't stop. I'm pretty sure that if I hadn't been exposed to certain things and if these things hadn't been described as being great, I never would have missed them.

 

For the larger part of my life I was convinced that I would love the respective one I currently had a crush on, so deeply that no one else could feel deeper love on this whole planet. I found out it was teenage confusion. I had always figured that I'd move mountains to love that person. I never figured, that love (in a non-naive way, or on an everyday-basis) is not about moving mountains. It's about being consistent, getting your priorities right, making yourself one piece of many in a puzzle, and you can't choose where you are put or in what direction, you have to be in the place and direction where you are needed.

 

Maybe you also tried to think of youself as the best loving person ever because you move mountains everytime you instantiate romance as an extra thing, something shining bright on top of everything else, not realizing that romance also is much more invisible and much less glorifying, but rather robust. ?

Wow I agree completely! I definitely did think of my love for my ex was strong enough to move mountains... but as you pointed out, I made love about romantic expression rather than a certain consistency. A consistency of which I can't help but see as a sacrifice. Even now, I often describe love as a sacrifice or a commitment. But as much as I crave relationships, I always feel trapped in them––and that the very nature of a labeled relationship... the mutual consistency of it... prevents the ability for change and self identity. Of course, this isn't true for everyone, but how I feel.

 

It's been a while since I last dated anyone. Particularly because anytime I try and get close... try and connect... it feels like a charade. They end up loving me and I end up breaking their hearts. I can't stand to break any more hearts. In a song, my relationships always feel like this:

 

"Cut myself into, pieces easy to chew. Carve me up into, someone you'd like to choose till I'm only pieces of you."

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sarah-Sylvia
16 hours ago, Wondertrampe said:

Wow I agree completely! I definitely did think of my love for my ex was strong enough to move mountains... but as you pointed out, I made love about romantic expression rather than a certain consistency. A consistency of which I can't help but see as a sacrifice. Even now, I often describe love as a sacrifice or a commitment. But as much as I crave relationships, I always feel trapped in them––and that the very nature of a labeled relationship... the mutual consistency of it... prevents the ability for change and self identity. Of course, this isn't true for everyone, but how I feel.

 

It's been a while since I last dated anyone. Particularly because anytime I try and get close... try and connect... it feels like a charade. They end up loving me and I end up breaking their hearts. I can't stand to break any more hearts. In a song, my relationships always feel like this:

 

"Cut myself into, pieces easy to chew. Carve me up into, someone you'd like to choose till I'm only pieces of you."

 

There's a vibe in society around love being sacrificial. It's very unhealthy, and is not what love is about at all. Love can carry something devotional sometimes, when it's pretty intense and constant, but that's also just one fascet. There's so much to love, and the best comes from the heart, not from pressure, that's for sure. When you love someone you want them to be happy, and if they feel the same then they want you to be happy too. They want you to be yourself, and not having to force anything for you. Love is so much more meaningful when there's a naturality about it, and you can both be yourselves and just genuinely enjoy being together, and grow together, and just find yourself caring for the other person. I understand how it's hard too sometimes, some people are hurt and there's something in them that makes it hard to see or feel love, and there's always baggage, we're human, but love is possible, and it can be much more easeful than the impression we get sometimes.
❤️

I like the video :)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wondertrampe
11 hours ago, Sarah-Sylvia said:

There's so much to love, and the best comes from the heart, not from pressure, that's for sure. When you love someone you want them to be happy, and if they feel the same then they want you to be happy too. They want you to be yourself, and not having to force anything for you.

@Sarah-Sylvia I have agape and philia abounds but I seem to be lacking in eros. I want everyone to love themselves. I don't want to force anything upon anyone. In fact, I truly love every one and every thing. Killing a spider feels like killing myself because I know there are no lines of separation in the world. It hurts so much worse when I break a heart. "I don't know where you end and I begin." When I was in my deepest/longest relationship, towards the end when I began feeling this strong agape, I would be stuck in wonder how I could possibly love the world as Self so deeply whilst also separating it into parts. That my love for my ex is just as strong as my love for the tree in front of my house... different... but equally strong. And I knew that she felt differently, and that it was an insult to say such a thing to her. I like the advice written above of just not putting labels onto these feelings––yet though I try that, those relationships seem insistent of defining theirs or my emotions, and thereby actions, for me.

 

"Love is the whole thing. We are only pieces." ~Rumi

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sarah-Sylvia
2 hours ago, Wondertrampe said:

@Sarah-Sylvia I have agape and philia abounds but I seem to be lacking in eros. I want everyone to love themselves. I don't want to force anything upon anyone. In fact, I truly love every one and every thing. Killing a spider feels like killing myself because I know there are no lines of separation in the world. It hurts so much worse when I break a heart. "I don't know where you end and I begin." When I was in my deepest/longest relationship, towards the end when I began feeling this strong agape, I would be stuck in wonder how I could possibly love the world as Self so deeply whilst also separating it into parts. That my love for my ex is just as strong as my love for the tree in front of my house... different... but equally strong. And I knew that she felt differently, and that it was an insult to say such a thing to her. I like the advice written above of just not putting labels onto these feelings––yet though I try that, those relationships seem insistent of defining theirs or my emotions, and thereby actions, for me.

 

"Love is the whole thing. We are only pieces." ~Rumi

Hm. So you're in a state of all-connection but you feel bad for things? Unless you actually live their lives with their nerves and can feel it for yourself, you shouldn't concern yourself with others' pain, it's their responsibility. You can care, but your own happiness should take priority. It's living this example that we can take charge of what's ours. Each of us. You have your life, I have mine.

We're all uniquely ourselves, but we're also all connected. I don't believe that your love for your ex is the same as the tree. I don't believe you're so disconnected from your feelings for her that they feel the same. It's ok if I'm wrong, and you can tell me. But there's some things you can't escape, only look aside.

Your girlfriend must've been hurt because she's looking for intimacy. If you bring other things in the relationship and compare the love she would like to a tree, yeah no wonder she'd be upset, haha.
Loving intimacy.. I'd like to think everyone can, but some people may not connect to that naturally? Maybe there's some that don't at all, I don't know. It doesn't have to be romantic either, it can just be.. sharing more love in a personal way with someone.

As for a higher picture as a whole.. I can't say that I relate, but I understand there's something more to life and consciousness. If it's something I'm going to learn, I don't think I'm close to that yet. Well, who knows, I wouldn't mind knowing greater love. I just want more love all around, including more personal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wondertrampe
3 hours ago, Sarah-Sylvia said:

Hm. So you're in a state of all-connection but you feel bad for things? Unless you actually live their lives with their nerves and can feel it for yourself, you shouldn't concern yourself with others' pain, it's their responsibility. You can care, but your own happiness should take priority. It's living this example that we can take charge of what's ours. Each of us. You have your life, I have mine.

Agape is not about feelings others pain––its a completely different paradigm of the world. Where pain isn't necessarily "bad"... conflict at one level is order at another. The microbiomes in our bodies are constantly at war yet that chaos gives rise to a consistent pattern that we call ourselves. This doesn't mean you seek pain or wish to cause it––as we established earlier, I don't want to force anything. But we need that conflict, not only on the microscopic level but in all aspects––for how are you to know pleasure if you don't know pain? You can't have light without dark, a left without right, a front without back. Self and other is as inseparable as black and white... there is an implicit connection where the two are really united. So I agree, "your own happiness should take priority", but the difference comes in how we identify as "self".

 

The usual feeling people have is that they are a single being suspended in a bag of skin, usually felt located inside the skull. We are all individuals moving through this world. Agape turns that feeling inside out. Instead of you identifying yourself as your body, agape is an overwhelming feeling where the entire Universe and everything that exists is what you really are. You are what the entire Universe is doing here and now.

 

But not in the sense that there is no free will. If having free will is akin to being a ship floating down a river and using your paddle to steer–––then having NO free will is akin to being in a ship floating down a river with no paddle. The reality is that there is no ship and you are the river. A wave realizing you are the entire ocean. This is agape.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sarah-Sylvia
6 hours ago, Wondertrampe said:

Agape is not about feelings others pain––its a completely different paradigm of the world. Where pain isn't necessarily "bad"... conflict at one level is order at another. The microbiomes in our bodies are constantly at war yet that chaos gives rise to a consistent pattern that we call ourselves. This doesn't mean you seek pain or wish to cause it––as we established earlier, I don't want to force anything. But we need that conflict, not only on the microscopic level but in all aspects––for how are you to know pleasure if you don't know pain? You can't have light without dark, a left without right, a front without back. Self and other is as inseparable as black and white... there is an implicit connection where the two are really united. So I agree, "your own happiness should take priority", but the difference comes in how we identify as "self".

 

The usual feeling people have is that they are a single being suspended in a bag of skin, usually felt located inside the skull. We are all individuals moving through this world. Agape turns that feeling inside out. Instead of you identifying yourself as your body, agape is an overwhelming feeling where the entire Universe and everything that exists is what you really are. You are what the entire Universe is doing here and now.

 

But not in the sense that there is no free will. If having free will is akin to being a ship floating down a river and using your paddle to steer–––then having NO free will is akin to being in a ship floating down a river with no paddle. The reality is that there is no ship and you are the river. A wave realizing you are the entire ocean. This is agape.


Sorry but I don't agree with that. We don't need conflict, I think it's the immature aspects that need that level of activity. Harmony is the way to go. Pain and suffering we learn from, but we don't need to perpetuate it, nor tolerate it, especially not thinking that it's needed to sustain the good side. Nuh-uh, never going to agree with that.

The self is the self. We're part of life, but uniquely who we are. A conscious being.
I agree we're not just our bodies, but we still have to learn what it means to be 'separate' in a sense. That's the human experience. The new age crap that tries to make everything all one and all that misses the point of the experience and what we're learning as individuals. but it's true that sometimes we feel very disconnected, and there could probably be a use for seeing beyond.

Sorry for being a tad abrasive, but I think you kind of came out with this spiritual stuff in a place where we're very much in our humanness, and it's a bit too far from where we're at. and also, you have to remember to be grounded to some degree. The balance, you know?

I've delved into some spiritual things, and I understand where you're coming from to some degree, but I'm not able to connect to it or experience it. My body's mind still has a hold on me. And I'm trying to get a hold on it. I'm open to grander, but I'm human, and most people you'll talk to here are as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wondertrampe
10 hours ago, Sarah-Sylvia said:


Sorry but I don't agree with that. We don't need conflict, I think it's the immature aspects that need that level of activity. Harmony is the way to go. Pain and suffering we learn from, but we don't need to perpetuate it, nor tolerate it, especially not thinking that it's needed to sustain the good side. Nuh-uh, never going to agree with that.

The self is the self. We're part of life, but uniquely who we are. A conscious being.
I agree we're not just our bodies, but we still have to learn what it means to be 'separate' in a sense. That's the human experience. The new age crap that tries to make everything all one and all that misses the point of the experience and what we're learning as individuals. but it's true that sometimes we feel very disconnected, and there could probably be a use for seeing beyond.

Sorry for being a tad abrasive, but I think you kind of came out with this spiritual stuff in a place where we're very much in our humanness, and it's a bit too far from where we're at. and also, you have to remember to be grounded to some degree. The balance, you know?

I've delved into some spiritual things, and I understand where you're coming from to some degree, but I'm not able to connect to it or experience it. My body's mind still has a hold on me. And I'm trying to get a hold on it. I'm open to grander, but I'm human, and most people you'll talk to here are as well.

This isn't "new age crap", it's Zen Buddhism. And pretty standard seeing as how I am half Japanese and living in Japan. Nor am I trying to convince you of anything––merely explaining how I feel as you keep misconstruing my emotions/beliefs and then saying everyone needs or should have this romantic love. Once again, we clearly have different definitions on what is the self. I don't think there are ever any right or wrong beliefs as there are many paths to the top of a mountain. We don't "have" to learn to be separate anymore than we "have" to learn to be connected. It may be your journey to explore the sensation of separate individuality. It may be my journey to explore connected centrality. Neither is more justified or right than the other, and both are necessary and fundamental to the entirety of existence. All I can say is once you experience the latter, you can't turn it off. A single moment changes your entire paradigm. I had no intentions of divulging my spirituality, nor do I want to argue over who is right or wrong. That's just silly. Besides, any attempts at explaining the ground of being will always fall short because you cannot pigeonholed reality into a concept.

In lieu of your comments asserting the necessity of "personal love", I was merely trying to differentiate types of love and offer an explanation as to why the specific type of love I have towards everyone may be coming into conflict with having a directed and individualized experience. I was explaining my own experiences, not speaking for everyone.

 

Just because you want "personal love" doesn't mean I do or that I need to. It's just disheartening to live in a society where this personal love is pressured on us to be held to a higher standard than all other unions. A mentality of "us versus the world". It's hard to feel like you are a couple fighting the world when you feel that you are the world. 

 

Moreover, as long as you are seeking for peace or harmony, then you are defining yourself as not having it. And as to the conflict in life––"The whole process of nature is an integrated process of immense complexity. And it is really impossible to tell whether anything that happens in it is "good" or "bad". Because you never know what will be the consequences of a misfortune. Or... you never know what will be consequences of good fortune." ~Alan Watts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sarah-Sylvia
22 minutes ago, Wondertrampe said:

This isn't "new age crap", it's Zen Buddhism. And pretty standard seeing as how I am half Japanese and living in Japan. Nor am I trying to convince you of anything––merely explaining how I feel as you keep misconstruing my emotions/beliefs and then saying everyone needs or should have this romantic love. Once again, we clearly have different definitions on what is the self. I don't think there are ever any right or wrong beliefs as there are many paths to the top of a mountain. We don't "have" to learn to be separate anymore than we "have" to learn to be connected. It may be your journey to explore the sensation of separate individuality. It may be my journey to explore connected centrality. Neither is more justified or right than the other, and both are necessary and fundamental to the entirety of existence. All I can say is once you experience the latter, you can't turn it off. A single moment changes your entire paradigm. I had no intentions of divulging my spirituality, nor do I want to argue over who is right or wrong. That's just silly. Besides, any attempts at explaining the ground of being will always fall short because you cannot pigeonholed reality into a concept.

In lieu of your comments asserting the necessity of "personal love", I was merely trying to differentiate types of love and offer an explanation as to why the specific type of love I have towards everyone may be coming into conflict with having a directed and individualized experience. I was explaining my own experiences, not speaking for everyone.

 

Just because you want "personal love" doesn't mean I do or that I need to. It's just disheartening to live in a society where this personal love is pressured on us to be held to a higher standard than all other unions. A mentality of "us versus the world". It's hard to feel like you are a couple fighting the world when you feel that you are the world. 

 

Moreover, as long as you are seeking for peace or harmony, then you are defining yourself as not having it. And as to the conflict in life––"The whole process of nature is an integrated process of immense complexity. And it is really impossible to tell whether anything that happens in it is "good" or "bad". Because you never know what will be the consequences of a misfortune. Or... you never know what will be consequences of good fortune." ~Alan Watts

I never talked about being wrong or right. I don't see spirituality in terms of right and wrong. I see it as an exploration, discovery, and creation.
I'm not sure what you interpreted in my post, but I didn't have an intention for 'having to' do anything. Everyone's free. I suppose I was trying to tell you that because a lot of people are more in humanness, your post can seem disconnected. I do think that no one's perfect, and just like I'm open to my flaws, you have some too, I see unbalanced aspects. It's natural for me to try to make things better, I'm sorry if you felt I was criticizing you, that's not my aim. You can be however you want. But listening to me is good too, I have a lot to offer :D

I think that love is awesome. I wish everyone could experience it. So yes I'm biased about it, of course, but I know that and I try my best to share that side because I believe in it, not because I'm aiming for that others 'should' have it, but because it's great :) There's different kinds of love, romantic is one, but so long as someone knows love, it doesn't matter what form it is. Being very intimate, I do like romantic love quite a lot. And so long as someone is happy, I'm good.

 

If you don't want personal love, then ok, I don't quite get why you feel like it's being pushed on you, and I certainly think that everyone has a heart, even you, so you'll have to learn the humanness of that at some point anyway, you can have a focus or specialty in what you're looking for in what you're exploring spiritually. I know some experiences that can change someone's paradigm, and it's still unbalanced if the humanness is ignored. Some people can take time away from it to hone certain aspects I suppose, but soul development would require it at some point, it's up to you how or when you'll feel ready for it.

How you create your meanings is up to you, if you think that seeking peace and harmony means it's not there, that's on you. It's there as much as it is, and we can always use more. There IS conflict in life, and that's what we're aiming to bring to peace. Denying it doesn't help, but I agree that perpetuating the idea that it's going to stay or any negative thought on it can make someone believe and perceive conflict beyond the actual reality. Sometimes even just seeing harmony can help view less since everything is ok and it can all be brought together, like in an inclusive view. Acceptance. And then you can create more based on care and wisdom.

Anyway, of course some of those are my spiritual ideas. But I base them on the most I can, including any universal truths I can.
I'm sure there's lots more I can learn, I'm always open to greater. (Though sometimes I get lost in the pain and am not as much, but i wont give up learning to heal or whatever's needed)

I'll leave it there for now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wondertrampe

 

17 minutes ago, Sarah-Sylvia said:

How you create your meanings is up to you, if you think that seeking peace and harmony means it's not there, that's on you. It's there as much as it is, and we can always use more. There IS conflict in life, and that's what we're aiming to bring to peace. Denying it doesn't help, but I agree that perpetuating the idea that it's going to stay or any negative thought on it can make someone believe and perceive conflict beyond the actual reality. Sometimes even just seeing harmony can help view less since everything is ok and it can all be brought together, like in an inclusive view. Acceptance. And then you can create more based on care and wisdom.

To this, we both agree but in different words. We are both saying you can't deny the conflict in life and must learn to accept it. I am saying that the only time you seek for peace is when you are in a state of conflict... thus through seeking you are implicitly defining yourself as not having it. And so the only way to get peace or harmony is to come to terms with your situation and accept it. You are saying the same thing, except adding that the goal is for peace to overcome conflict... while to me, having this goal is not accepting the conflict, nor accepting your adversities. However, I think while you have this as your goal, you also recognize neither side will ever win. So it's just a difference of vernacular and again why the ground of being can never be explained in concepts. We all see and hear what we want to see and hear. 

 

14 minutes ago, Sarah-Sylvia said:

If you don't want personal love, then ok, I don't quite get why you feel like it's being pushed on you, and I certainly think that everyone has a heart, even you, so you'll have to learn the humanness of that at some point anyway, you can have a focus or specialty in what you're looking for in what you're exploring spiritually. I know some experiences that can change someone's paradigm, and it's still unbalanced if the humanness is ignored. Some people can take time away from it to hone certain aspects I suppose, but soul development would require it at some point, it's up to you how or when you'll feel ready for it.

Do you not see how you are using your own personal experiences to imply that having a heart is synonymous with wanting personal love? It's unimaginable to you that someone has no desire for it... and is "required" for development. It's condescending and disregards everything that I have said up until now. That's the pressure I am talking about. The only benefit from this debacle is the firm realization that I am indeed aromantic. I don't see why I should listen to you, especially when it's not reciprocated.

 

Please... leave it there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sarah-Sylvia
12 hours ago, Wondertrampe said:

 

To this, we both agree but in different words. We are both saying you can't deny the conflict in life and must learn to accept it. I am saying that the only time you seek for peace is when you are in a state of conflict... thus through seeking you are implicitly defining yourself as not having it. And so the only way to get peace or harmony is to come to terms with your situation and accept it. You are saying the same thing, except adding that the goal is for peace to overcome conflict... while to me, having this goal is not accepting the conflict, nor accepting your adversities. However, I think while you have this as your goal, you also recognize neither side will ever win. So it's just a difference of vernacular and again why the ground of being can never be explained in concepts. We all see and hear what we want to see and hear. 

 

Do you not see how you are using your own personal experiences to imply that having a heart is synonymous with wanting personal love? It's unimaginable to you that someone has no desire for it... and is "required" for development. It's condescending and disregards everything that I have said up until now. That's the pressure I am talking about. The only benefit from this debacle is the firm realization that I am indeed aromantic. I don't see why I should listen to you, especially when it's not reciprocated.

 

Please... leave it there.

Well, just to clarify, I am saying to accept it, but not just to accept it. And we don't 'just' seek peace when we're in a state of conflict. More peace is good. More harmony is good. It doesn't matter what the state is. You can see harmony, and want more of it. We don't define ourselves by contrast. I've seen that type of mentality though, and again see it in new age views. It's not something I believe at all. You don't overcome conflict necessarily, you bring harmony, and goodness, knowing what you want. Knowing what you want is just being true to your values. You learn some values from experiences. We needed some amount of conflict to learn some of this, but we don't need it beyond that.

 

Love will win. It's inevitable.

 

The personal aspect exists. You can't really escape it. You can choose not to develop. But at some point you'll see it as necessary. There's no way around it.
I'm sorry you feel it disregards what you said. I certainly don't think that. I think the other side is important. But we're here on earth for a reason. It's to live as individuals. Our consciousness extends beyond that, of course.

I don't put pressure on by saying what I do. It's possible you're sensitive to it because of how you feel. If you see no value in this talk, then you don't have to respond. I see value. There's always more to learn, afterall. But not everyone is open, and if it's not interesting to you to talk about this, then we don't have to. But I may still respond to you if I feel like it. You just have to know that. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sora Lawlight
On 12/10/2019 at 3:37 AM, Wondertrampe said:

I thought everyone who did romantic gestures was just emulating them... That they did these gestures to make the recipient feel something—not because you yourself were feeling something.

wow dude I actually thought the same thing...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sora Lawlight

From what you describe what we experience is surprisingly similar. To me it does sound like you are aromantic, although I'm still trying to come to terms with myself being aro so idk. I have heard it is common for aro people to like the idea of romance and that is why it was so hard for me to come to terms with it. Because I do want to have a connection to someone that is that deep while I don't really want romance itself. But the world around us has those concepts tangled. And it's tough because everyone around me thinks that that closeness only comes with romantic relationships. There is an idea that once a relationship has comes to a point of closeness it becomes a relationship (with the gender a person is attracted to.) and with a gender a someone is not attracted to they are expected to always put their romantic relationships before "friends." For a while I was very confused with the fact that I wanted romance... but at the same time I did not also???? That was until I seperated the idea that close connections should only come from romantic partners. Anyways thanks for listing to my Ted Talk TM. (^_^)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wondertrampe
On 12/14/2019 at 4:45 PM, Sora Lawlight said:

From what you describe what we experience is surprisingly similar. To me it does sound like you are aromantic, although I'm still trying to come to terms with myself being aro so idk. I have heard it is common for aro people to like the idea of romance and that is why it was so hard for me to come to terms with it. Because I do want to have a connection to someone that is that deep while I don't really want romance itself. But the world around us has those concepts tangled.

I have trouble even understanding what is romance. Is it the supposed "chemistry" or "spark" people feel? I know how to be romantic, and I seem to be good at it... but I end up doing something that I don't feel to keep a relationship invigorating until I no longer know who I am. It's both heartbreaking and suffocating. But what is textbook romantic may not be how another person understands romance... for example, some people still think "making love" is the epitome of romantic expression. And so if everyone has their own definitions on what is romantic, where does that understanding come from?? I feel like there is a difference between romance and romantic gestures––with gestures being a symptom of that supposed spark (although emulatable). Yet if you ask "what is romance" on the internet, all you get are examples of gestures...

 

So if people only feel romance via others expressing themselves with romantic gestures that vibe... then there really is no difference between the gesture and the romance... only a difference in how people communicate it. Sometimes I feel broken, other times I feel everyone else is lying to themselves. But reality is I just don't feel that romance from the same gestures most people do. Textbook romantic gestures to me just feel fake... and it kills the romance. Because the single most romantic thing anyone could do for me is to be brave enough to show me their authentic self––and without expectations, afford me the space to be my own authentic self.

 

So if I'm being honest, engaging in textbook romantic gestures to keep a relationship strong may feel like the right thing, but by my true standards, it is the least romantic thing I could do for I am refusing a space for either of us to be our true selves... and why all my relationships have devolved into a hollow shell. I cherish my deep friendships because expectations are lower and it is much easier to feel authentic. Your ted talk was interesting :D sorry mine was long

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sarah-Sylvia

Romance should come from love, Ideally it would come naturally, that you don't have to force it, because if you force it then it's not really love.
Some gestures can be romantic, but they aren't required for it. They can be expressions of affection, which is when it feels good. Some people are less sensual, but like in my case I'm very sensual, so touching, cuddling, and caressing can feel very affectionate to me.  Everyone's different.

Romance, or affectionate gestures with more intimacy, can definitely be hard to talk about when they aren't physical, yet there's tons of it you can see around, like say marriage proposals, they could involve something very deep and meaningful to the person, maybe bringing them somewhere and showing them something they've talked about or. Those are all gestures as well, but so long as it's caring, and involves more intimate love, it becomes romantic. The feeling and the care matter the most, even if it's easier to show gestures. Because feelings are abstract. But it makes sense when you've experienced it and talk to someone and they can relate. Love is still the most important :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wondertrampe
On 12/20/2019 at 4:33 AM, Sarah-Sylvia said:

Romance should come from love, Ideally it would come naturally, that you don't have to force it, because if you force it then it's not really love.
Some gestures can be romantic, but they aren't required for it. They can be expressions of affection, which is when it feels good. Some people are less sensual, but like in my case I'm very sensual, so touching, cuddling, and caressing can feel very affectionate to me.  Everyone's different.

Romance, or affectionate gestures with more intimacy, can definitely be hard to talk about when they aren't physical, yet there's tons of it you can see around, like say marriage proposals, they could involve something very deep and meaningful to the person, maybe bringing them somewhere and showing them something they've talked about or. Those are all gestures as well, but so long as it's caring, and involves more intimate love, it becomes romantic. The feeling and the care matter the most, even if it's easier to show gestures. Because feelings are abstract. But it makes sense when you've experienced it and talk to someone and they can relate. Love is still the most important :)

Nothing you've said relates to what I expressed or how I feel. Nor are you even a part of this conversation any longer. You just butt in. Ignoring you doesn't work because you can apparently still post and detract from my comparisons. Of course romance should come from love, but it doesn't always. My post was discussing the differences between romance and romantic expression... not the difficulty itself to express it. My primary love language is physical touch, like cuddling. I've been engaged before... and a unique, romantic proposal was something I dreamed about much like how many women dream about their ideal marriage. I've already stated I have no problems being "romantic", but what is romantic for everyone is different. Those romantic gestures are a symptom of having romance... but those gestures may not always translate to the other person as romantic. Those gestures can be emulated so as to the giver having no romantic feelings but the receiver being influenced into having them. Likewise, you can feel the most profound love and express yourself wholly, but the other person just doesn't receive it in that manner.

 

I'm making an observation, not asking for advice... and especially not your advice. You sound like a high school girl and literally everything you say to me is irrelevant. Not only has nothing you said resonated or describe me, but you lost all credibility with me on your first post when you tried correcting me, a Japanese person, on Japanese culture by saying "I watch anime and I'm pretty sure aishiteru is used quite often"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sarah-Sylvia
35 minutes ago, Wondertrampe said:

Nothing you've said relates to what I expressed or how I feel. Nor are you even a part of this conversation any longer. You just butt in. Ignoring you doesn't work because you can apparently still post and detract from my comparisons. Of course romance should come from love, but it doesn't always. My post was discussing the differences between romance and romantic expression... not the difficulty itself to express it. My primary love language is physical touch, like cuddling. I've been engaged before... and a unique, romantic proposal was something I dreamed about much like how many women dream about their ideal marriage. I've already stated I have no problems being "romantic", but what is romantic for everyone is different. Those romantic gestures are a symptom of having romance... but those gestures may not always translate to the other person as romantic. Those gestures can be emulated so as to the giver having no romantic feelings but the receiver being influenced into having them. Likewise, you can feel the most profound love and express yourself wholly, but the other person just doesn't receive it in that manner.

 

I'm making an observation, not asking for advice... and especially not your advice. You sound like a high school girl and literally everything you say to me is irrelevant. Not only has nothing you said resonated or describe me, but you lost all credibility with me on your first post when you tried correcting me, a Japanese person, on Japanese culture by saying "I watch anime and I'm pretty sure aishiteru is used quite often"

Hey come on now, there's no need to be rude like that. I was expressing my opinion on the subject. If you feel it was a bit off somehow, that's fine, but I think you misinterpret some of what I say and also project negativity on me. It's not fun. I didn't read your post entirely, but I saw enough and you're really putting some frustration on me and taking things way off base to try to paint something on me. I don't appreciate it, and it's better to stick with conversation please. I don't know why you talk about credibility when we're just having a talk. People, having a talk, or sharing thoughts, however you want to see it so it doesn't seem such a big deal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Qutenkuddly

This conversation is starting to get a little too personal. Please try to remain civil and return to the topic as outlined in the originating post.

 

Qutenkuddly, 

AVEN Admin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...