Aromanticism vs Avoidance?

[Mienai]

I saw this post on Tumblr by user spcialagentartemis yesterday and it struck a chord with me. For anyone who doesn't want to go to another site, here's the transcript. Heads up, it's a bit long. 

Quote

Anonymous Question:

hello there! i saw your post and it made me want to ask you (feel free to ignore) if you decide aromanticsm is a stance you hold, what would u consider the difference between aromanticsm and simply being avoidant?

specialagentartemis's Answer:

Does there have to be one?

Like. I do think there is something inside me that goes “hhhgghhhhhhhh no” when I think about trying to Do Romance. Is that Lack Of Romantic Attraction? Well, I assume yes, because I do not feel a draw to do romance. So I guess definitionally there is nothing inside me that makes romance feel like an attractive prospect. So saying “there is something fairly fundamental to my personality that makes me not want to pursue a romantic relationship, and makes me uncomfortable when I consider trying, that makes me much happier when pursuing non-romantic relationships” is I would say an accurate descriptor of the part of myself that I identify as “aromantic.”

The fact that I identify it as “aromantic” is the stance I’m talking about. I’m identifying this as an important aspect of my personality and way I move through the world. Could I call myself avoidant instead? I mean, sure I could. Would that benefit me or anybody? I don’t think it would. However it is accurate that I avoid romantic relationships. So does that make me avoidant? Maybe. Is that a bad thing? I don’t think it is. “Avoiding romantic relationships because you don’t want them” is a neutral thing worthy of acceptance whether you identify that proclivity in yourself as “aromanticism” or not.

This is why I don’t like models of a-spec identities that reduce the whole thing to being about Attraction Only. Stressing over whether I was really aromantic or just Afraid Of Commitment, whether I was really asexual or Just Repressed, was making me stressed and unhappy. Reframing it around what I wanted—“What kind of relationships do I want? What life-path will make me happy?”—it felt like a weight lifted off my chest. It didn’t have to be about sussing out my True Attractions. It could be about determining what I wanted in my life and living it.

People are different and differences don’t have to be separated into “biologically innate and can’t be fixed, so must be accepted” and “just a choice where you are able to be realigned with the Norm, and so therefore are required to be.”

I think this is a common thing many aros and aces get: is it really an orientation or do you just not like it? This post really resonated with me as I spent many hours in my youth navel-gazing and agonizing over whether repulsion or aversion were grounds for claiming an identity. I came to a similar conclusion to specialagentartemis here: I can call myself what I wish, whether I feel no attraction or a particular aversion. And I like their reframing of identity around what they do desire and want to pursue, rather than what they lack. It's a hard thing for many aces and aros I've met, since we live within a culture that posits partnerships as a foregone conclusion.

I was just curious what other people think of this take on aversion as an aspect of identity.

[Aven Astankova]

Personally, I still identify as "I'll get back to you on that", but I'd prefer to keep my proclaimed identity more a matter of positives than negatives, if only for this reason:

 

I've found that it's quite easy to upset people with my expounding colourfully on my own aversion to sex (which presumably qualifies as negative), while probing others for contrasting experiences and perspectives.  I've ended up accidentally implying that their sexual pleasures (which would be the positive) are something I disapprove of.  Whereas in fact, these positives are merely things I feel alienated by,

 

My conversations have been a lot more fruitful when expouding colourfully on aspects of myself that are generally perceived as positives, strange as those aspects may be.

 

 

1 hour ago, Mienai said:

This is why I don’t like models of a-spec identities that reduce the whole thing to being about Attraction Only. Stressing over whether I was really aromantic or just Afraid Of Commitment, whether I was really asexual or Just Repressed, was making me stressed and unhappy. Reframing it around what I wanted—“What kind of relationships do I want? What life-path will make me happy?”—it felt like a weight lifted off my chest. It didn’t have to be about sussing out my True Attractions. It could be about determining what I wanted in my life and living it.

My aro nature feels to me like a phobia.  Words like dating and romance affect me similarly to words like ladder and tightrope.

A "phobia" could so easily be interpreted as "just Afraid Of Commitment", but then people often go their whole lives without confronting their phobias, and they've every right to.

So in this case, the way I see it, this makes the fear or phobia as much (or as little) a part of your nature or identity, as you want it to do.

 

2 hours ago, Mienai said:

Like. I do think there is something inside me that goes “hhhgghhhhhhhh no” when I think about trying to Do Romance. Is that Lack Of Romantic Attraction? Well, I assume yes, because I do not feel a draw to do romance

spcialagentartemis's internal voice is akin, I think, to my phobic feeling.  But the end of their statement is more of a positive.  I don't feel a "draw to do romance" either, but this absence doesn't make me feel pain or loneliness.  I similarly don't feel a draw to risk my own life breaking the land speed record, and I'm fine with my take on that too.

 

Hope something here contributes 😊

[Aven Astankova]

2 hours ago, Mienai said:

is it really an orientation or do you just not like it?

A simpler and more positive, diirect answer, if you prefer:

I think asexuality can qualify as an orientation, if only because testifies to the diversity that exists in sexualities, and adds another colour to the spectrum.  The greater the general appreciation of this diversity, the better.

You could argue that the aro / ace identity adds a zero to the number line more than it adds a colour to the spectrum, but zero is a mathematically highly significant and important number.