Hetero romantic or not hetero romantic that is the question .

[Rhaenys]

I am a bit confused.-_____-

I know I am asexual for sure but I don't know if I am aromantic , hetero romantic or both.

I thought I was hetero romantic but I saw some one here say that " If a hetereo romantic person found the right guy / girl and passed them up they are crazy " . ( Sorry I remember the user who made the remark but not the actual thread it was made in other wise I would have put it in quotes )

I have had squishes on guys but call me weird if you please.....I dislike romantic displays of affection ( example on another forum an ex has all his icons and signatures of anime pairings kissing or doing sexual things to represent him and whoever the girl he liked was , Receiving Valentine's presents , poems , those pet names couples come up with especially " Baby " ie. this has nothing to do with Justin Bieber btw are just a few >_< ). Usually I thought people who feel romantic attraction are ok with these things.

Also I prefer to be alone instead of a relationship. I'm not keen on sharing my life with someone for my own personal reasons. But I've kinda noticed that the living alone is more common among aromantics .

So in addition to wondering what type am I really..... I've been wanting to know if it's possible for a hetero romantic to want to live alone for the rest of her life willingly ? And is it really seen as crazy ?

[vrazda verlaine]

When you have had a crush, like you said, were you interested in being in a romantic relationship with the person? A "squish", as it has come to be called here, is a platonic crush - an interest in being friends with a person.

I thought I had crushes and was heteroromantic for years. It wasn't until the last year that I looked back and realized they had all been mainly platonic, and I had never been romantically attracted to someone.

[Rhaenys]

Good grief I didn't realize that term -______-

Yes it was a " squish "

Let me correct my post.

Thank you !

[Asexy Existentialist]

I've been thinking about this. Now that I don't have to worry about sex, I'm not sure I'm heteroromantic, because for eighteen years of my life I've been thinking of myself as a "screwed-up" heterosexual. But lately, it's occured to me that I might be demiromantic, or even aromantic. Because though I could see myself falling in love, I actually think I would prefer to stay single for the rest of my life. It just seems more natural, more convenient. And maybe part of it's selfish, but I don't think it's crazy.

So, there's nothing wrong with a heteroromantic not wanting to be in a relationship. :)

[GirlDreamer]

I would say that if one isn't interested in a relationship, that makes the person aromantic. But this can be really complicated, and it's really up to you what you think fit best for yourself. I've been questioning myself lately too, and I've been labeling myself as aromantic for a long time. Now I'm thinking that maybe there's a chance I might be demi- or grey-romantic, it's really hard to tell what fits best.

[brontide]

I am a bit confused.-_____-

I know I am asexual for sure but I don't know if I am aromantic , hetero romantic or both.

I thought I was hetero romantic but I saw some one here say that " If a hetereo romantic person found the right guy / girl and passed them up they are crazy " . ( Sorry I remember the user who made the remark but not the actual thread it was made in other wise I would have put it in quotes )

I have had squishes on guys but call me weird if you please.....I dislike romantic displays of affection ( example on another forum an ex has all his icons and signatures of anime pairings kissing or doing sexual things to represent him and whoever the girl he liked was , Receiving Valentine's presents , poems , those pet names couples come up with especially " Baby " ie. this has nothing to do with Justin Bieber btw are just a few >_< ). Usually I thought people who feel romantic attraction are ok with these things.

Also I prefer to be alone instead of a relationship. I'm not keen on sharing my life with someone for my own personal reasons. But I've kinda noticed that the living alone is more common among aromantics .

So in addition to wondering what type am I really..... I've been wanting to know if it's possible for a hetero romantic to want to live alone for the rest of her life willingly ? And is it really seen as crazy ?

I think the definitions of the 'romantic' categories are still very fluid and up for debate/interpretation.

I believe that you can be something-other-than-aromantic and yet still not go for displays of affection or the other mushy stuff that you mentioned. I tentatively consider myself panromantic, because I would quite like to share my life with someone (regardless of gender), but my reasons are mainly based on security/stability, companionship and a mental/emotional connection. I actually dislike most forms of physical affection. Some people might say that I'm aromantic but just looking for a non-romantic life partner. The reason I disagree is that I find something deeper than friendship in the idea of a committed, exclusive relationship...but it's all up for interpretation, I suppose. How the heck do you define 'romance', anyway!?

Just as a stab in the dark, though, I would say that prefering to be alone and not wanting to share your life with someone would indicate that you're aromantic. Mind if I ask what made/makes you believe that you're heteroromantic? Is it just the squishes?

(There's no agenda behind those questions, by the way. I don't know whether the consensus is that squishes make you ___romantic, or whether it's actually wanting a relationship that makes you ___romantic. Personally I would say that it's about the relationships that you want or don't want, but then again I don't really get squishes on people - unless it comes with wanting to be in a relationship with them - so I'm biased!)

[Rhaenys]

I am a bit confused.-_____-

I know I am asexual for sure but I don't know if I am aromantic , hetero romantic or both.

I thought I was hetero romantic but I saw some one here say that " If a hetereo romantic person found the right guy / girl and passed them up they are crazy " . ( Sorry I remember the user who made the remark but not the actual thread it was made in other wise I would have put it in quotes )

I have had squishes on guys but call me weird if you please.....I dislike romantic displays of affection ( example on another forum an ex has all his icons and signatures of anime pairings kissing or doing sexual things to represent him and whoever the girl he liked was , Receiving Valentine's presents , poems , those pet names couples come up with especially " Baby " ie. this has nothing to do with Justin Bieber btw are just a few >_< ). Usually I thought people who feel romantic attraction are ok with these things.

Also I prefer to be alone instead of a relationship. I'm not keen on sharing my life with someone for my own personal reasons. But I've kinda noticed that the living alone is more common among aromantics .

So in addition to wondering what type am I really..... I've been wanting to know if it's possible for a hetero romantic to want to live alone for the rest of her life willingly ? And is it really seen as crazy ?

I think the definitions of the 'romantic' categories are still very fluid and up for debate/interpretation.

I believe that you can be something-other-than-aromantic and yet still not go for displays of affection or the other mushy stuff that you mentioned. I tentatively consider myself panromantic, because I would quite like to share my life with someone (regardless of gender), but my reasons are mainly based on security/stability, companionship and a mental/emotional connection. I actually dislike most forms of physical affection. Some people might say that I'm aromantic but just looking for a non-romantic life partner. The reason I disagree is that I find something deeper than friendship in the idea of a committed, exclusive relationship...but it's all up for interpretation, I suppose. How the heck do you define 'romance', anyway!?

Just as a stab in the dark, though, I would say that prefering to be alone and not wanting to share your life with someone would indicate that you're aromantic. Mind if I ask what made/makes you believe that you're heteroromantic? Is it just the squishes?

(There's no agenda behind those questions, by the way. I don't know whether the consensus is that squishes make you ___romantic, or whether it's actually wanting a relationship that makes you ___romantic. Personally I would say that it's about the relationships that you want or don't want, but then again I don't really get squishes on people - unless it comes with wanting to be in a relationship with them - so I'm biased!)

Yep it's the squishes.

I may have mistaken them for romantic attraction.

[chipmunkgirl]

Just wanted to point out that you can also define aromantic as not being romantically attracted to anyone (i.e. possibly wanting a relationship theoretically, but not in reality)

[Ruth1-16]

I believe that you can be something-other-than-aromantic and yet still not go for displays of affection or the other mushy stuff that you mentioned. I tentatively consider myself panromantic, because I would quite like to share my life with someone (regardless of gender), but my reasons are mainly based on security/stability, companionship and a mental/emotional connection. I actually dislike most forms of physical affection. Some people might say that I'm aromantic but just looking for a non-romantic life partner. The reason I disagree is that I find something deeper than friendship in the idea of a committed, exclusive relationship...but it's all up for interpretation, I suppose. How the heck do you define 'romance', anyway!?

Hmm . . . see, that's where I'm going "are the words 'platonic life partner' a contradiction in terms?" Because I'd love that, something akin to romantic friendship, but I don't see myself going for any of that mushy stuff, plus the descriptions I've heard of romantic attraction are a little too . . . obsessed/inexplicably drawn to the person sort of thing, and the person I have the squish on is my best friend, who I know very well and love her for who she is (it's not this random inexplicable thing, and I've loved her for 8 years but I wouldn't say I'm "in love with" her either), and I'm not obsessed with wanting to spend all my time with her--but I would dearly love to live with her the rest of my life. It's like this halfway ground in between romantic and aromantic, but not regarding quantity or level of attraction, which is how I've thought grey-aromantic would be. I thought I was aromantic till I started thinking about how I felt about her and what I would love out of life in regards to sharing it with her. Now I'm a bit unsure.

Just as a stab in the dark, though, I would say that prefering to be alone and not wanting to share your life with someone would indicate that you're aromantic.

But does wanting to have a life partner of some sort make one *romantic* in some way? I find that is a good question. <_<

I don't know whether the consensus is that squishes make you ___romantic, or whether it's actually wanting a relationship that makes you ___romantic. Personally I would say that it's about the relationships that you want or don't want, but then again I don't really get squishes on people - unless it comes with wanting to be in a relationship with them - so I'm biased!)

Hmm, what makes a romantic relationship *romantic*, is what I'd love to know?

[Sleeping Beauty]

I can tell you about my experience.

I perfectly fit with the no romance-like stuff kind of person. I am very hard to show affection because 90% of what is considered proofs by others are to me pathetic (no offence intended, it's more a question of me feeling pathetic doing this than judging everyone else doing this). When I do it's mostly because I realize people around me need it and I make an effort. If it was for me my presence itself would be the main proof of my affection. Or leaving for "saving" them in my distorted view but it's another matter.

What was I saying? Oh, yes. I feel unable to form relationships too, I am afraid I would never handle them and usually ruin things because of that. This makes me tend to avoid them and I got used to being alone, which complicates things. I like my independence and I am not always inclined to compromise it. A relationship requires a lot of compromise and I don't always see the good in them, obscured as they are by the compromises. In the end I think it's a situation similar to yours, isn't it?

Yet I am sure I can be romantically involved with people because I am. I get romantic in friendship too. It has nothing to do with obsession and continuous butterflies in the stomach and the rest. I am an affectionate person, just it's not visible if you don't try to understand me. I have a slight preference to men in this regard but I came to the conclusion that it's more a matter of contingencies in my life.

As for sexuality it's not a matter of how I act, it's a matter of what I feel inside. I cannot consider me aromantic just because I am not inclined to romance in the conventional way or I think of myself as a long-life single woman with a son. I am asexual, what conventional I have left? ;)