Could be interesting.
So, as y'all undoubtedly know (unless you're new or tend to skim or something), I identify as asexual and aromantic. This means, in a nutshell, that I am neither sexually nor romantically attracted to other people: I have no interest in banging anyone or dating anyone
( Read more... )
Comments 30
Reply
Reply
On a serious note, I do wonder sometimes about how I would tell the difference between being aromantic and being intensely socially anxious to the point where romance is just not feasible. I mean, I often feel that failure is inevitable in almost everything I do, so perhaps it's just part of that, in the same way I'll never be the first person to set foot on the surface of the sun.
DAMN YOU, SUN!!
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
I think it's a common misconception that asexuals are necessarily disinterested in romance because romance and sex are considered to be inseparable, and it's true that some aces (such as myself) are disinterested in anything beyond platonic relationships. But most aces do experience what we call "romantic attraction"--the desire for all the warmth and fuzziness that a romantic relationship would provide. That's why we usually identify ourselves as "asexual and [hetero/homo/bi/pan/a]romantic" when we talk about our orientations. It's possible--even likely--that your friend is personally familiar with what it's like to fall in (or be in) romantic love, even if she doesn't know what it's like to look at someone and think, "I'd hit that ( ... )
Reply
I agree that writers write outside their personal experience, but can they write outside their own emotional experience? Or is the cultural kool-aid enough to counteract a lack of emotional experience here? Or is it more empathy? (But then, can empathy exist if the emotion you're empathizing with is totally alien to you?) I'm kinda thinking out loud here and kinda hoping for clarification, so take that as you will. Regardless, it's interesting to contemplate.
BTW, I really appreciate you providing the opportunity to ask this sort of stuff, because it's tough to grasp on your own--and tough to ask ( ... )
Reply
For most asexuals, there's just no automatic progression from "I love this person and want to spend my life with them" to "and also I want to have sex with them," because sexual attraction isn't part of the equation. To us, that's on par with something like, "I love this person, so naturally I want to go kayaking with them." It doesn't follow.
This is where things can get complicated, because some asexuals are willing to have sex with their partners to make them happy, or for the emotional side of the equation, just as some people who aren't really into kayaking might be willing to go kayaking with their partner if their partner was into that sort of thing. But the innate desire to have sex is still absent.
BTW, I really appreciate you providing the opportunity to ask ( ... )
Reply
a) it's really cool of you to provide this forum for people to increase their understanding and awareness, and
b) I initially read your first sentence as "I identify as asexual and aromatic" and heard Shirley in my head saying, "Oh, that's nice!"
Reply
b) I think just about everyone reads it that way at first. Most text programs tend to autocorrect it, too, so I'm always paranoid that I didn't catch it. XD
And now I'm hearing Shirley in my head.
Reply
Okay, a question (and I'm trying not to feel silly or shy about it)... A few weeks ago we shared a squee over this:
I MAY HAVE SKIPPED BACK TO REWATCH THE SCENE IN WHICH [ABED] CHANNELS DON DRAPER TO PUT THE MOVES ON ANNIE. BECAUSE IT WAS SHOCKINGLY HOT.
What does that mean in an asexual context?
I feel like that sounds like I'm trying to catch you in a lie or something, which please believe me I am not - it's just that at the time I wasn't really thinking about the asexuality angle, and now that I am, it's something I'm curious about.
Reply
This is partly a case of appreciating something without actually wanting it, much like you can admire a nice painting in a gallery without thinking, "I have to have this on my wall!" And it's partly a case of watching a show with your focus on the character's feelings and not on your own.
I can appreciate that what Abed did was excessively hot (exhibit a: I like his beautiful face; exhibit b: his voice got all deep and purr-y and I like that, too; exhibit c: Annie was totally into it) while also recognizing that if I had been in Annie's position, I would have giggled nervously and scooted away from him the moment he sat down because people invading my personal space makes me uncomfortable as all get-out.
Plus, as I said, Annie was into it, and that makes a HUGE difference. She was clearly enjoying it, so I enjoyed it with her, but if she'd been taken aback or displeased I would have tapped into that, instead, and been skeeved out by Abed's behavior.
Reply
Reply
I think explicit representation would be awesome. I think fiction needs more explicit representation of marginalized groups who otherwise have to settle for "arguably like me" when they encounter characters who strike a chord with them. It would be really great to have it be canon, and not in a "Dumbledore's gay because JKR said so in an interview" sort of way.
And I say that not to disparage that particular interpretation, but to point out that it's still interpretation and interpretation is not representation when you can just as easily interpret things a different way. Plus, being an ~English Major~ and all, I know just how little authorial intent matters when it comes to interpreting a work. Sometimes this works in the favor of fandom aces (see: anything Moffat has said regarding Sherlock's orientation and his ambiguous treatment of the Doctor and River's relationship), but often it doesn't, because most people don't fill perceived gaps ( ... )
Reply
Leave a comment