#biromantic allosexual | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

romancerepulsed · 5 months

Text

aspec terms for beginners!

since it's trending right now, i feel like it might be helpful to clear up some basic aspec (but particularly aromantic, as we are the center of attention currently) terms. if you have absolutely any questions, i would be happy to answer, either in the replies, dms, or my inbox!

★・・・・・・★

the split attraction model (SAM): a model of human behavior that posits that, for some people, romantic and sexual attraction are not the same.

[most often this will come in the form of someone being aspec on one axis and allo (not aspec) on another. for example, a biromantic asexual may be romantically attracted to two or more genders, but sexually attracted to none. some people may even use SAM for allo identities– a bisexual lesbian may be sexually attracted to multiple genders, but only romantically attracted to women (note that this is not the only way that someone can be an mspec lesbian, just one way!). the SAM does not apply to everybody, not even all aspecs! there are non-SAM aros, for instance, who do not differentiate their aromanticism from their sexuality.]

aspec: a collection of queer spectrums centered around the lack of a certain attraction or identity. the most common spectrums under the aspec umbrella are asexual, aromantic, agender, and aplatonic, though there are many other ways to be aspec.

asexual: experiencing little to no sexual attraction.

[aces can still have sex– whether its because they experience some amount of sexual attraction or they just want to participate in sex because they find the act appealing in some other way. that being said, there are still plenty of aces who have not and will never have sex. it is a spectrum.]

aromantic: experiencing little to no romantic attraction.

[aros can still have romantic partners– whether its because they experience some amount of romantic attraction or they just find relationships appealing in some other way. that being said, there are still plenty of aros who have not and will never be in a romantic relationship. it is a spectrum.]

agender: having no gender or little relation to any gender.

aplatonic: experiencing little to no platonic attraction.

[similarly to aros and aces, apls can still form friendships if they so desire– whether its because they experience some amount of platonic attraction or they find friendships appealing in some other way.]

aroallo: combination of aromantic and allosexual– allosexual being someone who fully experiences sexual attraction. an aroallo, then, is someone who is aromantic but not asexual. aroallos often do not have a standard relationship with sex due to its romantic connotations and the stigma against loveless sex. someone having sex with someone else they do not love does not inherently make them aroallo, much in the same way that having a nonsexual relationship with a partner doesn't inherently make either participant asexual.

aroace: someone who is both aromantic and asexual. because aro and ace are both spectrums, an aroace may still experience some amount of attraction on either or both of those spectrums, or they may experience attraction of some other kind (platonic, tertiary, etc.), and that attraction may be only for a certain gender or genders– these are known as oriented aroaces.

queerplatonic relationship: a type of relationship that is defined only by the people within it. i have a post dedicated to explaining this in larger detail.

partnering: an aspec (usually aromantic) person who has and/or desires to have a partnership or multiple partnerships– romantic, queerplatonic, or otherwise.

non-partnering: an aspec (usually aromantic) person who has no desire to form a partnership of any kind.

romance/sex/plato favorable: an aspec who desires or would not reject a romantic, sexual, or platonic relationship. they are also generally not particularly bothered by seeing these relationships in their day-to-day.

romance/sex/plato repulsed: an aspec who does not desire a romantic, sexual, or platonic relationship and generally does not like seeing those relationships in their day-to-day. [x] repulsed people are not necessarily judgemental towards people who desire or participate in those relationships, they just do not desire them for themselves. repulsion often takes the form of discomfort or annoyance. [x] repulsed people are not necessarily cruel sticks-in-the-mud– they are perfectly capable of being respectful, and they very often are. repulsion does not always stem from trauma, though it certainly can.

romance/sex/plato positive: not to be confused with favorability, [x] positivity is the belief that romance, sex, and platonic relationships are human rights that should be supported and uplifted. someone can be [x] repulsed and [x] positive at the same time, because favorability/repulsion revolves around the self, and positivity/negativity extends to others.

sex/romance/plato negative: not to be confused with repulsion, [x] negativity is an inherently judgemental and harmful ideology. most commonly in the form of sex negativity, these ideologies are centered around the opposition to or personal judgement of people who engage in romance, sex, or platonic relationships. sex negativity in particular is embedded in western white supremacist societies and it is important for aspecs not to play into that.

those are the basics, but i have more information below the cut!

★・・・・・・★

> how are aspecs queer?

aspecs are queer because "queer" does not only mean LGBT. queer theory is about far more than just LGBT people– though they are undeniably a large part of it– queerness is any subversion of the traditional cisheteronormative standard. this includes things that cishets may take part in/identify with, because you do not have to be LGBT to subvert those standards. cishets who are gender-nonconforming are queer, for example. a good rule of thumb is that if you have to explain what you whole deal is to cishets, you're queer. queer does mean strange, after all.

traditional cisheteronormative conceptions of attraction, gender, and relationships do not account for aspecs. it is expected that everyone will one day form a traditional partnership with one other person, and that relationship will include sex (even if only for procreation, under some dogmas). virginity past a certain age is seen as a point of shame and something indicative of a larger problem in someone– in men, a red flag even. people past 30 without a relationship are pitied. our economic structure is build for couples and families– it's near impossible for someone to live comfortably alone. romance, friendship, and love are placed on a pedestal, treated as the meaning of life, the best thing anyone could ever experience. "love is the point of everything," as many posts on this site like to claim. people who reject these ideas are undeniably queer.

> i can get behind aros and aces, but the whole "aplatonic" thing feels like a stretch to me. how is not having friends queer? "platonic attraction" isn't even real.

aplatonicism is more than just "not having friends," and many apls have friends anyway, much in the same way that aros can date and aces can have sex. someone who does not have friends is not inherently aplatonic, they only are if they identify that little-to-no platonic attraction in themselves and choose to label themselves that way (just like how virgins aren't inherently asexual). still, apls who don't have friends exist, and they are all queer. what is a greater subversion of traditional cisheteronormative relationship structures than an outright rejection of what's seen as the most basic, fundamental relationship our culture has to offer?

you may not feel that platonic attraction is a distinct phenomenon in your own experience, and that's fine! ultimately, a lot of aspec terms exist for the utility and comfort of aspecs themselves. the SAM isn't for everyone, and platonic attraction isn't for everyone either. you do not have the authority to tell people what their own experiences are, nor should you care.

> i think it's sad that you're limiting yourself with these labels. you'll find someone one day!

for the broad majority of aspecs, our identities are not self-disciplinary, nor are they necessarily permanent. all queer people are capable of misunderstanding their identity or having a fluid identity– it is not a problem unique to being aspec. that being said, a lot of us may always be aspec and completely happy with it. being aspec is not a tragedy. the only thing i don't like about being aromantic is the judgement i receive from other people about it. non-partnering aspecs are not "missing out" on anything, because we don't even want the things we're rejecting in the first place. many of us are romance/sex/plato repulsed and are far more happy engaging with the world and with other people in different ways, because there is so, so much more to life than relationships, and it's wrong to presume that relationships are universally fit for everybody. telling an aspec that they'll find "the right person" one day is no different from telling a lesbian she'll find "the right man" one day. there is no "right person" for an aspec just as there's no "right man" for a lesbian. a lesbian is not "missing out" on a heterosexual relationship just because it's culturally perceived as superior and more fulfilling.

[disclaimer before anyone tries to do a "gotcha," i'm talking about a lesbian who is fully not attracted to men in any way. it's not like homophobes know the intricacies of gender identity and nonconformity as it pertains to homosexuality anyways.]

lastly, i wanna give a special shout out to the loveless aros and the relationship anarchists.

loveless aros are those who either feel little-to-no love as they understand it, or they are someone who supports the de-centering of love. they're worthy of a whole post of their own, but in summary: the loveless experience is all about finding joy in yourself and the countless things our world has to offer that are not dependent on the vague idea of love.

relationship anarchy is another concept worthy of its own post, but in essence it's an ideology aimed at abolishing the standard hierarchy of relationships (in the USA, depending on who you ask, its typically friendship < family < romantic partnership or friendship < romantic partnership < family) and allowing everyone the autonomy to define their relationships for themselves.

if i made any mistakes, let me know! and of course i'm willing to answer any questions anyone may have. :-3 thanks for reading my long ass post!

2K notes · View notes

aroallo-corvid · 4 days

Text

Aroallo is not an "adult" sexuality

[plain text: Aroallo is not an "adult" sexuality]

I am aromantic and allosexual. I am also (as of writing this) a minor. TLDR at the end because I rambled on a bit.

There's a view in society that sexuality and sex are topics that are entirely irrelevant to children and should not be discussed around/with children because it is inappropriate/predatory. And to an extent, there is a point to that, and any discussions of sex and sexuality should be age-appropriate (e.g. an eleven year old would not receive the same sex ed as a sixteen year old because there is a vast difference in experience)

However, thinking like this leads to teenagers not being given proper sex education because they are "too young", which is wildly ignorant of the fact that a decent proportion of teenagers older than sixteen are sexually active. I live in the UK where the age of consent is 16, and I know plenty of people who were in relationships aged 14/15 were having sex. (Whether they weer mature enough to is another matter, but it's important to acknowledge that it does happen so there is no point ignoring this).

This rhetoric also leads to the belief that teens (and younger kids) shouldn't be coming out as gay/lesbian/bisexual/asexual/aromantic/etc. because they are too young to be thinking about sexuality and sexual attractiveness, which just.... isn't true. Many young people have crushes, and as the majority of people are allosexual, this does often involve sexual attraction as people mature through puberty.

Within the queer community, people have said that it is perfectly fine and normal and common for teenagers to come out as gay, lesbian, bisexual, asexual - Because if a teen can be straight, they can also be queer. These arguments are all set out beautifully and the points well made.

Yet.

Some people exclude aroallo people from that. They say that teens can be asexual, because they can know they aren't experience sexual attraction like their peers, and teens can be aromantic as well as asexual because they can realise they also aren't experiencing romantic attraction. But when a teenager says they are on the aromantic spectrum but still allosexual, often the same people who defend teens' rights to be (for example) bisexual turn around and say "you're too young for that".

Why?

Honestly, it comes down to sex-negative views that sex is inherently impure/disgusting, and of course children are the perfect example of purity and innocence, so they shouldn't be thinking about such "dirty" topics.

Of course a teenager can be asexual, that distances them from icky gross sex & means they would likely to be only engaging in chaste, pure, wonderful romance. Of course a teenager can be aroace, that makes them little cinnamon infantile babies, safe from all sexuality. (/sarcasm) (Also completely ignores the existence of sex-favourable aces and aroaces)

It comes off as very hypocritical though, because a teenager identifying as bisexual but not aromantic (so biromantic, but that distinction isn't typically made) is seen as acceptable, when they are expressing the same sexual desires as a teenager who is bisexual and aromantic. The only difference is that the first teenagers' sexuality is seen to be "balanced out" by the presence of nice wholesome romance.

tldr: if teenagers can identify as bisexual/gay/lesbian/pansexual/etc. whilst being alloromantic, it is hypocritical to say a teenager cannot identify as one of the above sexualities whilst being aromantic, because romance is not inherently more pure than sex and sex is not inherently impure.

#aroallo #alloaro #aromantic #aro #alloarophobia #aroallophobia #lmk if any other tags need to be put on here??#also apologies if the wording comes off strange i'm not used to writing big official posts like this and im autistic #i think the message still comes across pretty clearly??#crow cawing

151 notes · View notes

friend-of-a-cat · 2 months

Text

So... I'm doing research for a piece of creative non-fiction (a personal essay) I'm writing for one of my uni assignments about the fact that I'm asexual and demiromantic and think that we, as a wider society, have gotten the concepts of love and attraction all wrong, and I've been researching more into the split attraction model because, well, I see it as something that's important and relevant, and this came up in my Google search:

The initial red flag of this article is the fact that it's on BetterHelp. I didn't see this at first, and did a double take.

Anyway, the first thing I would like to ask is: what are these 'cons'? As far as I'm concerned, there are none. I understand that, for many people, romantic and sexual attraction are intrinsically linked, but, for many, they're not, and the split attraction model existing doesn't harm the former - it helps the latter. The latter includes people who are on the asexual and/or aromantic spectrums, as well as people who are, for example, heteromantic and bisexual, panromantic and homosexual, biromantic and heterosexual, etc. - basically anyone whose experiences differ between their romantic and sexual attraction.

I do find it a bit annoying that, when many people talk about both of these kinds of attraction, they lump them into one 'label', which is mostly [something]sexual (e.g. heterosexual, homosexual, etc.). But, for them, the two are linked, so referring to themselves as [something]sexual to cover both seems fine and dandy. Which... it is. However, I find it wild that people don't realise that, despite the fact that the two may seem linked to them, they are actually two different experiences. People who are both alloromantic and allosexual should be able to see this, right? They can think someone is sexually attractive yet not be romantically attracted to or want to date them. That is a thing that can happen.

Anyway, I decided to read through the article. It isn't bad, per se - much of the information is useful, and it seemed to be quite positive. Until I got to the 'cons':

Now, I'm not really into the discourse surrounding the split attraction model - in fact, I didn't realise there was discourse surrounding it. This is because I tend to, either accidently or on purpose, avoid discourse in general. But... 'oversexualisation'? In what context? If anything, not using the split attraction model would be considered 'oversexualisation' (even though I don't think that that is, either - I honestly don't know why this word has been brought up here) due to the fact that many people focus on sexual attraction over any kind of attraction and use it to cover romantic attraction, too, when they talk about it. I genuinely have no idea what they are referring to here.

In regard to the second point: what? Attraction is complex. That's the whole thing. The split attraction model makes it less complex for many people. It allows people to figure out who they are and have the terminology to be able to voice it. Attraction is a spectrum and so is gender. Of course both of them are going to be complex. Society made both of them rigid in the first place, so breaking out of those rigidities is going to be confusing for everyone. The split attraction model helps people understand themselves, and I would like to think it helps them understand others. Everyone benefits.

I don't know if I can speak much on the third point, as I'm not familiar with the discourse, as I previously mentioned, and don't really know what it entails. Though, in saying this... what do they mean? When has asexuality - or aromanticism, for that matter - ever been prioritised over other queer identities? There's a severe lack of discussion and education surrounding both of them. That's just a fact. People who are asexual and/or aromantic are oftentimes even shunned by the wider queer community they are a part of. I don't really have much more to add on this point because I'm so confused by it. By the way, this article barely talks about aromanticism, despite the fact that it's an important part of this model, too.

The last point is just a rehash of the second point. If I was told about any of this stuff growing up, I would have realised I was ace and demiromantic from the start. Instead, I realised I was ace a few years ago after watching Jaiden Animations' video about the fact that she's aroace (I don't want to use the term 'coming out' here because, frankly, I hate it - I'll save that rant for another time). I only realised I was demiromantic in the past month after... realising that people getting romantic crushes on and/or falling in love with someone when they barely know them is actually a thing that happens and isn't fake. These two terms fit me best at the moment, and explain everything. If I had've known these terms as a teenager, that would have been great. The split attraction model helped me so much in breaking down myself and my identity, and offered me the foundation I needed to ask myself questions. Yeah, attraction and gender are confusing - I said it before, and I'll say it again. But why would you cast something so helpful aside? That will only hinder people - both those who are struggling with their own identity and those who are trying to understand the identities of others. Education surrounding the complexities and spectrums of attraction and gender are so important, and this model will help people teach other people about attraction.

I also read a bunch of hate comments, as one does whenever they go on Reddit or Twitter or literally any social media platform ever, regarding the split attraction model. This didn't surprise me. These specific people seem to hate this model because... well, I don't really know. They were mostly spewing aphobia. I don't think a single one had a constructive point. Also, most of the search results for 'split attraction model' on Google are actually critiques of it, or articles talking about critiques of it and being on the fence. Come on, people. Do better.

Anyway, the split attraction model is important. Education is important. Allowing people to figure out who they are and express it is important. This should all go without saying.

That is all.

#my ramblings #my writing #i want this out there somewhere so i'm actually tagging multiple things for once in my life #asexual #aromantic #aroace #ace #aro #lgbtqia+#split attraction #split attraction model #uhhhhhh #i don't know what else to tag #if you've read this far... hi #edited because some of the sentences didn't flow as well as i wanted them to lmao

179 notes · View notes

asexualpolls · 29 days

Text

#ace #ace polls #acespec #asexual #asexuality #lgbtq #queer #aspec

173 notes · View notes

samamakhalid · 1 year

Text

jon archivist sims: as an ace, I know a thing or two about allosexuals peddling conjecture and shouting over corrections. That's why this pride season I'm partnering with Ghost Hunt UK-

Jonnythan: as a sex neutral ace, I'm largely indifferent to things that other people argue they can't live without. That's why this pride season I'm partnering with the remains of Peter Lukas' soggy corpse-

Jarchivist Sarchivist: as a biromantic ace, I've had to explain my identity to people so put off by reality that they engineered confusing lexicons on the spot just to save face. That's why this pride season I'm partnering with the publication of my husband's new poetry collection-

Sims comma Jon: as a sex favorable asexual, I know what it's like to be judged by unfair standards that try to challenge my right to exist. That's why this pride season I'm partnering with the London Police Sectioned 31 officers-

Jon SimssmiS noJ: as an asexual, i know sometimes the wrong relationships can make sudden demands that feel alien and parasitic. That's why this pride season I'm partnering with The Beholding-

Jonananathan Sims: as a sex repulsed asexual, I'm no stranger to the struggles of communicating and upkeeping my boundaries once I've decided against certain relationships. That's why this pride I'm partnering with the host of What The Ghost-

#jonathan sims #the magnus archives #tma #jon sims #melanie king #tma melanie #Georgie Barker #martin blackwood #jonmartin #shout out to THE ace representation of all time #asexuality #my text post

624 notes · View notes

tumbler-polls · 7 months

Note

does your sexual orientation and romantic orientation differ?

options:

No (ex: homosexual and homoromantic, bisexual or biromantic, heterosexual and heteroromantic, asexual and aromantic etc.)

Yes, I'm alloromantic but ace-spec

Yes, I'm allosexual but aro-spec

Yes, I'm aro-spec and ace-spec but different on a different part of each spectrum.

Yes, I'm alloromantic and allosexual, but with a different orientation for each (ex: bisexual and homoromatic etc.)

Please reblog for a bigger sample size!

#tumblr polls #asexual #aromantic #lgbtqia #lesbian #gay #straight #tumbler polls

169 notes · View notes

42-clocks · 3 months

Text

💚 a zine on aromanticism 💚

^an informational zine on aromanticism I made for Aromantic Spectrum Awareness Week

feel free to share/print!

(pages and image IDs after the break)

Image ID 1: the front and back cover. The front cover reads, “informational zine — Aromantic: What Does That Mean? — by Peter Z.”

there are two simple arrow shapes between lines of the text pointing in opposite directions.

The middle of the page has a long stripe with the colors of the aromantic flag, which extends to the back cover. the back cover side lists what each of the colors represent: green — aromanticism; light green — the aromantic spectrum; white — platonic and aesthetic attraction; gray — gray-romanticism and demi-romanticism; black — the sexuality spectrum.

The back page reads, “more resources!

TAAAP.org

Aro Spec Week.com

gsrc.princeton.edu (SAM)

aromanticism.org (AUREA)

Elizabeth Brake (aromanticism)

Aggressively Aro Spec Tumblr

Aromantic Guide.com”

End text. Two gray silhouettes of lily flowers act as embellishment. End ID 1.

Image ID 2: pages 1 and 2 of the zine.

Page 1: “Aromantic — or just ‘aro’ for short — refers to someone who experiences little to no romantic attraction to anyone — or experiences it in a different way than others. Alloromantic is the opposite — one who does have romantic attraction.” The text is green and dark teal with light green boarders around the sections.

Page 2: small letters says “this might help to understand” and arrow points to the title “Split Attraction Model” — “a way of understanding attraction by separating it into types: sexual, romantic, platonic, alterous, aesthetic, etc.

“Sexual Orientations: bisexual, heterosexual, asexual. Romantic Orientations: biromantic, heteroromantic, aromantic. — sometimes they match, sometimes they don’t! Words like biromantic and heteroromantic commonly refer to both S. O. and R. O.” End ID 2.

Image ID 3: pages 3 and 4.

Page 3: titled “A-spec Community”. Below is a Venn diagram, the left circle labeled “aro”, the right circle “ace”, the overlap space “aro ace”, this is all within a larger circle labeled “a-spec”.

“Aromantic is not the same as Asexual (little to no Sexual Attraction to anyone at all). The identities and communities are related but distinct”

Page 4: titled “Myths” with dark teal flower silhouettes on either side. Myths include “hates all romance, childish “late bloomer”, not LGBTQ+, unemotional, wants to be alone, can’t be in a relationship, afraid of commitment, can’t also be gay/hetero/etc” End ID 3.

Image ID 4: pages 5 and 6.

Page 5: “Are you aro? some common experiences: made up crushes, flirting doesn’t make sense, hard to identify romantic feelings, dating isn’t a priority, don’t like romance heavy media, dating because you’re “supposed to”, rarely if ever “fall in love”, don’t have celebrity crushes. *these are not exclusive to aros though!”

Page 6: the top of the page has the shape of an umbrella, the text inside reads “the Aromantic umbrella”. The body has four microlabel examples;

“Gray-romantic — romantic attraction rarely or weakly.” Next to it is a small rectangular flag with 5 horizontal stripes: green, gray, white, gray, green.

“Demi-romantic — romantic attraction only after a bond has formed.” Rectangular flag with a wide white stripe, narrow green, and wide gray stripe, and a black triangle on the left side.

“Allo-aro — allosexual and aromantic, no romantic attraction, has sexual attraction.” Rectangular flag with even horizontal stripes: green, light green, white, yellow, dark yellow.

“Aro-ace — aromantic and asexual, no romantic or sexual attraction.” Rectangular flag with even stripes: orange, yellow, white, light blue, dark blue. End ID.

#zine #aromantic awareness week #image id #aro #aromantic #arospec #arospec awareness week #aromanticism #aromantic pride #informational zine #image id in caption #pretend that I posted this earlier in the week lol #free to use

64 notes · View notes

vampire-meta-knight · 1 year

Text

Aces are queer BECAUSE they’re ace

It never ceases to piss me off that some ace exclusionists will claim you aren’t queer because you’re ace, but you are queer because you’re also homoromantic/biromantic/[insert any non-hetero and non-aro romantic attraction here].

I’m a sapphic ace. I am grayromantic, but the part of me that does feel romantic attraction feels it towards women, so I do identify with being a lesbian. However, I am far more of an asexual than a lesbian. I have more in common with asexuals, I am more impacted by my asexuality, and overall, it’s just a larger part of my identity and always has been. I knew I was ace long before I knew I liked girls.

I don’t fit in with allo lesbians--not all the way. There’s still that barrier there. I like women romantically and aesthetically, but not sexually. I can’t relate to a lot of lesbian experiences because of my lack of attraction and my sex-aversity, so although I still feel comfortable calling myself a lesbian, it doesn’t always feel like home in the same way “asexual” does.

Because I can relate to ace experiences. I do feel what aces feel. I feel the frustration of not being able to understand what allosexuals and alloromantics feel. I feel the anger at being the only one in a room who’s grossed out by sex and gets made fun of and infantilized for it. I feel the irritation at not being understood by those around you, how they just don’t understand that you aren’t interested in dating, don’t want to have sex, don’t find people attractive. I feel the internal pain of questioning yourself over and over, of feelings changing and wondering if you’ve been wrong about yourself all along, or feeling like you can’t change because you fear it would just prove everyone else right--that it was a “phase” and you did just need to “grow up” or “meet the right person” or “try it once to see if you like it” and denying your own complexity and fluidity to fit in the narrow box of what society thinks asexual is, all so they can’t invalidate you. I feel the despair at feeling broken, at fearing you’re missing out on something wonderful, at wishing you were something you weren’t just so you could fit in with everyone else and finally know what’s so great about being allo.

I am queer because I am ace. I am queer because I am grayromantic. I am queer because I’m sapphic. I am queer because I don’t belong with the alloromantic straights. I am queer because they way I view romance and sexuality is different from the mainstream.

My identity is shaped by many parts. I am queer because of all of them together, not by only one on its own.

#asexual #asexual positivity #queer #ace experience #sapphic ace #asexual lesbian #fuck exclusionists #ace #homoromantic #grayromantic #my thoughts #mine

507 notes · View notes