The Anecdotes Of An AroAce

Also, more often than you might think, they’re not actually promoting bigotry so much as “didn’t consider all the implications of something” or just used words that were polite then but considered offensive now.

"what do crushes feel like"

"how to tell if you like someone"

"am i in love"

"do i want to date them"

"do i have a crush"

"am i gay" quiz results: "you're pan! you're attracted to personality rather than body! you feel the same about every gender!"

"is this arousal"

"how to tell if you're aroused"

"am i horny"

"how to tell if you're attracted to someone"

"what does sexual attraction feel like"

"how to tell if someone is attracted to you"

"how to tell if you feel romantic feelings"

"how to tell if you feel sexual feelings"

"do i feel romantic feelings"

"do i feel sexual feelings"

....."define asexual"

"Butterflies in your tummy" I get that every time I talk to anyone because I'm an anxious wreck

"Ohh you get all blushy" I blush whenever I remember literally any compliment from anyone. I blush when someone says I blink robotically. I blush when I remember that time my driving instructor said I went through a stop sign correctly.

"You get nervous when thinking about them" I'm always nervous.

Whether you're a kid in school with classmates who won't take "no one" as an answer to who you have a crush on or an adult whose coworkers have picked up on the fact that you've never mentioned a romantic partner; after enough time, a lack or insufficient amount of romantic interest will raise the antennae of friends, family, coworkers, etc... They will notice and they will speculate and they will ask.

heteronormativity as it currently exists is built on amatonormativity, and heteronormativity requires a gender binary. there is no space for people other than "men" and "women" in a heteronormative society. Furthermore, there is no room for ambiguity in how people are "men" or "women." Womanhood in particular is strongly built around the idea of desiring romantic relationships with men; not being in a relationship (particularly when older) is seen as a failure. Furthermore, not being in a relationship with a man is seen as being a "failed woman." Lesbian and aspec communities have long talked about the way that they are denied womanhood by virtue of not being romantically attracted to men (my personal experience is that men's experience with romance is less policed than women's experience with romance; however, I'm sure there are also cases of gay men being seen as failed men for not being romantically attracted to women). The old maid or unmarried crazy cat lady archetypes are clear demonstrations of this--women are disproportionately judged for being single as older adults. Even in feminist circles, there is the stereotype of the unmarried "wine aunt." While not as explicitly derogatory towards women, and indeed sometimes celebratory, this still enforces a gender divide, since there is no corresponding "wine uncle" stereotype.

I'm going to talk generally about aromanticism!!

To:

Dear void,

Philosophy is full of amatonormative bullshit. It promotes and advocates for amatonormative bullshit. There is not a single article in the philosophical discussion of relationships and love that does not succumb to amatonormative bullshit. The very term 'amatonormativity' was coined by philosopher Elizabeth Brake back in 2012. So why is it the case that 12 years later, finding philosophical engagement with amatonormativity is akin to finding a needle in a haystack? Aromantic analysis and theory was needed in the discipline 10 years ago. It is a moral and epistemological necessity to develop and include aromantic analysis and theory within philosophy. Aromanticism has been overlooked, dismissed and invalidated by philosophy for too long. The discipline needs aromanticism now, and I'll be damned if I sit back and allow this ignorance to continue.

Philosophy? Do. Better.

Yours wrathfully,