#mod charon

isnt another aspect of aro that romantic attraction (if there is) is seperate from sexual attraction? /genq /nfta

so... there's been discussion about how non-SAM isn't a perfect term, because it technically has the implication you're seeing. but no other term really gained popularity, and so non-SAM aro has stuck.

essentially, while romantic and sexual attraction are different, they can be inherently tied together for some folks, and many non-SAM aros use the term to mean that. for our system, sexual attraction cannot be untied from the lack of romantic attraction. no matter what else is going on, it's aromantic, and that, culturally, is very different than what many folks mean when they talk about sexuality.

this could be expressed via other terms that have come around - archaro (ie, overarchingly aro identity), primearo (primarily aro identity), or some even smaller proposals I recall less. i honestly prefer "just aromantic", but I folks refuse to listen to that as anything but some new way of saying aroace, and emphasize their assumption of asexuality. all that said, non-SAM aromanticism is a community that I belonged to before those ever came around, and neither other term really feels like a totally accurate description either.

and - truth be told, it's not like most straight people use the SAM when calling themselves heterosexual either. in their case, they probably mean heteroromantic and heterosexual, but they come from the opposing experience of the normal. whereas non-SAM aro folks are just... inherently not the norm, either in the broader culture, or in the a-spec communities. we're hard to understand, and so we're easier to just... ignore, set aside for later, and worse - not try to accept.

my guy, you’ve barely reached double digits, you should be like. watching cartoons and eating sugary cereal, not seriously thinking about dating