Something I still don’t get: in the oppression debates and other times people try to divide us by orientation, why do aromantics always get lumped in with heteroromantics (often as an afterthought)?

it like…doesn’t make any sense. We’re not the same thing, people. And if you can’t even recognize that it certainly doesn’t make me want to listen to your arguments. 

Or is the idea that someone could have neither sexual nor romantic attraction just break people’s brains too much?

I feel like we sometimes get shoved aside because we mess up peoples assumptions that asexuals are just watered down versions of other sexual orientations, and not really something of their own. (I.e. well, if you’re a heteroromantic you’re really just straight. Or if you’re a homoromantic ace, you’re really just gay.) But the existence of aromantics then comes along and challenges their idea that everyone is really just straight, gay, or maybe bi, no exceptions. And so we get swept aside into the nearest category that isn’t them just so they don’t have to think too hard. 

58 Notes/ Hide

  1. calmandcalculating reblogged this from ace-muslim
  2. runwhenisayrunfightwhenisayfight reblogged this from nextstepcake and added:
    I feel like aromantics perhaps get classed as “less queer” than other romantic orientations because, while they don’t...
  3. ghostferry reblogged this from harmonioussanctity
  4. olanthanide reblogged this from writingfromfactorx and added:
    1) Trimered. 2) These days I tend to think of this as a 3D plot. x-axis with same-sex attraction at one end, hetero at...
  5. greenchestnuts reblogged this from captainjerkway and added:
    I agree with odannygirl7, both in what they’ve observed, and in the point that it’s not about whether or not aromantic...
  6. odannygirl7 reblogged this from captainjerkway and added:
    I think part of the issue with respecting the regular queer boundaries is that even within the queer community the...
  7. cameoappearance reblogged this from writingfromfactorx and added:
    arglebargle the premise of the header makes me want to spit acid. IT MAKES NO SENSE. The bit about internalised...
  8. captainjerkway reblogged this from odannygirl7 and added:
    Re: identifying as queer, it was my mistake to assume the regular boundaries would be respected. It was my intention to...
  9. emmaandthatisall reblogged this from equalseleventhirds
  10. equalseleventhirds reblogged this from greenchestnuts
  11. minato-rise-up reblogged this from greenchestnuts
  12. writingfromfactorx reblogged this from greenchestnuts and added:
    I am reblogging partly out of sheer joy for the term “trimered” and partly to agree with basically everything everyone...
  13. hotpotatohobbies reblogged this from greenchestnuts and added:
    Isn’t it also one of those “passing” things? Like, it feels like some people in general don’t like the slightest nuance...
  14. harmonioussanctity reblogged this from nextstepcake and added:
    Are you kidding me? You have to be. No really, you have got to be acting this deliberately obtuse to not get why this...
  15. ace-muslim reblogged this from kingedmundsroyalmurder and added:
    Yep.
  16. kingedmundsroyalmurder reblogged this from ace-muslim and added:
    Possibly also it’s also because people who do this kind of thing tend to be really wedded to the idea of separating us...
  17. adecentworld reblogged this from nextstepcake and added:
    Agreed. I always see it as a way to ignore self-identified sexual orientations and instead move to the “next” thing,...
  18. cupcakearrow reblogged this from nextstepcake and added:
    probably never will understand...lumping asexual people hetrom and/or heterosexual people.
  19. nextstepcake posted this