Romance…a word that’s plagued society since the dawn of time. While not all romances have been fairytale-perfect, the general, healthy experience has often been described as something wonderful—cherishable, if it wasn’t meant to be. Unfortunately, society has twisted the beautiful world of romance into something much more amatonormative (the belief that a long-term romantic relationship is the ultimate goal in life), which consequently damaged the way we see the world around us in the process.
Damage Caused by Amatonormativity
Children, who are the prime recipients of amatonormativity, tend to be exposed to romance in 3 different ways: on a television screen, in a book, or through a child-parent conversation. In retrospect, most introductions to romance aren’t inherently harmful because of the target audience being children. However, many parents have a tendency to say things such as, “This will be you someday,” when approaching the subject, which does, in fact, leave an effect on their kids.
Those effects, specifically, are the simple question: “When?”
The question of when is asked because the topic of romance was spoken in a way that implies it is something inevitable, when is asked because, as children grow older, the majority develop crushes—which are arguably not even romantic—and leave the outsiders feeling as if they’re late bloomers even though it’s not a mandatory experience. When is especially asked as children develop into teenagers and worry there’s something wrong with them for falling behind. And eventually, as that teenager grows into an adult, they’re left believing they missed out on something important.
For teenagers in the midst of the pressure, there’s commonly an uncomfortable, heteronormative conversation with friends and family surrounding their absent love life. Examples of this include invasive questions, unnecessary recommendations for partners, and many condescending comments. All these factors make teenagers feel worse than they already do, even if it’s not the source’s intention—though it often is. While the burden feels much worse on someone with a homosexual orientation, there seems to be a lack of conversation about those who have little interest in romance and more.
The Importance of Discussing Aromanticism and Asexuality
The term Aromantic is generally defined as experiencing little to no romantic attraction, with Asexuality having a similar definition, only with a different type of attraction. Both labels can also be categorized as large spectrums hiding even more specific identities under their umbrellas. A discussion about these two labels is heavily important because there are a lot of people in the world who don’t know they’re either one of these identities and are forcing themselves to pursue something they don’t want.
If they were educated on these topics, as well as the bigger conversation about romance not being a necessary experience for a successful life, then they’d finally find that freedom they’ve been searching for their whole lives. A discussion about Aromanticism and Asexuality should also be held for individuals who aren’t either of these identities so they can understand that not everyone is wired like them, but should still be treated as ordinary people. Modern educational discussions put a stop to old, misguided beliefs after all.
And, as controversial as the topic may seem, even children should be able to learn about these preferences. Adults aren’t obligated to be specific about either label in the same way they don’t have to be specific about homosexuality; the point is to have an appropriate conversation about these concepts in order to normalize them because that’s what they are: normal. Children can figure out the specifics later, but as of the present, all they need to know is that certain points regarding romance aren’t a guarantee and that it’s completely okay.
If older Aromantics and Asexuals who did not already know about amatonormativity had discovered their labels sooner, it could have prevented them from going through their rough self-identity crisis or internalized phobias. These internal conflicts are grave, and anyone who has gone through them can attest to that, so we must prevent them from continuing to happen because those internal conflicts don’t always end well.
Conclusion
Aside from the overall importance of knowing about Aromanticism and Asexuality, it is also good to know that they’re two separate identities, and that people can choose to identify as one without the other, or even both. As a reminder, they’re spectrums, so whichever label a person decides on is a result of their own personal experience. Rather than having a set definition, it’s better to address Aromantic and Asexual from an angle that is open to possibility but not fixed. The farthest range on either spectrum is repulsion, but even that can be bent!
Additionally, Aromantic and Asexual individuals aren’t robots and can participate in the same things as those who aren’t, or, they can engage in even more complex bonds, such as one that’s Queerplatonic: a committed relationship that defies traditional dynamics and is not inherently romantic in nature. However, if they simply decide not to indulge in romance at all or create boundaries regarding it, then that choice should be respected. As a final note, Aromantics and Asexuals can be other orientations alongside their identities, and it does not make them any less queer.
All in all, even though our feelings and perspectives are different to an extent, we are still as human as anyone else.
