Can aromantics date?

Some asexuals have sex, and in a similar way, do any aromantics date or have girlfriends/boyfriends/spouses/etc.? I sometimes wonder if I wouldn't mind dating someone just so I know I'd have a friend who is always around for me. After all, most romantic relationships are taken to include strong friendships, and if all I'm looking for in a relationship is friendship...should I really care if they also loved me in a romantic way? Of course finding someone who would want a relationship like that would probably be difficult, and I'm not exactly eager to put a lot of effort into something like that, but it does at least seem possible.

As I've said on another topic, I've been with my boyfriend for two years, of course aromantics can date. Although he wants a romantic/ sexual relationship and I want a friendly platonic relationship. It's extremely difficult... but we make it work.

LUVSUX wrote:

As I've said on another topic, I've been with my boyfriend for two years, of course aromantics can date. Although he wants a romantic/ sexual relationship and I want a friendly platonic relationship. It's extremely difficult... but we make it work.

What made you go into that? In another thread you said you wanted to spend time with him as a friend but why a romantic relationship? Also what compromises do you make? I can only think of an asexual/sexual relationship and though I suppose it's very similar I still cannot imagine it.

While its not something I'd ever do, I still think its not impossible.

What I have noticed however is that allot of people go 'if my girlfriend doesn't even want to hug me and kiss then I see no point at all !' so it must be a rare event to encounter someone who loves an aromantic and doesn't mind the platonic relationship. Not to mention that the aromantic isn't going to feel used/stalked/weirded out by this person. I would really not be able to handle it, but I'm not a people person heh.

I don't date and I'm not sure what really counts as dating. Therefore, I can't really see myself dating anyone.

Verp wrote:

I don't date and I'm not sure what really counts as dating. Therefore, I can't really see myself dating anyone.

I'm not sure what counts as dating either. But I don't like the whole idea of going on a date in order to decide if the other person is a potential partner or not. It seems to me that it's all about appearing one's best rather than being truly oneself. When my friends tell me about their dates, they're always so nervous before... what's the point? I'd rather go out with a friend, I know I'll feel comfortable and have a good time. They know me and they like me (if they didn't, they wouldn't be my friend) so I don't need to impress them, I can just be myself.

Really, all this romantic business seems so complicated and worry-inducing... Friendship seems easier and I can't see how a romantic relationship could be more rewarding or heart-warming than a friendship (spoken from the point of view of someone who likes having a few true friends and doesn't need more social contact than that).

I don't know what counts as dating either, and it might happen that a girl I was talking to thought it was a date, but what did happen was that what I did with a friend was dating, so I think intention plays a big role in determining what's dating.

I agree with Rainbow Amoeba, formal dating is the worst way to know a potential long-term mate, even assuming they'll act, since this way you'll find the best at pretending, so the greatest hypocrite. This makes sense in animal mating, but not for long-term coupling. We know many other environments to select mates for what they are instead of for how they pretend, so courtship might be relegated to flings. I think that not only friendship is more rewarding than dating as aromantic I am, but I also think that, for romantic people, friendship would be better than courtship for testing a potential mate.

I'd say aromantics can date/have a romantic relationship. Just because we don't experience romantic attraction doesn't mean we can't love someone as something other than a friend. The other person will have to be incredibly understanding though. I don't know many people who would accept a platonic romantic relationship (that sounds like a paradox, doesn't it? )

I don't feel attraction to either gender, but I do have a boyfriend. I never really wanted a romantic relationship, but I love him and I like it. I agree with Almagest, though

Almagest wrote:

I'd say aromantics can date/have a romantic relationship. Just because we don't experience romantic attraction doesn't mean we can't love someone as something other than a friend. The other person will have to be incredibly understanding though. I don't know many people who would accept a platonic romantic relationship (that sounds like a paradox, doesn't it? )

Just because you're aromantic and asexual doesn't mean your relationships have to be platonic.

If a sexual person is in a platonic relationship, that's a compromise for them. If an asexual is in a sexual relationship, that's compromise. It can go both ways. I was in a sexual relationship for 5 years with a sexual/romantic person. In the end, it didn't work because I am just not affectionate in a romantic way, and I just wanted a normal platonic friendship. I suppose it could work with some people, though.

I just hate the idea of formal dating. Even if I wanted a partner, I'd hate dating. It seems so formal and dumb to me, and just like it's not the best way to get to know a person the way they really are.

amyb wrote:

Almagest wrote:

I'd say aromantics can date/have a romantic relationship. Just because we don't experience romantic attraction doesn't mean we can't love someone as something other than a friend. The other person will have to be incredibly understanding though. I don't know many people who would accept a platonic romantic relationship (that sounds like a paradox, doesn't it? )

Just because you're aromantic and asexual doesn't mean your relationships have to be platonic.

This is true. I would just prefer a more platonic relationship. I don't mind cuddling, but anything beyond that is weird for me.

Quote :

If a sexual person is in a platonic relationship, that's a compromise for them. If an asexual is in a sexual relationship, that's compromise. It can go both ways. I was in a sexual relationship for 5 years with a sexual/romantic person. In the end, it didn't work because I am just not affectionate in a romantic way, and I just wanted a normal platonic friendship. I suppose it could work with some people, though.

I can fake affection quite well. But then the other person might be hurt if they found out I don't actually feel anything. (I know that being aromantic doesn't mean you lack feelings, but I'm an athymic aromantic.)

Quote :

I just hate the idea of formal dating. Even if I wanted a partner, I'd hate dating. It seems so formal and dumb to me, and just like it's not the best way to get to know a person the way they really are.

I know, I'd rather just hang out than go on a date to get to know someone. Plus, dates have certain expectations and connotations...

Almagest wrote:

I can fake affection quite well. But then the other person might be hurt if they found out I don't actually feel anything. (I know that being aromantic doesn't mean you lack feelings, but I'm an athymic aromantic.).

Yeah, that was it, too. If I did try to fake affection, I felt like a horrible fraud, and i just felt my ex deserved someone who actually shared the same feelings as he had for me. I didn't know I was aromantic at first, I just figured if I tried long enough, the feelings would come (I mean the romantic feelings. I had friendship-feelings for him, of course).

So yeah, I realized I was aromantic after a 5 year long distance relationship, and I was still wondering "Where are my romantic feelings?" I didn't have any romantic feelings, and I was sick of trying to fake it and be dishonest with him and with myself.

Kind of like when I was a kid and watching movies, I'd fast forward through the kissing and other romance parts. Everyone (myself included ) thought this was a "Ew boys are icky" stage that I would grow out of, this avoiding all hints of romance and stuff, but I didn't. I'm still bored by romantic parts of movies, and even a bit weirded out when I see stuff like jewelry commercials where the man is buying the woman diamonds and they're all staring into each other's eyes like they've just been lobotomized.

amyb wrote:

Almagest wrote:

I can fake affection quite well. But then the other person might be hurt if they found out I don't actually feel anything. (I know that being aromantic doesn't mean you lack feelings, but I'm an athymic aromantic.).

Yeah, that was it, too. If I did try to fake affection, I felt like a horrible fraud, and i just felt my ex deserved someone who actually shared the same feelings as he had for me. I didn't know I was aromantic at first, I just figured if I tried long enough, the feelings would come (I mean the romantic feelings. I had friendship-feelings for him, of course).

So yeah, I realized I was aromantic after a 5 year long distance relationship, and I was still wondering "Where are my romantic feelings?" I didn't have any romantic feelings, and I was sick of trying to fake it and be dishonest with him and with myself.

I tried the same technique in high school where I pretended to have crushes in the hope that they would become real and I'd finally understand what everyone else was talking about. But the feelings never came.

Quote :

Kind of like when I was a kid and watching movies, I'd fast forward through the kissing and other romance parts. Everyone (myself included ) thought this was a "Ew boys are icky" stage that I would grow out of, this avoiding all hints of romance and stuff, but I didn't. I'm still bored by romantic parts of movies, and even a bit weirded out when I see stuff like jewelry commercials where the man is buying the woman diamonds and they're all staring into each other's eyes like they've just been lobotomized.

I don't mind romance when it's well written. But most "romance" does seem to consist of staring at each other with that lobotomized look. And kissing just looks weird to me for the most part. I like romance stories where the two leads banter back and forth constantly. =P

Yeah, I don't hate ALL romance parts in all movies, but again, it's how they're written. Just like I can listen to songs about romance and I don't hate the lyrics if they are well-written. I just find that many aren't, and my reaction is "oh my god that's dumb."

Quote :

I tried the same technique in high school where I pretended to have crushes in the hope that they would become real and I'd finally understand what everyone else was talking about. But the feelings never came.

Yeah, in high school I just mistook appreciating people aesthetically for sexual attraction. Everyone else seemed to be experiencing sexual attraction, so I assumed what I felt must be the same. It took some time to realize how wrong I was. There would be guys who were nice people and good looking, and my friends assumed I was attracted to them, and I guess they talked me into thinking I was attracted to them.

It has been such a huge relief for me to learn the terms for asexuality and aromanticism and to know other people feel like that.

amyb wrote:

Yeah, in high school I just mistook appreciating people aesthetically for sexual attraction. Everyone else seemed to be experiencing sexual attraction, so I assumed what I felt must be the same.

According to traditional cultural standards, aesthetic attraction is even more appropriate for a person (so to say, more romantic, or more poetic, more human-like and less animal-like) than sexual one. I had the same experience. Why do you call this aromanticism?

amyb wrote:

Yeah, I don't hate ALL romance parts in all movies, but again, it's how they're written. Just like I can listen to songs about romance and I don't hate the lyrics if they are well-written. I just find that many aren't, and my reaction is "oh my god that's dumb."

The same thing about me. And what do you think is the main criterion for a well-written thing about romance? I suppose it is whether it describes aesthetic attraction. Your words helped me to understand that. Thanx! (Of course, too badly written pieces of text cannot depict anything at all, but there are some quite realistic pieces depicting lust which cannot be called first rate literature.)

Some pieces of good literature on romance don't describe pure aesthetic attraction, but CAN be used to describe it, as, e.g., "Lolita": an asexual adolescent can read it up to the end and never guess H.H. was not a highly egotistical asexual aesthete.

Yulia wrote:

Some pieces of good literature on romance don't describe pure aesthetic attraction, but CAN be used to describe it, as, e.g., "Lolita": an asexual adolescent can read it up to the end and never guess H.H. was not a highly egotistical asexual aesthete.

Not sure if we were reading the same Lolita.

Though I'm aware of I'm a rather sexual asexual. I can easily see how people wouldn't see the sexuality in his comments. I have, in my time, mistaken sexual cues as sexless and others.

I think things have gone over my head too but I in other places . I am blessed with very understanding considerate friends who view their private relationships as, well, private and not to be discussed with others.
Lets face it we are all different, so many different likes. I hate that TV makes it seem as if everyone likes open perverted sex making us all question ourselves . Why should anyone feel weird anymore and people still love others no matter what they are into. I used to feel like I had to say good buy when my relationships got too close, now I know they still care and if they really love me they will, 'hang in there'. Even if they move on I know they will be involved in something I do not want.