Ah, February. The unruly arm-pit of winter (if you’re in the Northern Hemisphere anyway), shortest month of the year, Aquarius/Pisces party season (if by “party” you mean sitting at home reading a book or yelling across the internet), Black History Month…and the onslaught of romance-related commercials because of Valentine’s Day.
Romance, and the concept of Love in general were always…thorny topics for me. Growing up, I (and it’s reasonable to assume a lot of other people) was swamped by ideas of what Love was supposed to be, how it was supposed to feel and what the most important forms of “true” love were. Ideas such as unconditional love, familial love, obligations to and from that love, romantic love and pursuing of it…never meshed with the flaming, often ugly, hot mess relationships that actually existed in my life. So I was left with a lot of questions about the nature of this odd thing called Love. How is it defined? Why is one act called love and another isn’t? Is Love ultimately helpful or something harmful? Is it something inevitable for everyone or is there some “opt-out” button that little child me could smash? Should parents be doing a “love” talk along with a “sex” talk with their kids? (I got neither) So, people who get to know me long enough will, at some point, get asked what they think Love is, because, what even is the point of having friends if not to get various view points for research purposes?
I think I was eight or so when I declared that I would never get married. Some 32 years later, I’m still single, don’t date and have never had a romantic relationship. And, to be perfectly honest, it feels like I’ve dodged a bullet. People get perplexed about such a thing though; I’ve had plenty of people get into the “there’s someone out there for everyone”, “you’ll feel different when you’re older”, “that’s not what love really is, it’s *insert totally subjective ideas here*”, “you only feel that way because your parents divorced/ you were abused/ you’re disabled/ you’re fat/ etc.”, “so, what, you’re just going to die alone?”, “oh that’s so sad, you must be so ever so lonely and alone” and on and on and on (think of the people who have kids, are obviously unhappy raising kids, yet are the first ones to tell you that you’re selfish for not wanting kids yourself and you’ll get the gist). I get why people say stuff like that; from the literal time we’re born the idea that a heterosexual, monogamous, committed, legally-sanctioned, life-long relationship is the pinnacle of human worth and happiness and a lot of things in American culture are built around supporting and promoting that idea, and sneakily, if not blatantly, discouraging or outright vilifying any alternatives. It’s got a term too, Amatonormativity, coined by author Elizabeth Brake. From every love song, every Disney movie (or almost any movie) from every ad stating that driving this car, losing this weight, getting this nip or tuck, wearing this perfume you’ll attract any number of wonderful alluring people to you, who will adore you and lavish you with love (even if it’s a shallow representation of it), we’re positively cocooned in a web of desirability, power plays, image, worth…and all in the name of being lovable. And making money, obviously. Yay, capitalism.
Warning: Totally cynical tangent about Amatonormativity and dramatic, conspiracy-theory levels of speculation about love. Yes, it’s a bit unhinged, poorly researched and probably depressing if you think about it. Feel free to skip to the next section.
And really, there’s so many other ways that this plays out that also tie in patriarchal ideas, familial abuse, sexism and probably a million other societal issues, but going into any number of them in any depth would require more time and brainpower (and probably qualify as a PhD level dissertation) then I’ve got to give, so I’m not going to veer off onto too many tangents. That said, if you have trouble linking “romantic relationships are the be-all, end-all of human experiences” to something like the patriarchy and all it’s bullshit, one of the things I always hear about What Love Is, is that it’s a feeling, a drive to care, nurture and protect. Now, the people who are allowed in society to openly express that feeling at all, are often also limited to expressing it in very narrow and often rigidly defined ways, often with supporting narratives that feelings are also often obligations and….well, like I said, I think a lot these ideas tie together on a much bigger societal scale, but I’m not a researcher or psychologist or sociologist, so feel free to take it all with small salt mine.
“But, that’s not real love! Love doesn’t mean hurting or controlling anyone!” Yes, true. BUT, if you accept the idea of Love (especially romantic love, but really any kind of love), being a particular feeling, then there really isn’t any 100% foolproof way to know what a person feels. Can they be feeling “love” and still act in unquestionably horrendous ways due to any number of reasons? I think so. Does that excuse harmful acts? Obviously fucking not. But unless you’re psychic, you can’t assume someone else’s feelings or if those feelings are identical from person to person.
All this, poorly-reasoned and poorly-expressed mess is just to say Love is messy topic that I don’t get, and am admittedly incredibly cynical about it just in general. That said, most of my close friends are staunch romantics and my brother just got engaged and watching his usually snarky and stoic self, absolutely fawn over his fiancee has been abso-fucking-lutely adorable. It’s like watching puppies cuddle, it’s that endearing.
I didn’t grow up with the range of identity terms available now and it’s been both awe-inspiring and concerning to watch to watch this section of language evolve in real time. While I love that there’s more nuanced and inclusive language for people’s identities and orientations, again we run into the whole “labels generally mean different things to different people because people don’t all have the exact same experiences, etc”, so I’ve also seen a lot of gate-keeping and hair-splitting about who really and “rightly” can claim or use which terms, which….well I can’t remember a time where that kind of attitude ever ended well, but I’m not a historian.
There is one label that I’ve liked and actually found useful for describing my own…experience? Thinking? Wiring? toward romance is aromantic (not to be confused with aromatic, which I also hope to be). Nutshell definition: having little or no romantic feeling toward others : experiencing little or no romantic desire or attraction.
I use this label because I myself have never felt the urge to couple up, find my soulmate, plan a wedding, or even date. I’ve never been big on conventional romance in general. And cue back up to paragraph three, it really confuses people. And considering that what’s considered “romantic behavior” varies wildly from person to person (at least to all the people I’ve asked the answers have been wildly different – if I had the resources what a study this would make), I can also get why it’s a hard thing for people to pin down. Is holding hands romantic? Is going to a cafe with someone friendly or romantic behavior? If you really like being around a certain person or persons…well isn’t that the same as a crush? If everybody has different answers to those questions, fine. But it’s when those same people assume that their answers are universal answers that everyone has, or should have…well that’s when things get messy, doesn’t it?
Anyway if you want more resources on aromanticism look for * at the end of the post
I’m in my 40’s now, which so far, has been a wild ride for my brain. While I know I’m constantly in a process of changing and growing and refining, it still felt like I was suddenly different, in new ways that I’m still learning to navigate.
No complaints though. As long as it’s not my bills, housing or finances, I usually like change.
One thing I’ve found though is the less labels I use express myself, the more descriptive I’m forced to be and I find that a more clear way of talking about my feelings and my connections instead of falling back on labels that, when broken down, don’t describe the same thing from person to person. While I still consider myself aromantic, it’s not a word I use much since the term itself requires more explanation and teaching, then me just saying “Nah, I’m not really into coupling up.” I only really use it when in LGBTQIA+ spaces where a TED talk isn’t required.
In other areas, I’ve found more interesting conversations are had when the labels are dropped. While a label (like “romantic”) might mean the same thing from person to person in a general and vague sense, every one has different experiences and are impacted by those experiences in different ways, and that makes them relate to the same labels in different ways and with different understandings. Not helpful when I’m trying to make my own experiences understandable, only to have them kicked into a label like trash into a bin and I’m like “is that what you think that word means?!” because how I relate to it seems vastly different.
It’s always the assumptions that get us in the end- literally and figuratively.
Anyway, I don’t know how to end what feels like the longest post I’ve ever written in my life (seriously this is version 3 on the topic and I’ve been tweaking and adding to it for over a month), so I’ll just post it as is. Questions are welcome since I know I tend to jump from idea to idea without a ton of explanation.
*Resources and more info:
What Is Aromantic And What Does It Mean For Relationships?
What It Means To Be ‘Aromantic,’ According To Aromantic People