Asexuality and Aromanticism

[peroxidepirate]

In my recent wanderings across the internets, I came across something that made me realize I've never given much thought to asexuality. And I realized, if I want my straight friends to be mindful of the direction of their sexuality (and I do), it's only fair that I am mindful of the presence of mine.

So I went wandering some more, reading and researching and learning. I didn't save links, unfortunately -- it was late and I passed through a lot of blogs and posts and essays and organizations. But... it was really interesting, and I'm glad I'm thinking on it.

The surprising part is how much of what I encountered resonates with me on a personal level. I didn't expect that.

It makes a certain amount of sense, though. The asexual movement, such as it is, is interested in separating emotional intimacy, love, affection, romance and sex. I get behind that, entirely. I've built my life on a foundation of not equating all these things; of not looking for or expecting to find all these things with the same person; of not needing all of these things to be happy or complete. So that bit of empathy is an unexpected shiny. 

I'm so not asexual, however. As I understand it, that's a sexual orientation (even if defined by a general absence of sexuality) and though it may evolve over time, it's not something you deliberately choose; it's something that just is. In my case, it isn't.

But another term that shows up when you search for "asexuality" is "aromantic." That's fuzzier, since romance is a fuzzy concept -- it's culturally constructed; something that didn't exist at all through most of human history. It's something we generally think should line up with sexuality, but not necessarily something that does. Is aromanticism something that just is, or something you deliberately choose? I don't know. From my reading, it sounds like it's a fundamental identity thing for a lot of people. But some of them also tried to do the "normal" romantic relationship thing for a while, and then chose to stop trying because it didn't work.

And I am -- or for a long time, at least, I was -- in that camp. I had romantic relationships when I was young, but mostly I felt like they were getting in the way of the important things. So eventually I stopped trying. I went through several years in my mid-to-late twenties when I didn't consider romance a possibility for myself. The sexual urges were still there, but they weren't connected to anything that seemed real. The prospect of having a romantic relationship seemed about as real as the prospect of becoming a vampire slayer or developing a magical gift. But for a good stretch of time, I didn't miss it. I wasn't looking, wasn't waiting, didn't want it. If you had asked me my sexual orientation at that point, I would have said bisexual -- because that's how I identified before that point -- but I would have quickly amended my answer with, "But it doesn't matter because I'm not interested in relationships." The lack of interest in romantic relationships was at least as much a part of my identity as my sexual orientation.

Was I repressing something I wanted all along? I don't think so. At a certain point I did some repressing, yes. Maybe for a lot of the past two years, up until I very recently faced up to the fact that yes, I want to be dating. But I arrived at the decision not to date -- not to be open to romance -- because romance had proven to be very much not what I wanted or needed.

Now it is something I want. Does that invalidate the half a decade I spent being aromantic? I don't know. Does identifying as lesbian now invalidate the half a decade before that, which I spent overtly -- and often very vocally -- identifying as bisexual? I don't know that, either. I don't talk about either situation very much, publicly... in part because I don't want to perpetuate the stereotype that either one is "just a phase." It's not. It's a totally valid lifestyle, a totally valid identity. For me, it was transitory. For me. Maybe this -- how I think of myself now -- is transitory, too: I don't know yet. But the problem with "just a phase" isn't that it's changeable; it's that we're encouraged to "get over" phases. I find that offensive and completely unnecessary. So I guess I just answered my initial questions: no, my earlier ways of defining myself are not invalidated by how I define myself now. I've changed. Neither identity is better or worse than another.


Anyway, I'm now (surprise, surprise) feeling an urge to explore this in fic. Therefore, f-list, I need your input! I've been omni-shipping so long, I'm having trouble thinking of characters I could write as asexual or aromantic. Help?

Comments

[q-sama.livejournal.com]

This may be weird, but one character I've almost always seen as asexual is Prince Roald. I see him marrying and conceiving children because it's his duty, but very much like imagining a homosexual person doing the same. I see him getting along with Shinko, even acknowledging her beauty, but not being moved by her, not really finding romance with her or anyone else.

[peroxidepirate.livejournal.com]

You know, I can see that. Interesting!

There's that mention near the beginning of LK about Roald and Neal both moping over their absent fiancees, being "in love with the women they were to marry." But that's very easy to fan-wank into "fallible narrator sees what she expects to see," and it's perfectly reasonable for Prince Roald to be all kinds of miserable and stressed out by his country being at war.

[stormwreath.livejournal.com]

Andrew Wells? He's generally assumed by fandom to be gay but repressed, but I think asexuality would fit him just as well.

The Doctor is also commonly assumed to be asexual, to the extent that some fans get infuriated if there's the hint of him being paired with someone else. ;-)

[q-sama.livejournal.com]

that's very easy to fan-wank into "fallible narrator sees what she expects to see," and it's perfectly reasonable for Prince Roald to be all kinds of miserable and stressed out by his country being at war.

My sentiments exactly. Of course, now I'm over-analyzing what makes me think of Roald rather than, say, Merric. We never see Merric tied to *anyone* romantically, but to me he is very sexual. I wonder if I'm equating passion as a personality trait with sexuality - which isn't a good correlation to make.

... your posts make me psychoanalyze too much! :P

[peroxidepirate.livejournal.com]

I forgot about Andrew! Thanks. :D

For that matter, I bet I could write TV-canon!Dawn as an asexual character. There's that bit in "Him," where Dawn's all, 'Yeah, it was just because of the spell, though,' and Buffy says, 'Wait until it isn't.' To me this indicates she hasn't had a major crush (yet), so anything's possible.

Oh yes, the Doctor is the one I remembered! But I see his lack of sexuality as a facet of his alienness, and I think the people around him see it that way, too -- so it doesn't really afford the opportunity to explore what it means to be asexual in a world that accepts sexuality as the unexamined default. And it's probably not something he really has to think about anymore, either.

Oh. Unless it varies with each regeneration -- like as part of the elusive transition from Ten to Eleven, which I'm still trying to understand. ::ponders::

[peroxidepirate.livejournal.com]

You're welcome! :D


I wonder if I'm equating passion as a personality trait with sexuality - which isn't a good correlation to make.

Yeah, I'm trying to avoid that trap, too. Merric... hm. I really don't feel like I know enough about him to call it one way or another, but I do read a bit of UST between him and Kel. Which could just be my SMACKDOWN bias acting up, of course -- it could just as easily be another kind of tension. :p

Whereas with Roald, we have an instance of his friends specifically commenting on his (to them, incomprehensible) lack of apparent sexual or romantic interest in his betrothed. It's put down to shyness, which he then overcomes -- but we still don't see them flirting and we still don't see clear romantic interest, even though we're told they grow to love each other.

[cysfics.livejournal.com]

I don't think you can really view any part of your life as "a phase", or else you view all of your life as a phase. We (as people) don't have a "final setting" - I was gay for several years, then I was bi, now I'm pan. I identified as female for nineteen years, now I identify as genderqueer. But who I am now doesn't invalidate who I was then.

Sorry, my cents. I've thought about this a lot, and it tends to get under my skin when people say something is "just a phase".

[elsceetaria.livejournal.com]

For me, there can be a progression and development within any sexuality. The way I view myself now may or may not be the way I actually view myself in 10 years.

Anyways, Seek, Alix, and I (Isha may also have been in on this) had a discussion about Dom being heteroromantic asexual. I actually wrote twitterfic this way for Dom week. He wants the romantic companionship, but he never really feels the need for the sexual part, which so much of society pushes for. Being twitterfic, I didn't really get to explore this, but it is something that I would like to explore more.

There are a few other characters, which I have played with in my head from time to time being ace, but none that have really stuck.

The discussion of who can pass as ace shows up in the asexuality community every so often in terms of general characters across all fandoms.

[elsceetaria.livejournal.com]

I can see this, and I like it.

[peroxidepirate.livejournal.com]

Thanks for commenting! I find it fascinating to hear the different things people have to say about this.

I've thought about this a lot, and it tends to get under my skin when people say something is "just a phase".

*nods* Me too. But I'm only recently parsing the reasons "just a phase" is so offensive. When I actively identified as bi, I was pretty determined that it was a "final setting," because I couldn't see any other way of proving that it wasn't a "phase" (connotation: something you'll grow out of when you actually grow up).

It's more of a recent -- though, in hindsight, blindingly obvious -- realization that identity/identification can shift for reasons other than, "I didn't know what I wanted back then." Yeah, I knew what I wanted back then. I want something different now. Five years from now, I'll probably want yet another thing. And as you say, none of it is invalidated by what comes after.

[peroxidepirate.livejournal.com]

Oh, fascinating! I really feel like I don't get Dom enough to know if that's feasible or not, but it could be. Maybe I'll give it a read. I'm really trying to move beyond my fic comfort zone (you know, since I'm a mostly-homosexual, often aromantic, non-Dom fan who has a hard time following Twitterfic :p ). Is it in the Tortall fic forum?

More than anything else, I'm disappointed in myself for never thinking this through before, in spite of having friends who identify as ace (and btw, ace is the coolest label ever :D ).

[ineptshieldmaid.livejournal.com]

Thank you, again, for sharing this :)

As for characters - Lucy Pevensie :D. Doctor Who is also often read as asexual.

Hmm. How about... Alex of Tirragen? That would be an *interesting* character study, I think.

[peroxidepirate.livejournal.com]

Yeah, the Doctor is a unique case. As I said in another comment, it's hard for me to separate his (frequent lack of, depending on which regeneration)sexuality from his alienness, which complicates things. BUT, it's certainly worth considering.

Lucy... you know, if I end up in Narnia fandom, it's all your fault! :D At present I don't know her well enough to write her, which I know borders on tragic.

Alex? Very possible. I certainly don't read him as straight, anyway. You can read his relationship with Roger through slash goggles, but that's clearly an optional interpretation -- and one that goes against Word of God. If I don't employ slash goggles, it becomes blindingly clear that he must be ace! Regardless, he obviously has a lot of drive and passion going somewhere other than sex/romance/relationships -- which I could connect to, as my primary thought during the aromantic stage of my life was, "I don't have time for that shit; I have other things to do!"

Very, very interesting.

[thegraduate09.livejournal.com]

Note on the emotional bit: I don't think the past would invalidate the past, at least in most cases. Things change, people change, etc. It'd be like saying once someone's gotten married, all the years they were unmarried are invalidated.

Anyways. The characters. I think you could swing Sandry in a non-sexual, romantic relationship. I could see that very easily. And of course Tris has only shown one instance of interest in anything romantic or sexual, and to me personally that felt forced and off for the character. Niko I think I can only see as aromantic. Crane... Personally I see him seeing relationships as a waste of valuable time. Tortall has a much bigger catalog of characters to think through. I could see Dove from the Trickster Duo as asexual, possibly even aromantic-but-marrying-for-her-country. I can't really think of anyone else for that universe but I know I'm missing people.

Another commenter said Lucy Pevensie, I could definitely see her as asexual.

[elsceetaria.livejournal.com]

Dom makes some comments which at least in my mind can be construed as romantic, but not really sexual. Twitterfic isn't really a great place for character depth, and this fic pretty much grew from a single line. Yeah, it's hiding over in Tortall ff (or at the own). The fic is called Beltane of all things.

For my comfort zone, I have issues writing smut. My writing tends to have Disneyesque romance, but trying to add the sexy in ends awkwardly.

Ace is a pretty awesome label. :)

[coldthermistor.livejournal.com]

I've actually always seen Zahir or Faleron as asexual, the more I think of it :/ I know you've got a bit more of an interest in female chaarcters, and on the female front, I'd wonder a bit about Delia. She seems to be a lot less into the sexuality bit and so much more about using it as a kind of means of control.

[littlemissgriff.livejournal.com]

of course, the other aspect could just as easily be that Roald and Shinko get along! I know when my best friend went to Ireland for a year, I was a sulking mess for weeks, particularly when I needed her to talk to and she wasn't there. Being Asexual isn't an absence of love, it's merely the absence of sexuality in love.

*adds two bits*

[boosette.livejournal.com]

You need to read Feed by Mira Grant -- it's a book about zombies where the zombies make sense, and if 2/3 of the trio-of-protagonists aren't somewhere on the ace spectrum I will buy a hat an eat it.

[peroxidepirate.livejournal.com]

OH YEAH.

Thanks for pointing this out. >.<

And I would totally be a sulking mess if my best friend was away for a long time, too.

[peroxidepirate.livejournal.com]

Very interesting possibilities! I agree that it's easier to think of this in relation to the Circle verse than to Tortall. It might be fun to write Tris and Crane having a very intense relationship that people assume is sexual, but isn't at all.

[peroxidepirate.livejournal.com]

Oh, those are all possible! I kind of want to write something where Faleron's friends keep trying to matchmake and then wondering why it pretty much never goes anywhere.

Delia.... hmm. Possibly. I have a whole mental backstory for her, but none of it would be invalidated by her being asexual.

[peroxidepirate.livejournal.com]

EVERYTHING'S BETTER WITH ZOMBIES!

I'll look it up. :)