to my understanding, romantic attraction is very close to falling in love. if sexual desire is the desire to have sex with that specific person, romantic attraction is the desire to do romantic things with that specific person; wanting to hold their hand, kiss them etc

keeveet-talks:

eirenical:

keeveet-talks:

eirenical:

zoinomiko:

keeveet-talks:

zoinomiko:

keeveet-talks:

The term “demiromantic” suggests there can be romantic attraction divorced from an emotional connection with the person one is attracted to, and that’s the part I don’t instinctively understand. I accept that it is a thing, but I wonder if I’m in the majority or the minority in that I don’t experience it that way. But if I’m in the minority, it would explain why I never wanted to date casually. 

If you’re in the minority I’m right there with you, yo.

It seems like that’s the way of doing things that makes sense? I never understood why people date casually on TV, and go on dates with people they’re not already in a relationship with. Dating acquaintances is a form of socializing that I don’t understand at all, it sounds so awkward, and I don’t see why you would want to do romantic things with someone you’re not in love with, or at least friends with. And yet people do. So that must be romantic attraction without an emotional bond?

Yeah. But like, isn’t the very definition of Romantic Attraction that it’s an emotional bond? So confusing.

(taking casual-dating-to-meet-someone out of the equation, of course.)

Just to throw my two cents in here… I’m not demiromantic, but I am aromantic and I think it may be easier to understand from that perspective?  Since being demi falls under the aro umbrella.

So, looking at the aro perspective first: I may desire closeness with friends, but never in the “I want to be romantically involved with you” way.  It’s really a question of intent, I think.  I may cuddle up to you, but in the same way I’d cuddle up to my sister or mother or father.  Same with everything else.  If we go out to eat, it’s just two friends getting dinner who didn’t want to cook.  There’s no intent to pursue a life together or any of the other romantic trappings.  You’re friends and there’s nothing more to it than that, nor would you want there to be.

Now, imagine that in the process of doing all the things one does with a friend, you suddenly DO start to want those things.  The romantic things.  That romantic attraction develops.  The thing with demiromanticism is that those romantic feelings CAN’T develop without the friendship feelings already being there.  You don’t go on a date with a stranger and fall in love.  You have to be friends first.

I’ve seen so many of my friends meet someone in a bar, or online, or through friends, or whatever, and fall in love and end up together.  If you’re demiromantic, that doesn’t happen.  You have to already have a close emotional bond before the romantic attractions happen.

Does that make sense?  Suddenly I’m not sure.  -.-;;;

Yes but how do you fall in love with someone who isn’t a friend? How do you fall in love with a stranger?? That doesn’t make sense to me. That it happens, like in those examples, is something I accept, but I don’t understand it in an instinctive or personal level. I don’t understand wanting to do romantic things with someone you’re not in love with. (Sex things, maybe, if you’re compatible even if you don’t know each other that well.) Which makes me demiromantic by this definition. I am curious, however, if that is a majority or minority experience. Is being friends first not the usual way? 

Also, the concept desiring closeness with friends without wanting to date them is not unfamiliar to me even though I do fall in love. 😀 I have no trouble distinguishing between being in love with/crushing on someone (which is just the early stage of love, really, when you can still back out) and liking or loving them without being in love. It’s very different.

Sorry it took me so long to get back to this–it’s been a hectic week.  😛

Not being demiromantic myself, I’m not entirely sure how to explain and honestly, whenever I think about this too hard it makes my head hurt because I usually manage to confuse myself.  But I think the idea centers around this: it’s not a matter of falling in love, but of feeling romantic attraction.  Which is maybe more the potential for falling in love instead of actually falling in love?  Like, I think what you’re calling “crushing” is probably what people mean by romantic attraction?  So, thinking of it that way, it’s entirely possible to have a crush on someone you aren’t friends with, right?  If I’m understanding the concept correctly, then someone who is demiromantic only develops crushes on people who they feel a close interpersonal relationship with already (i.e., friends).  Does that make sense?

(I know there are demiromantic people who follow me; if I’m totally botching that explanation, please let me know!  The whole idea of romantic attraction is such a foreign concept for me that I’m not sure if I’m even in the ballpark.  O_o;;;)

Nnnnnoooo, I can’t say I have ever crushed on anyone I was not friends with. I guess I’m just demiromantic and this will forever remain a mystery. 

Oh no, wait! When I was a little child I did. A boy was nice to me and I was so touched by this gesture – defying the uncrossable line between little boys and little girls – that I crushed on him. Hmm!

That’s certainly possible, too!  That’s a bit like how I figured out I was aro/ace, actually.  ^_~  (’Wait, but no one does that!’ ‘uh… yes they do.’ ‘…well, damn.  I guess that explains a few things.  O_o;;;’  ^_^)

I honestly have no idea if this will help or not, but here are the demiromantic and romantic attraction definitions from the AVEN wiki.

Good luck figuring it all out!  ^_^

to my understanding, romantic attraction is very close to falling in love. if sexual desire is the desire to have sex with that specific person, romantic attraction is the desire to do romantic things with that specific person; wanting to hold their hand, kiss them etc

keeveet-talks:

eirenical:

zoinomiko:

keeveet-talks:

zoinomiko:

keeveet-talks:

The term “demiromantic” suggests there can be romantic attraction divorced from an emotional connection with the person one is attracted to, and that’s the part I don’t instinctively understand. I accept that it is a thing, but I wonder if I’m in the majority or the minority in that I don’t experience it that way. But if I’m in the minority, it would explain why I never wanted to date casually. 

If you’re in the minority I’m right there with you, yo.

It seems like that’s the way of doing things that makes sense? I never understood why people date casually on TV, and go on dates with people they’re not already in a relationship with. Dating acquaintances is a form of socializing that I don’t understand at all, it sounds so awkward, and I don’t see why you would want to do romantic things with someone you’re not in love with, or at least friends with. And yet people do. So that must be romantic attraction without an emotional bond?

Yeah. But like, isn’t the very definition of Romantic Attraction that it’s an emotional bond? So confusing.

(taking casual-dating-to-meet-someone out of the equation, of course.)

Just to throw my two cents in here… I’m not demiromantic, but I am aromantic and I think it may be easier to understand from that perspective?  Since being demi falls under the aro umbrella.

So, looking at the aro perspective first: I may desire closeness with friends, but never in the “I want to be romantically involved with you” way.  It’s really a question of intent, I think.  I may cuddle up to you, but in the same way I’d cuddle up to my sister or mother or father.  Same with everything else.  If we go out to eat, it’s just two friends getting dinner who didn’t want to cook.  There’s no intent to pursue a life together or any of the other romantic trappings.  You’re friends and there’s nothing more to it than that, nor would you want there to be.

Now, imagine that in the process of doing all the things one does with a friend, you suddenly DO start to want those things.  The romantic things.  That romantic attraction develops.  The thing with demiromanticism is that those romantic feelings CAN’T develop without the friendship feelings already being there.  You don’t go on a date with a stranger and fall in love.  You have to be friends first.

I’ve seen so many of my friends meet someone in a bar, or online, or through friends, or whatever, and fall in love and end up together.  If you’re demiromantic, that doesn’t happen.  You have to already have a close emotional bond before the romantic attractions happen.

Does that make sense?  Suddenly I’m not sure.  -.-;;;

Yes but how do you fall in love with someone who isn’t a friend? How do you fall in love with a stranger?? That doesn’t make sense to me. That it happens, like in those examples, is something I accept, but I don’t understand it in an instinctive or personal level. I don’t understand wanting to do romantic things with someone you’re not in love with. (Sex things, maybe, if you’re compatible even if you don’t know each other that well.) Which makes me demiromantic by this definition. I am curious, however, if that is a majority or minority experience. Is being friends first not the usual way? 

Also, the concept desiring closeness with friends without wanting to date them is not unfamiliar to me even though I do fall in love. 😀 I have no trouble distinguishing between being in love with/crushing on someone (which is just the early stage of love, really, when you can still back out) and liking or loving them without being in love. It’s very different.

Sorry it took me so long to get back to this–it’s been a hectic week.  😛

Not being demiromantic myself, I’m not entirely sure how to explain and honestly, whenever I think about this too hard it makes my head hurt because I usually manage to confuse myself.  But I think the idea centers around this: it’s not a matter of falling in love, but of feeling romantic attraction.  Which is maybe more the potential for falling in love instead of actually falling in love?  Like, I think what you’re calling “crushing” is probably what people mean by romantic attraction?  So, thinking of it that way, it’s entirely possible to have a crush on someone you aren’t friends with, right?  If I’m understanding the concept correctly, then someone who is demiromantic only develops crushes on people who they feel a close interpersonal relationship with already (i.e., friends).  Does that make sense?

(I know there are demiromantic people who follow me; if I’m totally botching that explanation, please let me know!  The whole idea of romantic attraction is such a foreign concept for me that I’m not sure if I’m even in the ballpark.  O_o;;;)

to my understanding, romantic attraction is very close to falling in love. if sexual desire is the desire to have sex with that specific person, romantic attraction is the desire to do romantic things with that specific person; wanting to hold their hand, kiss them etc

zoinomiko:

keeveet-talks:

zoinomiko:

keeveet-talks:

The term “demiromantic” suggests there can be romantic attraction divorced from an emotional connection with the person one is attracted to, and that’s the part I don’t instinctively understand. I accept that it is a thing, but I wonder if I’m in the majority or the minority in that I don’t experience it that way. But if I’m in the minority, it would explain why I never wanted to date casually. 

If you’re in the minority I’m right there with you, yo.

It seems like that’s the way of doing things that makes sense? I never understood why people date casually on TV, and go on dates with people they’re not already in a relationship with. Dating acquaintances is a form of socializing that I don’t understand at all, it sounds so awkward, and I don’t see why you would want to do romantic things with someone you’re not in love with, or at least friends with. And yet people do. So that must be romantic attraction without an emotional bond?

Yeah. But like, isn’t the very definition of Romantic Attraction that it’s an emotional bond? So confusing.

(taking casual-dating-to-meet-someone out of the equation, of course.)

Just to throw my two cents in here… I’m not demiromantic, but I am aromantic and I think it may be easier to understand from that perspective?  Since being demi falls under the aro umbrella.

So, looking at the aro perspective first: I may desire closeness with friends, but never in the “I want to be romantically involved with you” way.  It’s really a question of intent, I think.  I may cuddle up to you, but in the same way I’d cuddle up to my sister or mother or father.  Same with everything else.  If we go out to eat, it’s just two friends getting dinner who didn’t want to cook.  There’s no intent to pursue a life together or any of the other romantic trappings.  You’re friends and there’s nothing more to it than that, nor would you want there to be.

Now, imagine that in the process of doing all the things one does with a friend, you suddenly DO start to want those things.  The romantic things.  That romantic attraction develops.  The thing with demiromanticism is that those romantic feelings CAN’T develop without the friendship feelings already being there.  You don’t go on a date with a stranger and fall in love.  You have to be friends first.

I’ve seen so many of my friends meet someone in a bar, or online, or through friends, or whatever, and fall in love and end up together.  If you’re demiromantic, that doesn’t happen.  You have to already have a close emotional bond before the romantic attractions happen.

Does that make sense?  Suddenly I’m not sure.  -.-;;;