Current Events > Can someone explain "asexual biromantic" to me?

(+) Yeah! (+)

Well..actually more like situations outside of that.

I met someone who described themselves like this recently and I feel like I mostly understand a lot of LGBTQ stuff, but I'm just not sure what it would mean to be asexual but solely be romantically attracted to e.g. women. Once you remove sexual attraction, it's not clear where sexual identity or gender identity are relevant when selecting partners.

This isn't a gotcha, I just want to understand.

---

Are you asking what's the difference between bi romantic, gay romantic, and straight romantic?

not much to say besides women are different than men not only sexually

ButteryMales posted...

Are you asking what's the difference between bi romantic, gay romantic, and straight romantic?

Sure!

I mean I understand what those are alleging, I more don't understand what the basis for having a gender or sex preference for an asexual person would be.

---

romantic love and sexual love aren't quite the same thing. it's the acknowledgment that you can love someone differently than a friend or a sexual partner.

for most people, the two seem to correlate pretty closely. it's a little more obvious for asexual people who clearly can feel love for a partner, but not ever actually want sex. or a pansexual person who feel romantically differently depending on the sex of their partner.

i don't think it's completely unheard of with cis het people, though, just not as obvious. someone, for example, who clearly enjoys sex, but is always chasing no strings hookups? no one has any problems saying he's heterosexual, but he could also be aromantic.

---

Anteaterking posted...

Sure!

I mean I understand what those are alleging, I more don't understand what the basis for having a gender or sex preference for an asexual person would be.

An asexual aromantic person wouldn't want or need a partner. Any of the bi romantic, gay romantic, or straight romantic would have romantic(not sexual) attraction to their preference.

Medussa posted...

i don't think it's completely unheard of with cis het people, though, just not as obvious. someone, for example, who clearly enjoys sex, but is always chasing no strings hookups? no one has any problems saying he's heterosexual, but he could also be aromantic.

Right but that makes "sense" to to me, because that cis het person enjoys sex based on sexual organs which is what determining heterosexual vs bi vs homosexual.

ButteryMales posted...

An asexual aromantic person wouldn't want or need a partner. Any of the bi romantic, gay romantic, or straight romantic would have romantic(not sexual) attraction to their preference.

Right, that's what the definition is. I'm more asking what the basis for a romantic attraction based on sex identity but not sex is.

---

Anteaterking posted...

Right but that makes "sense" to to me, because that cis het person enjoys sex based on sexual organs which is what determining heterosexual vs bi vs homosexual.

no, that's what determines straight/gay/pan sexual attraction. there's a second type of attraction, romantic attraction, that commonly overlaps, but is not actually the same thing.

let's try this. sexual attraction is who you want to sleep with, romantic attraction is who you want to sleep beside.

---

Anteaterking posted...

Right but that makes "sense" to to me, because that cis het person enjoys sex based on sexual organs which is what determining heterosexual vs bi vs homosexual.

Right, that's what the definition is. I'm more asking what the basis for a romantic attraction based on sex identity but not sex is.

I don't think you're using the right terminology. This is about romantic preference which it's counterpart would be sexual preference.

Do you understand the concept of romance?

I think TC"s question is that without sex, why would gender matter for romance?

I don't know, I still feel it would. I am not asexual, but I don't really want to cuddle with guys the same way I do with girls. So I feel that even without sex, I would still be straight romantic.

Now I miss cuddling with various female friends :(

---

Medussa posted...

let's try this. sexual attraction is who you want to sleep with, romantic attraction is who you want to sleep beside.

One of those feels far more learned/societal than the other though. My answer to ButteryMales sort of addresses your point too though so rather than repeat I'll just put it there.
ButteryMales posted...

Do you understand the concept of romance?

I do, but if someone asked me what made me romantically attracted to people, none of the qualities I listed would be related to their sexual identity. It would be about non-physical aspects of their personality.

---

ok, so far so good. now, can you not make the leap to finding a larger or smaller group of people in this category:

Anteaterking posted...

It would be about non-physical aspects of their personality.

than this one:

Anteaterking posted...

would be related to their sexual identity.

---

Anteaterking posted...

I do, but if someone asked me what made me romantically attracted to people, none of the qualities I listed would be related to their sexual identity. It would be about non-physical aspects of their personality.

So could you get romantic with any gender?

ButteryMales posted...

So could you get romantic with any gender?

Assuming you mean sexual identity I think so, but when I'm evaluating potential partners I need a level of sexual AND romantic attraction.

Medussa posted...

ok, so far so good. now, can you not make the leap to finding a larger or smaller group of people in this category:

Sorry it's late, I'm having a hard time parsing this, can you rephrase?

---

Anteaterking posted...

Assuming you mean sexual identity I think so, but when I'm evaluating potential partners I need a level of sexual AND romantic attraction.

That doesn't sound confident.

you seem to accept that sexual attraction and romantic attraction are separate. you say you need both, which as i said, is quite common.

all you need now is to accept that other people don't always have them completely overlap.

---

Medussa posted...

all you need now is to accept that other people don't always have them completely overlap.

I don't think that the overlap is the part that doesn't make sense to me though.

I would say it's more that if I was going to do an extremely reductionist split between the two concepts, sexual attraction would be based on physical characteristics and romantic attraction on mental characteristics.

That framework wouldn't require you to be both sexually and romantically attracted to the same person. But it would preclude things like "I'm romantically attracted to people with <insert physical characteristic>" or "I'm sexually attracted to people with <mental characteristic>".

Like I said, it's reductionist because things like kinks cross the wires of physical and mental characteristics. I would just find it odd for someone to say "Yeah men's bodies do absolutely nothing for me sexually but I'm romantically attracted to people having penises".

(I don't want to sound combative, I'm thankful that you are having this conversation Medussa, so thank you)

---

It means that both genders make you go "uwu" but neither make you go "owo".

---

TheAnthraxBunny posted...

It means that both genders make you go "uwu" but neither make you go "owo".

Oh, adding in anthros could help.

TC are you not into furries? Or how about vehicles?

Edit: Ever see the movie Her?

Anteaterking posted...

but I'm romantically attracted to people having penises".

this. this is the snag. this isn't what people are saying when they say they find someone romantically attractive.

Anteaterking posted...

romantic attraction on mental characteristics.

because this is also a little off. it's not mental so much as it is behavioral. now, behavior is closely related to mind, so you're not exactly wrong. just a little off on your focus.

---