View Single Post
  #33  
Old 05-18-2012, 09:29 PM
MeeraReed MeeraReed is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: East Coast, U.S.
Posts: 351
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BlackUnicorn View Post
The OP probably isn't with us anymore, and most people probably know this already, but I wanted to say it anyway (it keeps me distracted from what I should be doing, which is reason enough):

There's nothing bad about fearing commitment, or not wanting to commit to a partner, if that's what everyone's on board with.

Some reasons why people might not want to commit to romantic relationships, other than being afraid of commitment or being indecisive:
1) Youth. Not wanting to commit to a romantic partnership at the age of 25 doesn't mean there's something wrong with you.
2) Been there, done that. If you just got out of a 20 year marriage, it's okay not to want to get into another right off the bat.
3) Relationship anarchy. You are allergic to labels and defining your relationships.
4) Sleeping around. Self-explanatory.
5) Aromanticism. Plenty of aro people want a relationship that's not romantic that involves commitment, but not everyone does.
6) You just don't want to.

Not wanting to commit to romantic partnerships is not the same thing as being damaged goods or leading people on or being afraid of feelings and of growing up. If you are kind enough to let people you bump into know that you have no plans to make this bumping a regular thing and don't expect them to commit to bumping into you, you are good to go a-bumping imho.
Thanks for posting this, BlackUnicorn. You pretty much captured all the reasons why I cringe at the thought of getting into a deeply committed relationship, yet do not feel I have an unhealthy fear of commitment.

"Aromanticism." Never heard that till today, but I'm so glad that's a thing! Maybe it's the identity I've been looking for.

But the abbreviation "aro" irritates me. I see that it's used by the (very new) National Coalition for Aromantic Visibility, but it looks weird spelled out, is not obvious how it's pronounced, and seems to generate more confusion rather than less. The purpose of labels should be to simplify, clarify, and facilitate communication. When people go too far with abbreviations, it creates more of a secret lingo understood only by the community, rather than an easy shorthand for explaining oneself to others.

(For the same reason, I don't really like the terms "mono" and "poly." Outside the poly community, mono is the kissing disease. And to my engineer brother, poly refers to polymer materials or something.)

Thanks, BlackUnicorn, for bringing aromanticism to my attention. I feel kind of relieved that at least a few other people have thought of the concept!
__________________
Single, straight, female, solo, non-monogamous.
Reply With Quote