What are your Romantic Inclinations?

[Mr. Smith]

This seemed appropriate after the Gender/Sexual Orientation thread.

Romance is not the same as lust, and it seems this should be noted anyway even if romantic attraction often does link with sexual attraction.

Anyway with that out of the way, where do you stand on romantic attraction.

The first three should be obvious enough, and aromantic clearly indicates a lack of romantic attraction.(But it's still possible to lust after someone in spite of no romantic love)

Panromantic means attraction that can go to just about anyone of any gender.

And demiromantic means attraction that stems only from a very deep-seated or working emotional connection, no apparent attraction otherwise (Harry S. Truman is an excellent example of this one, if the rumors of him having the eyes only for Bess are true)


So yeah, what type of person are you most likely to fall for and if you can, what circumstances?

P.S. Hope this isn't too confusing

[Illuminati Blood Drinker]

Heh. Aromantic, most likely.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

I guess I'd be aromantic. I've very attracted to nice smells.

[Mr. Smith]

Demi is my leaning.

[Joe Republic]

Cisromantic

[Хahar 🤔]

Gray-asexual (normal)

[Mr. Morden]

Is heteroromantic a real word?  Because I think it's pretty cool that the English language includes a word with the sequence "roro".  It's like the dictionary is trolling both Astro from the Jetsons and Team America's Kim Jong-il.

[tik 🪀✨]

That's a tricky one, kind of. I'm bi, so I voted biromantic, but in life I've almost only felt a real romantic attraction to women. This is probably at least somewhat because I've only let myself explore romance with women because of pressures from the outside.

But, I've felt a strong connection with a number of guys that I would have liked to explore. If I try and place myself in a realistic relationship with a guy long-term in my imagination, it doesn't usually feel quite right somehow, if that makes sense. He'd have to be very special.

Anyway, I guess that means bi, lean hetero. Sexually, on the other hand, things can tend to skew in the opposite direction. Thanks for that, brain!

[Associate Justice PiT]

     I've never experienced any distinction between sexuality and romance. When I'm sexually attracted to a woman, I always develop a romantic interest as well.

[courts]

bi/pan

[afleitch]

No distinction. I'm sexually and romantically attracted to men and masculinity.

[Antonio the Sixth]

If I understand your definition correctly (didn't bother to google it to verify), I think I would qualify as demiromantic. I have a very emontion/personality-based conception of romance, where physical attributes play really no role. Basically, I'm the exact opposite of Pit and Afleitch. So, I really don't see why I couldn't be romantically attracted to people of any gender.

That said, I've only felt genuine romantic feelings once, and it was toward a woman, so I don't really know.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

I'm past this silliness, thankfully.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

Disregard that Frank, it's a bunch of liberal bullshit.

[Grumpier Than Thou]

Panromantic I guess.

[tik 🪀✨]

I'm past this silliness, thankfully.

How very big of you to reply, then.

[DemPGH]

Choice 1. I really could only ever be "romantic" with a woman. For me it's kind of a process of emotionally bonding with someone I am attracted to, and I am only sexually attracted to women. Now, I may be attracted to a woman but not wish to emotionally bond with her because there may be too many differences. So, the right kind of woman I can be easily romantic with.

[Mechaman]

I like things with breasts but really don't care that much about genitalia, so I guess heteromantic?

[bedstuy]

Seems like something a closeted gay person says, "I'm sexually attracted to men, but can only see myself in a romantic relationship with a woman. Therefore, I plan to make myself and some poor woman miserable."

Basically, a romantic relationship is a friendship where you also have sex.  It's not extremely different ultimately.  So, this enterprise is flawed.  

If you're gay and you call yourself, "heteroromantic," you're just holding onto a dream of not being gay.  You're not "heteroromantic," you have close female friends who you wish you were attracted to so you would be more normal.  Most people who say that haven't dated dudes I would bet.

[Oakvale]

I think bedstuy nailed it. The distinction you've invented here is basically bullsh!t tragically leads to the kind of cringeworthy sentences we're so familiar with like "I'm a pansexual biromantic otherkin" or whatever.

I looked up the definition of demi-romantic because my eyes rolled so hard I severed my optic nerve, and I was returned this alternate defintion -

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Okay guys, stop the ride. Stop it. We can't do this any more. Return Tumblr to its original purpose as a porn site. Let's stop living in this Maoist dreamworld. THAT'S NOT A THING. Surely we all know this. Why the Christ did some shut-in on his blog somewhere decide that this deserved a separate label? I've already given up on understanding what "pansexual" as distinct from "bisexual" is so maybe I've got no chance of working this one out, but come on. We're all adults here. I can't stress this enough, we all know, OP included, that this distinction is embarrassing for all concerned. Why are we going along with the charade?

People need to stop trying to be special.

[Sprouts Farmers Market ✘]

I looked up the definition of demi-romantic because my eyes rolled so hard I severed my optic nerve, and I was returned this alternate defintion -

You must be logged in to read this quote.

 

(I am mostly in agreement with you both - a lot of it is nonsense. Someone probably made it up to sell ridiculous merchandise.)

The thing that annoys me most is when they are offended that people (particularly their parents) don't understand what their terms means. Just stop and be a person. If there must be some separation, stick to the main 4 prefixes. Everyone's sexuality is different. Stop trying to find ways to make it sound different.

[Oakvale]

I looked up the definition of demi-romantic because my eyes rolled so hard I severed my optic nerve, and I was returned this alternate defintion -

You must be logged in to read this quote.

(I am mostly in agreement with you both - a lot of it is nonsense. Someone probably made it up to sell ridiculous merchandise.)

The thing that annoys me most is when they are offended that people (particularly their parents) don't understand what their terms means. Just stop and be a person. If there must be some separation, stick to the main 4 prefixes. Everyone's sexuality is different. Stop trying to find ways to make it sound different.

Yes. The other thing that confuses me about this is that I distinctly remember a similar group of people complaining about the concept of "labels" a few years back, yet now we're deluged with labels. I haven't got any particular problem with taxonomy but I can't keep track of the oppression wars any more. Particularly in this instance since they're silly and redundant (as bedstuy explained).

[afleitch]

I hadn't heard of most of these terms until this thread. And I'm very active in LGBT politics in which you would expect to hear such things. I have no idea what they actually mean; as in every day 'actual life' and within the context of 'actual relationships'

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

b-but muh individual special snowflake identity

[Antonio the Sixth]

I looked up the definition of demi-romantic because my eyes rolled so hard I severed my optic nerve, and I was returned this alternate defintion -

You must be logged in to read this quote.

(I am mostly in agreement with you both - a lot of it is nonsense. Someone probably made it up to sell ridiculous merchandise.)

The thing that annoys me most is when they are offended that people (particularly their parents) don't understand what their terms means. Just stop and be a person. If there must be some separation, stick to the main 4 prefixes. Everyone's sexuality is different. Stop trying to find ways to make it sound different.

Yes. The other thing that confuses me about this is that I distinctly remember a similar group of people complaining about the concept of "labels" a few years back, yet now we're deluged with labels. I haven't got any particular problem with taxonomy but I can't keep track of the oppression wars any more. Particularly in this instance since they're silly and redundant (as bedstuy explained).

To clarify (since I assume I was included as a recipient for this rant), I don't actually care for these labels. I definitely don't mean to translate them into some major ideological statement. The poll asked a question based on a few options, and I went by it. I don't see what's so dangerous with using a newish word in a specific context where this word is given a meaning.