RUBIN-STANKIEWICZ: Aromanticism challenges cultural norms around romance

There is significant irony in the fact that this year's Aromantic Spectrum Awareness Week took place from February 19 through February 25, which was right after Valentine’s Day.

But besides being a great punchline to a joke, the overlap of these events actually provides an opportunity to examine our societal norms around romanticism and look at how aromanticism complicates and exposes some of the problematic ways in which we think about romance.

Being aromantic is typically defined as experiencing little to no romantic attraction or otherwise experiencing and desiring romance in a way that is disconnected from normative societal expectations.

My experience of being aromantic is definitely not a reflection of all individuals with aromanticism. I have absolutely no interest in a romantic or sexual relationship of any kind.

When I was younger, I would never have considered myself aromantic. I transferred in third grade to a small elementary school that had a strong culture around crushes. My friend group would often ask each other who they had a crush on.

I had a very close friend who I was certain I had a crush on through elementary school. So much so that when I told certain family members about being aromantic in high school, they brought up the name of my elementary school "crush" to see if I was sure about being aromantic.

I was an avid reader of fiction books with young characters going to dances with their romantic interests and wearing long, beautiful gowns. I constantly imagined what my own dress would look like and could not wait to be old enough to go to a prom, wear my dress and dance with someone.

But starting in middle school, it quickly became clear that my experiences were different from my peers. I frequently bemoaned to my family that I could not understand why people were dating in middle school because I considered that age as far too young to date.

When my English class watched "Shakespeare in Love" for our Shakespeare unit, I covered my ears to drown out the noise of the kissing. As part of the same unit, I refused to fill out a worksheet about what characteristics my "ideal" partner would have, instead getting permission to fill out the worksheet about an ideal friend.

I even told my English teacher then that I was never going to date anyone, so the worksheet was pointless. I actually got very mad at someone who asked me out on a date because I did not understand how someone who had only met me a few times in class and barely talked to me could possibly know me well enough to be romantically interested.

I know others assumed this was just a developmental phase I was going through and that I would change my mind eventually.

But I did not — not in high school and not up to now.

Aromanticism can be really hard to define and explain, in part because romantic attraction can manifest differently for each person, and there is an entire spectrum of aromantic experiences.

I would also argue it is impossible to define romantic orientation, which is precisely the point. Aromanticism deconstructs our understanding of romance and romantic attraction as being universal.

Part of the reason romantic relationships are so difficult, in my uneducated opinion, is that our culture perpetuates an expectation of a certain universalized understanding of what romance is supposed to look like. One that people expect their partner(s) to recreate, despite the fact that romantic attraction and what people want in relationships is a very individualized experience.

Aromanticism inherently suggests that relationships can take a number of different forms. They can involve sex or kissing or neither of those things. They can involve romance-coded activities like cuddling or holding hands.

These conditions can also change in a relationship over time. But the most important thing is they have to reflect what everyone involved genuinely wants without pressure or coercion, not what they think they are supposed to do or have in a relationship.

Our romantic norms can be very problematic. They are often incredibly gendered and exclude trans people entirely. Media representations often show men proposing to women, paying dinner checks and initiating and actively pursuing sexual activities.

Men are also shown as being more consumed by sexual thoughts and urges, which can be used to justify sexual violence in the relationship and erase men who do not have a strong libido.

Women are seen as being more passive in their relationships, focusing on their appearance and being less driven by sex. Oftentimes, representations of women proposing are only in the context of non-straight relationships, permissible only because the relationship is already considered outside of the societal norm.

Representations of these heterosexual gender norms in media can be relentless. A study from 2007 found that the "Heterosexual Script" around genders having different courtship strategies and sexual expectations appeared on average 15.53 times per hour in prime-time adolescent TV programming.

Recognizing aromanticism can be liberatory because it creates spaces for narratives that push back against these scripts.

Rutgers, in my experience, is an accepting place with a live-and-let-live culture that works perfectly for me in my aromanticism. But at the same time, there is no explicit, on-campus space for asexual and aromantic students.

Rutgers could benefit from a club or a space for people on the aromantic and asexual spectrums. A number of universities, like the University of Massachusetts Amherst, provide visibility to aromantic and asexual identities and liberate spaces away from normative scripts and expectations around romantic and sexual relationships.

That is an experience all students at Rutgers deserve to have.

Raisa Rubin-Stankiewicz is a junior in the School of Arts and Sciences majoring in political science and minoring in psychology. Her column, "Rutgers Realities," runs on alternate Tuesdays.

---

*Columns, cartoons and letters do not necessarily reflect the views of the Targum Publishing Company or its staff.

YOUR VOICE | The Daily Targum welcomes submissions from all readers. Due to space limitations in our print newspaper, letters to the editor must not exceed 900 words. Guest columns and commentaries must be between 700 and 900 words. All authors must include their name, phone number, class year and college affiliation or department to be considered for publication. Please submit via email to oped@dailytargum.com by 4 p.m. to be considered for the following day’s publication. Columns, cartoons and letters do not necessarily reflect the views of the Targum Publishing Company or its staff