There’s Also A Thing That People Who Think They’re Being Accepting Do Where They Go “Not Wanting

There’s also a thing that people who think they’re being accepting do where they go “Not wanting romance is SO SAD AND LONELY! Not wanting to read romance novels is SEXIST! Not wanting a partner makes you a FREAK! Not having sex with your partner is BAD and ABUSIVE! Not feeling sexual attraction to your partner means there is SOMETHING WRONG WITH YOU!… unless you’re aromantic or asexual, of course! Then you get a pass.” The only acceptable reason to deviate from the amatonormative and sexnormative societal norm is to claim an identity label that exempts you. The actual thing you’re doing is still bad… but don’t worry it’s OK for you to do it! It feels like, we haven’t actually challenged any norms at all, you just get a pass on them because you can’t help it, poor thing. If you have the capacity to feel these, you have the obligation to; you are only exempt if you claim an identity that says that you are unable to. It implies that we would if we could, but we can’t, and it’s merely unfair to punish us for our shortcomings. Romance and sex are still social requirements, that hasn’t changed, we just are allowed a pass on it because we are unable to meet them. (And we’re still expected to reassure everyone that of course we recognize that their romance and sex is far more important than anything we will ever be able to have!)

I don’t want aros and aces to get special exemption from the requirement to have romance and sex and romantic attraction and sexual attraction; I want that to not be a requirement for anyone.