Amatonormativity, the Aromantic Spectrum + Relationship Anarchy: Why I choose Queer Platonic Relationships over Romantic ones.
“And so it is possible to live the life which is a life of freedom. And, therefore, a life of love. Whereas love is not attachment. Love is not jealousy. A mind that is burdened with all kinds of stuff, burdened with all kinds of problems, is not capable of affection and love. Ending your attachment to things means you really understand the depths of freedom.”
- Jiddu Krishnamurti
If someone were to tell me, while sitting on the altar of St. Anthony’s church in my white alb at the tender age of 15, that in my later years I would identify as queer and be involved in non-conventional relationships, I would have probably only believed the latter.
Growing up under the strong influence of a colonial, Catholic-Christian religious belief system stunted my understanding of my gender and sexuality, to say the least. It took me a good 19 years to realise I was queer and I know for certain that it was caused by the societally constructed, cis-heteronormative constraints that limited my middle-childhood developmental milestone twice over.
For most of my life I felt trapped in a Nigerian single-mother household (ran by the ultimate matriarch) that perpetuated toxic values in to my psyche such as; a capitalistic mindset, narcissistic behaviour and a traumatising heteronormative outlook on human relationships — all of which are shaped by the ongoing brutal legacy of imperialism. I am still patiently unlearning.
Needless to say, cultivating any kind of romantic relationship at such a delicate age would have caused a lot more confusion and unnecessary trauma for me. I didn’t know it at the time but my lack of social encounters with the opposite sex, due to studying at an all-girls Catholic school and an aim to get in to heaven, had saved me from the cringe-worthy expectation of forming a romantic relationship with a boy. I was practicing the art of self-preservation before even knowing what it was.
In this era of prepubescent solitude I was able to find my joy in small things, building my sense of self by expressing my creativity through movement, art and personal style as a map to understanding what brings me true happiness.
I had never felt the need for romantic relationships until I came out to my mother as a lesbian 2 years ago and faced the horrible, but readily expected, rejection of my then sexual identity. This is when I began to seek the love and acceptance in other lesbians that my mother refused to offer me as my birth right, recklessly following the script of amatonormativity; “the assumption that a central, exclusive, amorous relationship is normal for humans, in that it is a universally shared goal, and that such a relationship is normative, in the sense that it should be aimed at in preference to other relationship types”.
I tried with all my efforts and limited knowledge of non-monogamous relationships at the time to balance and dismantle the pressures of preconceived hierarchies to no avail.
In coming to understand the full complexity of my queer gender identity and pansexuality through the exploration of these romantic relationships (mostly polyamorous) I have realised the beauty and simplicity of love and how love can continue to expand when given the chance; unlabelled. It was in the last polyamorous dynamic I experienced that I realised I had an alterous attraction towards my friend, which is a form of emotional attraction that is not necessarily romantic, and began gravitating more towards the concept of Queer Platonic Partnerships.
As it is wonderfully explained in the article I will be frequently citing, ‘5 Ways Amatonormativity Sets Harmful Relationship Norms For Us All’ by Michón Neal, polyamory simply extends the monogamous, pair bonding framework to include several other people, but I realised very early on in the growing connection with my friend and shifting dynamic with my then — ‘partner’ that polyamory “makes deviants of everyone who values their family, friends, or selves more than their theoretical romantic possibilities.”
Therefore, I began looking in to implementing a Relationship Anarchist approach in this dynamic in order to fulfil my need to love and be loved by the people in my life non-hierarchically. The shift in dynamic from romantic to platonic in my initial relationship caused a strain in both our mental health, mainly because of our differing perceptions on what friendship truly means, boundaries and expectations. However, it was at this most difficult time that I began to understand the importance of offering love in its pure, uncategorised form to those who are ready to accept it in all its intensity, rather than shying away from the possibility of hurting someone who is not ready or wants that.
“Romance is depicted as competitive. Exclusive. Jealous. Restrictive and controlling. Ownership All-consuming. Normal.”
- Michón Neal
So, what is Relationship Anarchy?
Relationship Anarchy refers to “a philosophy, specifically a philosophy of love. A relationship anarchist believes that love is abundant and infinite, that all forms of love are equal, that relationships can and should develop organically with no adherence to rules or expectations from outside sources, that two people in any kind of emotionally salient relationship should have the freedom to do whatever they naturally desire both inside their relationship and outside of it with other people.”
Understanding the validity of Relationship Anarchy was the first step to understanding my aromanticism. Ultimately, it was my dear friend whom I love platonically and have an alterous attraction towards that made me realise I don’t need or desire any romantic relationships at all. And that while I may love them platonically, I can still show affection towards them and be sexually attracted to them; both of which would be considered romantic according to amatanormativity.
So, what is Aromanticism?
Aromanticism is comprised of a wide spectrum that includes various identities such as: greyromantic, demiromantic, aromantic, recipromantic, cupioromantic, quoiromantic and lith / akoiromantic. The complexity of romantic identities are so varied that it’s despicable how unwilling people in powerful positions, such as the education system and media industries, are to shed light on it.
For as long as I can remember I have been turned off, repulsed and mainly confused by the idea of romantic relationships — and who can blame me? The media, and subsequently, society constantly place a predominant focus on the rhetoric of amatanormativity.
In my younger years I didn’t understand the fulness of my discomfort with what I now recognise to be my aromanticism, but I remember being strongly repulsed by the idea of being in a romantic relationship and ironically thinking it would be something I grew out of.
Of course, it didn’t help that Eurocentric rom-coms existed such as: The Devil Wears Prada, Sweet Home Alabama or Bridget Jones’ Diary which had a primary focus on white women falling head over heels for white men in the most heterosexually performative manner.
Maybe I thought the reason for my repellence to romance was because I wasn’t white and didn’t see myself represented in films or TV, just like I thought I would never be queer because I only saw representations of queerness through white folks on Channel 4, candidly talking about their experiences in coming out to their already accepting parents.
I realise now just how much of our social conditioning in regard to relationships stem from the unhealthy and largely toxic depictions produced by everything we humans could potentially view our lives through such as: literature, movies and TV shows that only have the perpetuation of capitalism, romance and hyper-sexualization as its aim. I can already think of a handful of TV shows, films or online series that portray romantic relationships as an overarching theme before companionate friendships, some of these include; Love is Blind, You, Sex Education, If Beale Street Could Talk, She’s Gotta Have It, Easy, 500 Days of Summer and Jane The Virgin. Unfortunately for us aros, the list most definitely goes on.
“When’s the last time you really saw a healthy relationship (or communication) depicted on TV or in a book? When’s the last time you saw the hero pick their friend over their lover? When’s the last time a “love triangle” (which, in actuality is not a damn triangle, but a V) wasn’t simply a plot device?”
With all this in mind, one can only wonder whether the average media consumer actually knows what real love is without the constant interference of romantic constructs and its exaggerated depictions. I, for one, know that I will choose true, loving, companionate friendships over romance any day.
Finally, I would like to pose some questions and plant some seeds of thought for how we can envisage a Queer Future. Does the heteronormative construct of romance serve our community? How does the creation of hierarchies in our relationships serve our, already vulnerable, queer bodies?
There is already so much within the queer identity that resists the limiting constructs which society places on us, so will we choose to follow the cis-heteronormative, amatanormative ‘relationship ladder’ which consistently distances us from our community the higher up we climb in pair bonds — or prioritise a community of queer individuals that lack a loving home?
Do you agree that as queer indigenous souls we do not necessarily operate on the same time frame or reality as heterosexuals existing in a capitalist mind state?
I would love to further this discourse with anyone remotely interested in the topic so do feel free to leave me a message and start a conversation.
