The Other A in LGBTQIA+ (2026)
Online accounts and experiences of aromanticism, in book form.
This book attempts to capture a range of experiences and identities under the aomantic umbrella. I admire the ambition, but I struggled with the writing quality and I only made it through a handful of chapters. It felt like printed version of a Wikipedia article.
I didn’t hear anybody at Book Club who was a strong supporter of this book, but our conversation gave me a newfound appreciation for what it’s trying to achieve.
Several people observed that the book’s authors are predominantly young, very online people, and questioned whether the book needs to exist in published form rather than as an online resource. I actually like that it exists as a printed book, as a snapshot of current thinking – the Internet is transient, and those discussions won’t survive long-term.
I’m trying to resist saying “they’re too young and online”, because that’s such a cliché, but I felt it as I was reading. There’s a degree of naïvete, and moments where I wish they’d talked to people with more life experience – although aromanticism is often misunderstood, that’s not an excuse for misunderstanding alloromantic experiences. (I was particularly dismayed to see one contributor use a “ball and chain” metaphor, which is to sort of outdated sexist thinking I don’t see in any of the couples I know.)
The book quotes lots of personal experiences, but it struggles to incorporate them smoothly into the text. There are long sections of verbatim quotes that are often repetitive or distracting, and better editing would help. Often, we wish that a book included more direct quotes of people’s personal experiences; this book has the opposite problem. Combining quotes with a narrative is tricky!
Despite the book, I enjoyed the conversation that it sparked. We talked about aromantic experiences outside our own (like people who are aplatonic or eschew all relationships), and conflicting needs within queer inclusive spaces.
Notes and highlights
Preface, by Rachel Levi (she/her)
It feels like the English language is deficient in words. I wish we had as many words, or more words, for love as the ancient Greek language:
- Eros is physical love or sexual desire.
- Philia is love of friends or an affectionate love.
- Agape is unconditional love.
- Storge is familial love.
- Mania is obsessive love.
- Ludus is playful or uncommitted love.
- Pragma is love based on a duty or obligation.
- Philautia is self-love.”
Chapter 1 Our History, by Annika Baumgart (she/they)
This quote reminded me of the constant discussions about “cis” and “trans”, and how some cis people resist the term because they’d prefer to think of themselves as “normal”.
By naming both experiences—allo and aro—we treat them as equal. Neither identity is the default experience for a person; neither identity is the aberrant experience. Aromanticism and alloromanticism simply are.
The history chapter links or refers to other books and resources that I want to read over this one.
Dorothy Tennov’s 1979 book Love and Limerence: The Experience of Being in Love is mentioned as a possible resonance with aromantic experiences. Here’s an excerpt from Tennov recounting a conversation with a friend who’d never been in love:
Describing the intricacies of romantic attachments to Helen was like trying to describe the color red to one blind from birth. “It doesn’t make sense,” she would say. “I simply don’t understand how anyone could feel like that, how anyone could be so important to another person.”
The chapter explains that romance and weddings aren’t an inherent part of the human condition. Other cultures have different approaches, and the Western ideal is a relatively young invention.
I was tickled by this line from The History of Romance on womenshistory.org:
Romance blossomed in nineteenth-century American culture. Both men and women were encouraged to express their most intimate thoughts in letters. High literacy rates and a reliable postal service facilitated romantic communication.
From Amy Gahran’s book Stepping Off the Relationship Escalator:
Because this model is so familiar to most people, traditional relationships often seem simpler or easier, as well as propelled along by their innate momentum. Thus, it’s the Relationship Escalator, not the Relationship Staircase.
Chapter 2 The Aromantic Umbrella, by Annika Baumgart (she/they)
This chapter is a long glossary of terminology and microlabels. I found it useful as an introduction to certain attitudes towards friendship and romance that I was unfamiliar with, especially the more hardcore “I don’t care about any relationships with people”, but I’m unlikely to use or encounter the labels.
This chapter contains another passage that struck me as strange:
The terms “romantic friendship” and “Boston Marriages” were historically popular descriptions of intimate, same-gender relationships. Since the height of its popularity, some people have reclaimed the term “romantic friendship.” Today, it can be used by any two or more people of any gender(s).
I’m confused by the use of the word “reclaim” here. Normally I see “reclaim” used for slurs which are taken by a community, adopted as a positive term, and stripped of their derogatory effect. This was another phrase that made me think the authors are too online.