What do you think?
Rate this book
Hopeless Aromantic: An Affirmative Guide to Aromanticism
If you've picked up this book, the chances are you have some doubts about your Happiness 101 assignment sheet. True love; candlelit dinners; 2.1 children; joint bank accounts - The One? It might make you want to a run a mile - or you might just have a few big questions.
Aromanticism is defined as experiencing little to no romantic attraction to others. Sam Rendle, onetime aromantic asexual, sometime aroaceflux, and present-day label unspecified, knows a thing or two about the aro spectrum - and she has some answers for you.
You'll explore what aromanticism is, how aromantic people form relationships, how to know if you're aromantic and deal with internalised shame and societal stigma. With a history of aromantic representation, guidance on queerplatonic relationships, and testimony from your worldwide aro family - this is the affirmatory aro companion to have in your back pocket.
Aromanticism is defined as experiencing little to no romantic attraction to others. Sam Rendle, onetime aromantic asexual, sometime aroaceflux, and present-day label unspecified, knows a thing or two about the aro spectrum - and she has some answers for you.
You'll explore what aromanticism is, how aromantic people form relationships, how to know if you're aromantic and deal with internalised shame and societal stigma. With a history of aromantic representation, guidance on queerplatonic relationships, and testimony from your worldwide aro family - this is the affirmatory aro companion to have in your back pocket.
175 pages, Kindle Edition
Published July 21, 2023
29 people are currently reading
736 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 60 reviews
November 11, 2023
i’m so glad a book about aromanticism exists, but i think my expectations were too high.
as others have pointed out, this is very much a quick, basic 101 guide to aromanticism. which i don’t have anything against as a whole; they have their place in queer nonfiction and serve a purpose. the book covers the aromantic spectrum and various labels within it, different types of attraction and the split attraction model, the types of relationships arospec people can have, different types of arophobia and how to cope with it, aromantic representation, aromantic misconceptions and stereotypes, aromantic flags and symbols, and how to be an ally.
all valuable things to discuss, but i think the content of this book would’ve been better suited as an article, tumblr post, youtube video, or something else readily accessible and free. because the people who will benefit from this kind of introductory information probably aren’t going to purchase a book. they’re likely going to read an article that pops up on google, a tumblr post or twitter thread, a youtube or tiktok video, hell, even a carrd. and most of the people who have reviewed this book kind of validate that opinion for me, as they talk about how nothing in this book is new to them or offered them anything. the people who most need this information aren’t the ones reading the book, because they’re likely getting the information elsewhere.
either that, or the book should’ve had a little more time to cook. if the author had taken more time to flesh out the content, going more in-depth into the topics discussed and branching out more, it might have felt like a more complete, truly thought-out, worthwhile book that offers a unique perspective, a comprehensive look at aromantic experiences, or something you can’t get anywhere else. don’t get me wrong, i don’t have wholly negative feelings about the book, and i particularly like the author’s conversational/familiar tone as opposed to a more academic approach. overall, i think the book is important. even if it’s very rudimentary and nothing you can’t find on any given social media site, it can lead to the publishing of more in-depth, varied, and diverse books on aromanticism. outside of bigoted/harmful books, any queer nonfiction is a good thing and a step in the right direction.
one moment in the book that i really connected with is when the author talks about how she’s nervous that she refers to the aromantic community in the third person throughout the book. when posting on social media for contributions for the book, she received responses such as “are you on the aromantic spectrum yourself?” and “wording this as ‘their’ stories makes it sound like you’re no in the aro community yourself, or don’t think of yourself to be...” which she interpreted as “skeptical and mistrustful.” this is something i do more often than not. i write a lot about queer and pansexuals and experiences, and i usually say things like, “ask pansexual people how they feel” or “queer people are allowed to express themselves however they see fit” instead of “ask pansexuals how we feel” or “queer people are allowed to express ourselves however we see fit.” unlike the author, i don’t do this because i’m “unsure” of my place in these communities. it’s just how i talk. but i have thought things like, “this kind of makes it sound like i’m not part of these communities or aren’t including myself in what i’m saying” and gone back and forth on switching out “they” for “we” and wondered if other people took it that way. i personally would interpret those responses the same way the author did, like people are questioning whether i’m speaking on a community i don’t belong to or don’t have a right to or can’t be trusted to speak on. and that idea is really unfortunate and upsetting, even more so i imagine for people who actually are questioning their place in said communities. i don’t really know where i’m going with this, other than it’s just an interesting thing that i hadn’t seen someone express before.
now let’s get into the nitty gritty. one big thing for me is that the content of the book is very negative. not in the sense that the author is being negative, but the topics covered are on the negative side, such as feeling alone/broken/etc., forcing oneself into unwanted relationships, abuse/trauma, mental illness, internal and external arophobia, etc. and there’s nothing wrong with discussing these things, but when they’re the only experiences presented or examined with any kind of energy, it paints the picture that the aromantic experience is one inherently filled with pain. aside from a few brief mentions of the validation and community in finding a term for what you feel, there’s no real time given to aromantic joy, which is such a shame. it’s important to highlight the hardships, but it’s equally, if not more, important to highlight the joy.
the author puts a lot of expectations on arospec people in advising them to educate arophobes instead of laughing off their comments, stating coming out to people as arospec is a “necessary conversation” because it “increases awareness,” and advising allo people to ask arospec people questions about their arospec identity. i take issue with this, because arospec folks aren’t obligated to try to educate arophobes, come out to increase awareness/visibility, or field potentially ignorant or invasive questions about their identity and experiences. it’s a tall order, one that requires a lot of time, patience, and (emotional) energy that arospec people might not always have to give.
i wish the “are aros lgbt+?” section had been firmer in that, yes, they are. aromanticism is queer. period. on an individual level, you don’t have to consider yourself queer or lgbtqia+ or part of the community, but on the whole, in general, aromanticism is included. because being queer means you live outside the societal sexual/romantic/gender norms and expectations. aspec, gay/lesbian, mspec, transgender/nonbinary, intersex, polyamorous, kinky, etc. are all queer and part of the community.
the author talks a little about representation, specifically “bad representation” and honestly, i’ve come to view “bad representation” the same way i do “stereotypical representation,” in that it isn’t bad, wrong, or damaging as long as it isn’t the only representation or even just done in a thoughtful way. so, a pansexual character having sex with everyone all the time isn’t automatically “bad” and an aromantic character being a villain isn’t automatically “bad.” (besides, a lot of queer people actually gravitate more towards the morally grey and villainous characters rather than the perfect, pure characters.) and to be frank, three characters the author lists as “bad/stereotyped aromantic characters” aren’t even canonically aromantic. in general, the author only mentions two canonically aromantic characters, who also happen to be asexual (jughead jones and the main character of alice oseman’s loveless), and two asexual characters she believes are also aromantic (yelena belova and roy hinkley). the rest of the characters mentioned are simply characters some people interpret as aromantic (dexter morgan, sherlock holmes, barney stinson, mike hanlon, and entrapta). it’s a little disappointing tbh. i think she could’ve done a deep dive and found some actual aromantic characters, especially depictions she views as positive, even if they ended up all being in comics/books rather than tv and movies (which she implies are more important since people are more likely to watch a marvel movie than read the comics, but that doesn’t mean the representation in less common forms of media should be disregarded).
other general notes: it’s repetitive at times. the author makes assumptions about the reader, which is irksome. the author speculates about the sexuality/romantic orientation of historical figures, which will never be my jam. i’m not a fan of the personal stories from anonymous people sprinkled throughout, because i’m more of an information/ideas girlie. some misuses or generalizations of terms like monogamy, amatonormative, and neurodivergent. and a really weird comment about how it’s “dangerous” for therapists to advise people to “date when they’re mentally ill,” like, are you saying mentally ill people shouldn’t date....?
content/trigger warnings; acephobia, arophobia (internal, external, institutional, social), amatonormativity, allonormativity, homophobia, transphobia, domestic abuse, verbal abuse, relationship trauma, sexual trauma, sex, corrective rape, ableism, bullying, cyber bullying, online harassment, depression, anxiety, self-harm, suicidal ideation, therapy, conversion therapy, slut shaming, misogyny,
as others have pointed out, this is very much a quick, basic 101 guide to aromanticism. which i don’t have anything against as a whole; they have their place in queer nonfiction and serve a purpose. the book covers the aromantic spectrum and various labels within it, different types of attraction and the split attraction model, the types of relationships arospec people can have, different types of arophobia and how to cope with it, aromantic representation, aromantic misconceptions and stereotypes, aromantic flags and symbols, and how to be an ally.
all valuable things to discuss, but i think the content of this book would’ve been better suited as an article, tumblr post, youtube video, or something else readily accessible and free. because the people who will benefit from this kind of introductory information probably aren’t going to purchase a book. they’re likely going to read an article that pops up on google, a tumblr post or twitter thread, a youtube or tiktok video, hell, even a carrd. and most of the people who have reviewed this book kind of validate that opinion for me, as they talk about how nothing in this book is new to them or offered them anything. the people who most need this information aren’t the ones reading the book, because they’re likely getting the information elsewhere.
either that, or the book should’ve had a little more time to cook. if the author had taken more time to flesh out the content, going more in-depth into the topics discussed and branching out more, it might have felt like a more complete, truly thought-out, worthwhile book that offers a unique perspective, a comprehensive look at aromantic experiences, or something you can’t get anywhere else. don’t get me wrong, i don’t have wholly negative feelings about the book, and i particularly like the author’s conversational/familiar tone as opposed to a more academic approach. overall, i think the book is important. even if it’s very rudimentary and nothing you can’t find on any given social media site, it can lead to the publishing of more in-depth, varied, and diverse books on aromanticism. outside of bigoted/harmful books, any queer nonfiction is a good thing and a step in the right direction.
one moment in the book that i really connected with is when the author talks about how she’s nervous that she refers to the aromantic community in the third person throughout the book. when posting on social media for contributions for the book, she received responses such as “are you on the aromantic spectrum yourself?” and “wording this as ‘their’ stories makes it sound like you’re no in the aro community yourself, or don’t think of yourself to be...” which she interpreted as “skeptical and mistrustful.” this is something i do more often than not. i write a lot about queer and pansexuals and experiences, and i usually say things like, “ask pansexual people how they feel” or “queer people are allowed to express themselves however they see fit” instead of “ask pansexuals how we feel” or “queer people are allowed to express ourselves however we see fit.” unlike the author, i don’t do this because i’m “unsure” of my place in these communities. it’s just how i talk. but i have thought things like, “this kind of makes it sound like i’m not part of these communities or aren’t including myself in what i’m saying” and gone back and forth on switching out “they” for “we” and wondered if other people took it that way. i personally would interpret those responses the same way the author did, like people are questioning whether i’m speaking on a community i don’t belong to or don’t have a right to or can’t be trusted to speak on. and that idea is really unfortunate and upsetting, even more so i imagine for people who actually are questioning their place in said communities. i don’t really know where i’m going with this, other than it’s just an interesting thing that i hadn’t seen someone express before.
now let’s get into the nitty gritty. one big thing for me is that the content of the book is very negative. not in the sense that the author is being negative, but the topics covered are on the negative side, such as feeling alone/broken/etc., forcing oneself into unwanted relationships, abuse/trauma, mental illness, internal and external arophobia, etc. and there’s nothing wrong with discussing these things, but when they’re the only experiences presented or examined with any kind of energy, it paints the picture that the aromantic experience is one inherently filled with pain. aside from a few brief mentions of the validation and community in finding a term for what you feel, there’s no real time given to aromantic joy, which is such a shame. it’s important to highlight the hardships, but it’s equally, if not more, important to highlight the joy.
the author puts a lot of expectations on arospec people in advising them to educate arophobes instead of laughing off their comments, stating coming out to people as arospec is a “necessary conversation” because it “increases awareness,” and advising allo people to ask arospec people questions about their arospec identity. i take issue with this, because arospec folks aren’t obligated to try to educate arophobes, come out to increase awareness/visibility, or field potentially ignorant or invasive questions about their identity and experiences. it’s a tall order, one that requires a lot of time, patience, and (emotional) energy that arospec people might not always have to give.
i wish the “are aros lgbt+?” section had been firmer in that, yes, they are. aromanticism is queer. period. on an individual level, you don’t have to consider yourself queer or lgbtqia+ or part of the community, but on the whole, in general, aromanticism is included. because being queer means you live outside the societal sexual/romantic/gender norms and expectations. aspec, gay/lesbian, mspec, transgender/nonbinary, intersex, polyamorous, kinky, etc. are all queer and part of the community.
the author talks a little about representation, specifically “bad representation” and honestly, i’ve come to view “bad representation” the same way i do “stereotypical representation,” in that it isn’t bad, wrong, or damaging as long as it isn’t the only representation or even just done in a thoughtful way. so, a pansexual character having sex with everyone all the time isn’t automatically “bad” and an aromantic character being a villain isn’t automatically “bad.” (besides, a lot of queer people actually gravitate more towards the morally grey and villainous characters rather than the perfect, pure characters.) and to be frank, three characters the author lists as “bad/stereotyped aromantic characters” aren’t even canonically aromantic. in general, the author only mentions two canonically aromantic characters, who also happen to be asexual (jughead jones and the main character of alice oseman’s loveless), and two asexual characters she believes are also aromantic (yelena belova and roy hinkley). the rest of the characters mentioned are simply characters some people interpret as aromantic (dexter morgan, sherlock holmes, barney stinson, mike hanlon, and entrapta). it’s a little disappointing tbh. i think she could’ve done a deep dive and found some actual aromantic characters, especially depictions she views as positive, even if they ended up all being in comics/books rather than tv and movies (which she implies are more important since people are more likely to watch a marvel movie than read the comics, but that doesn’t mean the representation in less common forms of media should be disregarded).
other general notes: it’s repetitive at times. the author makes assumptions about the reader, which is irksome. the author speculates about the sexuality/romantic orientation of historical figures, which will never be my jam. i’m not a fan of the personal stories from anonymous people sprinkled throughout, because i’m more of an information/ideas girlie. some misuses or generalizations of terms like monogamy, amatonormative, and neurodivergent. and a really weird comment about how it’s “dangerous” for therapists to advise people to “date when they’re mentally ill,” like, are you saying mentally ill people shouldn’t date....?
content/trigger warnings; acephobia, arophobia (internal, external, institutional, social), amatonormativity, allonormativity, homophobia, transphobia, domestic abuse, verbal abuse, relationship trauma, sexual trauma, sex, corrective rape, ableism, bullying, cyber bullying, online harassment, depression, anxiety, self-harm, suicidal ideation, therapy, conversion therapy, slut shaming, misogyny,
January 7, 2025
The scholarship on aromanticism is few and far between. I understand that. However, seeing Wikipedia articles and Wiki pages being cited multiple times in the reference sections of each chapter did negative things to my brain.
I saw this highlighted in other reviews and discussions about this book, and I have to agree that it could've benefited from waiting to be published. It felt more like the author's own personal introspection about being on the aromantic spectrum rather than a comprehensive text that discusses the identity. And that's fine, but it raises the question as to why this book is called a "guide."
I mean, there were multiple sections where the author outright says they don't know anything about the topic they're discussing and it made me think, "Then why are you writing about it?"
I saw this highlighted in other reviews and discussions about this book, and I have to agree that it could've benefited from waiting to be published. It felt more like the author's own personal introspection about being on the aromantic spectrum rather than a comprehensive text that discusses the identity. And that's fine, but it raises the question as to why this book is called a "guide."
I mean, there were multiple sections where the author outright says they don't know anything about the topic they're discussing and it made me think, "Then why are you writing about it?"
October 24, 2023
Actual rating 3.5 just for this existing as an an Aro-focused book.
Because this is among the first, if not somewhat THE first book exploring Aromanticism, rather than a book on asexuality or the a-spectrum that addresses aromanticism, I'm glad it exists.
However, this SLIM volume is not yet what folks looking to really dig into the complexities of aromantic orientation might be hoping for. Orientations within the a-spectrum are all VERY YOUNG in their history of receiving literary, academic, social, or media representation and analysis, but whereas asexuality texts now have the range of robust and journalistic works like Angela Chen's "Ace" and Sherronda Brown's "Refusing Compulsory Sexuality" as well as ace-for-ace conversational/memoir-lite guides like Eris Young's "Ace Voices" and Michele Kirichanskaya's "Ace Notes," "Hopeless Aromantic" feels more like a blog reflection prolegomena to the Aro texts yet to come.
While I appreciate the author's transparency in naming the label-flux/deconstruction they were experiencing as they wrote what was meant to be a self-identifying guide to Aro experience, there's an indeterminacy to the whole text that comes across more as "maybe this book needed to wait and ripen a bit" than "being on the a-sepctrum really is complex." The latter is of course true, but in a book subtitled "an affirmative guide," the lack of substance is a bit of a let down.
Still, better to have a mixed bag of "okay" or "not quite there yet" aro texts than none at all. The things in here do resonate—there just isn't much in here.
Looking forward hopefully to a bumper crop of Aro texts to follow this in the way that so many Ace texts have reached the surface this year. Truly, the more the merrier.
Because this is among the first, if not somewhat THE first book exploring Aromanticism, rather than a book on asexuality or the a-spectrum that addresses aromanticism, I'm glad it exists.
However, this SLIM volume is not yet what folks looking to really dig into the complexities of aromantic orientation might be hoping for. Orientations within the a-spectrum are all VERY YOUNG in their history of receiving literary, academic, social, or media representation and analysis, but whereas asexuality texts now have the range of robust and journalistic works like Angela Chen's "Ace" and Sherronda Brown's "Refusing Compulsory Sexuality" as well as ace-for-ace conversational/memoir-lite guides like Eris Young's "Ace Voices" and Michele Kirichanskaya's "Ace Notes," "Hopeless Aromantic" feels more like a blog reflection prolegomena to the Aro texts yet to come.
While I appreciate the author's transparency in naming the label-flux/deconstruction they were experiencing as they wrote what was meant to be a self-identifying guide to Aro experience, there's an indeterminacy to the whole text that comes across more as "maybe this book needed to wait and ripen a bit" than "being on the a-sepctrum really is complex." The latter is of course true, but in a book subtitled "an affirmative guide," the lack of substance is a bit of a let down.
Still, better to have a mixed bag of "okay" or "not quite there yet" aro texts than none at all. The things in here do resonate—there just isn't much in here.
Looking forward hopefully to a bumper crop of Aro texts to follow this in the way that so many Ace texts have reached the surface this year. Truly, the more the merrier.
January 23, 2024
Got 50% of the way through this and decided to add it to my DNF pile. As much as a book of this nature is needed, this one fell flat. The half that I read felt as though it was an extended Medium article. In my opinion, this book could actually be potentially more harmful than beneficial for helping someone understand aromanticism. It felt as if you were being spoken to by a well intended, yet misinformed friend. I do feel that the author was (unintentionally) providing readers with misinformation at times.
I was very upset to see that Wikipedia and Reddit were cited so much. Although this is an underrepresented topic, there are still high quality sources that could have been incorporated. For instance, when discussing repeatedly, almost as if the author was trying to convince herself that "being single isn't bad", the author could have cited research describing some merits of being single. Incorporating a few articles by Bella DePaulo would have added some credibility to this claim.
Don't get me started on the "quiz" to help you identify if you're aromantic. Yikes. It felt like a buzzfeed quiz. As someone who uses self-report measures to conduct research, this one doesn't even come close to something that I would consider valid or reliable. Not that the author makes these claims, but a lay person being introduced to this topic may perceive that this quiz is legitimate.
Other issues I had included that the author appeared too lazy to do a deep dive on the topic. One quote that stands out is "bear in mind it took me five seconds to find the Facebook page and the Reddit page. That's a lot of possibility in a very short space of time, so there's hope. Imagine what you could do with an hour!" Would have been nice if the author used an hour of their time to provide readers with better resources. Similarly, "there are also a lot of dating apps that allow you to simply search for friendships, but I've never been on them so I can't confirm". Bumble? The app is called Bumble. Even if you haven't used it, a simple search would explain how it works. Additionally, it might have been beneficial for the author to test out this app so they could talk about it more extensively. Lastly, the author makes up statistics about aromanticism because they aren't "good at maths". Don't include a statistic if you aren't willing to do the work to either calculate it or find a source that contains it.
I was very upset to see that Wikipedia and Reddit were cited so much. Although this is an underrepresented topic, there are still high quality sources that could have been incorporated. For instance, when discussing repeatedly, almost as if the author was trying to convince herself that "being single isn't bad", the author could have cited research describing some merits of being single. Incorporating a few articles by Bella DePaulo would have added some credibility to this claim.
Don't get me started on the "quiz" to help you identify if you're aromantic. Yikes. It felt like a buzzfeed quiz. As someone who uses self-report measures to conduct research, this one doesn't even come close to something that I would consider valid or reliable. Not that the author makes these claims, but a lay person being introduced to this topic may perceive that this quiz is legitimate.
Other issues I had included that the author appeared too lazy to do a deep dive on the topic. One quote that stands out is "bear in mind it took me five seconds to find the Facebook page and the Reddit page. That's a lot of possibility in a very short space of time, so there's hope. Imagine what you could do with an hour!" Would have been nice if the author used an hour of their time to provide readers with better resources. Similarly, "there are also a lot of dating apps that allow you to simply search for friendships, but I've never been on them so I can't confirm". Bumble? The app is called Bumble. Even if you haven't used it, a simple search would explain how it works. Additionally, it might have been beneficial for the author to test out this app so they could talk about it more extensively. Lastly, the author makes up statistics about aromanticism because they aren't "good at maths". Don't include a statistic if you aren't willing to do the work to either calculate it or find a source that contains it.
June 28, 2024
I think this would be a great resource for people who are questioning if they're aromantic or people who've just figured this out about themselves. For me personally, it didn't do much.
Based on the sub title, "An Affirmative Guide to Aromanticism", I expected more of a deep dive into aromanticism with insights and advice for aromantic people. This is more of an introductory guide though, and I already knew most of what's explained simply from existing on the internet. So I'm sure many readers will find this helpful, but I'm not really one of them.
I also really didn't get along with the author's voice, which can get annoying quickly in any book, but especially in a non-fiction book.
Based on the sub title, "An Affirmative Guide to Aromanticism", I expected more of a deep dive into aromanticism with insights and advice for aromantic people. This is more of an introductory guide though, and I already knew most of what's explained simply from existing on the internet. So I'm sure many readers will find this helpful, but I'm not really one of them.
I also really didn't get along with the author's voice, which can get annoying quickly in any book, but especially in a non-fiction book.
January 21, 2026
boli podwójnie, kiedy tak potrzebne książki zawodzą, zamiast się pokrzepić tylko się sfrustrowałam
jako osoba aroace mam niewygórowane wymagania wobec widoczności aseksualności i aromantyczności, więc cieszę się po prostu, że ta książka ISTNIEJE; przynajmniej jest napisana bez sensacji i patologizowania. rendle pisze o byciu aro, o presji amatonormatywnej, o relacjach nieromantycznych i o szukaniu dla siebie języka, który wreszcie coś porządkuje. dla wielu osób to może być pierwszy moment rozpoznania i ulgi. niestety…
ton jest skrajnie osobisty — momentami aż za bardzo — i autorka wyraźnie dominuje książkę sobą, swoimi opiniami i anegdotami, kosztem rzetelności (zwłaszcza, że przyznaje, że ma wątpliwości co do swojej aromantyczności). problematyczne było dla mnie to, że rendle otwarcie przyznaje się do braku researchu, cytuje wikipedię i często nie opiera się na solidnych podstawach teoretycznych czy naukowych, choć książka aspiruje do bycia „przewodnikiem”.
do tego sposób, w jaki pisze o zdrowiu psychicznym w kontekście określania własnej tożsamości, bywa niejednoznaczny i chwilami zwyczajnie nieostrożny.
to więc książka ważna jako głos, ale słaba jako opracowanie. jeśli szuka się pogłębionej refleksji, kontekstu czy narzędzi, to zdecydowanie za mało.
jako osoba aroace mam niewygórowane wymagania wobec widoczności aseksualności i aromantyczności, więc cieszę się po prostu, że ta książka ISTNIEJE; przynajmniej jest napisana bez sensacji i patologizowania. rendle pisze o byciu aro, o presji amatonormatywnej, o relacjach nieromantycznych i o szukaniu dla siebie języka, który wreszcie coś porządkuje. dla wielu osób to może być pierwszy moment rozpoznania i ulgi. niestety…
ton jest skrajnie osobisty — momentami aż za bardzo — i autorka wyraźnie dominuje książkę sobą, swoimi opiniami i anegdotami, kosztem rzetelności (zwłaszcza, że przyznaje, że ma wątpliwości co do swojej aromantyczności). problematyczne było dla mnie to, że rendle otwarcie przyznaje się do braku researchu, cytuje wikipedię i często nie opiera się na solidnych podstawach teoretycznych czy naukowych, choć książka aspiruje do bycia „przewodnikiem”.
do tego sposób, w jaki pisze o zdrowiu psychicznym w kontekście określania własnej tożsamości, bywa niejednoznaczny i chwilami zwyczajnie nieostrożny.
to więc książka ważna jako głos, ale słaba jako opracowanie. jeśli szuka się pogłębionej refleksji, kontekstu czy narzędzi, to zdecydowanie za mało.
November 18, 2023
i really wanted this book to be the comprehensive guide aromantic orientations need, but sadly, it didn’t work for me personally, and i saw it more as a good example of a blogpost i might’ve stumbled upon and gained a lot of insight from when initially looking around for information online.
i had a big issue with the references used—the amount of times wikipedia was cited, even when there would be countless more reliable sources, say, as an example for the definition of the word “spectrum”—and the lack of depth in which they were discussed. the implications of existence of an aromantic spectrum for amatonormativity (which is concerning people and issues even beyond aspec identities), issues around sexism and ableism, just to name a few, was barley touched upon. while i do admit that there isn’t (yet) much empirical evidence on aromantic people around that could’ve been summed up and discussed, i still feel this book could’ve been more, even if it had just focused more on individual stories and, for example, intersections with gender, race and neurodiversity.
i empathise with the personal struggle around personal labels and changing labels the author touches upon in several chapters, but personally think this lead to too much of a focus on microlabels (which are valid and can be beneficial for many reasons, of course) rather than acknowledging both aromanticism, but also all kinds of sexual and romantic identities as spectra that are continuously developing and more or less fluent across an individual lifetime.
all in all, i do appreciate the work that was put into publishing this by many people—including myself—long awaited book. self-publishing may have been the only way to go as of yet, which may explain some of the flaws in this book that would have profited from a more extensive editing process. still, i applaud the author for still going through with the publication even in the midst of struggling with if and how she may (still) fall on the aromantic spectrum.
i had a big issue with the references used—the amount of times wikipedia was cited, even when there would be countless more reliable sources, say, as an example for the definition of the word “spectrum”—and the lack of depth in which they were discussed. the implications of existence of an aromantic spectrum for amatonormativity (which is concerning people and issues even beyond aspec identities), issues around sexism and ableism, just to name a few, was barley touched upon. while i do admit that there isn’t (yet) much empirical evidence on aromantic people around that could’ve been summed up and discussed, i still feel this book could’ve been more, even if it had just focused more on individual stories and, for example, intersections with gender, race and neurodiversity.
i empathise with the personal struggle around personal labels and changing labels the author touches upon in several chapters, but personally think this lead to too much of a focus on microlabels (which are valid and can be beneficial for many reasons, of course) rather than acknowledging both aromanticism, but also all kinds of sexual and romantic identities as spectra that are continuously developing and more or less fluent across an individual lifetime.
all in all, i do appreciate the work that was put into publishing this by many people—including myself—long awaited book. self-publishing may have been the only way to go as of yet, which may explain some of the flaws in this book that would have profited from a more extensive editing process. still, i applaud the author for still going through with the publication even in the midst of struggling with if and how she may (still) fall on the aromantic spectrum.
January 8, 2024
You should legally have to disclose somewhere on your book if you’re a YouTuber. This book isn’t even a 101, I went in really wanting to know more and left even more confused. Several times the author admits how little searching they did, how they did not use the sources they recommended, and also just was beefing with Wikipedia even though it was the only source they used in the first few chapters?? Calling da vinci aromantic bc he said like “those who fall to lust are no better than beasts” HELLO?? The worst book I’ve read in a while, the best chapter was written by someone else (who is C.D.??) and that was the only one that really helped me understand at all. I went into this wanting to learn but oh my god how did an editor read this and think it was fine 😭😭
August 27, 2025
3.5 stars. This was a nice little Aromanticism 101 book that was a very supportive and mostly basic read. This wasn't anything all that special or delivered any new viewpoints, but I also don't think this book wasn't trying to do that.
To people who think this is gonna be a mostly academic read with numerous secondary sources and sociopolitical discussions: it's not that kind of book, and the book doesn't advertise itself as that. It quite literally says on the cover that this is an affirmative guide, and that's (mostly) what you get. Sure, I would've liked more academic research stuff as well, and I am somewhat upset that Wikipedia was cited MULTIPLE times as a major source, but... you know, the book doesn't try to be an academic piece of literature, and if you're already familiar with aro-ace discourse, this book won't tell you anything new.
I did appreciate the positivity and focus on multiple everyday sociopolitical and cultural issues that an aro person can/will face in the world. The author is trying to be very affirming and supportive in every regard, and I appreciate the positivity and general hopefulness the book is trying to give its readers. You could argue that the book is lacking a clear focus/red thread, but I can still appreciate that the author is trying to address as many potentially important issues as possible.
The writing style is mostly casual and even conversational at times, and I see how that can be hit or miss for most people. I personally wish a handful of more secondary had been used instead of citing Wikipedia multiple times... I also feel like the author was repeating themselves over and over again. I get that certain things need to be emphasised, but I don't need to hear the exact same encouragement 10 times throughout this already short book. The general content is sweet and affirming, but this won't be anything new to the "experienced" aro reader. This is mostly intended for people who are still discovering themselves and might need some guidance, so the aromanticism 101 vibe is VERY strong with this book.
This isn't a bad book by any means. It's just a little too simple and repetitive for my liking. However, I do think younger people and newly discovered aros will find something interesting in this book and might even receive some very much needed affirmation and support.
To people who think this is gonna be a mostly academic read with numerous secondary sources and sociopolitical discussions: it's not that kind of book, and the book doesn't advertise itself as that. It quite literally says on the cover that this is an affirmative guide, and that's (mostly) what you get. Sure, I would've liked more academic research stuff as well, and I am somewhat upset that Wikipedia was cited MULTIPLE times as a major source, but... you know, the book doesn't try to be an academic piece of literature, and if you're already familiar with aro-ace discourse, this book won't tell you anything new.
I did appreciate the positivity and focus on multiple everyday sociopolitical and cultural issues that an aro person can/will face in the world. The author is trying to be very affirming and supportive in every regard, and I appreciate the positivity and general hopefulness the book is trying to give its readers. You could argue that the book is lacking a clear focus/red thread, but I can still appreciate that the author is trying to address as many potentially important issues as possible.
The writing style is mostly casual and even conversational at times, and I see how that can be hit or miss for most people. I personally wish a handful of more secondary had been used instead of citing Wikipedia multiple times... I also feel like the author was repeating themselves over and over again. I get that certain things need to be emphasised, but I don't need to hear the exact same encouragement 10 times throughout this already short book. The general content is sweet and affirming, but this won't be anything new to the "experienced" aro reader. This is mostly intended for people who are still discovering themselves and might need some guidance, so the aromanticism 101 vibe is VERY strong with this book.
This isn't a bad book by any means. It's just a little too simple and repetitive for my liking. However, I do think younger people and newly discovered aros will find something interesting in this book and might even receive some very much needed affirmation and support.
September 13, 2025
4/5
This book meant a lot to me as I've been identifying as aroace for many years but never came to terms with it. There aren't many aromantic media available so I treasure every little thing we've got.
This book meant a lot to me as I've been identifying as aroace for many years but never came to terms with it. There aren't many aromantic media available so I treasure every little thing we've got.
Read
September 18, 2023a good read, there are very few non-fiction books on aromanticism so i really appreciate this!
however, this book felt very informal and had some weird formatting (with the inclusion of little conversations, added at the last minute). the overall structure seemed a little messy, like parts thrown around, and based on personal experiences instead of research. more of a retelling of the author’s personal experience regarding aromanticism — trying to figure things out, rather than informing the reader about things, which was interesting i guess? there’s nothing wrong with that, and it might be comforting to some arospec people, but i don’t feel like i gained a lot of insights through this
i think this is a good introduction to aromanticism, but pales in comparison to other more well-researched aspec books (such as Ace). if i were to rate this, it would get a 1.5-2* rating, but uhh i kind of feel bad doing that to indie books about a niche topic lol 💀
anyway lol i’m v aro and i like how my goodreads history has sort of tracked this journey
however, this book felt very informal and had some weird formatting (with the inclusion of little conversations, added at the last minute). the overall structure seemed a little messy, like parts thrown around, and based on personal experiences instead of research. more of a retelling of the author’s personal experience regarding aromanticism — trying to figure things out, rather than informing the reader about things, which was interesting i guess? there’s nothing wrong with that, and it might be comforting to some arospec people, but i don’t feel like i gained a lot of insights through this
i think this is a good introduction to aromanticism, but pales in comparison to other more well-researched aspec books (such as Ace). if i were to rate this, it would get a 1.5-2* rating, but uhh i kind of feel bad doing that to indie books about a niche topic lol 💀
anyway lol i’m v aro and i like how my goodreads history has sort of tracked this journey
March 4, 2024
so glad this exists and will be looking for more on aromanticism. i really appreciated the author’s vulnerability about her own labels and journey; her tone and stories felt like a hug. however, this was pretty surface level and i wanted a lot more depth and exploration! great for 101 / basics (as mentioned in many other reviews) but i want more.
it often felt like she was trying to be encouraging which ended up making me feel bummed? like it was framing aromanticism as a hardship or like aro people feel lonely from the start?? i don’t think this was intended but just something i noticed!
it often felt like she was trying to be encouraging which ended up making me feel bummed? like it was framing aromanticism as a hardship or like aro people feel lonely from the start?? i don’t think this was intended but just something i noticed!
October 18, 2023
A great book for those interested in learning about Aromantism or those just coming to terms/think they're aro. Also an aro-spec person, I'm happy that this book exists, even if I didn't gain much from it personally.
November 17, 2024
I have been doing a sort of a mini quest in my reading - looking for aromantic-oriented specifically non-fic books. Maybe this quest needs to come to an end.
"Hopeless Aromantic: An Affirmative Guide to Aromanticism" is exactly what the titles says it is - a guide. Being among the first of its sort, I think the author did a commendable job. Out of all the a(ro)-spec books I have read, so far this is the one I'd feel most comfortable recommending to people. It's written with a lot of compassion and good intentions towards both the aros and allos. I loved that and I think we can benefit from such bright attitude.
However, on a personal level it couldn't offer me much. This is best suited for baby aros and I want to believe people who need it, will find it. Personally, I felt a little bored and found myself skipping a paragraph here and there, it jurs became to feel repetitive at some point. It's not particularly the book's fault - I'm just a little bit out of its target audience. That's okay tho, I'm glad such book exists. It is really made with aromanticism visibility purposes and I just crave something deeper than that.
I'd say I appreciate the author's transparency here. They do talk about their journey and the things they struggled with. Not gonna lie, I felt a little... betrayed? a silly thing probably? when the author says how they have a partner they're crazy in love with and later mentioned they'd want to marry. It felt a little amiss a person in committeed romantic relationship to write a book for aromantic people. I think I came to change my opinion, especially as the author talks more about their struggles with dating and labels and their time in the a-community. I guess we can say I had presumed for the author to write such book, they'd have to be 'strictly' aromantic. I think I actually ended up respecting the author a little more because they took the time to write AND publish a whole book on the topic when they could have left this part of their life behind them.
I think in the end of the day, it's an adequate piece of work on the topic so I don't want to nitpick the author's own identity, however they consider it or changes. It is truly nothing more than a guide but one written with a lot of care.
_____________________________________
(The only issue (a very small one) I have - as in the text's content - is when in the beginning of chapter they say that they find homophobia and arophobia to be extremely offensive and ironic. Because it suggests arophobia is a mental condition and that arophobics are terrified of aromantic people, according to the author? This, as funny and misguidedly cute as it is, was annoying. Because, no, actually this is not the thing these words are trying to suggest. The author would have benefited from a little more abstract or philosophical thinking, if you will.
Hate comes from fear. Hate towards such minorities comes from fear of the unknown. Fear of the 'other', of the alien and of this different from you. And when we don't know somthing we tent to fear it and therefore seek to destroy it. It's a social construct often build on racism and prejudice against marginalized groups. Homophobia, xenophobia - they're not the same as arachnophobia or vomiting phobia. They're just not.
HOWEVER, that's literally just two paragraphs that intented to be the beginning of a chapter. I was just annoyed by it and had to address it because I'm petty like that, it's really not the tone of the whole book.)
"Hopeless Aromantic: An Affirmative Guide to Aromanticism" is exactly what the titles says it is - a guide. Being among the first of its sort, I think the author did a commendable job. Out of all the a(ro)-spec books I have read, so far this is the one I'd feel most comfortable recommending to people. It's written with a lot of compassion and good intentions towards both the aros and allos. I loved that and I think we can benefit from such bright attitude.
However, on a personal level it couldn't offer me much. This is best suited for baby aros and I want to believe people who need it, will find it. Personally, I felt a little bored and found myself skipping a paragraph here and there, it jurs became to feel repetitive at some point. It's not particularly the book's fault - I'm just a little bit out of its target audience. That's okay tho, I'm glad such book exists. It is really made with aromanticism visibility purposes and I just crave something deeper than that.
I'd say I appreciate the author's transparency here. They do talk about their journey and the things they struggled with. Not gonna lie, I felt a little... betrayed? a silly thing probably? when the author says how they have a partner they're crazy in love with and later mentioned they'd want to marry. It felt a little amiss a person in committeed romantic relationship to write a book for aromantic people. I think I came to change my opinion, especially as the author talks more about their struggles with dating and labels and their time in the a-community. I guess we can say I had presumed for the author to write such book, they'd have to be 'strictly' aromantic. I think I actually ended up respecting the author a little more because they took the time to write AND publish a whole book on the topic when they could have left this part of their life behind them.
I think in the end of the day, it's an adequate piece of work on the topic so I don't want to nitpick the author's own identity, however they consider it or changes. It is truly nothing more than a guide but one written with a lot of care.
_____________________________________
(The only issue (a very small one) I have - as in the text's content - is when in the beginning of chapter they say that they find homophobia and arophobia to be extremely offensive and ironic. Because it suggests arophobia is a mental condition and that arophobics are terrified of aromantic people, according to the author? This, as funny and misguidedly cute as it is, was annoying. Because, no, actually this is not the thing these words are trying to suggest. The author would have benefited from a little more abstract or philosophical thinking, if you will.
Hate comes from fear. Hate towards such minorities comes from fear of the unknown. Fear of the 'other', of the alien and of this different from you. And when we don't know somthing we tent to fear it and therefore seek to destroy it. It's a social construct often build on racism and prejudice against marginalized groups. Homophobia, xenophobia - they're not the same as arachnophobia or vomiting phobia. They're just not.
HOWEVER, that's literally just two paragraphs that intented to be the beginning of a chapter. I was just annoyed by it and had to address it because I'm petty like that, it's really not the tone of the whole book.)
January 17, 2025
Very much gives- Im aromantic and I did a few Google searches. Anyhow this book lacks any depth about the topic it’s writing, it feels just like a bunch of article titles sticker together without any thought behind it. And maybe I’m the only one but I think that there should be a 100 reminders that you are valid blah blah blah, like okay… what about actually telling something useful
November 9, 2024
Den Start fand ich persönlich etwas holprig, aber das hat sich schnell geändert. Ich habe viel Neues gelernt, viel reflektiert und hinterfragt. Wird mich noch eine Weile beschäftigen.
September 23, 2023
I wanted to like this book a lot more than I actually did. It’s not bad, but it is incredible basic, the author’s writing style is almost too relaxed and casual (to the point where she qualifies how much she is not an expert so often that I’m not sure why she is writing in thr first place?), and there is occasionally a lack of focus on the specific topic of the chapter. I don’t know, I had really hoped for something more in-depth and thoughtful, or even something by a more experienced writer who was more engaged with the community. If someone entirely new to the concept is looking for a very basic introduction on the concept of aromanticism, this isn’t a bad choice, but if you are aro and looking for more than that, this probably isn’t the book for you.
February 17, 2024
Samantha Rendle has dropped all of her labels. That is fine. I get joy from my labels, but nobody is obligated to use labels if they don't want to.
Anyway, as some other reviewers have mentioned, this book is more of a basis 101 introduction to aromanticism. The language is very informal, which makes this an easy and accessible read. There are brief definitions of aromantic and its microlabels. It is also nice that there are quotes from people who are on the aromantic spectrum. Although in the section where she lists famous aromantic people, the only author she includes is Alice Oseman, when Claudie Arseneault is one of the biggest names when it comes to aromanticism and asexuality.
Aromanticism is one of the most ignored and misunderstood identities outside of LGBTQ+ spaces, and books like this can be helpful in bringing awareness and hopefully acceptance. This is not a perfect book by any means, but I'm still glad it exists and I would still recommend it. I would just advise that readers seek out more sources instead of just completely relying on this book.
Anyway, as some other reviewers have mentioned, this book is more of a basis 101 introduction to aromanticism. The language is very informal, which makes this an easy and accessible read. There are brief definitions of aromantic and its microlabels. It is also nice that there are quotes from people who are on the aromantic spectrum. Although in the section where she lists famous aromantic people, the only author she includes is Alice Oseman, when Claudie Arseneault is one of the biggest names when it comes to aromanticism and asexuality.
Aromanticism is one of the most ignored and misunderstood identities outside of LGBTQ+ spaces, and books like this can be helpful in bringing awareness and hopefully acceptance. This is not a perfect book by any means, but I'm still glad it exists and I would still recommend it. I would just advise that readers seek out more sources instead of just completely relying on this book.
October 18, 2023
This book was very digestable and easy to read. I am glad it exists. The authorndoes a good job touching on the label with an nuanced opinion, which I think is important. She describes this as a part of her identity which was more relevant in the past but still shares a lot of helpful information which is not so easily acquired online. De mystifying the concept of aromanticism to those who are alien to it.
Some of her turns of phrase rubbed me a bit the wrong way but overall it was a useful read.
Some of her turns of phrase rubbed me a bit the wrong way but overall it was a useful read.
May 1, 2024
While it was great to find a book that focusses on aromanticism, this book did not explore the topic with the depth I was looking for. It didn't add anything new that I did not see in "What is aromanticism/Signs you might be aromantic"-type videos and other resources online.
There were also sections that would have benefited from more research or from looking outside of the US/UK. For example, the sections on arophobia and aro representation in the media. The book would generally also have been strengthened by having more of an intersectional approach to many of its topics.
Still, hoping this opens the door to more books on aromanticism.
There were also sections that would have benefited from more research or from looking outside of the US/UK. For example, the sections on arophobia and aro representation in the media. The book would generally also have been strengthened by having more of an intersectional approach to many of its topics.
Still, hoping this opens the door to more books on aromanticism.
September 17, 2023
2.5/5
This book did not work for me. I found it a little too brief/basic on details and got a little confused on who the audience was. There was one chapter where the author started addressing allies and then jumped to aro people. I did like the inclusion of aromantic folks' perspectives and experiences and there were definitely moments, but otherwise I found the book a bit of a slog and regularly wanted more information/details.
I think this could be a good intro book for someone who's never really heard the term or seen much online.
This book did not work for me. I found it a little too brief/basic on details and got a little confused on who the audience was. There was one chapter where the author started addressing allies and then jumped to aro people. I did like the inclusion of aromantic folks' perspectives and experiences and there were definitely moments, but otherwise I found the book a bit of a slog and regularly wanted more information/details.
I think this could be a good intro book for someone who's never really heard the term or seen much online.
December 21, 2023
”You’re too important to forget.”
One of the most informative books I’ve ever read!
The author does a solid job explaining all the terms that get thrown around when the topic is aromanticism and asexuality and weaves their personal experiences with actual information quite well!
One of the most informative books I’ve ever read!
The author does a solid job explaining all the terms that get thrown around when the topic is aromanticism and asexuality and weaves their personal experiences with actual information quite well!
June 28, 2024
So. I believe that this is an important book for aromantic visibility, but it coexists with the feeling of I wanted something more as well. However, increasing representation is important and I’m here for it :)
February 22, 2024
It's alright. I found only a small section of the book was helpful to me, would get this book if you started to identify with aro; not if you already identify as one.
Read
June 9, 2025happy pride to my fellow aro baddies out there 💚
July 1, 2024
I was looking for a book to better understand this minority of a minority and this slight, YouTuber penned, volume wasn't it.
February 8, 2026
I got a mere 20 pages in and already found myself hate-reading this. I guess it was a bad sign when the forward of this book was written by a problematic queer author who published her own book in which she basically defended J.K. Rowling. That probably should’ve been the first red flag…Speaking as someone who’s currently questioning whether she could be on the aro spectrum as well as just wanting to learn more, I was really intrigued to read an affirmative guide on aromanticism! But from the get go, the author just sort of rubbed me the wrong way.
First off staunchly separating aromantics from asexuals
Now, I get why you would want to clarify the difference between aromantics and asexuals—because they are two separate identities, and it’s common for people to automatically lump the two together or assume that everyone is aroace when that’s not always the case. But the way the author speaks of asexuality, there seems to be a lot of tension there, with the author claiming that asexuals get all the representation and that, hey, at least people don’t think you’re dead inside when you’re asexual like they think about aromantics. It’s just a lot of animosity being thrown at asexuals and creating this unnecessary beef between the two identities, which is interesting, considering that in the real world, I feel like this isn’t the case? Like, asexuals and aromantics are not just out here beefing with each other. If anything, we consider each other close allies within the LGBTQIA+ community because we’re both very “othered” and misunderstood identities who are constantly made to feel like we’re not “queer” enough to belong. And yes, we also have similar to overlapping experiences, so our instinct is more often to help and validate each other. So wouldn’t it make more sense to be a united front than to try to set yourself apart from each asexuals so strongly? Because trust us… it’s no picnic for us either.
Compulsively labeling everyone aromantic: A rant
At one point, the author is talking about how aromantics have probably always existed throughout history. Which, true! But then goes on to speculate that essentially anyone in history who never married or remained single could’ve potentially been aromantic.
”Sounds pretty aromantic to me!”
Uh… no? Not necessarily??
And this is where it lost me. She notes Da Vinci as an example. Rumors speculated that Da Vinci was gay and “dabbled in a spot of sodomy.” But the author then goes on to say that maybe he was gay and aromantic! But by that logic… you could literally just speculate that anyone in history ever could’ve been aromantic without any actual evidence. That’s just a really lofty claim that could apply to virtually anyone in history who was single, and there simply isn’t any way to definitively know that—which is convenient for the author because, without any solid evidence either way, she could still say, “... But it’s possible!
NO.
That isn’t enough evidence to go off of!
That’s also famously not how you’re supposed to study and examine history from a queer lens, by the way. You have to take into consideration the historical context, the attitudes and societal norms at the time—not just apply everything through a 2010 Tumblr fandom lens. But then again, this is why this author is not a researcher, and it clearly shows in moments like this.
She then goes on to highlight Barney Stinson as an aromantic figure
*tired sigh*
*cracks knuckles*
Clearly someone didn’t watch the show, so allow me to educate you.
Barney’s disinterest in commitment is completely grounded in being an unfortunate product of toxic masculinity. He was in a committed, romantic relationship early on in his life with Shannon (if you know, you know). It wasn’t until she broke up with him and left him for a man who embodied a more hegemonic masculine ideal that he tried to embody that himself. From that day on, he rejects any form of commitment as a defense mechanism from ever getting too emotionally vulnerable with another person again, to keep himself from getting hurt. That’s the whole internal struggle of his character. He also goes on to enter a number of romantic relationships over the course of the series (i.e.: Robin, Nora, Quinn) that are hugely pivotal to his own growth as a character.
He. Is not. AROMANTIC. And if you think that, then you’ve truly missed the entire point of his character.
Friendships..?
The author��s guide to friendships is so funny in this book. Like, just from the way she speaks about her own experiences, she comes across as that one needy person who just CAN’T seem to keep friends in her life… and she doesn’t know why! Early on in the book, she admits to feeling insecure whenever she would see her best friend posting pictures of herself hanging out with other people (“Like, excuse me, you’re my friend”) and then follows up by reassuring the reader that “the right people will stay.” Like, don’t get me wrong, I’ve totally been in that situation where a friend didn’t know how to balance their friendships while they were in a relationship. But the way the author writes, she makes it seem like any friend who begins a relationship is abandoning her or is some sort of traitor. It’s giving victim complex and honestly comes across as deeply immature. So it’s not at all surprising that the author struggles with keeping friends in her life. Like, girl, maybe the reason you keep getting dumped by friends is because you act like a brat the second their entire world doesn’t revolve around you. Just saying.
This is made all the more evident when she talks about having work friends—the best part, of course, being that they’re free of romance! They can’t suddenly fall into a relationship and leave you!
Girl. Grow. Up.
She then seems to contract herself later on when discussing queerplatonic relationships: “many of us need that commitment; some of us need the reassurance that we are wanted and loved.” So, it’s okay for you to seek out this kind of relationship with someone (albeit, platonic) but it’s unfair when your allosexual friends want that for themselves?
….Mmk.
Makes sense.
There’s even a point in their guide to aromantics for supporting allies where the author says: “I have to admit I have been guilty of this, but please try not to be pleased if your allo friend’s relationship doesn’t work out. Yes, they’ll have more time for you, but remember that this person is grieving and in pain.”
BRUH.
What.
What kind of person is selfishly happy that their friend’s relationship imploded because yippee, they have more time for me now?? This is what I mean about the author coming across as deeply clingy and immature. The issues that the author has seem much deeper beyond just being aromantic, that’s all I’m saying…
Final Thoughts
Don’t get me wrong: this book does have some merit. It can prove to be useful for anyone interested in learning more about the aromantic identity, while also providing some helpful reassurance for those who may feel they fall on the aromantic spectrum. I just wish someone else had written this. I didn’t vibe with the author. I just found her to be pretty immature at times, and she absolutely came across as a random Tumblr blog who decided to write a book, from a very chronically online perspective.
First off staunchly separating aromantics from asexuals
Now, I get why you would want to clarify the difference between aromantics and asexuals—because they are two separate identities, and it’s common for people to automatically lump the two together or assume that everyone is aroace when that’s not always the case. But the way the author speaks of asexuality, there seems to be a lot of tension there, with the author claiming that asexuals get all the representation and that, hey, at least people don’t think you’re dead inside when you’re asexual like they think about aromantics. It’s just a lot of animosity being thrown at asexuals and creating this unnecessary beef between the two identities, which is interesting, considering that in the real world, I feel like this isn’t the case? Like, asexuals and aromantics are not just out here beefing with each other. If anything, we consider each other close allies within the LGBTQIA+ community because we’re both very “othered” and misunderstood identities who are constantly made to feel like we’re not “queer” enough to belong. And yes, we also have similar to overlapping experiences, so our instinct is more often to help and validate each other. So wouldn’t it make more sense to be a united front than to try to set yourself apart from each asexuals so strongly? Because trust us… it’s no picnic for us either.
Compulsively labeling everyone aromantic: A rant
At one point, the author is talking about how aromantics have probably always existed throughout history. Which, true! But then goes on to speculate that essentially anyone in history who never married or remained single could’ve potentially been aromantic.
”Sounds pretty aromantic to me!”
Uh… no? Not necessarily??
And this is where it lost me. She notes Da Vinci as an example. Rumors speculated that Da Vinci was gay and “dabbled in a spot of sodomy.” But the author then goes on to say that maybe he was gay and aromantic! But by that logic… you could literally just speculate that anyone in history ever could’ve been aromantic without any actual evidence. That’s just a really lofty claim that could apply to virtually anyone in history who was single, and there simply isn’t any way to definitively know that—which is convenient for the author because, without any solid evidence either way, she could still say, “... But it’s possible!
NO.
That isn’t enough evidence to go off of!
That’s also famously not how you’re supposed to study and examine history from a queer lens, by the way. You have to take into consideration the historical context, the attitudes and societal norms at the time—not just apply everything through a 2010 Tumblr fandom lens. But then again, this is why this author is not a researcher, and it clearly shows in moments like this.
She then goes on to highlight Barney Stinson as an aromantic figure
*tired sigh*
*cracks knuckles*
Clearly someone didn’t watch the show, so allow me to educate you.
Barney’s disinterest in commitment is completely grounded in being an unfortunate product of toxic masculinity. He was in a committed, romantic relationship early on in his life with Shannon (if you know, you know). It wasn’t until she broke up with him and left him for a man who embodied a more hegemonic masculine ideal that he tried to embody that himself. From that day on, he rejects any form of commitment as a defense mechanism from ever getting too emotionally vulnerable with another person again, to keep himself from getting hurt. That’s the whole internal struggle of his character. He also goes on to enter a number of romantic relationships over the course of the series (i.e.: Robin, Nora, Quinn) that are hugely pivotal to his own growth as a character.
He. Is not. AROMANTIC. And if you think that, then you’ve truly missed the entire point of his character.
Friendships..?
The author��s guide to friendships is so funny in this book. Like, just from the way she speaks about her own experiences, she comes across as that one needy person who just CAN’T seem to keep friends in her life… and she doesn’t know why! Early on in the book, she admits to feeling insecure whenever she would see her best friend posting pictures of herself hanging out with other people (“Like, excuse me, you’re my friend”) and then follows up by reassuring the reader that “the right people will stay.” Like, don’t get me wrong, I’ve totally been in that situation where a friend didn’t know how to balance their friendships while they were in a relationship. But the way the author writes, she makes it seem like any friend who begins a relationship is abandoning her or is some sort of traitor. It’s giving victim complex and honestly comes across as deeply immature. So it’s not at all surprising that the author struggles with keeping friends in her life. Like, girl, maybe the reason you keep getting dumped by friends is because you act like a brat the second their entire world doesn’t revolve around you. Just saying.
This is made all the more evident when she talks about having work friends—the best part, of course, being that they’re free of romance! They can’t suddenly fall into a relationship and leave you!
Girl. Grow. Up.
She then seems to contract herself later on when discussing queerplatonic relationships: “many of us need that commitment; some of us need the reassurance that we are wanted and loved.” So, it’s okay for you to seek out this kind of relationship with someone (albeit, platonic) but it’s unfair when your allosexual friends want that for themselves?
….Mmk.
Makes sense.
There’s even a point in their guide to aromantics for supporting allies where the author says: “I have to admit I have been guilty of this, but please try not to be pleased if your allo friend’s relationship doesn’t work out. Yes, they’ll have more time for you, but remember that this person is grieving and in pain.”
BRUH.
What.
What kind of person is selfishly happy that their friend’s relationship imploded because yippee, they have more time for me now?? This is what I mean about the author coming across as deeply clingy and immature. The issues that the author has seem much deeper beyond just being aromantic, that’s all I’m saying…
Final Thoughts
Don’t get me wrong: this book does have some merit. It can prove to be useful for anyone interested in learning more about the aromantic identity, while also providing some helpful reassurance for those who may feel they fall on the aromantic spectrum. I just wish someone else had written this. I didn’t vibe with the author. I just found her to be pretty immature at times, and she absolutely came across as a random Tumblr blog who decided to write a book, from a very chronically online perspective.
May 18, 2025
Wikipedia comme seule source au secours à l’aide venez me sauver amenez moi ma salière 🧂
Très grosse déception 😞…
Je sais pas comment c’est possible de pondre un truc pareil…
Y’a aucun travail de recherche ou d’effort 🤡 (la source principale c’est WIKIPEDIA qui est même CITÉ)
L’autrice dit même qu’elle n’a pas besoin de faire des recherches sur un truc « parce qu’elle a trois amis autistes » 🤡 ?! Genre comment ça ça justifie ton absence de travail ?! AU SECOURS 🛟
Elle va même jusqu’à sortir que Leonard de Vinci était aromantique parce qu’il n’était pas marié ??? Le mariage pour tous 🏳️🌈 avait l’air d’exister au 16e siècle ??
Il n’y a aucune structure, des infos sorties de nul part ou alors pas forcément prioritaires vu le manque de développement du livre 📖…
Une étoile ⭐️ parce qu’il n’y a pas assez de lire sur le sujet mais c’est vraiment pas une bonne lecture 🤡
Très grosse déception 😞…
Je sais pas comment c’est possible de pondre un truc pareil…
Y’a aucun travail de recherche ou d’effort 🤡 (la source principale c’est WIKIPEDIA qui est même CITÉ)
L’autrice dit même qu’elle n’a pas besoin de faire des recherches sur un truc « parce qu’elle a trois amis autistes » 🤡 ?! Genre comment ça ça justifie ton absence de travail ?! AU SECOURS 🛟
Elle va même jusqu’à sortir que Leonard de Vinci était aromantique parce qu’il n’était pas marié ??? Le mariage pour tous 🏳️🌈 avait l’air d’exister au 16e siècle ??
Il n’y a aucune structure, des infos sorties de nul part ou alors pas forcément prioritaires vu le manque de développement du livre 📖…
Une étoile ⭐️ parce qu’il n’y a pas assez de lire sur le sujet mais c’est vraiment pas une bonne lecture 🤡
February 21, 2024
It's great that people are writing about aromanticism but this book is heavily biased to one person's partial journey through life and frankly has minimal exploration of the different types of relationships that exist on the aromantic spectrum, it feels like there was very little research involved.
Also lacks psychological inquisitiveness and exploration of the tensions that exist when clearly engaging in romantic activity but not feeling comfortable in a romantic relationship.
If you're looking to explore your own feelings of aromanticism I'd suggest finding other people to talk to or a group, this book falls quite short.
Also lacks psychological inquisitiveness and exploration of the tensions that exist when clearly engaging in romantic activity but not feeling comfortable in a romantic relationship.
If you're looking to explore your own feelings of aromanticism I'd suggest finding other people to talk to or a group, this book falls quite short.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 60 reviews