Arospec identities stigmatization

This survey was conducted by aro-neir-o on tumblr, and following is the report of eir findings in eir own words

DEMOGRAPHICS

There were 623 responses to the survey. 357 of these responses were complete - these participants completed the survey in its entirety.

People were recruited from Tumblr, the Arocalypse online forums, and the Arocalypse Discord server. Snowballing was used as a technique for recruitment, so there may also have been participants who were recruited indirectly through other participants.

The survey was only made available in English.

Age

Over 50% of the participants in the study were between the ages of 18 and 24. Over 25% of the participants were under 18. The rest of the participants were aged 25 to 34, with a small minority being over 35.

Gender

Over 50% the participants surveyed reported being non-binary, genderqueer, and/or an other gender identity. Just under 50% of all participants reported being cisgender women. Transgender men and cisgender men also participated, but in small numbers.

Note: I separated out cisgender and transgender identities for the purpose of analyzing intersectionality. It may be the case that transgender people who are aromantic navigate microaggressions and stigmatization differently than transgender people who are not aromantic or aromantic people who are not transgender. Unfortunately, there were not enough responses for me to run this statistically, but other queer-focused studies have noticed intersections of queer identities affecting life experiences.

Racial and Ethnic background

A significant majority (read: over 75%) of participants in this survey identified as white. Most of these participants (about 75% of that 75%) did not specify further than “white,” but those who did specify fell into European, North American, and Australian/New Zealander categories.

After white persons, the next most common demographic was Asian, followed by Latinx, Mixed race, Jewish, Hispanic or Portuguese, Native or Indigenous, and finally, Black or African.

Note: In cases where ethnic backgrounds are reported together in these results, these categories were combined based on low numbers and relative appropriateness. Broad categories were determined based on several different Census conventions (e.g., Canadian Census categories) as well as categories used to report demographics in a variety of academic studies. If you are curious about which ethnicities went into which categories, you can ask me for more elaboration. People who reported multiple identities were counted in both or all relevant groups or put into the mixed race category, depending on the person’s answer (e.g., if they explicitly wrote “mixed race” or not).

(Romantic) Orientation

Almost 75% of the participants surveyed identified as broadly Aromantic. The next most represented orientations were Demiromantic and Greyromantic, accounting for 12.5% of the total (6.25% each). Participants in the Other category were the next most represented, followed by Quoiromantic, Aro-spec, Aroflux, and Lithromantic or Akoiromantic people.

Other identities captured in this survey include: fictorimantic, sansromantic, aegoromantic, abroromantic, cupioromantic, nebularomantic, oriented aromantic, non-SAM-using asexual, non-SAM-using aromantic, and queer.

Partnership Status

Almost 50% of all respondents reported being single with no intention to marry at the time of the survey. About 33% of respondents reported being single (never married). Single people therefore made up the vast majority (read: about 83%) of the survey respondents.

The next most represented participants were those dating or Other. A very small minority reported being married, and an even smaller minority reported being divorced or separated from their partner(s).

Do you consider yourself polyamorous?

Just over 25% of respondents considered themselves polyamorous. The rest (i.e., the majority) did not consider themselves polyamorous.

Have you ever been diagnosed with a physical or psychological condition? Does this have any bearing on your view of aromanticism?

About 60% of respondents reported having been diagnosed with a physical or psychological condition. Of the people who had been diagnosed with a physical or psychological condition, almost 30% reported that their condition does have a bearing on their view of aromanticism.

SURVEY QUESTION RESULTS

The following questionnaires are revisions made by the researcher to Foster (2017)’s revisions of existing queer/LGBT scales. Foster (2017) applied an Asexual focus to the scales. The researcher for this study applied an Aromantic focus, changing terminology where appropriate.

Experiences of Aromanticism

The diversity of the aromantic community was highlighted in the response rates to the following items.

I experience romantic attraction toward other people: 22% True, 78% False
I lack interest in romantic activities: 77.5% True, 22.5% False
I don’t feel that I fit the conventional categories of romantic orientation such as heteroromantic, homoromantic (gay or lesbian), or biromantic: 92% True, 8% False
The thought of romantic activities repulses me: 52% True, 48% False
I find myself experiencing romantic attraction toward another person: 17.5% True, 82.5% False
I am confused by how much interest and time other people put into romantic relationships: 85% True, 15% False
The term “non-romantic” would be an accurate description of my romanticism: 70.5% True, 29.5% False
I would be relieved if I was told that I never had to engage in any sort of romantic activities again: 77% True, 23% False
I go to great lengths to avoid situations where romance might be expected of me: 76% True, 24% False
My ideal relationship would not involve traditionally romantic activities: 73.5% True, 26.5% False
Romance has no place in my life: 70% True, 30% False

Aromantic Microaggressions Scale (AroMS)

Of the participants who experienced microaggressions against them (i.e., participants who responded with frequency ratings greater than 1), the following trends were observed.

Generally, participants reported experiencing microaggressions aimed against them at a rate of “sometimes” (mean=2.84/5). Participants reported these incidences as moderately distressing (mean=3.69/5).
The most frequently reported aggression against aros was others telling them that there is no such thing as aromantic discrimination or prejudice (mean=3.39/5, sometimes to often). This moderately distressed participants (mean=3.72/5).
The most distressing aggression against aros was aros being propositioned for pursuing romantic relationships because they were aro-spec (quite distressing, mean=4.01/5; occurring once in a while, mean=2.68/5). As well, participants found that being threatened with harm was quite distressing (mean=3.90/5; occurring once in a while, mean=2.5/5). The latter was also the least frequently reported occurrence.
The least distressing aggression reported was being asked to provide examples of how aros knew they are aro-spec (mean=3.2/5, meaning being bothered a little bit to moderately).

MOST OFTEN EXPERIENCED TO LEAST OFTEN EXPERIENCED

Others have told me that there is no such thing as aromantic discrimination or prejudice
I have been made to feel inferior by others because I am aro-spec
I have been told that I am aromantic because I haven’t met the right person yet
Others have assumed that I choose to be aro-spec
I have been told that aromanticism “isn’t real”
I have been asked to provide examples of how I know I am aro-spec
I have been told that being aro-spec is against human nature
I have been told that no one will want me as a relationship partner because I am aro-spec
I have heard non-aro-spec people speculate about the ‘cause’ of my aromanticism
I have been called derogatory names (e.g., “manipulative” or “freak”) in relation to my aromanticism
I have been told that aromanticism is a form of dysfunction or illness, not a valid way to identify
I have been propositioned for pursuing romantic relationships because I am aro-spec (e.g., “I’ll show you what you’re missing”)
I have been harassed because I am aro-spec
I have been told that I am “not healthy” because I am aro-spec
People have asked me if sexual/relationship trauma is the reason I am aro-spec
I have been threatened with harm because I am aro-spec

MOST DISTRESSING TO LEAST DISTRESSING

I have been propositioned for pursuing romantic relationships because I am aro-spec (e.g., “I’ll show you what you’re missing”)
I have been threatened with harm because I am aro-spec
I have been made to feel inferior by others because I am aro-spec
I have been told that aromanticism is a form of dysfunction or illness, not a valid way to identify
I have been told that aromanticism “isn’t real”
I have been called derogatory names (e.g., “manipulative” or “freak”) in relation to my aromanticism
I have been told that being aro-spec is against human nature
I have been told that I am aromantic because I haven’t met the right person
Others have told me that there is no such thing as aromantic discrimination or prejudice
I have been harassed because I am aro-spec
I have heard non-aro-spec people speculate about the ‘cause’ of my aromanticism
I have been told that I am “not healthy” because I am aro-spec
People have asked me if sexual/relationship trauma is the reason I am aro-spec
I have been told that no one will want me as a relationship partner because I am aro-spec
Others have assumed that I choose to be aro-spec
I have been asked to provide examples of how I know I am aro-spec

Stigma Consciousness Questionnaire (SCQ)

This scale is a common and reliable questionnaire used to measure how aware respondents are of stigmas others have toward the respondents’ community.

The most agreed upon item for all respondents was that most non-aro-spec people have a lot more anti-aromantic thoughts than they actually express (mean=4.03/6 or slightly agree)
The most disagreed upon item for all respondents was that most non-aro-spec people do not judge aro-spec people on the basis of their lack of romantic attraction (mean=2.66/6 or slightly to moderately disagree)
Particularly variable were participants’ responses to the item “I never worry that my behaviors will be viewed as stereotypical of aro-spec people.” Similarly, responses to the item “stereotypes about aro-spec people have not affected me personally” were variable.

Collective Self-Esteem Scale (CSES)

This scale is used to measure the aromantic community’s collective self-esteem.

Most agreed-upon item internally (i.e., response with least variance) was “overall, aro-spec people are considered good by others,” with the response slightly disagreeing (mean=3.22/7)
Respondents also generally agreed that others do not respect aro-spec people (mean=3.13/7 or slightly disagree)
Respondents were ambivalent about “most people consider aro-spec people, on the average, to be more ineffective than other social groups” (mean=4.36/7, or ambivalent, but with quite a bit of variance)

In general, respondents’ thoughts were that the aro community is not well-respected, liked, or considered good by others in society, to a slight degree

The Heterosexist Harassment, Rejection, and Discrimination Scale for Aromantics (HHRDS-A Aro)

For the participants for which these questions were applicable (i.e., for participants who reported frequencies greater than 0), the following trends were observed.

The most frequently reported aromantic discrimination from participants was hearing anti-aromantic remarks from family members – on average, happening once in a while to sometimes (mean=2.68/6)
The least frequently reported aromantic discrimination from participants was being denied a raise – on average, happening never (mean=1.02/6). Considering the most represented age demographic in this survey, this result makes sense, as many young adults and teenagers are not far enough into careers to have this opportunity arise at all

MOST TO LEAST FREQUENTLY EXPERIENCED

Heard anti-aromantic remarks from family members
Been treated unfairly by parents
Been treated unfairly by friends
Been treated unfairly by a romantic partner
Been made fun of, picked on, called insulting names, pushed, shoved, hit, or threatened with harm
Being treated unfairly by strangers
Been rejected by a romantic partner
Been verbally insulted
Been rejected by parents
Been treated unfairly by a sexual partner
Been treated unfairly by sibling(s)
Been treated unfairly by extended family
Been treated unfairly by people in a medical profession
Been treated unfairly by peers, co-workers, or colleagues
Been rejected by extended family
Been rejected by a sexual partner
Been rejected by sibling(s)
Been treated unfairly by teachers or professors
Been treated unfairly by employers or supervisors
Been treated unfairly by people in service jobs
Been denied a promotion
Been denied a job
Been denied a raise

CORRELATIONS AND ANALYSIS

The statistical tests used for the following results include: Pearson’s correlation, ANOVA

Frequency of microaggressions vs. Frequency of harassment

Purpose of this analysis: to understand whether considering microaggressions and harassment are related, as they are defined differently and often considered separately in discussions of antagonism

The analysis showed a moderate relationship between microaggressions and harassment (r=0.4865, p<0.01). Higher reported frequencies of microaggressions typically correlated with higher frequencies of harassment. This suggests that while microaggressions and harassment are related measures, they are not identical constructs. They are different enough to benefit from separate analyses and consideration.

Social desirability vs. Reported frequency and distress levels related to aro antagonism

Purpose of this analysis: to disambiguate aromanticism from unrelated aspects of social desirability that may contribute to others’ harassment of people

Only participants whose frequency or distress scores were greater than 1 were included in these analyses.

The analysis showed no relationship between social desirability and reported frequency of harassment or distress levels related to this harassment.

This suggests that a person being targeted for harassment is not in any way related to that person’s level of social desirability (i.e., how ‘sociable’ or ‘good’ that person is considered by others).

This result also suggests that people who are aromantic are targeted for harassment because they are aromantic, not because their personalities or social styles are disliked in general. Furthermore, it does not seem to be the case that aromantic people behave in a way more or less socially desirable than the average person.

Note: I included a specific measure in the survey for the purpose of this analysis. Many respondents found the questions in the social desirability scale random and irrelevant. In a future iteration of the survey, I will likely not include these questions, as the current research has shown that social desirability does not impact other more relevant measures.

Stigma consciousness vs. Reported frequency and distress levels related to harassment/aromisia

Purpose of this analysis: to understand how aros view non-aros’ support of aros, how aros view society’s support of aros, and how these views may interact with aros’ reactions to aro antagonism

Only participants whose frequency or distress scores were greater than 1 were included in these analyses.

Analyses showed that stigma consciousness and harassment frequency were slightly positively related (r=0.2071, p<0.01). As participants’ awareness of others’ stigmatization against them grew, so did their reported frequency of harassment by others.

Analyses showed that stigma consciousness and microaggression frequency were positively related (r=0.3274, p<0.01). As participants’ awareness of others’ stigmatization against them grew, so did their reported frequency of others using microaggressions against them.

Analyses showed that stigma consciousness and microaggression distress levels were positively related (r=0.3927, p<0.01). As participants’ awareness of others’ stigmatization against them grew, so did their reported distress levels when experiencing microaggressions against them.

These results suggest that aromantic people are slightly to moderately good judges of how often non-aromantic people view them and whether non-aromantic people are likely to harass or antagonize aros.

CONCLUSIONS AND COMPARISONS TO OTHER QUEER/LGBTQ+ GROUPS

Measures obtained in this study on aromantic people were similar in terms of frequency and distress levels as measures obtained from other LGBTQ+ groups. Aros were less likely to report being fearful of or of having been assaulted for their identity than other LGBTQ+ groups, but were more likely to report being delegitimized and dismissed (e.g., others saying “aromanticism isn’t real”). Many bi and pan communities share history in this delegitimization trend.

Aromantic people do not seem to be targeted in the same way as other LGBTQ+ people. Nevertheless, they are still targeted. Aromanticism was not linked to physical or mental health in this study, nor was the treatment of aromantic people linked to social desirability, in line with research on other LGBTQ+ groups. Aromantic people were targeted for harassment because they were aromantic - based on their orientation - just like other LGBTQ+ groups.

The results as a whole suggest that aro-spec people have issues unique to the aro-spec (and more broadly a-spec) community, but also share much in common with the broader LGBTQ+ community.

LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE WORK

This survey relied on self-reporting. This method of data collection is not always reliable, as people’s perceptions of what happened to them and what other people think about them may not be wholly accurate. Additionally, many people opted out of participation, whether out of discomfort with the subject matter, disinterest, survey length, or any other reason. It would be useful to collect data on non-aromantic people’s perceptions of aromantic people to validate this study’s data.

The results overrepresent young, white, cis female, and non-binary aro-spec people. Intersectional analyses were therefore difficult to do. Literature has shown that privilege and harassment/distress are multifaceted, as identities are interrelated. For example, missing from the results were items related to later milestones in life, such as career development, as a direct consequence of the ages of respondents. Analyses integrating ethnic background and experiences of stigmatization were not possible due to the skewedness of the data. The same is true for the intersection of gender and orientation stigmatization. Many respondents shared that their psychological/physical conditions did have bearing on their view of aromanticism (and, furthermore, many participants reported having been diagnosed with a condition, regardless of whether that was perceived as related to their aromanticism). Additionally, this survey uncovered the fact that many aromantics are also polyamorous; this would be useful to understand further and is a unique demographic. Further study on intersectionality and aromantic experiences would be beneficial.

Knowledge of how out people were was not covered in this survey. It was assumed that participants who responded with frequencies less than or equal to 1 in the harassment and microaggressions scales were not out. However, this may not be true, as social acceptance is highly dependent on support and context. A future iteration of this survey will include an analysis of how out people are, to understand whether this has any bearing on participant answers.

Many response options, especially in the demographics portion of the survey, were binary (Yes/No or True/False). This did not adequately capture the experiences of questioning or fluid individuals. A future iteration of this survey will include response options that are more inclusive of questioning and fluid identities.

Experiences of other types of attractions (e.g., alterous, queerplatonic) were not taken into account except in a catch-all “other” category. It would be interesting to look at other types of attraction and relationships as related to experiences of stigmatization.

The survey was very long (as is this report). Length sometimes makes surveys inaccessible to people. The option to pause and continue the survey at a later time was available, but it may also be useful to trim the survey, based on results from this survey. For example, social desirability measures may no longer be needed, as it was shown in this survey that they are unrelated to others’ perceptions of aro-spec people. In addition, later iterations of this survey should be kept open longer, so that people have more time to answer and come back to the survey before it closes.

This was an English-speaker-only survey. Aromantic people who do not read English well or at all were missing from this report. This may change in the future if there is enough demand from the aromantic community. The current researcher speaks both (Canadian) French and Polish in addition to English; other languages would have to be added by additional researchers.