Categorizing different forms of love is very genuinely a social construct (and there's nothing inherently wrong with that). It's cultural and it's subjective, which is why no matter how many people ask or how many times, none of us will ever get a consistent definitive answer.
It's also an emotion. The difference between love (romantic) and love (platonic) and love (alterous) and so-on is similar to the difference between sadness (grief) and sadness (yearning) and sadness (disappointment), etc. No correlation to the order, just intended as, it would be difficult to explain the distinction in types of feelings to someone who wasn't sure if they'd ever felt real grief, too, you know? That's part of the subjectivity. And similarly, lines can blur. Sometimes you're just sad and you can't pick just one more-specific flavor. Sometimes you're just filled with love.
(Note: Whatever its form, love is also often an action as much as a feeling, a conscious choice to be there for people even when it's hard, but we're focused on the feelings of attraction and their potential flavors.)
Ultimately it really does come down to
A) Does it feel like what you think of as romance to you? Whether you think yes or no, you "could" be wrong and that's okay. Sometimes you just need time to better understand your feelings. If you think yes, roll with it (though remember you can and should define for yourself what you want a relationship to look like rather than trying to force a script), and if not, don't try to force it.
B) If youāre not firmly one way or the other, do you WANT it to be? The thing about being wrong applies here too. But it literally is okay to explore your feelings under an assumption without being sure. It's okay to use outside factors to classify without ever being internally sure, too.
And remember, as obnoxious as it is to have non-aro folks spout "aromantics can still date!" as a way to downplay and erase us, that statement is still true. It's a spectrum as much as asexuality is, and you can experience some but not full attraction, or full but only rarely or under the right circumstances, or whatever. Arospec or fully aro, you can be romance-neutral or romance-positive. Of course, you could also be totally allo-ace and just haven't experienced it yet. This isn't a push for anything except to be open to your own experiences and remember that labels exist to help you describe them, not to limit you.
Obligatory: if you haven't before, reading up on "relationship anarchy" could also provide some interesting insight. Media and cultural influence has pushed a narrow range of ideas as Correct, but life is a sandbox and the usual templates are suggestions. Relationships can be basically whatever you want them to be, as long as it's communicated and agreed upon, and if you don't know what you want, figuring it out can be part of the fun.
