Proving being aromantic is ass cuz how are you supposed to prove something that doesn't exist (or lacks but I assume every single person is stupid and needs the most basic/extreme form explained to even begin to understand subtypes)
What really sometimes works in explaining the difficulty of aromanticism though is logic....
Assume i am not aromantic. I do not carry the lable and just haven't found "the one" yet (for whatever reason: young, disabled, traumatised, name your reasons idc). Let's say i wait and search for 10 years and still haven't found a person i like. Have i still not found "the one" yet?
Let's stretch it. Let's say it's been 20 years. Do you think i earn the title now? Or what about 30 years? 40? I could be 80 and not have found "the one".
In theory, i would need to search for my entire life span. But at some point people will notice and accept that "yeah maybe this person really doesn't feel shit"
Essentially what I'm doing is proving by slow and tedious induction. But at least it works and they get an idea.
