hi, so where would i actually find the SAM model? i see it mentioned a lot and while i understand the general gist of what it is, i'd still like to be better informed
GOOD QUESTION! (lots of those today, i’m loving this lol)
Ok SO, I just found a great def from 2016 that actually pretty much defines it exactly as I do, in that it specifically states that it’s only for SOME ppl bc they don’t fit the standardized experience of sexual and romantic orientations matching. So it’s not a standard experience to use the SAM, it’s just needed for those of us that break the mold lol. Here it is:
The split attraction model is commonly used within the aro/spec and ace/spec communities. While not everyone uses it, for some it’s an essential part of how they define their orientation. While there is some use of it outside of the A community, it’s by far not as common (which isn’t to say it doesn’t have a purpose unless used by ace/spec and aro/spec individuals).
So what is the split attraction model? Essentially, the split attraction model states that for some people romantic and sexual attraction are two different things. For instance, someone who is asexual can still feel romantic attraction, and someone who is aromantic can still feel sexual attraction. Similarly, it also applies to people who are arospec or acespec.
If someone’s sexual and romantic orientations are the same, for example someone who identifies as pansexual, then that word covers both their romantic and sexual attraction, i.e. they don’t have to say they’re ‘pansexual and panromantic,’ but rather can just say they’re pansexual (unless, of course, they want to state them as separate).
There are several ways people can express their split attraction. If someone is ace and feels romantic attraction only to the same gender, they might identify as asexual homoromantic, but could also just as likely call themselves ‘asexual and gay/lesbian’ or ‘a lesbian/ gay asexual.’ Either way, they express both their romantic and sexual attraction, and how those two differ. This is also especially common for people on the aro or ace spectrum. For example, I (mod j) am greyromantic and bi. I could write this out as “greyromantic biromantic bisexual’ (which is quite a mouthful), ‘greyromantic bisexual,’ in which the bisexual covers both my sexual attraction and part of my romantic attraction, or simply as “greyromantic bi,’ which simply takes away that last suffix.
That having been said, people who are aro/spec and/ or ace/spec don’t need to use the split attraction model if they don’t want to. If someone is both asexual and aromantic, and they feel as though a single term, such as asexual, covers both their romantic and sexual attraction, that’s 100% okay. Your orientation is yours to define. What’s important here is that you use whatever makes you comfortable when talking about your own orientation. And remember that, like any orientation related term, it’s 100% okay if you don’t want to use it for yourself. It’s also entirely okay if someone feels it’s not useful for them. The purpose of the split attraction model is to help us understand ourselves better, and then communicate that understanding to others. If you don’t find it helpful for you/ don’t feel like it applies to you, then it might just not be a useful way for you to express your orientation.
-mod j (of @aroacefaq, emphasis mine)
What I particularly like about MY adjustment to the definition though is that it insists that aroace is the standard assumption of anyone claiming to be asexual (instead of also possibly hetero-ace, which lots of ppl also assume) and in so doing, it SHATTERS heterosexist assumptions about asexuality.
And IMO, this is a nice “one-two punch” at heterosexism in general. :)