I've been thinking a lot lately, and I think something gets lost in the conversation when it comes to the whole "ID-ing as aspec because of trauma" conversation.
Yes, it is wrong to conflate aspec identities with trauma, and it is wrong to say to an aspec person something along the lines of "what happened to make you this way." But it's not wrong because the idea of orientation and trauma being related is absurd and harmful. It's wrong because (1) that's just a deeply inconsiderate thing to say to a person, whether it's true or not, and (2) it implies that aromanticism and asexuality are an affliction that you acquire and something to be fixed, not a neutral or natural state of being and a part of one's identity.
I think in addition to those points, though, and perhaps most crucially: (3) it suggests that "healing" from one's trauma is about reverting back to baseline, back to "normal", back to who you were before, and that just isn't how it works. We already know that trauma and other experiences can rewire how your brain and body work, sometimes permanently; why should one's orientation be exempt from that?
If someone has had experiences, negative or otherwise, that lead them to feel most comfortable using an aspec label, or being in aspec spaces, and they don't feel any need to change that or go back to how they "used" to be, who am I to begrudge them the language and community that helps them make sense of their reality? Who am I to judge someone's reasons for putting a label on something as nebulous and individual and socially constructed as their sexuality, just because I feel I was "born" this way? If someone's reasons for identifying this way make you uncomfortable, why? And why should your comfort dictate what language others can use for themselves?
I am very tired of the narrative that there is a sexuality/romantic orientation/gender/whatever else that you are inherently born as and if something "happens" to make you something else then it should be fixed. I already hear enough that my aromanticism and asexuality are things to be fixed, and this is how I've always been. Why would I ever want to project such an idea onto other aspec people, just because their reasons for identifying as aspec are different or perhaps even transient? It is of no material threat to me whatsoever. In fact, I think people having the language and the support to make sense of their lives and to build a life without romance and/or sex, if that's what they want, can only ever be a good thing, regardless of why they want it. They're all welcome on my shores.
When I hear "you can't ID as aro/ace because of trauma" what I actually hear is "YOUR aromanticism and asexuality are begrudgingly acceptable because you were born that way and can't help it, if you could fix it then you should, and if you weren't born that way then this is a tragedy that has befallen you and you should fix it." Maybe some people's journey with trauma does not involve "fixing" their sexuality but instead embracing what their life looks like now and being content with that. If they're okay with that, why do you care? There are people with trauma in your community who can't extricate that trauma from their identity. How is that a threat to you? How would eliminating those people from your community magically make society more understanding of aspec identities? I promise you it wouldn't. Confront your own discomfort. Your discomfort is not harm.
