Heteroromanticity and Being "Straight"

TW conversion therapy, corrective rape

It's becoming increasingly common to lump heteroromantic asexuals under the label of straight. I respect many of the arguments behind this practice (though not the argument that heteroromantic asexuals are "really" heterosexual, because explaining someone else's sexual orientation to them is pompous), but I disagree*:

Among all the cries of "heteroromantic asexuals are straight!" one group in particular seems to disagree, and that's heterosexuals. Straight people often don't consider heteroromantic asexuals to be straight, probably because they realize there's a pretty big difference between being romantically attracted to someone and being sexually attracted to someone. I come to this conclusion-- straight people don't consider heteroromantic asexuals to be straight-- by observing the pushback that surrounds discussions of heteroromantic asexuality, for example, this article. Most heterosexual people probably would not date a heteroromantic asexual of their preferred gender with the same willingness they would date a heterosexual of their preferred gender. To people who are actually straight, there's a big difference.

Heteroromantic asexuals also don't get the societal approval that straight people do. Behavior is not orientation and not all asexuals are celibate; nevertheless, many are. A heteroromantic asexual woman, for example, who wants to date and even marry men but not have sex with them, absolutely is not conforming to the dominant paradigms. Neither is a celibate heteroromantic asexual man.

More important than people's feelings is their actions, and heteroromantic asexuals are not treated like straight people. Straight people get approval for their sexual orientation, if not their sexual practices. Heteroromantic asexuals may face what other asexuals face-- conversion therapy, corrective rape, etc. Straight people can generally go get treated for a physical or mental illness without having to worry that their doctor will blame their sexual orientation for said illness. Heteroromantic asexuals, like other asexuals, can't always be sure of this. Heteroromantic** couples in the UK have been prevented from adopting because of their asexuality. And, in some countries, for heteroromantic asexuals who are also celibate, their celibacy can make it impossible for them to marry if consummation is required. (I can't find it now, but I recently saw a question from a heteroromantic asexual Muslim couple who wanted to marry but weren't sure how to get around the consummation requirement.)***

Heteroromantic asexuals certainly have passing privilege, but they also face discrimination and oppression for their sexual orientation, even if they pass as heterosexual most of the time. It's misleading and inaccurate to lump heteroromantic asexuals in with heterosexuals by calling them straight.

*Some heteroromantic asexuals identify as straight, just like some homoromantic asexuals identify as gay or lesbian, and I am 100% okay with that. There's a big difference between identifying a certain way and having someone else tell you you must identify a certain way.

**Cormier-Otaño does not explicitly say that they are heteroromantic. However, given that they apparently point to asexuality-induced celibacy as the reason they have not had children "by [themselves]", it's almost certain that they are. A same-gender couple could have children of their own without having to have sex; presumably a social worker would be aware of the potential costs and complications involved, and not question why they hadn't gone that route.

***ETA: I seem to have mischaracterized this. It's not clear whether the couple in question actually was concerned their marriage would be considered invalid without consummation, or merely wanted to uphold tradition.