`Emotionally Intimate Friendship`OR `Romantically Attracted`?

There is zero credible research to show any indication of discordant romantic vs sexual attraction. Thus, you're correct. There's no difference. Nobody even mentioned 'romantic attraction' until a few years ago when it became a term du jour advocated, with no evidence, no basis, and nothing other than a small-but-loud group of folks deciding something was the case.

So no, there's no difference between "romantic attraction" and "emotionally intimate friendship" because they are the same thing.

If you have thoughts and dreams of a non-sexual nature (meaning, it's about spending time and hanging out, but there's no sense of sexual arousal, desire, etc) about someone... that's friendship. Whether it's emotionally intimate or not depends on the mutual vulnerability and depth of the friendship.

 

I think you misunderstood. At least from my perspective (and I would be open to change, were anyone to present compelling data to justify that change), the two are identical. I'm
of the opinion that since they are identical, the "romantic orientation" thing should just be tossed entirely, and replaced with the other term, since all it really seems to do is keep people who are gay from acknowledging they are gay.

Discordant romantic and sexual orientation is the 2020 version of saying "I'm bisexual" , which used to be the term that people used during the 'bargaining' phase of coming to terms with being gay... which, in turn, creates stigma with people who are genuinely bisexual. Many people wrongly assume that all bisexuals are gay and haven't come out yet, and that isn't helped by people misusing the label. From my experience the folks who now claim discordant romantic and sexual orientation either haven't come to terms with being gay, or there's a significant emotional/mental health issue getting in the way of emotional intimacy.

 

I am pretty confident that I have never stated that there is a difference between romantic attraction and emotionally intimate friendship. I've heard others make an argument to that effect, but nobody can provide anything, even anecdotally, that differentiates the two, and as I've previously said, there's no credible evidence of discordant romantic and sexual orientation in any of the research or literature I've seen.

"Romantic attraction" is described as a feeling of deep, emotional closeness to another person, but without any sexual attraction, or any desire to have sex.

There is no desire to have sex.
There is no sexual attraction.
There is a deep sense of connection to the person.
There is mutual vulnerability

If you watched Glee, think of Kurt Hummel and all of his BFF girlfriends. That's emotionally intimate friendship. It is indistinguishable from what is described as "romantic attraction". The sex/gender of the other person is irrelevant.

Emotionally intimate friendship is exactly the same thing as romantic attraction.

 

That may actually have been a bad example, because I forgot about the story arc I now have a vague recollection of where they were sort of trying to be a couple. And of course, I think Grace probably had genuine sexual attraction to Will, which complicates matters. What I was intending to speak about was the wonderful, authentic, vulnerable friendship they have, which is indistinguishable from what is described as "romantic attraction".

I would say "As a guy, you can have an emotionally intimate friendship with a guy, which by the nature of it precludes sexual attraction or desire". I generally don't use the term "romantic attraction" because, basically, it's bullshit (and also functionally identical to the term that's been in use for decades or longer), and the other term more accurately describes what's going on.

You can absolutely have a wonderful, deep, emotionally intimate friendship with a guy that has nothing to do with sexual attraction to him.