Jump to content

Lokiana

Member
  • Content Count

    12
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

1 Follower

About Lokiana

  • Rank
    Newbie
  • Birthday 04/01/2001

Personal Information

  • Name
    Lokiana
  • Gender
    Female
  • Pronouns
    she/her
  • Occupation
    Student, Waitress, Online Editor (busy 25/8)
  • Romanticism
    Aromantic
  • Sexuality
    Asexual

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. ASAW IS IN 40 DAYS. 

    1. Show previous comments  1 more
    2. Lokiana

      Lokiana

      Aromantic Spectrum Awareness Week!

    3. YXSHINN

      YXSHINN

      I thought it'd be in March though? :0

    4. Lokiana

      Lokiana

      Nope! It falls the week after Valentine's Day annually.

  2. I believe those pamphlets went up with the original site, so it may be a while if/when they get changed. Although I do struggle to understand how the issue of origin of QPRs affects the commonality/frequent usage of the phrase "QPR" and related terminology in aro communities.
  3. prepping for ASAW 2020 & christmas break. wishes everyone could just get along, but she doesn't even go here.

  4. There is a flag, if rarely used, for omniaromantics (people who do not feel romantic attraction, do not desire romantic relationships, etc. I'll let y'all read the definition). Found here. It's been around for more than a year because we, as a community, recognize anyone who is gray-aromantic as aromantic, and belonging in our community. Even if some people did recognize the desire for a second flag, they wanted to keep the aromantic flag for our community as a whole: that's who it was created for, after all. As a final note, I am what you might call a "true aromantic" or whatever somewhat offensive term you are using - I don't feel any romantic attraction, ever - and I think that the way you've approached this topic is slightly offensive at best. Creating separate terminology for aromantics who feel no attraction whatsoever is fine - I believe I've seen terms like "null aro" floating around, as well as omniaromantic and others - but doing so in a way that alienates gray-aromantics leaves a serious bad taste in many people's mouths. In fact, it reminds me very much of the time when I was told that "arospec" was for gray-aros (including demiromantics, lithromantics, etc.) but not for null aromantics. It made me very uncomfortable - after all, I had been using that terminology for years, and it was part of my identity. People telling me I could no longer use that term for myself was a struggle (and yes, we did come to a consensus for the opposite conclusion, but it was a discussion that was had). So while I understand you may want a term or flag for your individual identity, it comes off as offensive and rude to alienate gray-aros from our community and flag when they have been here since the beginning, and since the creation of the flag. It makes a lot of us (gray-aro or null aro) feel very uncomfortable with the discussion, and not in a way that produces positive results. In conclusion: gray-aros are aromantic, and absolutely should be able to use our flag.
  5. I've been excited to help out with AUREA and here's some translations for our "basic terms" in Polish, German, and Russian (with more in progress!). I also know off the top of my head that Spanish aromantic = arromántico. Kind of neat to see variations of different languages!
  6. I'll do my best! Can't promise it'll be perfect but hey. So here's a def I'm stealing from AUREA: and here's a coinage post just for kicks. Really, alterous is not overall specifically defined - the general consensus is that it's an attraction or relationship based on emotional closeness that might not necessarily be romantic or platonic. (Overall, similar to QPR, but not as common or neatly defined, usually? A lil more wiggle room and less connotation, imo.) Possibly sexual, possibly nah, really up to you! Here's a couple opinions on how the two differ: one, two (i'm gonna note since it's toward thread top that i don't agree with the idea that QPRs are always non-sexual before anyone starts coming @me) Hey, you're still normal! Just not straight. I just left a romo relationship and figured out that hey, I don't want that and then hated myself for not feeling more attached - so I get it. But just because it's more complicated in an amatonormative world doesn't mean you won't figure it out.
  7. First and foremost: welcome to the family! We bicker and we hug it out, but we are glad to have you. I'm so happy your coming out went well and that your partner took it well! If you are looking for some nifty relationship terms, queerplatonic and alterous may be useful. (but that could be my inclination to all the niche terms ;p )
  8. today's mood: tired web developer, in need of assistance or coffee. 

    1. running.tally

      running.tally

      Really really awesome and irreplaceable tired web developer who works very hard :aroicecream:

  9. I'm not sure that the use of nonamorous is going to help ( as evidenced by like, our entire community ), and the implication that personal narratives have little value or aren't useful is somewhat annoying. As for the question of how it's happening... It's relatively easy to figure out. On one hand, many aromantic people enjoy sexual relationships, committed or nah. Many others are involved in romantic relationships, and still more are involved in queerplatonic relationships. These relationships, per societal norms, are considered "beyond" or "more complex" than typical friendship, and thus, merit a lot of discussion on how to approach and deal with them within our community. And we do! We talk a lot about how to function in relationships, how to approach our partners, etc etc so on and so forth until the end of time. What I've found is that we don't talk as much about how to deal with friendships, or touch starvation due to no relationships/friends reading it as romo, how to do life when you're not going on dates and don't necessarily have a partner and that kind of thing. When we do, we don't talk about it as much - I've seen a couple glancing posts that touch on it, but in comparison to the vast amount of content available on QPRs alone, it can feel kind of overwhelming. I don't necessarily have an excellent solution, but the problem isn't a lack of language or even a single narrative being promoted. Imo, it's a matter of having a vast amount of content to discuss and people to discuss it with, vs. a smaller section of the community with different needs that aren't being addressed on an equal level.
  10.  Can you elaborate? Sure thing! So, I found this label as I was doing flag cleanup for a glossary I worked on, and it just...fit. I had that moment of "oh my god that's me". And for a brief period there, I was able to use some of the language from the definition ("aplatonic", for example) to find communties of aplatonic people, if not necessarily omniaromantic people. I found people who were in a similar experience vein to mine, if not my "exact" experience, because the language used in the definition pointed me to further inquiry and helped me understand who I was relative to....everyone else. It also helped me because I tend to be the person who likes to hyperspecifically label myself, and to be able to broadly categorize "nope", was a nice experience, especially in a community that so specifically discusses QPRs and partnering relationships without romance. It helped lead me to a place of "hey, the aro community discusses qprs a lot but it's okay if that's not relevant to my experience, some people may experience other attraction or love than romantic that I don't and that's fine too". So it helped me contextualize myself into the aromantic community. It also helped describe a sitch that wasn't quiiiiite romance repulsion, but also not quite neutral....rather, somewhere in the middle. this drives me up a wall. Honestly. I understand the intent sometimes, but coining terms for other people is just....argh. I'm a fan of marking old terms with identifiers, and that's how I've traditionally found the best way to include them but also inform people that they may not be as frequently used. How does everyone feel about doing the same thing with relatively new terminology, after it gets some use? Including in glossaries with a note like **this is a developing term coined recently, and change is based on current community discussion or some such? But I do see the problem here with people who don't like microlabels spamming. Unfortunately, tends to be a problem no matter what you do.
  11. An interesting perspective....but I'm not sure I entirely agree with it. (Although the notes on Rabger's model are very true.) Personal bias playing in, but I've always been fond of hyperspecific labels, regardless of how used or unused they are. A good personal anecdote is the time when I identified as omniaromantic. It's by and far an underused label and is probably one of the ones categorized by this article as a label we should let die - but it certainly helped me through a time where I was questioning /a lot/ of things. I didn't expect to find community with a microlabel, especially not one I dug out of a glossary, but it was useful to me nonetheless. I do also question the idea that we shouldn't necessarily keep our labels around. Even in the case of Rabger's model, the documentation was not removed - simply moved and re-categorized. I'd be curious as to suggestions: how do we keep a record of terms used previously, so we can understand previous posts and conversations, but still indicate, respectfully, that the terminology in question is dated? Further, when do we decide that a term is "dated" or "not used" enough to be categorized as such? I know the system I use, when sorting the glossaries I work on, but I'm curious to hear further thoughts on how to resolve these conflicts.
  12. I've been a Methodist for my entire life - not entirely forced, mind you, my parents taught me to ask a lot of questions and to never blindly trust authority - and honestly, the process of finding out I'm aromantic has strengthened my faith. It was the starting point to me questioning a lot of harmful beliefs I had, and forced me to actually read my Bible and develop my own conclusions regarding science and God, as well as questions like "what about my bi friends" and so on and so forth. My assistant youth pastor and I hold down the "question everything" fort at my church and we discuss theology a lot. It also led to me actually acting on my inability to trust blindly, and to call out the teachers when I noticed inaccuracies to scripture or science. Basically, aromanticism was a big part of strengthening my faith. Although I will say I'm uncomfortable with the concept of blindly cross-applying the label "asexual" to Jesus or any other deity I believe in.
  13. I did this until very recently...because I ended up in a relationship. But definitely avoids a lot of the terminology mish-mash.
  14. I don't think that "Ace and Aro" implies both, as it is. I think the logo definitely needs work, but, as you said, that takes know-how and time, so doing your best to make it as obvious as possible that it's both is good. I'm in agreement that "Liverpool Area Ace and Aro Group" is pretty generally a good and used format in many areas. The biggest thing is the language change - changing the group name to "Ace and Aro", changing the language used in discussions to "a-spec"...these are all things that need to be done that don't require as much effort, but are important to overall inclusiveness. As much as this suggestion is well intentioned, this isn't practical or...what they were asking? No offense at all, @Mark, but this comes across super unfriendly to the concept of allowing a group to grow to be inclusive, even if it wasn't originally. The group is currently alienating even to me if the group is called "Liverpool Aces Meetup" or something along those, because I identify more with my aro-ness. However, that suggestion is not helpful or practical, unless you're in the Liverpool area and want to start a group yourself.
×
×
  • Create New...