Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


About LauraG

  • Rank

Personal Information

  • Name
    Laura G
  • Pronouns
  • Romanticism
    Greyromantic (still 100% aromantic)
  • Sexuality

Recent Profile Visitors

229 profile views
  1. Yeah, it's just about done now, should be going up within the next few days. My goal was to just get something that would be a good primer on queerplatonic to compete with the bad one in the tags. I'm thinking the audience for that one is people who don't know what queerplatonic means at all - where I don't think who coined it is necessary. I was more thinking that this would help with combating a slightly different but related misconception - that (allo)aces use queerplatonic to refer to non-sexual romantic relationships (aka "aces stealing aro terms"). I have not personally seen any evidence that suggests that's a widespread problem, and that original infographic is the one post I've seen that actually does that. It's just one post, but it also has nearly 9k notes, which is a problem, and probably the root of that misconception. This was my way of trying to combat that problem at it's source. That's probably a good idea. I think that's aiming a bit more for an aro audience or at least a more informed audience, as opposed to a general audience like the previous infographic. Perhaps a second infographic aimed more at an aro audience that's about the history of the word queerplatonic would work better for that. I'd mentioned a while back that I might try to make a summary of Coy's history of queerplatonic post that's more digestible - this might be a substitute for that.
  2. I think that makes a lot of sense. Since I think Coy was asking in order to find a replacement phrase for "aro reparations" in the title, here are a few possibilities for that one: Building Aro Community Aro Community Building Building Aro Community & History (Maybe too long) Also if this is the ending, I think "proxy" doesn't quite make sense... perhaps a word like "vehicle" would get it across a bit better? QPR Misinformation Is Not an Appropriate Vehicle for Aro Community Building We could also play around with the sentence order a bit, which could shorten it more, and potentially allow for more detail in the part talking about motivations: Aro Community Building Deserves Better Than QPR Misinformation Building Aro Community & History Deserves Better Than QPR Misinformation I wholeheartedly agree that I'd like the communities to relate to each other as equals, rather than as either of the two framings you mentioned. If we're being super careful in this thread about not taking people's words out-of-context by making sure to acknowledge why people say the things that they say, which it seems we are, I do want to add that the person you're quoting there said that statement in response to having her own identity and community membership erased. Whether or not people find that motivations are more important than the impact such statements have will vary I'm sure. I just encourage everyone to consider the motivations for everyone involved, if that is something that's important to you. I also wonder whether the entire framing of "indebted and benefactor" would even exist if it weren't for misinformation being spread about the origins of the word queerplatonic (or more broadly, attempts to separate aro history from ace history where that would be impossible). One of the benefits of addressing the misinformation in our community is that it would help prevent this kind of framing from happening as a reaction.
  3. Would you consider the phrase "platonic relationship" to be a synonym of "friendship"? Do you consider all friendships to be platonic relationships? Do you consider all platonic relationships to be friendships? (I'm intentionally asking a question I know people are going to have different answers to. I'm curious what everyone's first instinct is!)
  4. That sounds good. Does anyone have any suggestions for how to make this more concise? Maybe we can take out "in aro circles"? I don't think that alters the meaning too much. Maybe also "real problems between aro and ace communities" can just be "community relations". So "misinformation on qprs hinders conversations about community relations" Perhaps this might also be a substance over style situation where it's better to have a wordy title that gets across the right impression. True. We can definitely make sure that happens too.
  5. One thing that I think is important for us to keep in mind as we discuss intent... Just because someone does this intentionally doesn't mean they are doing so with bad intent. While we all seem to be in agreement that spreading this misinformation is not a good thing, I think it's important to realize that recognizing that there may be intent behind some instances of this happening doesn't mean that that intent can't be good. One thing I took away from Coyote's post was the entire idea that the intent behind misinformation on qprs (whether done knowingly or unknowing, and I believe both happen) is positive intent. People feel genuinely hurt by the ace community and worried that they'd lose a word that's important to them if they admit that it was the ace community and not the aro community that created the word. As someone who's been hurt by the misinformation, it was hard to keep this in perspective, but Coy's post helped me do that and I'm grateful. (And one final note - if assuming positive intent is a value of yours, I encourage you to take a moment now to check in with yourself to make sure you are applying that principle evenly in this thread.)
  6. Hm... I'm not totally sure whether to read this as potential solutions to the "real crimes" or "fake crimes" - I'm thinking maybe you meant both? That's how I'm going to respond to it. In terms of addressing misconceptions, I wish that there was more of a community-driven effort to not tolerate this kind of thing - much the way there is about not tolerating anti-gray nonsense. Though, I'm thinking this is a situation that requires a bit more delicacy, since, as your blog post points out, there often is a legitimate hurt there that deserves attention and to be addressed. Unlike the anti-gray bigotry which warrants a stronger response. If you'll excuse the ace community example, I'm thinking much the way the ace community self-polices sex-negativity. In all the ace communities I've been a part of, bad mouthing others' sexual behaviors is unacceptable, but when its corrected it's often from a place of "I get why you feel this way, but saying that still hurts other people. Try framing it this way next time." Something like that.(And there may be some people already doing that, which is awesome!) To move a bit away from the context of coinage and towards another common greivances relating to qprs - that alloromantic aces use the word to mean non-sexual romantic relationships. Personally, I haven't seen evidence to suggest that this is as pervasive a problem as it is sometimes framed as, but what I have noticed is that the one post I've seen that does this is one of the first results when you search queerplatonic on Tumblr. Which is a problem. Seeing as the op has not responded to any of the corrections, I was thinking of ways of trying to combat that, and I think the best course of action there is to create a competing post (that's equally pretty, since I think that's a factor in why it spread). It wouldn't take down the other post, but it would hopefully provide enough conflicting information that people stop to think about which is correct. I'd been working on that with a couple other people and it fell through the cracks - I'm thinking it's time to start working on that again.
  7. Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. I know I've felt skeptical before of posts that sounded similar to things that have hurt me in the past, and it makes sense that you felt that way when you saw this thread. I think this is what I'm confused about? The point of the first post was to share the link to the blog post, of which the whole point was acknowledging why these things are happening. And the paragraph length summary started with: "A common problem in the ace community is that people don't give enough attention to the aro spectrum as an independent entity. In the process of pointing this out..." Which, yes, isn't particularly specific, but it is a summary. Perhaps you misread that sentence? Or is there something else I'm not seeing? Yeah, that's true. I can see how not having that might make it feel like the post was existing to point blame rather than fixing the problem. @Coyote can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that was included to point out that the misinformation was spreading faster than the corrections. And that's par the course for Tumblr. In my eyes, that's all the more reason to try to spread the corrections in some other way. Ah, I see. You don't feel like Coy acknowledged the why behind arokaladin's post enough - am I reading that right? Coy mentioned the reason why this was happening in the original post, but didn't mention it again when referencing the other examples of this happening in this thread, until you pointed out that ix may have been mischaracterizing arokaladin's words?
  8. Can you elaborate on why it feels like that to you? I'm personally not reading that from Coy's initial post that started the thread. And in the rest of the thread, it seems to me like Coy is responding fairly calmly to some confrontational responses to the original post. I realize that different people read things differently though, so I want to understand where you're coming from here.
  9. Well, QPRs being coined by aces shouldn't be taken to mean that they need to be non-sexual. In one of the early posts introducing the term (dated 2011), s. e. smith says "The key feature is the idea of being deeply connected to someone, without a romantic element (though a queerplatonic relationship can be sexual)." What the word "platonic" actually means widely varies from person to person in the aro and ace communities, and also outside of them. Not all usages of it are intended to mean "non-sexual." (Which yes, is very confusing.)
  10. While many of you commenting on the thread do know about this issue already, there may be other people on arocalypse who don't. I think part of the purpose of Coy's initial post, and this thread in turn, is to try to get ahead of the misinformation to prevent it from spreading more. Yes, it's happening on Tumblr, but at least half of us here are also on Tumblr and I'd imagine that the rest of arocalypse's userbase also contains some Tumblr users who might unwittingly spread misinformation here. I'd handle it the way you'd handle any other misinformation. If you see it, correct it if you're able. If you've unwittingly spread it? Make a correction. Again, this may be what a lot of people commenting on the thread are already doing. Being tired of this makes a lot of sense. My suggestion? Don't mention who coined the word. If someone's tired of people telling them that ace people coined the word, spreading misinformation is not going to help that. It's just going to prompt people to come on their posts and tell them the one thing they don't want to hear - that aces were actually the one to coin it. If people just don't mention who coined it, no one is going to mention the ace community. And if for some reason they did make some comment about terms coming from the ace community without prompting, that would be inappropriate (and you'd also be justified in telling them so).
  11. Hm. In my experience people tend to be quite reluctant to let go of the idea that it was aros who coined the term, often getting stuck on not believing that the coiners don't identify as aro. Maybe bringing that up earlier in the conversation would work better. I also found @Coyote's post helpful because it highlighted that often the reluctance comes from being afraid of losing the term somehow? So I'm planning on reassuring that that's not the case in the future too. Hopefully one of those things would help. Yeah, I agree that this is somewhat of a widespread problem that does warrant some community effort to correct. I get that we're all tired of this topic, but as long as the misinformation is spread more than the corrections to the misinformation, the more the problems going to keep coming up. If we address it, we'll be able to put it behind us much more than if we ignore it. And to further illustrate the point of this causing harm, I've gotten anon hate calling me an "alloro ace stealing aro terms" for mentioning that aces (of unspecified romantic orientations) might be in queerplatonic relationships. Seeing as I also get hate calling me allo for being greyro, it wasn't the most pleasant message to receive. I want to make sure that doesn't happen to other people.
  12. How do people typically react when you correct them? My experiences trying to politely correct people have... not been positive, to say the least. I'd be curious to hear how you go about it if it typically goes smoothly for you.
  13. @Mark you are right about the both sides comment. As I said in my last comment, I have thought about this a bit and no longer agree with the statement I made that you quoted there. I wrote that when I was a bit frustrated, and my apologies for that. Hindsight is 20/20, and I realize now that we should have coordinated with Siggy and Sennkestra to delay one of the projects so they didn't happen at the same time. We didn't think of a solution to this problem at the time, and I apologize that this led to people feeling excluded from this initiative, as that was never our intention. We will try to do better in the future, particularly by getting more input from allo aros. We did not delete all past references to TAAP on our blog posts, as that would be disingenuous to go back and re-write history to be something it wasn't. I'm sure you would agree based on other things you have said that pretending we never were TAAP would not be a good thing. The projects page is also not blank when I look at it? I'm not sure what the problem is there but I will look into it. Thank you for the suggestions for the etiquette guide. That was copied and pasted from the Creating Change 2019 program, and we will probably be taking it off our site soon. I will certainly pass on the suggestions to whoever the team is working on it next year. I find the issue with the three paragraph thing is the format typically used to explain split attraction: [explain asexuality]+[explain the SAM through an asexual lens]+[explain aromanticism once people understand romantic orientation] which is very common. Since helping work on that guide, I've toyed around with reversing it, and explaining the concept of the SAM through an aromantic lens to try to combat it, and I am now wondering if there is a way to explain the SAM neutrally. (Same goes with explaining grey identities as goes with the SAM)
  14. I've thought about this a bit, and I think I've been having a bit of trouble distinguishing between having a significant majority of people (with diverse aspec identities) being comfortable with how everything rolled out vs having literally everybody feel comfortable. So my logic was that we were never going to have everyone okay with it, so we shouldn't let that stop us from trying to work towards a common understanding, but perhaps there were ways that more people could have been okay with it. I guess I need to do a bit more work on not using black-and-white thinking myself. I'm sorry that the way things rolled out made some people feel unwelcome. That was never our intention (quite the opposite, in fact). @Jot-Aro Kujo I am truly sorry you feel that way. I actually have been feeling very similarly lately about interacting with the aro community, and I just want to get to a place where none of us feel unwelcome in our own communities.
  15. TAAAP member here. First of all, my apologies for not noticing this thread as it happened. Thank you @bananaslug for clarifying the intent and logistics of the carnival. Regarding the topic, I have responded to these concerns on multiple other platforms, but I just wanted to say something here: I believe three things. First, I believe that it is important that the aro and ace communities form a constructive dialogue to address concerns felt on both sides, as well as that it is important for that conversation to happen sooner rather than later. Second, I believe that it is important that everyone is involved in this conversation in both a sharing and listening capacity, whether they are alloace, aroace, alloaro, non-SAM-using, somewhere in the grey area, or a combination. Third, I believe that the Carnival of Aros will help foster higher-level dialogue among the aro community, and that it was important for it to get started sooner rather than later. If you disagree with any of these beliefs, then you won’t agree with the decisions we made because of them. When it comes down to it, I can’t see a way that we could have done anything significantly different enough that would have alleviated the problems everyone here is mentioning while at the same time honoring all three of those beliefs. If anyone here has any suggestions that do align with these beliefs, please share. I am at a loss for how we could have made this better, and I would love to learn for the future. I don’t want to shove the problems that exist between our communities under a rug and hope that they go away. I hope I am not alone in that sentiment. TAAAP provided Siggy and Sennkestra with the names of 4-5 people who were active in aro-specific communities, critical of various ace community initiatives, and willing to have constructive conversations with us or others in the past. We figured that they would know additional people who would also be willing to work with them in launching the carnival. There seem to be quite a few misconceptions about our organization floating around here! Let’s clear some of that up: TAAAP is an aro organization. TAAAP is also an ace organization, yes, but we do just as much aro advocacy as we do ace advocacy. In fact, were I to pick whether we are more ace-focused or aro-focused at this very moment, I would say that we are more aro-focused, as we are currently expending more energy and resources towards aro initiatives than ace initiatives. Yes, we started as an ace-specific organization, but we naturally started doing aro advocacy because a lot of us are aro and we care deeply about aro issues. We were working on two separate aro advocacy projects before we ever changed our name. The substance behind our organization changed first. We changed our name to be a reflection of that. We have been around for less than a year and a half, and are only really solidifying what our foundation is now. Our website lists an equal number of ace and aro resources. You may look at our website, taaap.org, to verify this information. If I somehow missed something, please let me know specifically what it is so I can fix it. I recognize our header image is still out-of-date; I plan on replacing it when we have a chance to take a new picture at pride this year. We do need to work on having a greater number of non-ace aros on our board and volunteer teams at the moment. We have one, but due to personal reasons they haven't been able to commit much time to helping work on projects recently. We have been a bit swamped with all the other work we have been doing, and recruitment hasn't been at the top of our to-do list. That being said, if you or anyone else you know might be interested in getting involved (especially if you live in or around DC, but people living in other locations are welcome as well), please send us an email. In the meantime, we do our best to read as many allo aro perspectives on aromanticism as we can so that our work can best reflect all aros, not just aroaces.
  • Create New...