Jump to content

assignedgothatbirth

Member
  • Content Count

    18
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

1 Follower

About assignedgothatbirth

  • Rank
    Newbie

Personal Information

  • Name
    Oliver
  • Pronouns
    they
  • Romanticism
    aro

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. I do think for younger, financially-secure, and/or abled people there aren't a lot of issues (not that I'm saying you're any of those) but once you consider other factors money becomes a big issue. So, for one, kids are expected to take care of their parents when they get older. And I think it's probably safe to say that aros are either less likely to want kids, don't have the proper supports to raise kids as a single parent, or can't adopt because of legal barriers. Disabled people also have a lot of issues such as having higher healthcare costs and needing more support in general, and while sometimes having a romantic partner can alleviate some of that we also need to make sure that we're providing proper care for all disabled people, not just ones in relationships. Then there's the harassment many of us have received due to things like the Tumblr flamewars- probably not the most traditional political thing but considering it was a campaign that was trying to construct us as being fundamentally evil for existing, I'd say that's pretty damn political. And these are just the ones I came up at a moment's notice.
  2. listen bud if there is one thing that i can say is true about all leftists its that we love complaining about other leftists. it is a remarkably broad term after all- the fact that anarcho-communists and stalinists both fall under that label is pretty wild. so i wouldnt say that there is a single leftist echo chamber. again depends on what space you're in. shockingly enough there are still plenty of islamophobic leftists because again, it's a very broad term (though this is going to be true of any group- i dont think that you'll be able to exclude bigots from every group). and then there are actually leftist spaces that do criticize islam in a way that isnt islamophobic- generally, from people who are muslim themselves, or once were. you didn't actually specify what those critiques were though, so im not sure i can take you on you're word here. ah yes the gays are such an echo chamber...in fact we're a hivemind that communicates with each other telepathically and we're all in agreement about anything. we have never had a disagreement ever. all communities are identical to one another, regardless of space and time. ...the issue with saying 'some peoples sexualities can be forcibly changed' isnt that we're 'judging' people its the very real harm that conversion therapy and abuse cause to queer people. that's not a community thing though, it's individual. and i really dont like the way that it implies that all aros want sex? and id say there are plenty of material realities that aromantics face because of how much romantic relationships are tied into the nuclear family. id say two good goals for the community would be the destruction of the nuclear family as the favored social unit from a legal standpoint, and expanding our social safety net so that people who don't have romantic partners don't have to worry about being homeless, or not being able to pay a medical bills, etc.
  3. Hm just as someone who was involved a lot with the ace flamewars on Tumblr I'm not sure how much of a difference this is going to make as far as earning respect from other orgs. Aces on there really, really, doubled down on the "asexuality just means no sexual attraction" definition as a response to the claim that aces were just "losers who think they're special just because they don't want to fuck" and "incels". This did nothing to stop the harassment however. Of course, I doubt that queer orgs will be quite this hostile but I think we should maybe take that as an opportunity- why not go the whole way and try and get as much support for everyone in our community as we can? From an education standpoint too, it will let us give information so that more people may identify as aromantic than would have otherwise. Just from my own experiences with "graysexual", it took me five years between hearing the term to finding this post that Siggy wrote and this description of a greysexual narrative: Which was an experience that I had certainly had, but never thought about in the context of greysexuality- even though I had identified as such in the past! But that was because the only definition I had seen up to that point had been "experiences attraction infrequently". I had drifted away from using that label though, precisely because I thought that I was having the weird in-between feelings of not quite sexual attraction too frequently for me to use "greysexual". I was lucky enough to stumble across a greysexual narrative because I was still a participant in the broader ace community, but what if I hadn't been, and instead felt completely alienated by both asexuality and allosexuality? I think if our definition is too narrow, we risk having people who might have otherwise identified with aromanticism simply not joining the community in the first place- and if participating in our community is the only place where more complex narratives emerge, then I do think we run the risk of alienating many of our own simply because we prioritized certain narratives.
  4. lmao you're the one who got so offended when someone pointed that you don't know what you were talking about that you left the site like...that sounds real emotionally mature compared to us 'aspies'. but to get back to the original point, you used...a principle from physics to discuss the creations of queer communities- two things which have absolutely nothing to do with each other. i know our society is so obsessed with this false notion of 'science' as the only way to derive truth that people will invoke 'science' like its the word of god constantly in discussions that don't need it but i think we should maybe not do it because it's bad rhetoric and untruthful. if you want to learn more about this 'scientism', i'd highly recommend the following paper: https://www.uta.edu/philosophy/faculty/burgess-jackson/Haack, Six Signs of Scientism.pdf (and, for the record, using disabilities as insults is bad. though i hope most people here already understand that?)
  5. my biggest problem is struggling with living alone, especially as a disabled person. i live in a big city so at least ive been able to avoid the transportation issue (i cant drive either thanks to my disability) but when even leaving my room is a struggle that doesnt really fix much. but things like having a single income, not having anyone to take car of me when im sick, even silly stuff like not being able to open a jar on my own, are the kinds of day-to-day struggles that come from being aro for me.
  6. er, im fine with that actually? if gender is a construct than 'weirder' nb identities should be just as valid as the more well-known ones like 'agender'. also....the trans flag gets way more attention than any of the ones you listed because it is far, far more well-known. the biggest problem i have with the plethora of microlabels is how people just coin them and then make a flag and don't do anything else- there's no community or really any discussion about how being that identity affects someone. ive identified with some of these terms in the past! but there's no community for it, so i just kinda forget they even exist.
  7. I dont think so- for example, "friend" generally is taken to mean "not romantic or sexual" but "friends with benefits" is still considered a type of friendship. and I think just because platonic attraction by itself is not sexual doesn't mean that you cant also have sexual attraction along with it, or a platonic relationship that is also sexual. like, romantic attraction and sexual attraction are two different things but most romantic relationships are also sexual. and honestly I dont think pointing at a dictionary is the best way to make this argument, especially when comparing the definition made by an amatonormative society versus how these terms are used with in aro spaces.
  8. Same. I definitely have had things in the past that could be described as "squishes" but I personally don't like the way it (or any of it's derivatives like smush or lush) sound. And if I were ever to talk about having one to non-a-specs I feel like it would require too much explanation- I'd use "friend crush" instead just because it feels more self-explanatory.
  9. So what you're saying is less vocab, more praxis. Really though, we have a huge lack of meatspaces and its an issue especially for more material matters. I live in the NYC area and on meetup.com I was only able to find one aro group that from what I could tel only had a few members and hadn't really done anything before it got deleted a few months ago. Unfortunately I'm not really sure what we can do to avoid this, since meatspace activism and organizing takes a lot more time, energy, and money than online activism does. I think the best thing we can do for now is try and work aro causes into other LGBTQIA+ orgs- we're probably not going to be able to create a specifically aro org for a while. I know AUREA has just started up, but they're main focus seems to be visibility (Coy's discussed the issues with that here) and it's just a website at this point so that doesn't address the meatspace issue. I wrote a bit more about this issue here- do mind it was more of a rant so it's not edited at all, but it's the general idea that I think is important.
  10. I agree with Coyote- I also don't think that it's our place to be coining terms for alloromantics when we aren't them. Why should we be inventing terms for other people?
  11. i'm not super-thrilled about how the author listed familial relationships as being considered lesser than romantic ones when id say they're seen as being equally important in our society, especially as someone who does not have a great relationship with their family. i think this is because the two are so heavily intertwined- romance is supposed to end in marriage and kids in our society, so romance and the nuclear family are difficult to separate from each other in that respect. im also not keen on them saying that friendships "don't rely on the crutch of sexual attraction" bc it seems to be reinforcing a binary between sex and friendship that i dont think exists. (not to mention that language seems a bit ableist". the rest of it is fine. nothing particularly new that i haven't seen discussed already in the community but it's always nice to see people from outside our sphere talking about this stuff.
  12. Er, there's a lot actually that could stop them? Money and time being the biggest things. If there were already twenty different aro orgs out there I'd be more inclined to agree but since this is supposed to be a broader, larger initiative so trying to accommodate as many people as possible should be a main goal. It obviously can't be everything just because of how competing needs work but that doesn't mean we should just go "eh do whatever you want" (especially if they're asking for our money).
  13. Just for future reference- you may want to look for alternatives to PayPal if you plan on getting more money in the future. Here's pages from the Better Business Bureau, Consumer Affairs and a YouTube video from an artist they screwed over. The video I linked has a couple of alternatives linked in the description but I'd recommend doing your own research as well, because it's not an exhaustive list by any means.
  14. hmm, i definitely agree that as a political goal at least its good to recognize that there are other types of attraction that don't get recognized as much, but im not so sure about using it as an identity word. if you're going off of those qualities, most of those are functions of our current society, not necessarily 'inherent' to the types of attraction that we typically think of. (and im not a huge fan of describing them as 'more complex/nuanced' either....like personally i feel like my sensual feelings are a lot more straightforward then my sexual ones). this point is probably moot on here but i think its good to keep in mind that these 'tertiary attractions' are generally included romantic and sexual attractions for most people so if we do have more political discussions about these kinds of attractions we should probably specify that its a-specs with these other attractions that tend to be affected by this stuff more than allo people... i think the a-spec community's gotten over the more obvious kind of applying the "split-attraction model" to everyone but just in case. maybe we should call it hipster attraction that's a good point. its the same issue you run into with aroaces not really seeing those (non-)attractions as separate and wanting just one orientation instead of having to split up their identity like that. i think there are probably more than one umbrella terms for these though- like, alterous, platonic, and queerplatonic could all go under "emotional" attractions, and aesthetic attraction could already be considered an umbrella term that includes aesthetic attraction. there's still more combos that could work too though- like, i personally experience queerplatonic and sensual attraction separately but linked to a certain degree, and even though im okay identifying as both i can definitely see a scenario where people would want a way to link the two. maybe "emotional-sensual attraction"? (of course, romantic and sexual attraction could also fit into any of these categories i mentioned, but i still think its useful for like...personal discussions, just not as much for political ones)
×
×
  • Create New...