Jump to content

Mark

Member
  • Content Count

    809
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    38

Everything posted by Mark

  1. I'd have though if there were a need for a term to describe such relationships it would be expressed by allo aces. AFAIK they use "romantic", to describe such relationships. What I think is more lacking is recognition (and terms to describe) non-romantic sexual relationships. The adjective form of "friend" is "friendly". With platonic lacking an obvious noun form. I don't understand how these words have become linked.
  2. The definition "platonic" meaning either "non sexual" or "non physical" is what you typically find in English language dictionaries. The usual way it's associated with friendship is the term "platonic friend". The notion of "platonic" meaning "friendship" appears to have originated within the ace community. Plato never made use of the term. TBH it has about as much to do with him as "romantic" has to do with the Romans It can be used for both "in between A and B" and "neither A nor B" which are somewhat different.
  3. Is this London Group you mean? Which dosn't appear that active and currently unable to offer ace, rather than aspec, events. AUREA lists a group in New Jersey (which may be the New York one). This also does not appear to be especially active either.
  4. I'm not sure that there are any genetic factors involved in romance at all. Even allowing for the possibility of horizontal gene transfer it dosn't seem plausible that something could come into being and spread so rapidly. Whereas cultural imperialism does seem a plausible explanation for near global amantonormativity which currently exists,.
  5. Linguistically speaking there is no issue. Nor is there with the original definition. Where the issues occur is that many polyamory groups are highly couple and romance centric. I think how to navigate societies where conflation of sex and romance is normative. It's, ironically, something I think the ace community can do better....
  6. This sounds rather like quoiromantic. Though do be aware that there are mis-definitions of the term are to be found on the likes of Urban Dictionary.
  7. Ironically groups for gay men are fairly common. The issue I have with many "A-spec" groups is they are, defacto, ace groups. All of them appear to have started off as ace groups which have attempted to diversity. These are the same kind of issues which would arise with a gay or gay & lesbian group trying to become and LGBT+ group involved. This isn't how things happened with ace meetups. AFAIK these happened from having a good and extensive online community. This is something which is, IMHO, very much lacking for aros.
  8. Guessing you mean the Visibility, Articles, and Meetups forum. Which dosn't have that many posts about meetups, TBH. If you look for aro meetups using meetup.com there are very few which are actually ace groups or subgroups of ace groups. Similar with aces & aros with additionally their "world map" only really covering two countries.
  9. Who's him? I would understand "platonic" to mean either "non physical" or "non sexual".(The former including the latter.) Thus "platonic attraction" does not make much sense to me. Hence "quoiplatonic". Whilst I do find "platonic relationship" to be a useful term. I see "platonic" and "romantic" as different concepts which are not at all antonyms. Effectively "between platonic and romantic" being about as meaningful as "between temperature and colour". Nor do I see any reason a relationship cannot be both "platonic" and "romantic". I do see "platonic" and "sexual" as antonyms. With terms like "platonicish", "partly platonic", "mostly platonic" being descriptive of a between.
  10. One possibility would be to give aro allo members priority in terms of facilitating/leading discussions.
  11. It's certainly a romantic coded idea. But for some people in may be a sexual or other physical intimacy thing. Similarly for wanting to share a bed with two or more people. I was thinking that this would come under "group". Though plausibly a large group. Which of the group options would depend on if this were separate rooms or some kind of dormitory.
  12. What would be your idea situation? Assuming there were no practical concerns or limitations.
  13. How would you ideally like to live? Assuming that there were no practical issues constraining your choice.
  14. Reading a review of the Hinge app your experience makes sense. Unfortunately allos tend to equate and conflate "serious" with "romantic". Though IME Tinder also has many people seeking romantic relationships. How do your family suggest you meet people? In practice in person meetings are likely to be the most dangerous.
  15. I wonder if there is a way to "beta test" surveys. Since these kind of issues are not uncommon. I've encountered which are impossible to complete, due to logical fallacies, but are unfixable because of "sunk costs".
  16. There's a meme which goes: “Diversity is having a seat at the table. Inclusion is having a voice. And belonging is having that voice be heard.” How will that help allo aros with inclusion or belonging? This tumblr covers some of the reasons why aro allos might be uncomfortable in aspec spaces. That would only address diversity, rather than inclusion and belonging.
  17. I was surprised when I put up this poll how uncommon squishes appear to be amongst aros. When most aro related articles imply that they apply to the majority of aros. It's similarly possible for someone to have a non-sexual crush on someone else and threat them poorly. Which might even be seen as more morally pure than a crush with concurrent sexual attraction. Which could be a possible complication with romantic harassment. The difficulty here is that purely sexual attraction, along with interest in non-romantic sexual relationships, can be highly pathologised. Including self pathologisation. If you are constantly exposed to toxic ideas it can be difficult to avoid internalising them. I'm left wondering why squishes are talked about so much when they just arn't that common. It's not just movies. This trope appears throughout drama and fiction. As well as being pushed through peer pressure. The deception aspect would also apply to the "nice guy" trope.
  18. "When did you first start identifying as aromantic?" with the option of "before 1970" does not really make sense. Possibly if there was a question like "When did you first realise your attitudes towards relationships and romance differed from those of most people?"
  19. Something important to me would be avoiding conflating aro with ace. Also something which wasn't just for students.
  20. I think it's also useful to ask "What is the main difference between a QPR and a romantic relationship?".
  21. Monogamy may be sexual, social, structural or emotional. None of these require the relationship to be romantic. Other non -romantic ways in which you can see binary relationships lionised include "platonic soulmates", the singular "best friend", even the idea that one-to-one interactions are "easier" than groups. There appears to be a social expectation that people will "grow out of" group relationships. Even though this is self evidently false. I've seen this kind of idea in quite a few places. Including solo poly, single at heart and, even, aro. I think, even for an extreme introvert, it's not practical or sensible.
  22. I experience envy (including being envious of situations) rather than jealousy. With the two often being conflated. It can seem almost that jealousy (and posessivness) is expected of allos, Including as a metric of "how much they love" their partner.
  23. I recall an article which even quoted Brake. Whilst describing something which sounded virtually identical to a romantic relationship. It's likely that they don't. Also that the intended audience is other allos. For me it's the "half person" idea which makes me think "just no". It's important not to overlook that there is a cultural context involved in the QPR definition(s). Also that factors like social class, age, gender, race, religion, etc. can affect someone's cultural context as much as geography. I find this a rather dystopian removal of individuality and autonomy. Trying to turn humans into something like The Borg.
  24. If someone needs to justify not doing something that is a good sign of it being normative. (Even more so if there's a "missing some essential human instinct" meme associated with it). As well as having children, this certainly applies to romance, the 'relationship escalator' and marriage. Maybe it would be better to ask if wanting a QPR is a choice? There's also my poll, which showed only around a quarter of those responding are interested in QPRs. Where it originates from the aro community it's an example of "respectability politics". It was specifically intended to be an umbrella term. Articles about the subject, especially from non aspec sources, can describe something very romance like. There can be a great deal of denial about QPRs having romance like elements or dynamics. I'd also say that they can, in some cases, be a "stand in" for a romantic relationship. (Even though calling those 'queerromantic', 'quasiromantic' or 'pseudoromantic' might make more sense.) These are also the kind of examples you are most likely to see in non-aspec media, since they are easiest for allos to comprehend.
  25. This section is attributed to Aristophanes.Possibly Plato is using people he knew as archetypes. Though it might be reasonable to describe the soulmate concept as "platonic". On the other hand "platonic love" dosn't appear to have that much to do with Plato. (Ditto for "romantic love" and Rome.) I don't know French. Though I'm not sure that French translations would be any easier to make sense of than English.
×
×
  • Create New...