Jump to content

Spacenik86

Member
  • Content Count

    60
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

About Spacenik86

  • Rank
    Member

Personal Information

  • Name
    Charlie
  • Gender
    male
  • Pronouns
    he
  • Location
    planet Earth
  • Occupation
    space enthusiast
  • Romanticism
    aromantic, ideologically opposed to romantic love
  • Sexuality
    hetero

Recent Profile Visitors

295 profile views
  1. Wow, your post just shows that this board is what I suspected to be - an echo chamber for insane far leftists. I'm done with this place.
  2. I use e/em/eir (borrowed from Orion's Arm) to refer to people of unknown sex or to someone who is neither male nor female, like a transgendered person who identifies as a woman but keeps eir cock. It has a real-life precedent: in Melanesian Pidgin "em" is the only third person pronoun and applies to everybody. And MP is a child of English, so to say. I don't like "singular they", maybe we need to express gender more precisely but distinguishing between one person and more is also important. And I still use "generic he" in sentences like "the comedian should surprise his audience". I don't think that's sexist at all, it's simply a quirk of English grammar. Sometimes I'll use "generic she" as well
  3. Like your username. Why did you choose it?
  4. Social media became mainstream about 2006 but the profusion of politics started later. I disagree with it. If you wonder why, you could be interested in the following essay: https://thecriticalrationalist.weebly.com/blog/the-personal-isnt-nessecerily-political In general I don't have good opinion of 1960s American radicalism. It's enough to say these radicals sympathized with various totalitarian regimes in the Third World, because these regimes supposedly stood for national liberation. I'm appalled by students wearing T-shirts with the murderer Che Guevara. The second is closer to my definition of politics. Citizens of Western democracies. In places like North Korea or Saudi Arabia things are completely different. If I was living in such a society, my priority would be to bring down the tyranny. Okay, I am new here. Which phrases I should have avoided not to come off as impolite? So this is the opposite extreme. For activists or "SJWs" everything is political. For therapists everything is personal. We need a more balanced perspective which avoids both extremes.
  5. Spacenik86

    No more humans

    no more people born in the 20th century Cleopatra
  6. It's a form of disability. Social disability to be precise. If people with a physical disability could buy a healthy leg, wouldn't they do it? Us transhumanists say: the same applies to mental and emotional disabilities.
  7. The quote is from Last Men in London. Everybody who wants to understand Stapledon should read both Last and First Men and Last Men in London. The first is an imaginary future history, the latter - a narrative of a future human being exploring the mind of a guy from the 20th century. The future civilization of genetically perfected humans is able to transmit information back in time. The "slaughter of the animal in you" seems to be mostly about sexual repression. It is of interest to aromantics that Stapledon's future humans don't really have pair-bonding. They have "marriage groups" of 96 people for the purpose of uniting as a group-mind. There is of course sex within the groups, but they also feel free to spend literally centuries outside the group and pursue casual partners.
  8. True! I never thought of it as a code. Did you think along the lines of: they think you have a partner, just don't want to introduce em to the workplace? Nowadays the Internet is the best tool to educate yourself. Presence of drunk people can discourage people to visit a place, not to mention it's not conducive for quality conversations.
  9. There always were some political maniacs, but this sort of attitude wasn't so prominent before social media and full-time TV news channels. The sort of attitude was typical only of full-time radicals, now it started to pervade mainstream society. It might have to do with decline of spirituality as well, the more energy goes to the spiritual engine, the less is left for the political engine. They just talk about someone who is a huge part of their life, and don't see it as potentially divisive because most people view it as a normal human issue, not something political. BTW, talking about your aromanticism to your co-worker within a context of friendly communication is absolutely OK. It would be akin to saying that you're a Jehovah Witness and explaining their tenets. But aggressive activism, or aggressive proselytising, should be kept outside the workplace. If I wore a conspicuous badge with the aromantic arrows: How would it be different from wearing a conspicuous religious emblem? To be frank, people would be less likely to react negatively to the arrows, because the symbol is not widely known outside of our subculture, and most peeps would see it as nothing more than a fashion statement. Not necessarily. Only in a totalitarian state politics permeated every aspect of life. In a free society, you can just live your life without paying much attention to politics. Look how many people don't even bother to cast a ballot? Don't get me wrong, we absolutely should vote. However, we should get a sense of meaning from our personal lives, rather than from politics. Elevating politics to the position of most important thing in all human experience is just wrong. We already have the necessary human rights, like freedom of expression. The point is to use them wisely to spread our message.
  10. All periods have all types of individuals, true. But microlabels were hardly as prominent before the 2010s or at least late 2000s. You could say it's because of social media, but again the widespread adoption of this technology tells us something about the generational character of current young adults.
  11. In the 2010s everything is politicized, most people are already tired of politics, please don't make aromanticism a political issue. Aromantics shouldn't forcibly re-educate people by pushing for law changes, if there has to be a cultural change away from pair-bonding let's it happen naturally. Adoption should above all give the child a responsible, stable and mature environment, and in most cases this means the conventional family. Workplace - I don't think anybody was ever sacked for not being in a romantic relationship. Anyway, people should not advertise their private life at work. Healthcare - a good point: "making sure we could seek therapy without having to educate them about our identities or have our identity medicalized". I had to quit psychotherapy because the therapist tried to hard to awaken my romantic side. Though I'm happy with leaving this nonsense, I suspect psychotherapy is a cant in general. I recommend reading a very good book on this issue: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Psychology-as-religion-cult-self-worship/dp/B00072QQRC I also agree that "having some way to declare someone as “family” for purposes of medical leave and such without requiring marriage/romance" and "alcohol-free community resource centers" are both good ideas, though I wouldn't like to see the resource centres politicized.
  12. Same as the stupid term "significant other", which implies friendships and family ties are insignificant. As for microlabels - some of them are funny in their precision. Strauss and Howe with their generational theory would explain it - millennials as a civic generation are looking for teams to join. A prophetic generation like boomers preferred to say things like "I am my unique self".
  13. How do you imagine an all-aro society? What would be the family like without pair-bonds?
  14. Aro allos have more problems than aces, because they have sinful sex outside of marriage 😜
  15. How many religions do have a problem with asexuality, though? Christianity certainly doesn't - Jesus was an asexual and chastity is an ideal in most churches. Same for Buddhism. Islam might have a problem, as it want its followers to procreate. Paganism? Given its nature orientation, sex is a huge part of nature, so "traditional" heathens could have a problem. Based on lack of bigots in your community, I reckon you are a Wicca-like Pagan rather than a folkish one.
×
×
  • Create New...