Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won



About Coyote

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Personal Information

  • Name
  • Location
  • Romanticism
  • Sexuality

Contact Methods

Recent Profile Visitors

1,300 profile views
  1. Bumping this thread because I still don't know of anywhere anybody's put together anything like this. @sennkestra In the mean time, here are the things I know so far: 200[?] -- the word "aromantic" used on Haven for the Human Amoeba 2006 -- the word "aromantic" used on the AVEN forums 2011? -- National Coalition for Aromantic Visibility founded, now defunct First flag proposal (green/yellow/orange/black ) 2012 -- "amatonormativity" coined by professor Elizabeth Brake 2014 -- Aromantic Awareness Week suggested on Tumblr (since renamed Aromantic Spectrum Awareness Week) 2014 -- Second flag proposal (green/green/yellow/gray/black) and Third flag proposal (green/green/white/gray/black) 2016-ish? -- Arocalypse created (@Blue Phoenix Ace can you confirm?) 2017 -- Aromantics Wiki was created 2018 -- aromantic and other romantic orientations added to the Oxford English Dictionary 2019 -- Aromantic-Spectrum Union for Recognition, Education, and Advocacy was created See also my timelines on QPR & related concepts (like "squish") and wtf/quoiromanticism. I get the sense that there would also be an interest in this over on aro tumblr. Anyway, somebody else take over for me here.
  2. Also "squad" and "community." Sympathies. And yeah, I think this is an important part of understanding what "amatonormativity" is -- not just the romantic/nonromantic distinction, but also thinking about individual relationships to the exclusion of group relationships. Thanks for sharing your thoughts!
  3. +1 to the anti-soulmates resistance. The idea of "soulmates" at this point is basically inextricable from the idea of predestined relationships, which... is just a bad outlook to have on relationships all around, no matter what kind. I'd really like to know how these people define "friendship." There isn't necessarily any difference -- they can be the same. "QPR" is just... more specific, or I guess, a more specific way of indicating how you think about the relationship/how it doesn't fit within societal norms. Different people live in different cultural contexts, so there can't be any hard and fast rules for what exactly that will entail. Oh geez, what?
  4. Admittedly the other reason he wouldn't have said "heterosexual" per se was because he was a German and writing in German. I'm not sure what the exact German words he used were, besides "Uranodioning" etc., which has been translated as "bisexual."
  5. @raavenb2619 Link should be this: https://assignedgothatbirth.home.blog/2019/08/02/call-for-submissions-for-august-carnival-of-aros-relationships/
  6. Well, I don't know how to provide proof of consensus, but I find the "non-aromantic" use of "aro spectrum" to be new and bewildering, and this is how I use it: In this post, Siggy (a grayro) refers to the excluding-aromantic use of "arospec" as "nonstandard usage," and I'm inclined to see it the same way. See that post and the comment section for a further discussion of the consequences of shifting the spectrum framework. ...Also, having been watching the responses come in to the Romantic Ambivalence Survey.... well, to be fair, that's not supposed to be a measure of the whole aro community or opinions on the community, but it is getting a lot of aromantic respondents, and so far, I can tell you that definitely the vast majority of respondents who checked off "aromantic" as their identity did answer "Do you identify on the aromantic spectrum?" with "Yes, I do."
  7. @lonelyace Sorry about your thread getting derailed, but here's a linkspam I put together on tri-label aro aces.
  8. Recently encountered a reblog-chain started by @arokaladin that touches on a few different sites of language/expectations shift:
  9. I had this problem a while ago too. It turned out they were disabled on my account. If you go to your own profile page, clicking on "Edit Profile" (right next to where you change the Cover Photo, top right) will bring up a widget of edit options. Under "Basic Info," one of these options is "Enable status updates?" -- with a toggle button right next to it. Does yours show on or off?
  10. I agree. I think any time these questions come up, we should avoid things like "That makes you X" or "You're probably X." Ideologically, it's important to me that people always affirm identity labeling is always in each person's own hands to decide for themselves, barring other concerns (like if there's a problem with a term itself). FTR, I was thinking it would be convenient if there were an aro or even just romantic-orientation-questioning-in-general version of Queenie's linkspam for people giving advice, particularly Sci's "Am I asexual?" "Who can say?" and @sennkestra's reblog-thread exchange with a prescriptivist, or even Hezekiah's identity prescriptivism linkspam. But I don't know of any equivalents.
  11. Hey folks, maybe y'all can help me out with something. You may have notice that there seem to be a steady stream of questioning threads in this board (no doubt because the board description presents that as one of the main things the board is about -- which is why I think it might be good to split off a separate Personal Questioning board from more of an Issue Discussion board, but I digress). Since people come here for help, I think it would be helpful to have a set of "things to help if you're questioning" resources ready at hand. But also, I think it would be good to standardize some advice for the advice-givers, if that makes sense. So: 1) Do y'all have links to specific things that you think would be helpful to questioning people? 2) What do you think are necessary parts of helping questioning people? What's helpful to say, what's not helpful to say, and what are the ethical stakes and standards?
  12. Both of those sound like what I think they were saying there -- there's different social standards applied to same-gender touching for women vs. men, and I think it may be standard for people to befriend more people of their own gender, while also (if they're straight) only ever getting romantically/sexually involved with men (as women) or women (as men). However, I think there's an additional consideration here, because I was also interested in the part mentioning "both sexes prefer to be touched by women more than by men." That part seems to be attributed to these two citations: Crawford, C. B. (1994). Effects of sex and sex roles on same-sex touch. Perceptual and Motor Skills,78, 391–394. doi:10.2466=pms.1994.78.2.391 Willis, F. N., & Rawdon, V. A. (1994). Gender and national differences in attitudes toward same-gender touch. Perceptual and Motor Skills,78, 1027–1034. doi:10.2466=pms.1994.78.3.1027 I don't have access to these, although it's possible to look up their abstracts. They're probably light on explanation anyway. But if left to guess, I'd figure that in the U.S., even straight women prefer same-gender touch because generally speaking, men don't bother to make themselves seem as safe or approachable. Also who knows how any of these results would look if they bothered to invite or account for nonbinary participants.
  13. @techno-trashcan Ah! An opposition to emotions dogma.
  14. Well, in order to know the answer to that, you first have to take into account that not everyone experiences or uses the terminology of "squishes" at all. See this thread on that. It's a concept that's useful to some, but not everybody. Of the people who do both experience those feelings and label them as something like that -- well, it depend on if you're asking if it's "normal" as in "within the norm" or if you mean "normal" as in "the absolute most common way." If it's the latter, I can't say for sure. I don't think anything like that's been... measured, exactly. But within the norm? Certainly. But if you mean "normal" as in "anything other than this is abnormal"... nah. It seems like it's also pretty well within the norm to have a gender preference in the people you get attached to or hang out with. But in any case -- you don't need to worry about what's normal. There's no stakes to it either way.
  15. You mean in the Flyod article? There's this, as speculation:
  • Create New...