Jump to content

Apathetic Echidna

Member
  • Content Count

    603
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    77

About Apathetic Echidna

  • Rank
    Prickly Ball of Aro

Personal Information

  • Gender
    Female
  • Pronouns
    She/Her
  • Location
    The Antipodes
  • Romanticism
    Aromantic
  • Sexuality
    Greyasexual of some form

Recent Profile Visitors

1,697 profile views
  1. These descriptions are much much clearer for me than the ones detailing convergent pieces and multiple orientations. So much clearer. I must say I love the wording you have ended up using, it really puts the emphasis on the way people present themselves to others. I'll probably say more later, but I don't have time now
  2. oh, I was thinking it might be swapped to singular to avoid the plural use of They. None of your examples in the table specifically made that clear, so thanks for telling me!
  3. I actually haven't ever seen that variant before with the 'h', but I have seen many using the 'i' like in Zir. The Ze is probably becoming more popular (well at least the pile of content using it is growing quicker) because the letter makes sense to many people. Your chart certainly makes it clear, and as a singular it would bypass the only failing I think 'They' has which is its need to change more than one word in most sentences to keep it grammatical....but it is not like I use find & replace regularly to swap out She/He with They. also I just noticed this That comes into regional grammatical slang. Have you seen the movie 'Brother where art thou?' ? it is used there, and is representative of the speaking quirks of the region and time but I doubt it has fully dropped out of use. There is a great quote that starts "Is you is, or is you ain't...". It is like the English/British(?) use of 'I was stood' rather than 'I was standing'
  4. @Magni I am seeing the Ze form much more now and I think they are a cool set of alternatives to use! Are you saying you coined them? if so, super cool! (Though a little while ago I read a short (very short) work of fiction which had two characters (un-named characters I might add) that used Ze and it's other forms. It was the most confusing thing I have read recently. The author had taken it all a bit too far. The same exact problem would have come up using two 'she', 'he' or 'they' characters. The author just really needed to give at least one character a name!)
  5. Definitely. I wouldn't say it is a unanimous community reaction, I just find for answering those initial questioning topics that run less along 'I feel bad about my self' and more like 'I am scared I am this thing I have preconceived notions about' with a 'you don't have to be that thing' is more welcoming/encouraging(?) than debating why they are wrong, when the perception change must come from inside which is best done by hearing others experiences and opinions which never really seem to make their way onto those questioning posts. I guess this is all my reaction to those posts elsewhere where questioning people ask about terms they are interested in and get answers along the lines of 'that's not really a recognised/legit term #toomanylabels' and then the questioning person abandons their account. Some people have a drive to quantify themselves with labels even if they later decide to stop using them. (Those other 'I feel bad about my self' topics don't tend to focus on labels like questioning topics do so it is much easier to discuss and reassure using personal contexts, generally they also get much more activity, more different users and more comments) This thread is monster length 😎 and it goes off topic a few times (with very long posts). Sorry!
  6. Welcome! It is tradition to give new members some aro flavour/coloured icecream as for help with figuring things out, well reading other peoples experiences and thinking about your own should help a lot. It is fine to be as specific or as general in definition as you want, or you may find you never want to use a label which is cool too
  7. well the only reason people hang around in online communities is when they feel accepted, if they feel it is toxic they will leave. So I just think giving them whatever kind of support they want initially. Don't think I have ever brought up cupioromantic unless it was already in the thread. As I said to Mark, these are the people who see 'aromantic' as a painful idea so they are not initially going to listen to 'but aromantics can do that too' comments. These sorts of things are all over the forums. It is a popular topic in all it's guises. My mind set on this is basically reassure them in however they want to be reassured, so that they accept that the community is welcoming. Then hope they might find some conversations and experiences of others that can help them, or even start a conversation about their fears. I know there are some people around who had a label before aromantic because they thought to be aromantic was to give up on a dream, which it doesn't have to be. I guess the 'giving up on something' is a trope we are fighting as a community, and the labels that define 'aromantic but unhappy about it' are a soft way to handle people's distress. Not to mention all the 'letting go of something I don't actually want anyway' distress in the forums. I'm not going to poke the cupioromantic bear (at least not yet) as some people find it reassuring . Ahh, I was still working from the understanding from the raws, so if you've edited it might be clearer for me. (I did think that the circles section was the most confusing, but with clearer context hopefully I can get a better understanding)
  8. @MarkWell I see the 'separation' I'm specifically talking about here as being caused by the questioning people having ideas (probably mostly fears) about what being aromantic means (probably based on a whole heap of misconceptions about turning into crazy-cat ladies who are forever alone or all their dreams of finding The Onetm and having happily ever after suddenly being smashed). So, we, the aromantics who find partners or enjoy romantic-coded things are sort of invisible because 'being aromantic' has already been rejected by them. And when someone has a gut reaction against a label or is uneasy about a label that should be respected like Oak says here. There are some interesting points over here, even if they are mostly using a sexuality vocabulary. As for your specific comment about being easier being something else, I don't really understand. Sure, the world would be a simple place if we were all allocishet with no neurodivergency, (but it would also probably be boring.) But if you mean that using the alloromantic label or asexual label would make things less difficult, that would be a personal choice you would have to make, just like if you decided to stop using 'aromantic' because you felt it did not explain your experience (like Ashere or oak in the first link).
  9. drawing....pictures? diagrams are good. 😤 🌑🌓🌕🌗🌑 Discussion of the circles warrants it's own thread, and some new commenters. Though I can just image that this is going to end up on a linkspam as the longest article (that probably even warrants a length warning)
  10. I'm just going to tie these comments together because they work together to answer. So since I moved off AVEN all the discussion about aromanticism sort of hard lines 'aromantic' in relation to attraction and maybe a few other things on an individual basis. Desire, drive and wanting don't come into it in relation to aromantics, all of those other criteria are pushed into different labels like cupioromantic which then take it into account in it's definition. There have been quite a few people come through these forums expressing (sometimes very upset or stressed) that they don't feel romantic attraction but don't want to be that way, don't want to be 'aromantic'. They need that separation from the rest of the aromantics. Those labels may simply be a middle-step as they come to self acceptance or it may be the identity they choose for life, but they are incredibly important for people who want an 'out' from being aromantic as I highly doubt there will be much push to change the current attraction centric definition of aromantic. Sorting out the chafing in all our communities is probably the best aim any of us can have right now! I must say I composite, but not sexual orientation as everything defaults to aromantic for me (and I prefer not to name the rest). I find it is only in aro & ace communities that I find myself detailing other things and people assume they are separate, which is fair because generally it comes up when talking about a specific incident or event. I think what chafes is some of the language which reinforces division and there is no alternate terms, and the suffixes trip me up. Even with apressexual it makes little sense to use -sexual because it also involves another attraction anyway* (sexual only follows another sort of attraction), but I guess that is part of the sexual or sexual/romantic centric mentality. All I can say on suffixes though is that -ttracted would definitely not work, at least in the case of apres-. *Think about how messy long that would get adding varying gender targets for both or more attractions into one sexuality term if that is how people decide to specify their identities. and 'differentiating types of attraction' is what I meant by SAM, I guess I should change over too to be clear (Goodbye SAMwise Gamgee) Yes, Yes. Everything you say. I understand it all. And it is precisely why until this topic sat without comment for 6 or so hours while I was on and off brain dead bored at work that I had avoided discussions of SAM. Detailing this stuff is hard. The fact that the vocabulary we have is insufficient or conflicting makes it so much harder still. When/if you manage to work up a post I would be very excited to read it, even if it takes a year or two The understanding of 'orientation' seems to be only slightly less messy, so good luck with that too. So maybe we can all agree that the concept of SAM as defined as 'a person may feel many attractions and they may not all be similar' (Using the word 'may' to also include a negative option or possibility of an absence of attraction) is a useful coarse tool for some people, but does not encompass many subtleties for which finer tools, concepts or terms are needed. Personally I think the most problematic thing abut SAM is the fact people are trying to stretch it to cover those subtleties when ultimately it can only fail or exclude people.
  11. I JUST FOUND ONES FILLED WITH FRUCHOCS!! It is a boutique bakery that probably doesn't sell to your state but if you are ever down south at this time of year, nothing says Easter more than a hot cross bun filled with dried apricot covered in chocolate to make lumps of chocolate the size of Maltesers. 🍫🍬♥️
  12. I'd be interested in seeing the results of this once you are done collecting data
  13. I guess with that it would depend on where the person relates to their other influences. That would be a individual decision according to the person's own feelings. I remember one comment on AVEN where someone on the Autism spectrum wanted that to be taken into account when they discussed their orientation (via orientation label that they included the word 'autism' in just to make sure everyone got it), so obviously they thought it was a fundamental part that could not be divided from whenever they discussed anything to do with their experience. My search skill have left me again but this link says pretty much the same thing but about gender Not what I was looking for, but sorta? But what could N possibly be? Split Attraction Model Now! Nah, I think we should go with yours, PAMYDHAIYBIOPRYDHLYIATTM. I can't think of a word, or even set of words, that mean 'could be felt as separate, or combined but identifiable, or combined but melded together to basically be the same thing, or any combination of these 3, or their absence(s)'. All in all @Coyote's Convergent, cohesive pieces/Divergent pieces and Singular composite/Singular specific/Multiple specific orientation is much more comprehensive than identifying as using SAM or non-SAM, but it is still a concept that would best apply when people have sorted shit out, which is hard most of the time and SAM (as per my basic understanding as stated before) is a useful tool for at least some people *cough* me *cough* to get that shit sorted...and that took between 5 months and 13 years to do (depending how you look at it) but personally I think that tool's usefulness is over for me and so I would prefer something less vague than 'non-SAM' to be out there. But even now I'm unsure about how I would fit in your 4 circles, maybe Divergent Pieces (as I can tell the difference between the ever pervasive constant aromanticism and the sexual/sensual) but maybe Singular Composite as I experience them as a cohesive whole when they do occur in conjunction and most differentiation is done in hindsight and even then it is tricky. Is that 5th circle or am I doing it wrong?
  14. One thing is for sure of, if the wall chart is anything to go by, Lars really likes sex and as there were only men on that list we can be pretty sure he has a gender preference
  15. ah, yes this a distinction I did not actually think of before but yes. For some people things will be more clearly defined and so can be 'separated' and identified easier, but for a lot of people (as seen from all the pain from those "what am I?" posts) the decision/choice has to be made to self-evaluate and examine if other attractions can be identified (either singly or in conjunction with others). I hadn't realised you didn't catch this idea when @bydontost brought it up the first time. I skimmed that post too, but I recognised the distinction and it is pretty much the same one I make. It is possible this is the point that is tripping some of our conversation up. I have tried to be clear in my own posts about when I was talking about orientation or the orientation/identity label that we choose, but if that wasn't picked up I can understand how odd some things might get. The basic framework of this can be seen as: Self Our inner being, thing, mind, whoever we are when meditating. Basically not important to the concept beyond it being the starting point. Orientation An uncontrolled thing that we discover the presence of and we learn about through experiencing the world. Attraction/Pattern of attractions Another uncontrolled thing that generally is associated with orientations. Orientation label/ Identity label/ Label Something that is chosen. We make a conscious choice to add terms to our identity assemblages according to internal and external factors. It lines up with the concept of 'Born this way' that got publicity and debate around the campaigns for same-sex marriage laws around the world as well as campaigns against aversion therapy and the idea that non-heteronormative people can be 'cured'. Summed up as Many other people have said basically the same thing, but recently (not sure when) the 'sexual' has been dropped to include a-spec orientations. Not knowing the label words or denying them does not change the orientation or attraction patterns as they are uncontrolled, unlike actions or identifying as something which is a choice. I know this is all of on another tangent but I felt this had to be cleared up because in a way it does tie back to the understanding of the current view of SAM. The only thing I disagree with @bydontost about is that 'orientation' and 'pattern of attraction' are the same thing, simply because using them as synonyms denies the possibility that there may be other influences, in addition to pattern of attraction, that may influence someone's fundamental orientation. A specific case for this might be neurodivergency. @Prismatangle Welcome! I'm sorry to have misunderstood you when I quoted, so thanks for coming over and clearing things up (also thanks for clearing up the pronouns! I didn't want to make assumption so I went neutral). Am I right in re-reading your comment as you used the concept that we (at least Croutons and I) now call SAM? As for this, I would be more worried if you did find Tumblr important because that seems to be the stronghold of all sorts of bad stuff. Just saw I got pinged here, so just going to post it oh also @Coyote yes, just having 'Orientations' would solve the issue but I am sort of attached to my pyramid so I'm not going to be the one to mention it in the site improvement topic On SAM: Yeah, Split Attraction Model (SAM) is not the best use of words but I do like the acronym. I did think that maybe Differentiated Attraction Model might be a possible solution but that acronym.....😲..😂
×
×
  • Create New...