Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I'm sure that many readers already know well of this blog but since new people join all the time I thought it could be worth mentioning it. I see that this has already been somewhat discussed in the thread  our attitudes to aven I feel like it plays an important role in aro invisibility because most times I google aromanticism it comes up in the results and I've read many interesting and well formulated thoughts on there.  It's no longer active and the author has a disclaimer that they have changed some of their views from those expressed there but I think many of those post will still feel current for aros for many years to come. For example, today I read Water is Wet, Everybody Dies, and Romantic People Suck at Friendship which after lead me to another article  Romance is not love. I don't share every experience as described but I do identify strongly with some of it. 

 

What are your thoughts of this blog? 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't know any of that about AVEN ! I knew some people disliked it but I didn't really know why.

 

I joined AVEN before Arocalypse and I didn't have any issues with it, people were usually nice but since I'm aro/demisexual my aro side didn't feel represented enough. Unfortunately, 70% of the posts in the aro section are from people questioning their identity (not that there's anything wrong with that but I wanted more discussions about being aro).

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's one of my favourite sites. I really like the way the author thinks.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/4/2018 at 1:37 PM, SoulWolf said:

It's one of my favourite sites. I really like the way the author thinks.

They have some interesting things to say about language use and abuse.
https://thethinkingasexual.wordpress.com/2013/05/29/sexualized-language/
https://thethinkingasexual.wordpress.com/2012/06/06/platonic-love-is-a-problematic-term/

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had come across it before but the writing style is not something I can pleasantly read, so I would really have to be in 'the mood' to more than skim read their stuff (really some of it reminds me of Anthropology articles I read at Uni). I did just now though read through the whole https://thethinkingasexual.wordpress.com/2015/11/13/the-asexual-and-aromantic-identity-spectrums-dont-make-sense/ There are some good points as per the semantics of who/how meaning of attraction for different labels and ultimately the model they propose makes more logical sense if the whole non-allo section of society is going to be used for psychological or philosophy studies.

But really, I can't agree with them as I do see aces and aros as being on the same line of spectrum as  demi- and grey- and allos though using the terms 'aces' and 'aros' as shorthand when people are talking of that end of the spectrum is a bit annoying simply because then what are you going to call a group of asexuals or a group of aromantics and have people understand that there is no attraction experience in the room?  

Also I think there is an easy sidestep around the semantics issue 

How are aromantics attracted to people?

Compute error: No

Who are aromantics attracted to?

Not Applicable

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Apathetic Echidna I too think of it as a spectrum. Many people might not know which side they fall on, and they might never know. There's no purpose in doing some kinda clear cut divide.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with @Apathetic Echidna about the writing style. I like that their articles are really thought through, the author makes a lot of good points but at the same time it's a little too black and white for my taste.

 

On 8/9/2018 at 9:48 PM, Holmbo said:

I too think of it as a spectrum. Many people might not know which side they fall on, and they might never know. There's no purpose in doing some kinda clear cut divide.

 

Same here. Identities are already complicated enough as it is (especially aro/ace identities) and I don't like the idea of having an "a-police" telling us if we're not aro or ace enough to be able to call ourselves that (do I make sense ? I don't know).

Demi/grayromantic and demi/graysexual are valid orientations and I don't mind them calling themselves aro and or/ace.

Yes, some people can argue that because it's not about the who but about the how, it's different but they do experience a lack of attraction at some point.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×