QPR Misinformation Is Not an Appropriate Vehicle for Aro Community Building

[Coyote]

23 hours ago, bydontost said:

anyway if someone wants to make a post to tumblr, here's a draft graphic that could be used https://drive.google.com/open?id=18wNTeK4GF1szk0lVKDTTjttvGr0ht09q

suggestions for some tweaks are okay

 

Interesting. I see the structure here is patterned after the bad one.

 

Frankly, I don't think mentioning the origins is necessary, if the goal is just to put out a better infographic that doesn't reflect the same problems as Twenty's.

 

More importantly... I don't actually think the original structure (with its blocks on Love, Commitment, etc.) was the best choice on her part to begin with. This could just be me swinging too far in the other direction, but I associate this kind of breakdown of features with the attempts to define queerplatonic too narrowly as a particular kind of relationship style, rather than an umbrella term.

 

I see your approach was to take some similar blocks and mostly talk through how variable they each are, which is good. I also have to assume, though, that some people will just glance over the headers w/o reading the smaller text and possibly get the impression that it's intended as a trait list. Do you see what I mean?

 

@LauraG -- you mentioned an infographic project too, right?

[bydontost]

1 hour ago, Coyote said:

Interesting. I see the structure here is patterned after the bad one.

yes, as i said before, i'm kinda tired of this qpr talk and so didn't want to put too much effort into it and it seemed this format was attractive

 

1 hour ago, Coyote said:

Frankly, I don't think mentioning the origins is necessary, if the goal is just to put out a better infographic that doesn't reflect the same problems as Twenty's.

i decided to put it there, bc it's sth that aros don't know about and often think aros coined it, this is the reason for this whole thread. the goal is to put accurate info out there in a form that people like, read and reblog (if we're talking about tumblr)

 

Quote

Coyote said: This could just be me swinging too far in the other direction, but I associate this kind of breakdown of features with the attempts to define queerplatonic too narrowly as a particular kind of relationship style, rather than an umbrella term.

 

I guess this is why i tried to go with some broad categories, and then show the possible variance, but i get what you mean

 

1 hour ago, Coyote said:

I see your approach was to take some similar blocks and mostly talk through how variable they each are, which is good. I also have to assume, though, that some people will just glance over the headers w/o reading the smaller text and possibly get the impression that it's intended as a trait list. Do you see what I mean?

yes, thank you. i mean... i guess we can assume some people won't read it, that's fair, a lot won't be interested and just scroll past, but i can't do anything about that. at least the first block is personalization, so maybe the more curious ones will see that " Every relationship looks different because of the different people in it, though most relationships have certain expectations of activities that happen within them. QPRs are meant to be free of those expectations and are very customizable relationships by design. You can settle on what you and your partner(s) want, because it's your take on a partnership. The personalization is also why a lot of definitions of QPRs exist - the relationship may be different for many people."

 

edit: this on the other hand is minimal information, but very aestheticc and contains a disclaimer about consent: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1XaHpZ9qvTRmQaz1Asn4zYQlyf9y41v8v/view?usp=sharing

edit 2: idk if it shouldn't say "a qpr" instead of "qpr", who knows english, not this guy

 

[Mark]

15 hours ago, Coyote said:

Frankly, I don't think mentioning the origins is necessary, if the goal is just to put out a better infographic that doesn't reflect the same problems as Twenty's.

I think it's important that people know the origins so as to avoid the misinformation, misassumptions and misunderstandings surrounding the word.
This is likely the case with other "aro terms" which have similar origins.

 

15 hours ago, Coyote said:

This could just be me swinging too far in the other direction, but I associate this kind of breakdown of features with the attempts to define queerplatonic too narrowly as a particular kind of relationship style, rather than an umbrella term.

It's important that "umbrella terms" not be too wide. Otherwise they can become uselessly ambiguous.

[Coyote]

On 1/6/2020 at 3:49 PM, bydontost said:

i decided to put it there, bc it's sth that aros don't know about and often think aros coined it, this is the reason for this whole thread. the goal is to put accurate info out there in a form that people like, read and reblog (if we're talking about tumblr)

 

On 1/7/2020 at 6:49 AM, Mark said:

I think it's important that people know the origins so as to avoid the misinformation, misassumptions and misunderstandings surrounding the word.

 

I appreciate the shared priorities.

 

Currently, (in relation to this thread) I'm thinking of the goal of QPR infographics in terms of this:

 

On 12/19/2019 at 11:12 PM, LauraG said:

To move a bit away from the context of coinage and towards another common greivances relating to qprs - that alloromantic aces use the word to mean non-sexual romantic relationships. Personally, I haven't seen evidence to suggest that this is as pervasive a problem as it is sometimes framed as, but what I have noticed is that the one post I've seen that does this is one of the first results when you search queerplatonic on Tumblr. Which is a problem.

 

Seeing as the op has not responded to any of the corrections, I was thinking of ways of trying to combat that, and I think the best course of action there is to create a competing post (that's equally pretty, since I think that's a factor in why it spread). It wouldn't take down the other post, but it would hopefully provide enough conflicting information that people stop to think about which is correct.

 

So I'm thinking of a second infographic's goal as mainly just "knock the bad one off its throne of notes." 

 

The problem with the bad one, besides being bad, is that it also happened to combine the ace-origin narrative with a very skewed understanding of what queerplatonic can mean. This makes bad QPR definitions & the ace-origin narrative seem like they're intertwined, which then makes people feel extra suspicious of the ace-origin narrative when they see it again in the future. A couple of different posts I've linked here have shown some of the reactions that result re: presenting the ace-origin narrative without getting into detailed proof, and if it were me, I'd want to try and anticipate how to respond to those reactions, should they happen again.

 

Hypothetically -- and this might not be what would happen, but hypothetically -- if even one blogger reblogged the infographic to add "No, this is false, it's actually an aro term" and then several more bloggers shared it from there, then even if the original poster responded, "Common misconception actually, here's proof," then you've still got people who maybe only saw the post in its earlier form, ending on, "No, it's an aro term." In that scenario, the post ends up with a reblog-tree where one version of the post leaves off on the aro-origin narrative. That's a version that more people might see and get the wrong idea from, which continues the cycle.

 

So when people present the ace-origin narrative in that context, at this point, I think it's risky to simply mention it in passing instead of getting into the proof.

 

For the goal of "addressing the aro-origin misinfo," there are three general things that I figure people can do:

• Directly correct people who state/spread the misinfo, ideally angling for a retraction. Just telling them isn't enough, since their mistaken posts are also seen by other people, and those people need to be reached, too. 
• Spread the corrections independently, as an original post/reblog, specifically about the misinfo issue and its causes. 
• More generally, encourage/participate in broader conversation about the issues this one is intertwined with, in order to try and address some of those root causes.

[LauraG]

On 1/6/2020 at 3:48 PM, Coyote said:

you mentioned an infographic project too, right?

 

Yeah, it's just about done now, should be going up within the next few days. My goal was to just get something that would be a good primer on queerplatonic to compete with the bad one in the tags. I'm thinking the audience for that one is people who don't know what queerplatonic means at all - where I don't think who coined it is necessary.

 

I was more thinking that this would help with combating a slightly different but related misconception - that (allo)aces use queerplatonic to refer to non-sexual romantic relationships (aka "aces stealing aro terms"). I have not personally seen any evidence that suggests that's a widespread problem, and that original infographic is the one post I've seen that actually does that. It's just one post, but it also has nearly 9k notes, which is a problem, and probably the root of that misconception. This was my way of trying to combat that problem at it's source.

 

On 1/6/2020 at 4:49 PM, bydontost said:

i decided to put it there, bc it's sth that aros don't know about and often think aros coined it, this is the reason for this whole thread. the goal is to put accurate info out there in a form that people like, read and reblog (if we're talking about tumblr)

 

That's probably a good idea. I think that's aiming a bit more for an aro audience or at least a more informed audience, as opposed to a general audience like the previous infographic. Perhaps a second infographic aimed more at an aro audience that's about the history of the word queerplatonic would work better for that. I'd mentioned a while back that I might try to make a summary of Coy's history of queerplatonic post that's more digestible - this might be a substitute for that.

[Coyote]

14 hours ago, LauraG said:

Perhaps a second infographic aimed more at an aro audience that's about the history of the word queerplatonic would work better for that.

 

Oh, that reminds me (I knew I was forgetting something) -- besides the things I listed above, I'm also wondering about which blogs might be the most influential in aro tumblr. Or maybe not "influential," but, among the users who have been making misinformed remarks, are there any particular aro bloggers that they listen to on aro issues? And, among those lists, is there any overlap? Someone who could reach more than one at once? If one of those bloggers were willing to reblog something on this, whether it's an infographic like Laura is suggesting or some other myth-debunking post, that might help put this matter to rest as well.

 

I'm not very familiar with that landscape, though. Can y'all offer any insight on who's networked to who?

[Coyote]

Deafening silence over here, I see.

 

Figured I'd add, for anyone who doesn't want to address this topic on this particular forum thread -- especially since our time here might be limited anyway -- there's still the Wordpress post comment section (no account needed).

[bydontost]

I mean, this post https://shades-of-grayro.tumblr.com/post/611142713511936000/shades-of-grayro-queerplatonic-relationships-an already has 9k notes...??

[Coyote]

38 minutes ago, bydontost said:

I mean, this post https://shades-of-grayro.tumblr.com/post/611142713511936000/shades-of-grayro-queerplatonic-relationships-an already has 9k notes...??

 

It does, and I'm glad. Laura reached their goal to surpass the notes of the Twenty post even faster than I would've expected.

 

What's your point?

[bydontost]

1 hour ago, Coyote said:

 

It does, and I'm glad. Laura reached their goal to surpass the notes of the Twenty post even faster than I would've expected.

 

What's your point?

My point is that there hasn't been deafening silence

[Coyote]

12 minutes ago, bydontost said:

My point is that there hasn't been deafening silence

 

Oh! Okay. Thank you for clarifying. I meant deafening silence in response to this:

 

On 1/11/2020 at 11:19 AM, Coyote said:

Can y'all offer any insight on who's networked to who?

 

[bydontost]

2 minutes ago, Coyote said:

 

Oh! Okay. Thank you for clarifying. I meant deafening silence in response to this:

 

 

Ah, this I can't help with rn, maybe if you asked a year ago

[Coyote]

That's fair. I don't expect everyone would be in a place to know.

 

Anyone else?

[deletingthisaccount]

In part, from the perspective of an aro-ace who's also active on AVEN, I think a lot of the misinformation stems from the ace community's hesitance, especially AVEN in particular, to clearly define romantic vs. sexual attraction in the split attraction model. On top of that, creating a flood of other terms that further muddy the water.

 

Reading about David Jay's life experiences as a romantic ace (the founder of AVEN), he seems strikingly similar to what many aces would now describe as an "aro-ace wanting a QPR." In middle school, he didn't understand all the hype about crushes, dating, sex, etc., but still wanted partnership based on emotional connection, actively seeking partnership out. Nowadays, many aces on AVEN still actively experience attraction, have crushes, want to date, etc. but don't want sex involved (or even do want sex involved, but only at certain point). So then aces similar to David Jay feel out of place saying that they desire romantic relationships, since they don't want any of that.

 

Honestly, I was shocked when I joined AVEN how many aromantic aces still actively desire partnership in QPRs. Which was in part why I joined Arocalypse. I felt out of place, realizing "wow, even aro aces want a partner... is something actually wrong with me then??"

 

Of course, it's possible for some aros to want QPRs... and that's okay! But to the point where I can't even use the word "aro ace" anymore to convey that I have no innate interest in partnership at all... that seems a bit extreme. I think correcting wrong misconceptions will help. And also maybe trying to more clearly define terms, will help a lot of the confusion.

[Blake]

55 minutes ago, Ace_of_Spades7 said:

Honestly, I was shocked when joined AVEN how many aro-aces still actively seek partnership in QPRs. For myself personally as an aro-ace, I had always felt like an inherent part of being aro was not wanting partnership of any kind. Which was in part why I joined Arocalypse; I felt out of place, realizing "wow, even aro aces want a partner... is something actually wrong with me then??"

First, you are valid for not wanting to be in a relationship of any kind. The beauty of being a human being is we are all different. Yes, some aro want a relationship, probably not a romantic one, maybe a qpr. But there are some that do not want to be, like you. Aromanticism is a spectrum, so there is not just a single type of aro (greyaro/demi/a/cupio/etc). Also, what is for me a relationship isn't the same for others. Hipe this could help you mate.

[Coyote]

1 hour ago, Ace_of_Spades7 said:

In part, from the perspective of an aro-ace who's also active on AVEN, I think a lot of the misinformation stems from the ace community's hesitance, especially AVEN in particular, to clearly define romantic vs. sexual attraction in the split attraction model.

 

I... don't see any connection there, actually. The term "split attraction model" emerged from a completely different set of conflicts.

 

1 hour ago, Ace_of_Spades7 said:

Which was in part why I joined Arocalypse; I felt out of place, realizing "wow, even aro aces want a partner... is something actually wrong with me then??"

 

Not at all. There's been a lot of conflict around that too, unfortunately. Aro narratives are diverse, and not wanting any kind of partner is one of them.

 

1 hour ago, Ace_of_Spades7 said:

I think correcting people when they're wrong, and also maybe trying to more clearly define terms, will help a lot of the confusion.

 

With all due respect, this response makes me think you probably read the first post and then commented without reading all four pages here -- which is an understandable choice. I mean, I probably wouldn't have the patience to read this whole thing myself if I hadn't been involved all through it to begin with.

 

For the record, though, what I've experienced and witnessed so far has been:

• I try to correct someone directly, and we spend like three straight days messaging back and forth before I can get them to begrudgingly accept the correction.
• I point out a correction indirectly, and I get told I'm irritating to deal with, and then that person just jumps ship rather than apologize for any of it.
• Someone else makes a correction directly, and they get completely ignored.
• Someone else makes a correction directly, and they get told that it doesn't matter.
• Someone else makes a correction indirectly, and another person comes back at them reiterating the incorrect version.

So I mean, sure, keep correcting people, I guess, but what do you do when this is the result? There's a lot of politics involved here that seem to be less about the information itself and more about who it comes from and what that narrative is interpreted to stand for.

 

[deletingthisaccount]

49 minutes ago, Coyote said:

 

I... don't see any connection there, actually. The term "split attraction model" emerged from a completely different set of conflicts.

 

Sorry, I realize I didn't explain what I meant by this very well. I understand that these conflicts are different. But I mean because the split attraction model only very vaguely defines types of attraction, plus all the other new terms, tends to create very different understandings of what constitutes a romantic relationship vs. a queerplatonic relationship within both communities. So a relationship that, at the beginning of the ace community, would have been seen as "two romantic aces in a QPR" now is viewed as "an aro-ace QPR", while the relationships of romantic aces are viewed as "more" than that. And many people in the ace community tend to believe that being "aro-ace" means wanting a QPR. So I think that's where some of the misunderstanding on the origin of QPR came from. Does that make sense?

 

1 hour ago, Coyote said:

With all due respect, this response makes me think you probably read the first post and then commented without reading all four pages here -- which is an understandable choice. I mean, I probably wouldn't have the patience to read this whole thing myself if I hadn't been involved all through it to begin with.

 

For the record, though, what I've experienced and witnessed so far has been:

• I try to correct someone directly, and we spend like three straight days messaging back and forth before I can get them to begrudgingly accept the correction.
• I point out a correction indirectly, and I get told I'm irritating to deal with, and then that person just jumps ship rather than apologize for any of it.
• Someone else makes a correction directly, and they get completely ignored.
• Someone else makes a correction directly, and they get told that it doesn't matter.
• Someone else makes a correction indirectly, and another person comes back at them reiterating the incorrect version.

So I mean, sure, keep correcting people, I guess, but what do you do when this is the result? There's a lot of politics involved here that seem to be less about the information itself and more about who it comes from and what that narrative is interpreted to stand for.

 

You are correct. I only read the first page. Thank you for taking the time to explain this though, so I didn't have to reread. Well, that's unfortunate then. I have no other suggestions ?

[Coyote]

15 minutes ago, Ace_of_Spades7 said:

Sorry, I realize I didn't explain what I meant by this very well. I understand that these conflicts are different. But I mean because the split attraction model only very vaguely defines types of attraction, plus all the other new terms, tends to create very different understandings of what constitutes a romantic relationship vs. a queerplatonic relationship within both communities. So a relationship that, at the beginning of the ace community, would have been seen as "two romantic aces in a QPR" now is viewed as "an aro-ace QPR", while the relationships of romantic aces are viewed as "more" than that. And many people in the ace community tend to believe that being "aro-ace" means wanting a QPR. So I think that's where some of the misunderstanding on the origin of QPR came from. Does that make sense?

 

Well, that can't entirely work as a lineage, because as I explained at the link above, the term "split attraction model" emerged on Tumblr in 2015 among people who were up in arms about ace community language proliferating (in some cases objecting to it being too universalized, in some cases just objecting to the concepts existing at all), and "queerplatonic" was coined in 2010, so that predates "split attraction model."

 

The original language within the ace community itself was just "romantic orientation," "romantic attraction," other specific attraction subtypes, etc. -- and ace communities were talking about these things as early as 2003 or so, before a bunch of non-aces decided that our language needed to be supplanted by theirs because ours is evil.

 

And in any case, queerplatonic relationships don't have to be based on a particular type of attraction, anyway.

 

What is possible is that different definitions of "romantic" (itself) and "aromantic" (as an identity term) are putting people in tension, but that doesn't entirely explain why people get invested in this whole narrative of the ace community as thieves who wrongfully co-opted the concept of the QPR.

 

[deletingthisaccount]

1 hour ago, Blake said:

First, you are valid for not wanting to be in a relationship of any kind. The beauty of being a human being is we are all different. Yes, some aro want a relationship, probably not a romantic one, maybe a qpr. But there are some that do not want to be, like you. Aromanticism is a spectrum, so there is not just a single type of aro (greyaro/demi/a/cupio/etc). Also, what is for me a relationship isn't the same for others. Hipe this could help you mate.

Thank you, I appreciate this. I understand some aros do want partners, which is also valid! It's just hard for me when people assume that even all aro-aces are looking for partners. I've seen other aro-aces express worry of being lonely once all their friends marry, have kids, etc., and even when they say that they don't want a QPR, their posts are still flooded with comments about how they should be in a QPR. But in my case, I feel like I can force myself to want that, you know? So that assumption becomes very frustrating.

[Blake]

27 minutes ago, Ace_of_Spades7 said:

Thank you, I appreciate this. I understand some aros do want partners, which is also valid! It's just hard for me when people assume that even all aro-aces are looking for partners. I've seen other aro-aces express worry of being lonely once all their friends marry, have kids, etc., and even when they say that they don't want a QPR, their posts are still flooded with comments about how they should be in a QPR. But in my case, I feel like I can force myself to want that, you know? So that assumption becomes very frustrating.

It is up to you if you want to look for a partner. I understand your worry of everyone leaving at some point of your life, because it is my worry and the worry of a lot of people here and in other communities. I think everyone in the a-spectrum feels alone and even betrayed by friends when they leave. Also, it is normal to want to connect with people, because we are social animals (if you believe in evolution). Moreover, people change their minds a lot. ^^ My advice is to connect with people that you know share your goals or passions. I have found a dnd group that we reunite once per month for sessions. I love to taste coffee, and I got a friend who shares this passion with me, so we go sometimes to coffee bars to drink and talk. Having different activities with different kind of groups has help me not rely on just one or the other. It wasn't easy, but it is not impossible. Finally, the most important thing is to never force yourself into something you dont want to be in. I forced myself to date for 9 months and I hated myself for it, because i thought that i should like to date (this was before knowing i was aro). And it was selfish of me to put my partner through the sadness of those 9 months just because I wanted to know what it was to date. (There is more to the story but that is for another day). If you dont like broccoli, then don't eat it, there are other options ^^. The hard part is to find it, but hey that is life i guess.

[deletingthisaccount]

4 minutes ago, Coyote said:

 

Well, that can't entirely work as a lineage, because as I explained at the link above, the term "split attraction model" emerged on Tumblr in 2015 among people who were up in arms about ace community language proliferating (in some cases objecting to it being too universalized, in some cases just objecting to the concepts existing at all), and "queerplatonic" was coined in 2010, so that predates "split attraction model."

 

The original language within the ace community itself was just "romantic orientation," "romantic attraction," other specific attraction subtypes, etc. -- and ace communities were talking about these things as early as 2003 or so, before a bunch of non-aces decided that our language needed to be supplanted by theirs because ours is evil.

 

And in any case, queerplatonic relationships don't have to be based on a particular type of attraction, anyway.

 

What is possible is that different definitions of "romantic" (itself) and "aromantic" (as an identity term) are putting people in tension, but that doesn't entirely explain why people get invested in this whole narrative of the ace community as thieves who wrongfully co-opted the concept of the QPR.

 

You're explaining exactly what I mean, just in a much better way ? I know these terms have originated in different times. But the language evolving to describe these concepts over time, from romantic orientation/attraction --> queerplatonic --> split attraction model, and otherwise, has led over time to relationships that are functionally the nearly same as one another being described as all different terms. Which has also created divides on what romantic vs aromantic mean. So now a relationship between romantic aces, which at the beginning the aces themselves would've described as romantic, tends to just be called a QPR now, while "romantic" is used for "something more." Sorry if I'm not explaining it well.

 

I don't think the different definitions entirely explain the narrative, but I think it could be a factor. There's a lot of definition debate swithin the ace community. I'm new to Arocalypse though, so maybe definition debates don't happen as much in the aro community. Was just a thought, but if my perception is misconstrued, then I'll retract.

[Coyote]

13 minutes ago, Ace_of_Spades7 said:

So now a relationship between romantic aces, which at the beginning the aces themselves would've described as romantic, tends to just be called a QPR now, while "romantic" is used for "something more."

 

I'm... not sure I've seen that? I don't recognize what you're talking about here.

[nonmerci]

1 hour ago, Ace_of_Spades7 said:

And many people in the ace community tend to believe that being "aro-ace" means wanting a QPR.

Wat what? How do they come to this conclusion?

I am aroace and certainly don't want a QPR. Aroace just means no romantic and no sexual attraction... some wants a QPR and some don't. It depends on the person.

I don't even think it is an aro ace thing : I'm sure I saw some aro allo said they want one too... so they can add a sexual composent sometimes.

 

Maybe it is an example of how some aces are still stuck in amatonormativity? They have to difficulty to understand some people are juste not interested in monogamous relationship, romantic or not? I don't know.

[deletingthisaccount]

20 minutes ago, Blake said:

It is up to you if you want to look for a partner. I understand your worry of everyone leaving at some point of your life, because it is my worry and the worry of a lot of people here and in other communities. I think everyone in the a-spectrum feels alone and even betrayed by friends when they leave. Also, it is normal to want to connect with people, because we are social animals (if you believe in evolution). Moreover, people change their minds a lot. ^^ My advice is to connect with people that you know share your goals or passions. I have found a dnd group that we reunite once per month for sessions. I love to taste coffee, and I got a friend who shares this passion with me, so we go sometimes to coffee bars to drink and talk. Having different activities with different kind of groups has help me not rely on just one or the other. It wasn't easy, but it is not impossible. Finally, the most important thing is to never force yourself into something you dont want to be in. I forced myself to date for 9 months and I hated myself for it, because i thought that i should like to date (this was before knowing i was aro). And it was selfish of me to put my partner through the sadness of those 9 months just because I wanted to know what it was to date. (There is more to the story but that is for another day). If you dont like broccoli, then don't eat it, there are other options ^^. The hard part is to find it, but hey that is life i guess.

Yes, for sure. I'm a pretty social person and I love having friends. I've made many close friends over the years. I'm not lonely now, but I worry about it in the future. Once all my friends and colleagues start having families, I'll probably do as you said and try to find group meetups. But I just don't want a partner, you know? Like, even if at some point in time I feel like I have to be in a partner-like situation solely for the sake of avoiding economic and social disadvantage, I wouldn't be doing so because I consider that person as a partner, you know? I just want friends, nothing more lol I just wish our society wouldn't act like the only cure for loneliness is relationship/partnership.

 

I can relate to that. Although I never actually managed to make it into a relationship, I tried to force myself to want and be in relationships for 7 years, just because that's what we're "supposed" to do. I guess I never got there because it just felt so wrong, you know? And when I discovered aromanticism/asexuality, it was the biggest relief in the world!

[bydontost]

honestly my experience is that everyone thinks the grass is greener on the other side: aros who want partners chafe at the perception that being aro is seen as being partnerless by default and aros who don't want partners chafe at the perception that being aro is seen as desiring qpr or similar relationship

in any case, nonarmrous or nonpartnering means not desiring a partnership of any kind or a lifestyle choice of not having a partner