Jump to content

nonmerci

Moderator
  • Posts

    705
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    100

Posts posted by nonmerci

  1. @mewixthe problem is that as aro are the one who came with that definition, they are expected to define what romantic attraction is, except that it is already very hard to describe a feeling that we feel, so a feeling that we don't feel... impossible lol.

    For me, even of sure there is a part of social construction in romance (as in any kind of relationship), the feeling in itself is not socially constructed, it does exist. And that's why I prefer a definition that refer to that feeling. Because as you said, anybody can chose to engage or not engage in a romantic relationship, but they can chose to feel or not to feel the romantic feelings.

    The simple definition I use with people is "I don't fall in love (and I don't have crushes)". To include grayros we could add "rarely or under specific circumstances". For me it describes what "romantic attraction" means without using a word I would have to define. Sometimes I talk about "attirance amoureuse" (love attraction) because in French "amoureux" only refers to romance so everybody gets it.

     

  2. That's... weird. I don't even get what she meant by that. Does she thinks aro can't make friends? But she is your friend. Does she also thinks you can't have a sexual relationship? You are aro not asexual. Or maybe she thinks aro can't be upset or sad when we people walk away? She needs to educate herself then.

    I would also be upset if I were you.

    • Like 2
  3. @Ashe.the problem with "if it looks romantic then it is romantic" is that 1) what's look romantic osn't the same for everyone and 2) it doesn't say anything about the feeling involved.

    For instance you say

    3 hours ago, Ashe. said:

    ut they do do things together; they spend time with other couples as friends; they go do stuff together like plays and going for walks and going on day trips. They do things together as a pair. Is that what you do with your qpr? Do things together? Because that looks romantic. Why isn't it romantic?

    Doing things together is not at all romantic for me. You can do things together with a lot of people. A friend, a best friend, your family... And there are people we'll see mire than others because we get along more woth them, but it doesn't mean it is romantic.

    In fact, a lot of things couples do, we can do it with friends too.

     

    It is not the actions that makes the relationship romantic but the feelings involved. Which is the problem with the definition you gave. It kept talking about an "emotional response" but never defines the nature of the emotion, as if there were only one type of strong emotion. Of course describing an emotion is very difficult. But that's still a very important point because when we forget it, it leads to a lot of confusion. For instance, it is said that twins have a strong connection, a "meaningful and significant way" to interact to take your words. Are twins romantically attracted to each other? No.

     

    To make it more clear I'll use an analogy.

    Let's take the action of crying. Usually, it is associating with an emotion : sadness. So people will see someone cryong and assume they are sad.

    Except that sometimes, people don't cry because they are sad. They can cry because they are relieved. They can cry because they laugh too much. They can cry because they hurt their body. A lot of reasons.

    So even if we usually associated crying with an emotion, it is not necessary this emotion that leads people to cry.

    That's the same thing with romantic coded things.

  4. 4 hours ago, Ashe. said:

    is this not romantic attraction? romantic attraction is the emotional experience that revolves around finding a romantic partner and romantic activities with that partner.. if you crave a romantic relationship, that feeling is romantic attraction for you.

    The attraction has to be directed towards someone. If this is just a general feeling like wanting romance in general, it is not romantic attraction.

    To say it another way, some people loves the idea of romance and are open to a romantic relationship, without being romantically attracted to people. Cupioromantic will explain it better.

    • Like 1
  5. Speaking as a not oriented aroace.

     

    I don't feel this way about the term. I just think some people have a strong connection for the attraction they felt and want this to be reflected in their label and speak about it, and that's fine. I don't think it separates us.

    But I don't really go in other aro space than arocalypse so I don't know, maybe there is something specific that make you feel it does and I am not aware of it.

    • Like 1
  6. 5 hours ago, Acecream said:

    But just some thoughts of mine: being a choice DOES mean that nobody is allowed to exclude all heteroromantic aces from lgbtqia+ spaces as long as the person doesn't say, they are not queer, doesn't it?

    I'd say it is the same thing as being gray vs being "completely" aro or ace. Some people in the spectrum will still identify as alloromantic or allosexual, and nobody can say to them "you are wrong, you are aromantic or asexual". But there are still gray people who identify as aro or ace and we can't say to them "no you are not, get out of the community".

     

    I think a-spec are in this position because some feel like they belong to the LGBTQUIA+ community, other don't. But I think that regardless of that, the LGBTQUIA+ should work to be more acceptable for these who wants to go in there spaces. And of course that in return, we should not force the label on those who feel the opposite.

  7. Yes, that's it, crêpes are thinner. Don't know for other countries,  but in France, it is common to have people sell some near beaches in holidays areas. So yes, perfect for summer.

  8. Tough question. There are so much good food in the world. If I had to chose one, I'd say pasta carbonara.

    For sweets, it will be crêpes. Google tells me that English for crêpes is pancakes, but I ate pancakes and even if that's good too, that's not the same, so I will call that crêpes lol. Tell me you don't want some :

    crepes-au-praline-maison.jpeg

     

     

    • Like 1
  9. 8 hours ago, kikicita said:

    What I'm still speechless about is that he said that he is not really interested on educating himself on the issue, can't believe it...

    Sadly some people are like that... They see all of this are an ideology and not as something that actually exist and can happen to anyone regardless what their opinions on the subject are.

    Also it is sometimes difficult to understand for cis people, I think. If I take my personal experience, when I first heard about it, it was difficult to understand that some people identify with another gender, none of them or more than one. For me it was not that I believe there were only two genders, but that I have problem to believe genders exist in the first place, and it was a long way to understand that genders are real.

    As I am an open-minded person (or at least I like to think so), I tried to understand,  and I read what trans people had to say and things like that. For people who are not willing to do that, well... Let's say they have another step to pass, which is : get that their conceptions are not necessarily universal truth. And sadly, when they are in this position, it is very hard to educate them on these subjects... I know a demiboy who tried to educate his husband for years until the husband saw a documentary on Netflix and finally get it.

     

    I am not saying that to discourage you. Just be aware that if you want him to understand, it will probably be a long way.

    As @Sam Spade says, talking about different cultures who had a lot more genders than 2 could be a good idea.

  10. Recently I saw 4 marriages and a funeral. I heard it was an iconic movie so I gave it a try. There were some fun scenes in it, sure, but the main romance... I just don't know how I was supposed to root for this couple. Carrie annoyed me so much. She knew Charles loved her, she knew she loved him, but she still decided to marry another guy (even after cheated on him with Charles even if it was only the second time they met). Charles is not better, he wanted to marry a woman just for the sake of marrying and then left her in the church because Carrie told him she divorced, so now he wants to be with her. I don't think I ever wanted more a couple to not get together.

    And the worst part is : they made huge love declaration even if they met something like what, six times? Maybe less? And the whole time, Charles idealizes Carrie instead of seeing her as a true person. Am I really supposed to believe they are completely in love when they don't even know each other?

    • Like 1
  11. I don't think it is wrong you feel weird about it. For what you say, it is possible your friend has a crush on you and had trouble accepting your identity because of that, and now wants a QPR because romantic isn't an option. At least that's what I get from the story, I could be wrong, I don't know your friend after all. But your friend kinda seem to force on the QPR idea and I think talking about it with him could be a good idea, even if it is to say that you are not interested.

    • Like 5
  12. You did nothing wrong. In fact you were really calmand nice in my opinion. You even give her an explanation when you didn't have to.

    I don't know her but from what you say it seems she has some issue. I don't think it is a normal way to react even for an alloromantic. It was very excessive. Really I think it came from her, not from you.

     

    And as @Jot-Aro Kujosaid it is ironic that she didn't know what aro meant but then talked as if she met so much aros that she can tell you that guys are the worst. She clearly didn't know what she is talking about and was just mean. I know it is an easy thing to say but you shouldn't bother about someone who were so unfair to you.

    • Like 4
  13. I had a list of traits that was needed to be a good boyfriend for me (being nice, intelligent, pretty, funny... not very original I know). Then I chosed one of the boy (because heteronormativity) that fitted the criteria the most. But there were no romantic feeling involved, sometimes I didn't even care about them. When I wasn't thinking about who could be my crush, I wasn't thinking about them.

    With a weird comparison, it's like being in a shop, feeling I have to buy something but I don't really want anything. So I look at all the products and compare them to determine which would be the better choice, according to logical criteria. On the other hand, all the other people who enter the shop don't have this problem : they know exactly what kind of products they want and feel attracted to one in particular.

    • Like 1
  14. I don't really have an advice except "be prepared to answer questions". In particular "but weren't you having crushes before" if someone thought you were. And then explaining you were saying that to fit the norm or because you thought having crushes just meant thinking someone is nice or funny. 

    • Like 1
×
×
  • Create New...