nonmerci

11 hours ago, Coyote said:

No, it does not mean being on the aromantic spectrum. When I wrote "people without romantic orientations," I was thinking of personal narratives like this one, this one, or this one, where the authors talk about not wanting to apply the concept of romantic orientation or romantic attraction to themselves, one way or the other.

Thanks for clarifying it.

I make more than one choice : purely platonic friendship, something else (familial relationship), and little interaction (because though I enjoy people company, I also enjoy loneliness).

5 hours ago, Jot-Aro Kujo said:

Wait, so by "without romantic orientation", are you including or excluding aromantics?

I have the same question, because I consider aromantic as a romantic orientation, so I don't know what to say. I want to say no because I dis agree that I have no romantic orientation (I understand that as "thinking that romantic orientation is not relevant for me"). But at the same time if here it means "being on the aromantic spectrum", my response will be mistaken as "I am alloromantic" and I don't want that either. What should I do?

3 hours ago, Coyote said:

Nope. I'm really confused where people are even getting this. Is it in one of the wikis or something?

Queerplatonic and platonic are close words, and to be honestly I'm not sure if I really get the difference or not (except that queerplatonic is use for QPR, and that people don't want it to be associated to friendship). Then there is the fact that squishes seems to be linked to QPR sometimes.

3 hours ago, Coyote said:

Why would we do that (again)? That's basically what this thread was in response to people already trying to do. And to me, it's like... I don't know, it's like have a word specifically for "not being a Cheondoist." It's just so niche and specific to even know what queerplatonic means anyway. The way I think about it, we have words like aromantic and asexual because of amatonormativity and sexnormativity.

I just would like a word to feel my experience. Plus I won't use it outside the aro community I think, if I ever do it out loud, so with people who use that concept.

I don't think we have words like aro and asexual because of the norm, but because it can describe our experiences. Of course if everybody were aro and ace we won't use it, but I think that if we live in a word 50% aro/ace and 50% allo, and being one of the other is completely seen as normal, we would still use these words.

I like to have a word to express how I feel, that's it.

3 hours ago, Coyote said:

Like I asked before -- how many people even have QP relationships? I

I don't know, but that doesn't mean they don't feel this attraction. Just like a allo is still allo even if he don't date.

I personnaly like describe things in terms of attraction, it is more useful than doing it in term of behavior, though I get that everybody don't feel this way.

3 hours ago, Coyote said:

Is their a comparable.... queerplatonicnormativity? I

Maybe talking about queerplatonicnormativity is too much (and too long to wrote lol), but yeah, something like that. One of the first thing you saw everytime you go on a page about aromanticism is something along the line "don't worry, we can have QPR's". I remember that it kinda calm me at first, and I ended up thinking about a QPR the way I think before about romantic couple. The way I see it, QPR is using the same was as romantic love by asexuals, as a way to justify their humanity.

Same for squishes.

Now I'm not saying we should not talk about QPR and squishes, because some people want one and a lot of aros seem to feel it. But having a term to describe those who haven't would be useful I think. Vocabulaire help people to conceptualize,  and as you said the first thing we see (and the first thing people search) is a definition. So if we had a word that we can use and put on the AUREA for instance, and else where,  to explain better that not all aros want QPR, I xan't see how it would be negative?

Anyway as you said this thread was not originally about words, so I'm not in the subject any more. 

I'm really confused right now. I thought aplatonic was about queerplatonic attraction, but apparantly I was wrong and erasing people? But I don't get what platonic attraction is exactly. I mean, I guess I sometimes feel it as I initiate some friendships with people, but it didn't sound like an attraction, more a desire (though it was directed to someone so I guess it was an attraction anyway?), and not often.

And now, can we name the lack of queerplatonic attraction? Aqueeplatonic is ugly and with some problems from what I heard. Asquishy? Nonsquishy? My, I am confused.

I said I suspected, because I never see a therapist (not enough money,  plus in France we are late for these questions).

I love to be aro represeted as a valid identity, not something to fixed or linked to a disease, to a mental condition, to a trauma, or whatever. Even if a character could have a disease etc, make it clear that aromanticism is not linked to it.

I don't have a specific wish for sexuality or gender, though I think it will be cool if the aro is not ace too, because people still think it is the same thing.

Autism is  not a disability, is another way of react (any therapist would tell you that). Just like gifted people (is it the word in English for people with a High I.Q?), it is a different way of thinking. I never see an autistic people wanting to be "cured", in particular autistic people with a normal or High I.Q.

Being different doesn't mean being inferior. 

2 hours ago, Spacenik86 said:

 

Wow, your post just shows that this board is what I suspected to be - an echo chamber for insane far leftists.

I'm done with this place.

He just showed fact.  You are the one not acceptons contradiction. By denying the fact, you are just dogmatic.

10 hours ago, eOrion said:

Will from stranger things,

Oh yes!

I haven't finish season 3 yet, but from what I saw he is experiencing something we talk a lot here : his friends forget him now that they have girlfriends. Of course some people will argue he's gay, but I am sure he is 100% aromantic. 

3 hours ago, Skittles87 said:

"Kissing is gross, you just mash your food-holes together!"

A demon has never been that relatable.  For the guy that explain they'll find their  soulmate in the good place, he is very aromantic.

On 1/16/2019 at 2:53 AM, Jot-Aro Kujo said:

Oh god, yeah. It's like you watch one (1) clip from a TV show involving two characters, and next thing you know your YouTube recommendations are like "HERE HAVE 20 DIFFERENT PUZZLESHIPPING AMVS, YOU LIKE THAT RIGHT? RIGHT?? KISS KISS FALL IN LOVE" no. die

So true. Everytime I watch clips of Arthur and Merlin best moments, I have in recommandation "Arthur and Merlin, are they gay?" Everytime I want to scream : "Merlin is aro leave him alone!".

I think it also happened to me watching Harry Potter videos. There are hundred of possible ships with this one.

Romance is everywhere. You can't run, it will find you.

(Now, this sound like the pitch of a horror movie.)

5 hours ago, Mark said:

As this kind of study shows many people remain oblivious to (or justify/excuse) it even when directly contrasted with other forms of discrimination. This, undoubtedly, includes those who are on the receiving end of it.

Interesting study!

Another thing, I don't know if it considers as oppression or not, but the fact that in tv show, a single person will always be show as someone sad,  or someone who lack something in his life.  Or someone who is afraid of commitment, or someone who wants to "have fun" before dating (meaning having sex with multiple persons). For allos, romantic feelings are the best feelings in the world (at least they present it this way in movies or books),  so if you don't feel it, you are unhappy pr unsatisfied. This is tiring to always see single people portrayed like this.

7 hours ago, assignedgothatbirth said:

Then there's the harassment many of us have received due to things like the Tumblr flamewars- probably not the most traditional political thing but considering it was a campaign that was trying to construct us as being fundamentally evil for existing, I'd say that's pretty damn political.

 I'm glad that I'm not into Tumblr. People are crazy. But I think that when aro will be more know,  this is thought we'll have to face. People love to hate things they don't understand.

1 hour ago, Holmbo said:

. I also don't feel oppressed in any way by my romantic orientation and I'd hesitate to lump myself in with other LGBT+ categories that faces hostility or discrimination.

True that oppressed may not be the best word, and that a lot of things we have to face is shared by single allos. But I still think they are thing we are alone to face, and can be consider as oppression. Like, therapists trying to "fix" your orientation because it consider it part of your disease. People assuming you're ill because of your orientation (I hear it more about aces though), or that you are heartless (in particular to allo aro who want sex without romance).

Now, I don't know if this is political or not. But there is stigmatization of aro I think.

12 minutes ago, Cristal Gris said:

And now that I think about it, even when peoples try to be respectfull to queer/lgbt+ peoples, you bet that they forget about aromantism. Still amatonormative too

The show Riverdale is a perfect example of that. It is prise for his representation of LGBT people... but completely erase Jughead's aroaceness. And if you point it out, there will always be someone to say "what his aromanticism would bring to the show" (because apparantly,  you should justifier yourself for not changing something), or "Jughead wasn't aro, he was gay, that was how gay people was portraits before, by a non interest in girls!" (even if gis asexuality (meaning aro ace I guess) was confirmed; plus how are you suppose to portray a character that assume his aroaceness without making him not interesting in girls???).

I know I talk about it a lot, but I'm still not over it.

6 minutes ago, Cristal Gris said:

I never see it classified as "oppression" outside of some part of the queer/lgbt+ community (again, sometime. And mostly in aro space).

And sometimes, even in lgbt+ place, there is debates ro know if we are oppressed or not.

11 hours ago, Magni said:

The legal benefits of marriage and lack of alternate options….having some way to declare someone as “family” for purposes of medical leave and such without requiring marriage/romance. Also, partnering with the polyamory community on this because they also face issues with the current system of marriage.

In my country there is an alternate option I think : the PACS. But it's for couples too I think (it was create mostly for couple of the same sex, when marriage wasn't allowed for them, but any couple coud use it; I Wonder if a QPR could too (well, they won't verify if you are a romantic couple or not, and there is no coding ceremony like the wedding).

11 hours ago, Magni said:

2. Adoption: the adoption system has lots of issues in general with what sort of parents they consider “capable” and how that can be an issue against queer people in general, but more specifically, so single aro people can better adopt children if they wish.

I think that's something where we could be unite wih other LGBT groups. As Coyote said, it is link to the nuclear family. There are debates about procreation where I lived here (in French it's PMA, procréation médicalement assistée), because they cant to open it to same sex couples. The debates are mainly about the fact that "a family is a dad and a mum" (same argument when that there were about gay marriage). When I talk with my mum about my desire to have children, but not a husband, she says exactly the same thing. Though, she is more open to the idea of adoption while single than having my own child while single.

11 hours ago, Magni said:

4. Education: along with wanting schools to teach about queer identities in general, making sure Aromantic is included.

Yes! One of our main problem is visibility and this would help a lot.

11 hours ago, Magni said:

5. Healthcare: this has some overlap with my first point about “spousal” benefits, but generally making sure aro people aren’t discriminated against in healthcare. This includes mental health, and making sure we could seek therapy without having to educate them about our identities or have our identity medicalized. Additionally, I believe there is something about single people receiving less aggressive treatment options and therefore having worse outcomes, so preventing that kinda thing too.

One of the Reason I'm not seeing a therapist right now (except for my lack of money) is that I'm too scared he or she wants to "fix" my aromanticism. Even if I'm perfectly fine alone.

Aromantic people don't feel this kind of attraction or love (to say it simply), but hey, that makes us good advisers I think.

I suggest, if she lives close to you, to invite her so you can discussion this in person. If she feel the same that's perfect. If not, you will stop torturing yourself (I think ignorance is worst than the s'adresse you'll feel if she's not interested).

Now as @Jot-Aro Kujo said, I think you mistaken what aromanticism is if you ask here. 

You wasn't wrong for trusting him. He was the one who lied by saying he understood. Sadly some people are like that, taking a "no" for a "try again later". But don't worry, you're not a jerk for not reciprocating. Nobody could be a jerk for feeling the way they do. Only the way we behave on that feeling can, and he was the one who were wrong, pretending you were his girlfriend.

51 minutes ago, Ice Queen said:

If anyone ever gets a crush on me again, is it already a red flag? Should I run?

I don't think so. Some people can be nice even if they had a crush on you. A guy had a crush on me, then we became friends, but he never brings the subject again, even when all the class was shipping us (I was in school then).

Another guy in high school however pretending he was my boyfriend, didn't accept no as an answer (he said he'll commit suicide if I refuse...). Really it depends on the person.

Maybe write aro and ace instead of ace and aro? That's not a big thing, but as some aros are always suspicious that "and aro" had been added to be inclusive but that it is mainly an ace group (in particular aro allo doesn't feel at their place), it could sens a good message for them to write aro first.

On 7/4/2019 at 5:26 PM, Mark said:

An alternative would be to start up a specifically aro group. Ideally with someone who wasn't asexual as an organiser.

The problem then is that an aro ace could say exactly the same thing : not an allo as an organiser. Honestly I don't think quality depends on the sexuality of the organizer. But on his desire to incluse everybody and to are aware of all the problematics. Chosing an organiser according to his sexuality would not sent a good message. I understand that aro allo are scared to be left being, but I think it would not be productive.

7 hours ago, Mark said:

Something I also wonder is how often allo aces who arn't sex repulsed have sex (with their romo partners) because it's romantic coded.

Someone I know said that when she realized she was ace, she and her husband discussed to find a good crompromise. That variates, depends if she wants or not. Anyway they did it less often now that she realized she's asexual.

10 hours ago, Cristal Gris said:

Please tell me if I derail the topic, but it can happen to sex positive aro aces too. Some of them want sexual connections without romance, i mean

Maybe, I don't know. Maybe there are some sex positive aros here who can tell? I suppose this is not the same thing as being aro allo (in particular in terms of attraction, the feeling is different), but in term of behavior an external person may not makes the difference. 

I identify strongly as aro, mostly because it is expecting to get married, etc. Well about ace, I am ace too, but I care less. I think it's because I see romance as a live style, and sexe as a hobby. I mean : romance has a huge impact in your life, as you have to live with someone else, is expecting to do things with him/her, give support, have children... but I see sexe just as something I am not attracted too, like I don't like football even if a lot of people enjoy it. And that's why I ended up on arocalypse, whereas I never feel the need to be on a ace forum.

I suppose I would think differently if I was allosexual,  because (correct me allo if I am wrong) my sexuality would have a bigger impact in my life style : searching for sexual connections without romance is hard,  and people juge you for that.

19 hours ago, Lokiana said:

On a more personal perspective, I really like this as an outreach strategy. I don't necessarily think it's 100% foolproof, but I think it certainly helps to find common ground with other queer people to help transition the conversation.

 

I do wonder though, how this might impact later discussions on amatonormativity in queer communities, because I don't find that I entirely agree with the perspective that it's a part of heternormativity

I don't think it's a part of heteronormativity either. Homosexuals and bisexuals can be amatonormative too. Amatonormativity can't be reduced to heteronormativity, even if it is a part of it. I think it's more general than that.

Though it doesn't change the argument : just because some people don't fall in love doesn't mean marriage can't celebrate their love.

1 hour ago, IntrovertedSoul19 said:

Though sometimes I do find it annoying and it will make me feel less confident in my style. This is actually funny! This girl was flirting with me my first year of college and I had no idea because same sex you think they’re just friendly. And when I realized what she was doing I felt uncomfortable and just started avoiding her. Explaining you’re asexual to people they could understand but aromantic I really don’t think so. So I kind of leave them with no explanation. 

Some people understand, it really depends. If you don't want to tell them, you can also say you're not interested in her, without talking about your orientation.

11 hours ago, Spacenik86 said:

 

-asexual and aromantic - model Catholic priest, or Buddhist monk

-asexual and romantic - archetypal Victorian lady. Today people will assume such a person is conservative, religious, etc. If you are male, add the low testosterone effete guy stereotype.

-sexual and aromantic - archetypal playboy ("making love for him was fun, he never needed anyone"). People will assume such a person is emotionally shallow, and very selfish.

-sexual and romantic - normalcy

That's true and that upsets me. 

Other variation if you're ace, aro or not : you lack of confidence. Or if you're a woman, you are frigid. When people don't understand, instead of trying to, they put you in the box of a stereotype they already know.

If you're an aro allo woman, people will call you a slut. If you're a guy, you are using women. Anyway you can't win. 

All this makes me think of a Kelly Carsons's song : you can't win. She enumerates different situation, show in you never won in society. There is this part :

"If you're straight, why aren't you marry yet? If you're gay, what aren't you wearing a flag? "

We could add : "If you're ace, you should do a therapy. If you're aro, you just haven't find the one yet". That's how some people reacted,  sadly.

I thought lush was for sexual attraction? At least I'm sure I've seen a word for that, and I think it may be that 

About 8 years-old not watching porn, I won't be so sure : they start early now. I saw people claiming they already did at that age.

And funny thing : when I was eight, my family offered me make-up (something for kids, to have fun), and I liked it. Now, I wonder why, because nothing in the world could make me wear make-up. Think of all the money I am saving.

Kids express feminity or masculinity differently. Maybe society help : people offer dolls to their daugthers, mini cars to their sons. Toys are seen as masculine or feminine. I remember when I was a child and saw adds for toys. I didn't pay attention then, but now I see that some adds only have boys in them, or girls, depending on that.