nonmerci

8 hours ago, idreamofgenie said:

I'd rather selfship than get married.

Some people marry themselves so...

I'd rather run every morning than get married.

4 hours ago, Spacenik86 said:

But I don't like the cultural values connected with masculinity: body-building, watching violent sports, guzzling beer or being a part of an all-male group

Same but with feminity. For instance I don't wear make up and I don't get why woman do it. All the thing they do for their skin,  their hair... I don't have hours to waste with that. Enjoying mode or cute things too. I identify myself as a woman, but not a feminine woman. ?

Seeing your name I guess you were French too. 

Except for the aro topic in AVEN I don't know a lot. However sometimes I saw articles about it.

Yeah allegory works. Something that can be used is "it's like being a straight boy in a place full of boys".

Welcome!

I love how the title of your topic match your avatar. And I love Disney.

The quests for dating starts in year 4. They are side quests so you don't have to do it, but I wish there was a thing for aro too.

8 hours ago, Questioning peep said:

Heck well thank you for spoiling it I’m only a third year

Sorry.

In fact Penny is not the only gay option. All the dating characters can be chose, no matter if you're a girl or a boy. I think that's cool. But it would be nice if aro had an option too...

Since the game started people are asking for dating options. People can be crazy about it.

I like my eyes. Not my hair for sure. 

I think we just should admit that both definitions are acceptable. People should be allowed to describe themselves because of gender or because of biology. Words are different meanings after all. I think this is good that woman and man too another meaning, but that it is wrong to do as if it was the only one.

16 minutes ago, running.tally said:

I've heard very well-meaning individuals who are genuinely afraid that aros will take away resources from everyone else "just because they don't feel romantic attraction," saying that queer people need resources for "having queer experiences, not for lacking them." (This is a misunderstanding of the "not feeling romantic attraction" definition, i.e., that not having romantic feelings is not in and of itself a queer experience, but the 'lacking' narrative is pretty common in my spheres.

I don't have the time to search for it now but I'll do it later if you're interested,  but I remember having seen something similar on arocalypse. I think the members who said those things had been excluded. They were saying that aromanticism should not be included in LGBT communities because they would feel excluded. That we don't know oppression. Even that if we call the LGBT line for suicidal thought we are stealing someone place. That was so awful.

16 minutes ago, running.tally said:

Perhaps we can say somewhere that our definitions are just that - simplifications and starting points that stand in for more nuanced discussion that interested persons are encouraged to become involved in.

I think that's a good idea.

As you say, some people are helped by narratives, and other like me are helped by definitions. Having both on the website can only improve it. Plus if you present definitions as a starting point, people who are interesting will go de deeper,  while people who just want a general idea could have one but still know this is more complicated.

YMBAI playing hogwarts mystery, when you see the quest first date, you feel conflicted. Should you pursue you goal to succeed in all the secondary quests, or should you scream "ARO POWER!"?

40 minutes ago, Star Lion said:

This question is one I’m trying my best to comprehend what you mean and where you got that assumption. I’m saying that micro labels such as graysexual are created to give more of a description to your sexuality or romanticism. A person might just say “bisexual” to some people but “grey-bisexual” to others

What confused me is that you use "graysexuality" to speak about both sexuality and romanticism. For romanticism, we talk about grayromanticism. People can be gray for sexuality and not for romanticism, and vice versa.

41 minutes ago, Star Lion said:

Why the heck in any world across a multiverse would somebody want a romantic relationship if they are both unable to experience romantic feelings and even repulsed by the concept of romance itself?

I'm not sur about that. Humans are illogic, and we live in an amatonormative world. I even think there would be less cupio if there wasn't this pressure to get married. So people who could be both romance repulsed and aromantic could want a romantic relationship, to do like other people for instance. Maybe they don't call themselves cupioromantic, or are not even aware they are aro, but they must exist.

Nothing us humans can do can surprise me, really.

10 hours ago, Star Lion said:

Cupioromantics are just aromantics who aren’t romance repulsed.

How do you come to that? Cupioromantic are aros who want a romantic relationship. Nothing to do with being romance repulsed or not. I am not romance repulsed but surely I am not cupioromantic.

5 hours ago, Star Lion said:

Romanticism isn’t based off of your politics on a situation, it’s about who you’re attracted to and you have micro labels such as graysexual to be more specific on that attraction.

Wait what? You suggest we should use greysexuality to speak about our romantic orientation?

7 hours ago, Coyote said:

With all due respect, what you're talking about here -- saying there's no choice but to oversimplify things in order to appeal to the sensibilities of more powerful people -- sounds like the ethos of respectability politics.

I think some generalizations can be useful not to satisfy powerful people, but as a pedagogy. When you want someone to understand a new notion, you don't jump to the more complex ideas without being sure he understands the general idea.

In fact it's not that we have to generalize. But I think that when we come to a definition, we begin with something general and then complexify it. See what I mean?

For instance, I remember that when I came across asexuality and aromanticism, I was very confuse at first. Why? Because of how things were explained. It was saying attraction was an umbrella, and then presents the different grey labels. But I didn't understand what was this grey are and why it was useful or consider aro or ace rather than allo.  Surely, spending time on a general explanation before talking about the different grey labels would have helped me to understand these labels then in their specificities. 

On ‎6‎/‎6‎/‎2019 at 10:59 AM, Chandrakirti said:

I once was stalked by a guy for 5 years, because I didn't pick up on his advances and when he told me straight ( no pun intended), he got the hump after I told him I wasn't into that kind of relationship.

After he watched me with binoculars and tried to run my car off the road, I went to the local police and it almost got to court ...but it's a man's world and nothi g was done.

I moved away!

That guy was crazy!  I can't believe nothing was done! This word is stupid.

A common aro problem : your parents not understanding that you don't want to get married. Or that you want children, but not a husband (my mother think it is selfish to decide to raise a child alone, without a father, and also wonder if it is possible for a virgin woman to procreate (I do admit that this is an interesting question, but honestly I Don't know anymore if I want a child or oocytes donation (yes, I am juste a a pretentious woman who wants her genes to live on).

On 6/23/2019 at 8:54 PM, DeltaV said:

hough how do you know that? I only “know” that I’m a man in the sense that my biological sex seems to be male. Certainly I don’t feel an internal sense of gender.

Thinking about me as a man or a non binary person doesn't fit, so I assume I must be a woman. Maybe it wouldn't if I was born with a penis, but I'll never know.

On 6/23/2019 at 8:54 PM, DeltaV said:

 

If we only look at the Wikipedia situation

As far as I know, the Wikipedia articles were not write by the same person or at the same period. Plus words can have different meanings.

• Your scores:

Your strongest moral foundation is Care.

Your morality is closest to that of a Left-Liberal.

Interesting how we all have High score fore care.

4 hours ago, Cristal Gris said:

How about "I defy amatonormativity"?  

But that's a bit vague...

But it can fit polyamory too, isn't it?

Something like "my goal in life is my personal fulfilment" sounds good to me, though this has the same problem to not be specific to aromantic people.

The thing is: I think aromanticism is a lack of something. But it doesn't matter, if we don't miss it. Plus, this lack is replacd by other things and desires. So I am fine with it.

Thanks for all your responses. Sometimes Identity is so confusing, and I hate hurting people, so I wanted to be sure.

18 hours ago, Coyote said:

My question is: why are people feeling left out in the first place? What's creating this impression of QPRs as some Master Narrative of How To Be Aro? Where is that coming from? Out of all the aromantics in this thread, how many of y'all even have a queerplatonic partner?

I Don't know for others, but the first time I encounter the word aromantic and do some researches, I find a lot of website saying things like "not feeling romantic attraction doesn't mean aros don't form couples", and then explaining the concept of QPR. Then, I saw people talking about wanting to form QPR, about squishes, but no one about not feeling it (it's not something I need to talk about in particular, and maybe that's the same for others so nobody did). That gives the idea that QPR is a norm.

Hi everyone!

I don't think that my gender is meaningful when it comes to my personality. I know for sure I am a cisgendered woman : I won't use anything than "she", I feel at ease with my gender Identity (though I won't descirve myself as a feminine woman at all). However, if I had to list the things that affect my personality or way of living, my gender is at the bottom of the list. I even think there would not be a lot of difference if I was a guy. In other words : I think myself (and of other people) as a person and not as a woman (or a man too for others).

My problem is : it makes me feel very transphobic. I had a hard time understood transgendered people (though now I think I do for trans men and trans women, for agendered it's more complicated because before I discover transgenre, I never thought that people are identifying themselves to their gender; sorry, I don't mean to be rude or offense anyone; I know there is a lot of trans and non-binary people here).

Now, I've learned that some aro doesn't mention their sexual orientation because they don't think it is relevant. I think that's a bit how I feel about my gender : I know I am a woman, but I don't think it is worth mentionning nor a big part of my Identity.

But I know gender is very important for trans people, who suffers from people who think gender is not big deal (I would never say that to invalidate their feelings, their distress is real and that for them it is a big part of their identity).

So my question is : am I valid in my way of feeling things, or am I just a cis that doesn't understand anything and is transphobic?

EDIT : it seems I failed to post anonymously. I thought I just had to sign in anonymously but it seems I was wrong, my bad.

9 minutes ago, Coyote said:

I mean I get why people want a word for this stuff that doesn't have the word "non" in it, and people like a more established word over a neologism, but this is a problem with that word that's never going to go away.

That's not a problem only for platonic I think. I personally hate the word aromantic, but that's just me, and I'm still using it because it the word for my attraction. (I Don't know if it  is the same in English, but in French "romantique" is a word that comes from the romantism movement, and by extension it can mean someone with a lot of sensibility (in particular when it comes to romance; like someone who will buy flowers or like candlelight dinner; so if you just say "aromantic" people completely misunderstood the meaning).

But language evoluates, and now it has a different meaning and I am fine with it.

Saw the first Twilight movie, never get so bored in my life. There is no plot at all : just two te ens falling in love for 2 hours.

And let's not forget how the love triangle is solved in twilight 4 : in fact Jacob was never in love with Bella, he was in love with the part of her that will become her daughter (but somehow not the part of Edwards that will become hus daughter,  I guess someone doesn't know how biologique works...). He literally has a crush on a baby (well they don't call it a crush, but he asks Edward if he can call him dad,  meaning he intends to marre his daughter when she will be old enough). What was the author thinking?

 Also, Sierra Burgess is a loser. The girl catfish a guy, kisses him while he was thinking he kisses someone else.  But he  still dates her at the end because she write a song to apologize. What?

For me it means something different than friends. More QPR. So aplatonic : doesn't form QPR. I think it could be useful this way because some people forget all aros don't look for QPR.

6 hours ago, Holmbo said:

 Just cause someone doesn't get squishes  doesn't mean they're unable or unwilling to form platonic bonds with others. Platonic attraction seems to me as too vague a term to be useful, but if there is a way to describe it I don't think it's just about getting squishes.

I think it all depends on how we define "platonic". The problem is that it is a very vague concept, and I think we should as to people who have squishes to define what platonic attraction is. Because right now I feel like we don't have the same idea of what platonic attraction or platonic bounds mean.

Why not tell them the truth? If people assuming your sexuality or pretending to be straight makes you uncomfortable, it seems the right thing to do. That's not easy, in particular if they don't know about aro and ace, but in the end it will make you feel better. Because even if people don't believe you, at least you will be true to yourself.