eatingcroutons

It rhymes with apocalypse.

INTx types are over-represented in pretty much every kind of MBTI self-assessment. Various factors contribute to this; one example is that people generally see themselves as more rational than they actually are. Two things to mention here: 1. Tests with binary options have a LOT of flaws in determining your MBTI type because they simplify the whole system down to E versus I, N versus S, etc. This is not at all how actual MBTI types work. For example it's a common misconception that the difference between say, ENTP and INTP is simply that ENTP is more extroverted and INTP is more introverted. That's not true at all. They have completely opposite primary cognitive functions (extraverted intuition versus introverted thinking). 2. It's absurd to think that everyone fits neatly into one of 16 personality types. Personalities exist on a spectrum. Some people fit very well with a given MBTI personality type; others are vaguely borderline between multiple types. Like any other psychological categorisation, MBTI types are more useful for some people than others. If you don't neatly fit one of the pre-described boxes then the whole system is probably a waste of your time.

.

Things that are invasive: Sending or showing any sort of explicit sexual or romantic material to a person who hasn't consented to receive or view it. Stalking or harassing people for any reason whatsoever. Things that are not invasive: Fantasising about other people, or relationships between other people. Sharing those fantasies in spaces that exist to share fictional fantasies and are clearly marked as such.

No-one has the right to declare anything about anyone else's orientation, full stop. And many people's orientations shift or fluctuate over the course of their lives. It looks like some posts have been removed from this thread so maybe I'm not getting the full picture, but I'm not really sure what you're getting at here. Why is it important to you to know exactly how every person you describe as a "non-romantic, highly sexual guy" identifies in terms of orientation?

Because amatonormativity as generally defined is not just about prioritising romance, it's about prioritising a particular model of monogamous, lifelong romance. The opposite might be a word that encapsulates embracing a diversity of relationship types - or embracing people's freedom to make their own choices about what kinds of interpersonal relationships they engage in.

I was about to ask/suggest exactly this. Presumably you have mechanisms in the group for accommodating romance-repulsed people, while making space for discussions about romance. You can apply the exact same principles/mechanisms to manage discussions about sex!

I don't think this is a function of QPRs being a "new concept". I think it's a fundamental, and fundamentally important, aspect of a QPR that it doesn't have "defined rules and expectations". The entire point of a QPR is that it's whatever the people involved in it want it to be. A QPR may look more or less like a friendship, or more or less like a romantic relationship, depending on the expectations and boundaries of the QPR and how well those match with society's expectations of boundaries in friendships and romantic relationships. But there's no singular set of necessary or sufficient conditions for a relationship to be a QPR. A QPR is any relationship that is sufficiently different to the typical social categories of "friendship" and "romance" that the people involved in the relationship prefer to call it a QPR instead.

I am really, deeply confused as to why we're spending so much time discussing the semantics of the title of a thread on the Arocalypse forums in order to address issues happening on Tumblr. In all seriousness: what on earth does anyone expect to accomplish in terms of combating the misunderstandings that happen on Tumblr, as highlighted in the OP, by crafting the perfect topic title on these completely separate forums? My thoughts? Bluntly, I have little to nothing in common with "the ace community" as I've experienced it, and based on my experiences it's one of the last places I'd turn to for help with aro activism. I've tried, many times, believe me, to connect with ace communities. But there's only so many times I can see attitudes like "sex eww, romance yay" being paraded around as the community zeitgeist before I nope the hell out.

Ahh okay. Again though, I can't help you with that one, as arokaladin blocked me some time ago because I read stories about immoral things. Again, I recommend contacting them directly if you have issues with what they're saying. These misunderstandings do occur in the aro communities I'm actively involved in, and in this thread I've already talked about what I've found are effective ways to respond to them. I'll definitely continue to correct misunderstandings when I see them, but to be frank, you couldn't pay me to wade back into Tumblr. I suspect the two options you've mentioned yourself (emailing them, and pinging them here) are not a bad place to start! The massive problem with the language you're using is that both of these words imply intent. People are misinformed about the history of the term "queerplatonic". They're not, in the vast majority of cases, actively trying to suppress it. Your language comes across as accusatory and that is not conducive to building bridges or reaching solutions. Mate I know we've had our differences but I am 100% with you on this. You know if you'd stated in your OP that this was the goal of your thread, it would have saved us all a lot of wasted time and miscommunication. I would like to say though, as one of the admins of an aro community, I've just had a really fantastic experience with one of our partner communities. The partner community in question is nominally for aces and aros, but is in practice ace-dominated. There was an issue last week where some aro-exclusive things were said in a conversation - a "real crime of the ace community". I brought this up to the community admins, frankly with the sinking feeling that I'd be ignored and we'd have to end our partnership. But the admins in question took my comments deeply seriously, and are now planning a community announcement and adjustments to their rules to help ensure that aros are as welcome, in and of ourselves, as aces. That's not just a potential solution, it's a practical one that's being implemented right now. It involved honest discussions about things people found upsetting and why, and practical objectives that we hope will help make everyone feel more included. As @Jot-Aro Kujo has said, I'm not really sure what the practical objectives of this thread are.

The link in Coyote's post is a reblog. Try to click through to the OP and you'll see it no longer exists, as Coyote mentioned. I'll just highlight, in case it wasn't explicitly clear, that my experiences are with aro communities outside of Tumblr. I'd qualify your claim that "...there are a lot more people willing to spread misinformation..." with an on Tumblr, as it seems that's where all your examples are from. There are a bunch of reasons I (and many others) are not part of any aro communities on Tumblr, and if you have issues with Tumblr communities or what's being said by the people in them, it might be more effective to talk to those communities rather than complain to this one. I mean it's up to them, but I personally wouldn't expect them to give an "official response" every time someone on a social platform makes an inaccurate post about something to do with aromanticism. They've done a pretty good job collating a set of resources that any of us can link to when we see myths or inaccuracies being perpetuated.

The post in question has been deleted by the OP. As for getting out ahead of ignorance: Tumblr is a terrible platform for controlling the spread of misinformation. We've all seen how political psyops campaigns take advantage of this, and Tumblr's algorithms are notoriously fickle and opaque. End result being that comparative numbers of notes on different posts are an extremely poor measure of any community's attitudes to or interest in a post or idea. Posting something in the general tags in the hope the platform will surface it to others is a crapshoot at best. Some things that can be more effective include sending asks to people who've posted/reblogged incorrect posts, reblogging to reply directly to incorrect posts, tagging people in posts with correct information, and contacting larger resource blogs if their information is inaccurate. In terms of discussing this on a community level, we've done that at some length in this community; I can't remember anyone spreading misinformation about the origins of "queerplatonic" in this community any time recently. I'm not part of any of the aro communities on Tumblr, so can't help you there. AUREA is the closest thing we have to do building a coordinated resource between the many scattered aro communities, and explicitly acknowledges the origins of the term queerplatonic. If people really want to dig their heels in, I just link to the primary sources. They're all still out there, and I've yet to meet someone who disagrees with hard evidence of how the coiners themselves choose to identify.

Usually with something like "huh, interesting, I didn't know that," before getting back to whatever they were actually talking about in terms of queerplatonic relationships. Sometimes the discussion sidetracks for a bit into the history of the term. As for how I go about it, I just point out that the term was coined before a distinct "aro community" really existed, and that the people who created it don't identify as aro. I've never had a negative reaction to that. Mate I can't help you with that one, they blocked me ages ago for enjoying Impure Fiction. But if you take issue with their posts on Tumblr, have you considered contacting them directly, rather than posting essays on different platforms entirely? You ask, "What are we to make of that?" but nobody on these forums can read their mind any more than you can.

Yeah, you went into the relationship in good faith, and were honest as soon as you realised it wasn't working for you. It's a shame that it didn't work out and he was upset, but sometimes that can happen even when nobody's don't anything wrong. Glad to hear he's learned something about himself too, and that things ended well overall!

Multiple people, my own bedroom. I don't like living alone, but I need my own space - not least so I can have sexual partners over!

But tost, someone is Wrong on the internet!!!! Seriously though, AUREA cites the original coiners of the term and a comprehensive etymological history. Equating kids on Tumblr not knowing that history to a campaign of intentional revisionism is a stretch. Just correct them with a link to the actual origin of the term and move on. That's what I do if I see someone who mistakenly thinks queerplatonic was coined by aros.

Apps to do what?

To be honest, it sounds like you're the one with the insecurity here. A lot of aromantic people feel this way about relationships: we don't like the idea that any one person should be more important than everyone else in our lives. To make this relationship work, you may have to find a way to accept that she will always value her friends just as much as she values you. If it's a dealbreaker for you that you need to feel more valued than everyone else in her life, you might want to discuss with her whether that's something she can realistically do for you.

.

??? I've been reading the books in the meantime and they're really fantastic - definitely worth picking up if you enjoy the show!

I know there's been a fair bit of research done on how portrayals of love in the media distort expectations, e.g.: https://hyrmina.com/paper/77580c7344e348268a031bf742ff5671 http://web.archive.org/web/20120210050418/http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/film/3776923/Romantic-comedies-make-us-unrealistic-about-relationships-claim-scientists.html This kind of research isn't strictly about aromanticism, but it does give plenty of evidence about the pervasive and powerful impact of media on our concepts of what love is, and what kinds of relationships society tells us everybody should be striving towards. I think it'd be pretty reasonable to speculate in your paper that this pressure to have a movie-like romance hits people who don't want relationships at all even harder.

Given how poorly-written most romance is, is it really surprising that "they're hot" often becomes the most compelling reason to care about characters' relationships? ?

One hundred percent. And that's absolutely nothing to feel guilty about! There's nothing at all wrong with thinking hey, those two characters are hot, it'd be even hotter if they boned. I can appreciate a romance plot when it's genuinely well-written, and is believable and important to the characters. The problem is, most romance sub-plots in media are about as deep as he was a boy, she was a girl, can I make it any more obvious? And that's just lazy. I have a hard time believing that two characters will fall in love just because they're a straight man and a straight woman in the same place at the same time. And yet a lot of media seems to take it as given that any such situation will inevitably lead to romance, and therefore that there's no need to do anything to show or convince the audience why it happens.

.

My understanding of "emotional vulnerability" is being in a position where your emotional state depends to some extent on another person, or other people. Is saying or doing things which put your emotional state at risk, depending on how others respond. So yeah - if you're not worried at all about how others see or feel about you, you're probably not going to feel emotionally vulnerable no matter how open and honest you are.