bydontost

2 hours ago, Coyote said:

• To explain how people are reviving a similar concept today, I'm not sure whether to provide a paraphrased summary or link directly to examples.
  • If I didn't link to examples, I would have to just very closely describe what people are saying and say, basically, trust me, this is really a thing that people are saying.
  • If I did link to examples, they would either be examples that 1) people have been given and refused the opportunity to apologize for/have not been retracted or addressed, even when prompted about it, or 2) are not really saying anything wrong, per se, just saying things that help to contextualize and elaborate on the picture.

So do I restrict myself to paraphrasing of other's words w/o citations, asking people to just take my word for it, or do I include links to what exactly the contemporary issue looks like?

my prefernce would be to have actual examples when you can find them. it's hard to judge for yourself with people paraphrasing...

I think memes, such as the "attraction is cancelled" one may be a bit insensitive, may be not reletable to some, but theyre there to turn some frustration into humor. I can see memes that could easily say "romance is cancelled" which would be insensitive to a whole lot of people, but it's a meme, it's good for those who relate to it. I follow groups with political memes that im usually into, but I dont like all of them, sometimes they go too far in making fun of upsetting things, but maybe someone else needs to make fun of this particular thing right now to feel better with how shitty the world can be.

On 3/27/2020 at 8:23 PM, sennkestra said:

My suggestion is this: when you get frustrated by the fact that you can only find mentions of aromanticism in research articles that are also about asexuality, instead of thinking, ugh, they're all tying asexuality and aromanticism together again (many research articles these days actually make a point to acknowledge them as seperate!), or making comments like "it is hard for aro to emerge as its own community when everything is tying it to asexuality"  which implicitly blame aro aces specifically or aces more generally for aromantic obscurity, ask yourself this instead:

 

"Why is it that, outside of aromantic authors themselves, the only researchers and writers who give a damn about aromanticism enough to acknowledge it are asexuals and the people interested in studying them? Why aren't researchers and writers on allosexual subjects also stepping up?"

Because frankly, when it comes to your comment about not finding allo aro specific research papers, asexual research shouldn't be held responsible for generating content on allo aros - allo aros aren't asexual, and that's the whole point! The ability of the tiny niche of ace researchers and activists to influence more mainstream allosexual establishments is limited at best, and we can't blame them for this.

is it possible to be frustrated that all mentions of aromanticism are in papers that either focus on asexuality too or are about asexuality, and know that it's definitely not on asexuality researchers to write about aromanticism..?? bc i find that im frustrated, but I definitely don't blame aces or asexuality researchers for... not changing their scientific interests i guess. bc I am frustrated, and definitely not disappointed in those researchers specifically, or expecting ace communities to generate that spark for researches, etc., and am far from blaming anyone for this state of things. still, frustrated, and it's generated by the situation at large

I'll give an example of what frustrates me - a character from a cartoon was recently confirmed by an artist to be aroace. the title of an article that talked about it - "A crystal gem confirmed as asexual". I saw it, thought "cool, good for aces for the rep!!" and moved on. later, I see that aven rt'd the article, but they added a caption: the gem was confirmed asexual AND aromantic. i got angry!! how am i supposed to know that she was also confirmed as aromantic if the damn title doesn't mention it? she's also aro rep, that I could be telling other aro people about!! am I supposed to click on every article that mentions asexuality in hopes that maybe somewhere in the body it says that actually someone is aromantic too, that something includes aromanticism too, etc. And I don't blame aces for being more estabilished, more visible and all, but the situation that we're in is suboptimal. take a look at the article in question: https://www.cbr.com/steven-universe-crystal-gem-confirmed-asexual-peridot/. It mentions asexuality 20 times and aromanticism - 4 times. All 4 times as either "asexual and aromantic" or "asexual/aromantic". It's a singular example, but it starts weighing on you when it's a pattern. there's no one to blame for it, except for maybe the concept of sexual orientation for becoming so prevalent in today's society and the fact that because of that asexuality is more known. ideally, what id like is for the title to mention aromanticism too, and for it to be mentioned 20 times as well.

On 3/27/2020 at 7:23 PM, Guest Sennkestra said:

The problem I see with the post quoted above is that you seem to be assuming that if people stopped talking about aromanticism in the context of asexuality (point 2), that somehow that will change the fact that there aren't many articles primarily about aromanticism (point 1)....but it won't. It will just mean that there are no articles about aromanticism at all.

The problem isn't that there are too many articles about asexuality and aromanticism, it's that there aren't enough additional articles about aromanticism in other contexts. That can only be solved by promoting and developing new content.

I'm... not sure if a lot of people think that people should stop writing articles that are about both asexuality and aromanticism and that'll mean more aro articles will appear. there for sure are some, but it sounds so bizarre that I can't imagine that the majority of people could think that

On 3/28/2020 at 5:19 AM, LauraG said:

So I've seen something new that I'd like to share on this thread,

im curious now

7 hours ago, Guest Sennkestra said:

there's sometimes an assumption that like.....being aromantic should automatically make people experts on what asexuality is and also what harmful anti-ace tropes are and how/why to avoid them? 

I think it also goes in the other direction, that aces should have some intuitive knowledge how to avoid anti-aro sentiments and why things like mistaging can feel like more of a malicious act instead of any other kind of act.

7 hours ago, Guest Sennkestra said:

the are community barely even has groups, let alone trainings.

??? it's the reality tho

7 hours ago, Guest Sennkestra said:

I also think there's an assumption that aces and allies are "natural" allies and that being part of one group makes you both able/responsible for both, which also downplays the amount of actual work that is required for two communities to build active allyship.

Yeah, that's true. But there's tension there, bc why should we build this allyship with aces first and foremost..?? So there are some aroaces who put effort in it when they're involved in ace activism, but there are also aros (of all kinds) who don't think that's a priority (I'm willing to take everything).

7 hours ago, Guest Sennkestra said:

also in the form of people assuming/demanding that groups that cater to one of these groups must also serve all "aspecs" equally even if that's far outside their actual scope.

That annoys me, and I want it to go. But it's also a reason why i never look at ace resources as potentially having anything relevant to aromanticism, which is often not true ¯\_(ツ)_/

2 hours ago, LauraG said:

Why not put energy there as opposed to tumblr tags, which is like, the least productive community space you could possibly put effort into?

i agree with everything laura said, but this especially ?

i haven't checked the tags on tumblr personally for a long time now, and from what i remember, the posts that I didn't want to be in the tag were things like "all lgbt people are beautiful" tagged with every identity label the person knew, and stuff like "it's okay to be ace! i love being ace" tagged as ace and aro. the second kind of thing annoyed me more, bc it was specifically about aces with no mention of aromanticism, was only tagged with aromanticism other than asexuality, which to me implied that the author thought it'd be relevant to aromantics (why not tag it lesbian for ace lesbians..??), and i felt that aces should know better, bc idk, they're naturally more sensitive to the difference between aromanticism and asexuality.

2 hours ago, pressAtoQUEER said:

hours ago, Korbin said:

Hell, as far as many people are concerned aromantic may as well mean the same thing as ace. What I'm getting at is that this is making it difficult for aros to try making aro specific spaces for the aros that do see a distinction. And saying this very concept alienates aroaces is unhelpful.

how is the general misconception that aromanticism and asexuality are the same thing making it difficult for aros to make aro specific spaces?? to me it's more the invisibility of aromanticism that hinders that, as a lot of aros do see the distinction when they know aromanticism as a concept exists

2 hours ago, pressAtoQUEER said:

We're talking about aroaces feeling generally excluded from their own community. I have seen fellow aroaces get bullied out of the aromantic tag for making posts about aromanticism that also include their asexual experiences and/or are of course also wrapped up in their asexual experiences to the point where I'm afraid to not only post in the aromantic tag but to even acknowledge my asexuality at all in aromantic spaces. I am an aroace person here telling you that I feel alienated by some beliefs that have become prevalent enough in aromantic spaces. There have been points where, even though at this point in my life my aromanticism is a bigger part of my identity, I have felt like I need to stop identifying as aromantic at all because I'm just a nuisance and a problem. Do my experiences and feelings here not matter?

this sadly seems like an issue for many aroaces. and the "funny" thing is im sure that some allo aros would be able to say similar things, but in reverse - maybe about a different space, or at a different point in time. what's going on that makes us fight each other to the point that everyone feels like they have to leave parts of their experience at the door??

21 minutes ago, Coyote said:

And they've been largely getting away with it, from what I can tell.

yeah it doesn't seem like there's an opposition bigger than their following to what they say...

26 minutes ago, Coyote said:

their posts merely strike me as the most blunt and obvious expression of a framework that other aros have been operating on more implicitly.

what group does "other aros" mean here?? all aros, certain aros..?? could you say sth more about the implicit framework, how that looks to you??

29 minutes ago, Coyote said:

It sets up a linear hierarchy, doesn't it? "Bottom" can only exist in relation to something else positioned higher.

it does set up some hierarchy... i do think other a-specs can have it marginally better in some ways (for example representation and offline resources). but idk if it has to imply that all aces are privileged over all aros at all times (tho I may be biased here!!)

re: what @sennkestra said: I wanted to encompass in this thread instances where all aros say sth against mostly allo aces (for example: if you're not aro, shut up about qprs), and instances where allo aros go against all aces, but all examples in the thread are actually about the second type.

14 minutes ago, pressAtoQUEER said:

I've sometimes been made to feel like I, as an aroace, made some specific and active choice to somehow oppress and erase alloaros and non-sam aros from aromanticism simply by the fact that I'm aroace (and that if I want to participate in aro spaces, then I need to disregard my asexuality).

I'm sorry that you feel this way, that's a big problem

16 minutes ago, Jot-Aro Kujo said:

Well, yeah. But not everyone is constantly looking to do Activism™ every time they talk about their identities. Definitely if someone is setting out to say something with the intention of getting people to listen and think, then yes, it's probably in their best interests to not simply scream about things, but sometimes people just... Are venting, on their own blogs? Allo aros are allowed to be angry.

That's sth that I agree with to a limited extent, bc if we're talking about tunglr dot hell, there's not really a way to make sure a post stays personal (for example by making it non-rebloggable). And that's especially true if you do some activism from a personal blog, but then also do some venting from a personal blog, it can get muddled up. Though it isn't a problem objectively unless it does dip into acephobia.

23 minutes ago, Coyote said:

"Aces hold power over aros!" (link)

take a look at: "Aros deserve to be angry at you for contributing to our oppression! We get to be mad! We get to hate you for it! Stop calling us acephobic for being angry at our oppressors!!" it doesn't talk about being allowed to feel angry when you've been hurt, it talks about people *deserving* to be angry, about being allowed to hate aces! This person says that they hate aces (that literally means they're acephobic), but not to call them acephobic. Also, obviously, aces are a marginalized group too, not the allonormative society that's the source of our oppression, etc., intersectionality anyone, etc.

29 minutes ago, Coyote said:

"allo aros are kind of at the bottom of the barrel in the aspec community"

this is not a post i loved, but it is very much an example of an personal vent post on a personal blog that i argue isn't really personal on tumblr. this statement in particular doesn't strike me as wrong - out of all a-specs, allo aros are for example the least represented, the least visible, etc. and imo doesn't imply that other a-specs have it good or are to blame for this.

35 minutes ago, Coyote said:

"allaros [are] literally the most poorly treated aspecs"

i sign under everything @Jot-Aro Kujo said in this reblog with both hands, that comment about sex-favorable aces was tone deaf. "Yeah, there are sex positive aces, but they’ll never be treated the same way that alloaros are. And like, it all started when allaros started getting mad at the fact that we’re literally the most poorly treated aspecs." on the other hand implies that aces are privileged over alloaros imo.

49 minutes ago, Coyote said:

Further thoughts on that point.

going to also pull this on tunglr dot hell from there "First, at the most basic level, we don't even know from context whether or not the OP intended the original post to be an announcement post or just a vent post, because Tumblr doesn't allow people to disable reblogs or anything -- yet various tumblr users seem to have reblogged it to their aro blogs, turning it into a kind of announcement post regardless of whether it was ever intended as one. Reblogability controls and privacy controls could have allowed a post like this to stay a private vent post instead of spreading around in the way it did."

26 minutes ago, Jot-Aro Kujo said:

31 minutes ago, LauraG said:

but it also had a dni banner that made it very clear that it actually wasn't for that audience? That post made me think a lot about the potential for confusing a vent post for a Doing Activism post, because without the dni banner I definitely would have misinterpreted that.

 

Yeah posts like that confuse me too, what is up with those? I'll see a post that's a politely worded statement like "Aroaces tend to assume that all aros share their experiences, and this can be really harmful to allo aros when they make sex-antagonistic statements and expect everyone to agree" and I'm like yeah you're right! Good explanation! And then they have a banner that says, like "Allo aro only post, non-allo-aros don't interact" and I'm like... ???? So it's... So you're talking exclusively to allo aros, to tell us things that we already know because we experience them? Ok... Why..?

omg yeah that is so weird. and i really don't like the way it doesn't set up conversations?? this doesn't feel like wanting to solve a problem for me, it seems like wanting to be angry for anger's sake, and pitting one group against another, bc you were hurt in the past

1 hour ago, LauraG said:

2 hours ago, Coyote said:

What are we using as criteria, though? Asking because I want to know what other evidence would be relevant to bring in. I've got some links stored, but I want to make sure I'm not wasting anyone's time with anything not salient enough.

 

The criteria I used for the above was whether or not the statement was something I've heard non-aro/non-ace people say before and considered it to be anti-ace sentiment at the time, excluding generalized statements of frustration that don't deal directly in issues (e.g. "I'm tired of aces" or something like that, which would be very different coming from a non-aro/non-ace person vs. an aro person who had been hurt by aces.)

i'd say that everything that resembles things that exclusionists say is fair game, including things that imply aces are privileged are imo in, taking sth an ace does as a personal attack on your group (like with queergamic, which was not really a word for allo aros)... also, if we think sth doesn't look like discrimination, I'm sure we'll tell you C;

eta: I wouldn't count people being misinformed about where qprs came from as acephobia, unless they were given sources and repeat it or say they don't care

40 minutes ago, Lokiana said:

I'll offer up a discussion I had with someone about using "dirty allosexuals" which is just straight up ace discourse rhetoric....

i wish it wasn't used by exclus as sth ace people say

34 minutes ago, Jot-Aro Kujo said:

It definitely is a very difficult line to identify though. Allo aros need to be allowed to express frustration with the way the ace community treats us, and we need our frustration to be respected regardless of if we're being "polite"- But we also need to be very, VERY careful that we do not express this frustration via straight up repeating acephobic rhetoric, in the same way that aces need to be careful that they don't express their frustration via repeating homophobic rhetoric.

i... agree, tho i also think that we could get a bit more done if we were polite while explaining more often. the anger is going to be there, im angry a lot, but it's easier to say sth insensitive then, want to hurt the other person

i think not generalizing could help, when we're talking about a problem?? instead of talking about aces doing this and that, we could say that a certain thing happened idk, with aces?? an ace person did sth and other aces didn't react?? i think framing the problems as sth that happened or a behaviour, instead of a thing a person or group is, could help avoid the anti-ace sentiments??

11 hours ago, Coyote said:

Interesting choice of topic.

Yeah, it evolved when i started thinking about things that were bothering me most recently

11 hours ago, Coyote said:

Since you raised it, I'd like to bring in this question I asked in February:

 

https://theacetheist.wordpress.com/2020/02/23/what-would-anti-ace-problem-aro-community/

It's a food for thought, and I think that what we have now is an acephobia problem

Some more links:

a person saying they can't interact with ace or aro communities anymore https://asterosian.tumblr.com/post/611325453799702528/i-wont-unfollow-you-i-still-love-the-content

a post specifically about allo aros not being free of ace antagonism https://shades-of-grayro.tumblr.com/post/613597892756799488/just-like-allo-aces-can-sometimes-say-things-that

some more perspectives on the things that are happening, started as talking about the tone of our interactions https://shades-of-grayro.tumblr.com/post/613603658970644480/my-problem-with-current-intracommunity-issues-tm

some background:

qprs are a term coined by people who identified primarily as ace; queergamic is a new word created by an ace, who wanted a word that means "qpr but explicitly nonsexual"; the first carnival of aros was on the topic of "the relationship between aro and ace communities" that left many allo aros feeling that they have nothing to contribute or that everything they have to contribute is negative experiences

comrade or paramour

I said i'd like to talk about antagonisms in various parts of the a-spec communities, but what was on my mind recently was acephobic antagonisms in the aro communities, so...

There's a lot of cooperation between aro and ace activists, initiatives, orgs. There's also hostility in some aro and ace spaces, which is usually aimed at one identity. So it can be aimed at aces, at aros, at alloaros or at alloaces, maybe to a lesser degree at aroaces (they deal with being caught in the crossfire of aces vs aros antagonisms instead), but that happens too. There's a lot of hurt and bitterness, and the communities are linked (by people, by history), and it creates tensions, because we have our differences. Some people would like to be separate - alloaces were vocal about asexuality not always going together with aromanticism, now alloaros are starting to be more vocal about the differences and not wanting to associate with aces. This creates an identity split in some places - it's aros against aces, aces against aros and everyone with the same label gets thrown into the same bag. That leads to divisions, because we have our differences, but what the "aros this", "aces that" actually achieve? Hurt, alienation, helplessness..? Cool, very constructive, we'll go far on this. This split also creates an allosexual vs ace division in the aro community, which puts non-sam aros and greyaces in a weird vacuum.

Say an aro person is angry at an ace person for doing something a bit insensitive. We create anger and guilt, and people who are feeling guilty don't make good progress for a cause, because they don't want to actually do it, they feel shitty, they burn out. And if someone feels wrongly accused, they're probably not going to listen to the points another person is making anyway.

There will be assholes everywhere, and it's important to correct them, stand up to their assholery, or not give support to their harmful behaviors, because it's impossible to get rid of them all. They can't take over the conversations and narrations though, because that just leads to toxic communities.

That was a rather large introduction, but: aros who act acepobic. They're there and we need to address this problem. For the last few years we've been steeping in acephobia (exclusionist crusades on tumblr and other social media) and we're not immune. The way our communities are linked creates strong and contradictory feelings. They're our strongest allies and we want them to remain so, we're grateful, but there's also jealousy - they're bigger, more visible, have more resources, people often ignore aromanticism when it's paired with asexuality.

There have been instances of aros invalidating, diminishing ace people's struggles, when we get so angry when it's in reverse. There were aros saying that if you're asexual or you define your relationship as nonsexual, you're oversharing about your sex life - "you're asexual, so what, no one needs to know about your sex life" is a common acephobic talking point. There are aros taking a thing one ace person said, generalizing it to all aces. They were dismissive of things an ace person said on the basis of their asexuality. Any disagreement with an aro person by an ace person was treated as an example of arophobia, instead of someone else's opinion. "Aces are less oppressed than aros" is... an argument, suddenly (please, this really isn't oppression olympics). Ace people can be treated as if they have privilege..?? There's this mentality that if your group (aros) is more oppressed on average, it's impossible really do harm to a person from a group that is less oppressed. (No, I'm not getting into who and why and how is more oppressed, pls do me a favor and don't start that topic on this thread.)

I think we need to realize that some aro spaces are getting acephobic, realize that there's potential in aros to be acephobic, and try to combat that, so that we're like you know, decent humans, and don't start alienating aroaces who identify strongly with their asexuality.

1 hour ago, Lokiana said:

 

I think saying no one is ready to have that conversation might be an unfair representation. This has been a very long thread and at some points has gotten very heated, so people might have muted or ignored it (like I did for a while) because that's not something they're prepared to deal with.

 

It seems to me that there are segments of both communities that are working very well together right now and are listening to each other, and there are portions that are very hostile to each other, intentionally or unintentionally. The aro antagonism I've seen from a lot of aces is ridiculous, but I'm starting to see more ace antagonism rather than pushback against aro antagonistic ideas from other aros, and it makes me very uncomfortable. 

 

Saying no one is ready to have that conversation based on one thread seems to be largely ineffective, seeing as this conversation has gone four or five different directions. Imo, separate, smaller threads and conversations would be more effective.

oh my gosh, so much this lol

to me it seemed mostly a discussion about qprs...?? i'd actually really like to talk about antagonism in various parts of a-spec circles, but maybe on a thread that is specifically for that..??

eta: im gathering my thoughts on a thread like that

2 hours ago, Mark said:

Rather depends what is and isn't included in it...

masturbation isn't

2 hours ago, Mark said:

I think we really need something similar for aros.

Lol you're in luck, bc AUREA is finalizing an Aro Census, so the survey should be out around  the end of March, and results somewhere in 2021

14 minutes ago, Coyote said:

Okay. So you're saying that the community history between bi and aro communities is

• The Golden Orchid Society, a collection of organizations in South China that began during the Qing dynasty and existed from approximately 1644 to 1949, which practiced marriage between women (to women) and nonpartering/solo marriage
• The concept of sexological orientation models which include "emotional preferences" and "affectional preference"
• A Tumblr post saying "There was a 2 (or more?) point kinsey-like scale used among me and my queer friends in HS"

?

Only the second one. Third is an example of 2nd imo.

15 minutes ago, Coyote said:

I figure it's perfectly appropriate to say "I don't know" when one doesn't know, which is the thing that @flergalwit did. If anything, I wish people would take that approach more often.

Okay, sorry, they said they didn't know about such a history for aros and bis, but do know of such a history with aces and bis. I mean... do you gather what I'm trying to say at all? ?

2 minutes ago, Jot-Aro Kujo said:

 

If you're talking about the one run by aro-allo-positivity, yeah I also hate that one cause the owner is super fucking racist, but that really doesn't change the fact of the matter: Someone made a server for allo aros only, aroaces demanded to be let in and complained that they were being exclusionary. Can you imagine if someone made an ace-only server and allo aros demanded to be let in? That wouldn't be ok. And from what I understand this has also been happening with the other allo aro server, which I am also not in.

That's the one lol. I just know that they made a complaint about aroaces demanding to be let in when they were dealing with other allo aros telling them their moderation was shit. An allo aro was painted as an "ace miffed that they were kicked" (I'm going to say that this is a very rude and insensitive way of talking about anyone) for reporting the fact they wanted pictures of people's legal documents (blurred out) to confirm their age. Some of the drama: https://quiet-times.tumblr.com/post/611178074343653376/just-letting-you-know-ive-reported-your-server

I'm not sure about another servers, but people who make servers get to decide who they want to be in it in the end. I'm personally okay with letting interested people spaces intended for allo aros, as long as they respect it's a place for us, but I know this isn't something that would suit everyone

59 minutes ago, Coyote said:

Is that a yes? I can't tell if you're saying "Yes, that is the community history between the bi and aro communities"

Yes, that is the community history between bi and aro communities - that I know of, in the sense how anything about this can be known anyway. There could be other, better sources, but I don't know of them. I was just agreeing with @VoidArcana that it seems like a weird reasoning to tie aros and aces, and aces and bis, but then deny the tie between aros and bis.

1 hour ago, Coyote said:

For reference -- and this is just talking generally about where I'm coming from on this -- here's an example of intersecting-LGBT-and-asexual-history that is arguably not relevant for "aro history" per se (and also more sexological than communal, but anyway): Bell and Weinberg's Homosexualities: A Study of Diversity Among Men & Women has some sections on an "asexual" subgroup within their "homosexual" research participants. This "asexual" label is one assigned by the researchers, and their criteria for it are pretty sex-specific, in a way that necessarily would have excluded people with higher/moderate levels of "sexual interest" or sexual activity, who would have been sorted into a different group.

 

If somebody then extrapolated from there to say that this example demonstrates shared conceptual history for aromanticism & gayness, I'd say that jump wouldn't make sense -- and, if anything, that would be actively doing a disservice to the idea that aromanticism isn't inherently an ace thing.

I used up my willingness to dig through this today, so I'm going to believe you and yeah, in this case I wouldn't claim that this part of ace history (if it can be classified as ace history with asexuality being more attraction-focused nowadays) is also aro history, that wouldn't make any sense. If there were researches that took into consideration sexual as well as emotional, affectional or romantic preferences and labelled them all together, then depending on the scales (hetero-bi-homo spectrum vs. heterosexual axis and homosexual axis) I would consider some of them caught aros in either bisexual group (first type of scale) or bisexual or asexual (second type of scale). With the first scale, allo aros and aroaces would be together in bi group and with the second, it'd be possible for allo aros to be in the bi group and aroaces in asexual group. Buuut I'm not sure how it's actually calculated/used, so those are my thoughts on how imperfect tools may be simplifying some things

8 hours ago, nonmerci said:

I think that seeing that aro felt not comfortable, the asexual community decided to be more inclusive. And that's why now, all ace events wants to be "ace and aro" : they fear that if they don't, they will be seen as not inclusive, or discriminatory against aros.

I think there's also another reason and it is that at least some ace and aro events organizers are aroace and while they used to center their ace identity or talk about their aro identity only in ace spaces, now with aro spaces separating in some ways, they want to reflect that with the names of the groups/events. It's possible that some groups didn't change their character much, but it was understood before that an ace group could also be an aro group. This is not the case now.

2 hours ago, Jot-Aro Kujo said:

I think we need both. We absolutely do need ace spaces to become more inclusive of aros, but we need aro-specific spaces as well.

Yup!! I think ace spaces mainly owe it to aroaces to be more inclusive of aromanticism, bc aroaces are a big (in numbers) and important part of their community, in a way that bi, lesbian, gay or hetero aros won't ever be a big part of bi, lesbian or gay communities (idk if talking about hetero communities is justified, but)

4 hours ago, Jot-Aro Kujo said:

I tend to distrust them unless they do something to outright state that they are welcoming to allo aros, because I can never tell if something is genuinely by and for aros (and by that I mean, not just aroaces who exclusively interact with the ace community)

Same, though I may also look for wording such as: all aros, aros and/or aces. "Aros and aces" is ambiguous to me and while maybe allo aces feel welcome and claim this space (idk actually), I don't automatically think I'm always welcome

3 hours ago, Jot-Aro Kujo said:

There's been a problem with aroaces getting upset at us "excluding" them from such spaces

I heard of an issue with a discord server being presented that way... This may have happened too, but i know what also happened was that some allo aros didn't agree with some moderation practices, but idk if you may have that in mind

In the end, there's a lot of conflicting needs and interests and I think we should be mindful of this and assume everyone wants to do what they think is best and tread with tact. And at least in aro spaces, all aros should be welcome

3 hours ago, Coyote said:

That's certainly... personal testimonial. Which counts for something, sure. Does this mean that people exclusively sexually interested in one gender could get grouped as bi if that sexual interest didn't extend to wanting to get married? That's what this would imply. Do we have any personal testimonial from those people themselves?

Yeah, it is, true. That's what it implies. I only have access to this statement

3 hours ago, Coyote said:

So are we equating "affectional" to "romantic" here?

 

No, but I'm guessing this is how it can be interpreted by at least some people, and they're usually not reporting how many friends of a certain gender they have

3 hours ago, Coyote said:

If.... you think these links should be added to my timeline compilation, I can do that. Is that what you're linking them for?

No, no, just pointing out that sexual orientation measures aren't always only about sexual experiences/desires. I think it's worth talking about somewhere, but not documenting in this compilation

3 hours ago, Coyote said:

the reason I necro'd this thread in the first place is that Ax responded to "I don't know [anything] about [a long intertwined history between the aro and bi communities]" with "Are you seriously gonna sit there and say 'there is no denying that the history of the two movements (asexuality and aromanticism) is highly interconnected' and then turn around and talk about the connection between the bi and ace communities while claiming you don't know of any such connection between the bi and aro communities? [...] The bi community housed aros when we didnt have a name, just like it did aces."

 

The idea being, I guess, setting aside the "if something's true of aces then it's true of aros" idea, that there's a particular history there that someone deserves to be scolded for not knowing.

 

Is this... that? Is this the community history between the bi and aro communities?

I mean... I don't see anything wrong with this..?? If aro and ace communities were interconnected and ace and bi communities also were, then like... at least the aroace people were connected to the bi communities too. For myself, I can say that I definitely mistook my 0 romantic attraction to everyone as being biromantic ( @Jot-Aro Kujo possibly feels the same) and I'm bisexual.

2 hours ago, Mark said:

It's definitely from an ace perspective. Can't see anything obviously allo aro applicable.

If asexual was a category used in research some years ago, then it can be compared with concepts that also appeared in around that time, but aro is a new concept and doesn't really have a 1:1 translation to a concept that existed. Possibly some allo aros did what some do now - were in some relationships that were based on friendship and sex. But it's possible we'll never know. Aroaces are part of the aro community too tho, so like things that apply to them are part of the aro history too. Tho not all aro history, obviously.

6 hours ago, Coyote said:

It looks like the only one that talks romance specifically is this part--

second link (https://atomicbubblegum.tumblr.com/post/113202572465/cease-and-de-cis-so-i-reblog-a-lot-of-things) has this:

Quote

What I am getting at, is that in the models I grew up with, among the queers I grew up around, both aro and ace people could qualify as not just bi, but bisexual. Or any other sexual orientation, really. (...) There was a 2 (or more?) point kinsey-like scale used among me and my queer friends in HS. It had a numerical range which translated to homo->bi->het. (...) If you were in the middle for either/any of them, you qualified as bisexual.

The two following books talk about scales to measure sexual orientation, and that the distinction between no sexual interest and sexual interest in men and women can't be accurately captured in many of them. Those scales can measure exclusively sexual interest (like Sell Assessment of Sexual Orientation) , or sexual and emotional/affectional interest (like Klein Sexual Orientation Grid, which includes emotional and social preferences or Shivley Scale of Sexual Orientation, which asks about sexual and affectional). It's possible that when the books talk about "asexual" they may be also talking abut "aromantic", but this really depends on the scale and definition a lot.

We're in a thread called Aro History Timelines, and I just have to second everything @pressAtoQUEER said above about the difficulty in talking about queer stuff in history that is older than 30 years ago. I think it's important to document things that are happening right now and that are explicitly labelled aromantic, but it's fine to see some similarities in people, movements, concepts that happened before

I just watched the new pope and Voilello said that "in the end everyone makes the same mistake and falls in love" or sth like that, so like... he's an aro icon now

also second what @nonmerci said about jo march from little women, she was just obviously super aro

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

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

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

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

On 2/28/2020 at 1:08 PM, Mark said:

Something like "This was written by an aro ace. YMMV especially if you are an aro of a different sexual orientation" at the start. Rather than "not all aros are ace".

 

Does this mean creating resources specifically for LGBT sites or  "cut and paste" of existing resources? These could look, very, different in terms of both content and style.

 

The omission of relationships based around sexual attraction from articles on Non-romantic relationships.
Over focus on platonic, including squishes and QPRs, would be rather indicative of a lack of aro allo perspective.
Ditto for erasure of other non-romantic and non-platonic attractions.

 

Also

Which is why I asked for some examples of the "stuff" in question.
What is it and where does it originate from?

I'll stick with my assertion material on an ace site is likely to have an ace bias. Ditto for material with an ace author.

Cool, I actually understand more about what you meant now. I don't agree that general descriptions of aromanticism should be prefaced with "an aro ace person wrote this", and even between one aro ace person and another, the mileage may vary. I'm thinking just of general "aromanticism is a romantic orientation that means x, y, z" style information, not "i'm aromantic and this is my story". I've seen allo aros say that they thought romance is sex and friendship, so maybe this could be a narrative we could mention in basic introductions too.

I know we have a different definition of platonic too - I was surprised to learn, as allo aro, that platonic also can mean "non sexual", bc I always used it to mean "non-romantic, can be sexual". It's sth that requires a clarification in any case.

On 2/29/2020 at 5:03 AM, pressAtoQUEER said:

If you want examples of aromanticism being more visible in ace-focused spaces, go browse the tumblr fuckyeahasexual. It's an ace-focused blog, but they do talk about aromanticism and I believe a couple of mods also identify as aro.

I know this is just an example of the fact that ace spaces mention aromanticism more often,

but I have to second  , bc my experience with fyeahasexual is mostly one of frustration at the innacurate info (see: when they said asaw changed the name from aro awareness week to arospec awareness week last year) or ace centrism (see: "don't force yasmin benoit to say she's aro too"). I feel AVEN is doing better in this regard.

On 2/29/2020 at 5:03 AM, pressAtoQUEER said:

Anyway, to get back to the original topic, I agree that I'd love to see aromanticism become more visible and well-known and not just as a subset of asexuality. I actually do think this is happening (AUREA's creation and everyone's work during ASAW in particular is a really good sign imo) - we just have to remember that it takes time and keep speaking up where we can and supporting those who are advocating and working for more visibility.

I'm quite hopeful about this too!