Jump to content

Mark

Member
  • Content Count

    952
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    51

About Mark

  • Rank
    Veteran Member
  • Birthday October 17

Personal Information

  • Name
    Mark
  • Orientation
    Aromantic Pansexual
  • Gender
    Gender Queer
  • Pronouns
    They, Mx
  • Location
    United Kingdom
  • Occupation
    IT

Contact Methods

Recent Profile Visitors

4772 profile views
  1. I think the narrative itself is often the false dichotomy of "single and independent" or "coupled and connected". Whilst it may have been co-opted by neoliberalism it predates it. This is an obvious way the narrative fails. With "isolated singles" tending towards having many significant relationships which connect to community/communities. Whilst "connected coupled" tending towards having a a singular relationship with each other. With fewer and weaker relationships with anyone else. Possibly this represents a recent change in the behaviour of coupled people Possibly the term "amantonormative narrative" might be more accurate. Since the assumption here is is only romantic relationships matter at all. This turns out to be what many single people (including allos) actually want. TBH amantomormativity has likely been hugely damaged the field of psychology. With many people who claim to "study relationships" whilst in practice only studying romantic relationships. (Even just those which are hetero, monogamous and marital.) The whole concept of "attachment theory" assumes a singular "primary" relationship. Even in respect of children in societies which are vitriolic about single parent families... Similar things can happen with such leave for family members (other than, minor, children) vs romantic partners.
  2. This can also have assumptions of introversion or, even, misanthropy. Possibly because this is least challenging to the idea of amantonormativity There are several studies showing that single people tend to be more "community minded" than those who are coupled/married.
  3. Is there census data to what proportion of Swedes marry (or follow the cohabiting couple lifestyle)?
  4. Maybe even similar characters played by different actors.
  5. Mark

    Sirens and aromatics

    Two possible reasons. Greek Mythology is a well known example of a pre/aromantic culture. The term "platonic" is very much (over) used in aro spaces. Even if not that reflective of Plato's ideas.
  6. Mark

    Sirens and aromatics

    Sirens arn't in the official D&D source material. Though there are "home brew" stats. As well as for the rusalka from North Eastern European folklore.Which is in some ways a similar monster.
  7. Possibly "QPR favourable", "QPR indifferent" and "QPR repulsed". Also remember that in a D&D world there might be sexual orientations which do not exist in the real world.. Nor is there any reason such a world need be, universally, amantonormative.
  8. Mark

    Sirens and aromatics

    purificatory / cathartic It might be aesthetic or sexual attraction, but romantic attraction does not exist in The Odyssey. This sounds plausible. What does the original, Homeric Greek, text say? According to Plato they are celestial, under Zeus; generative, under Poseidon and purificatory / cathartic under Hades. With those in The Odyssey, obviously, being generative. It's unlikely that anyone in the time of Odysseus (or Homer) would want a (romantic) relationship. Classical Greek has no words to describe one.
  9. I've heard it suggested that the correct context for "platonic" meaning "not sexual" is teacher/student relationships. Apparently Plato was against the, then common, practice of teachers having sex with their students. The term "romantic" has also changed it's meaning substantially. At least until Renaissance times it described only Latin derived languages. With the term "romantic story" originally being associated with the adventure genre. What we'd now call a "romantic subplot" being unusual until the 20th century.
  10. So what did he do before he met you? A related question being how do needs in terms of companionship and life direction wind up so highly romantic coded and centred on a single individual. How come this is considered "cute" rather than "weird", "controlling" or, even "tragic".
  11. The notion of "platonic" meaning "not romantic" appears to be a quirk of US English. Given that the only dictionary to mention this is Merriam-Webster. Whilst every other English dictionary goes with "not sexual" or "not physical". Additionally there's the term "zucchini"... IME allo aces tend to use "romantic", rather than "platonic" or "romoplantonic/platoromantic". To me QPRs tend to look quite romance like. The term "platonic friends" also exists, implying that other forms of friendship are possible. Something which makes platonic/romantic a false dichotomy is that the concept of "soulmates". Strongly associated with romantic relationships whilst being taken from Plato's work. Additionally allos tend to interpret the "friends" part of it as a euphemism.
  12. Ironically this may be fairly close to original meaning of "romance" when it first emerged as a distinct fiction genre.
  13. Perioriented vs varioriented (as well as overlapping vs mutually exclusive varioriention) tends to only be seriously addressed within the ace community. Given that periorientation is a normative assumption and that, at least, 11% of people appear to be varioriented this is an "elephant in the room" type of issue. Rarely does it get mentioned that even perioriented allo allos can experience only sexual or only romantic attraction either. It can sort of work. Where "a-spec" means either "ace-spec" or "aro-spec". Though both at once would require vectors or complex numbers. Even then you have quoi orientations which are Not a Number
  14. In general attempting to apply linear scales to multi-dimensional qualities is both complex and of little use. You'd also need to consider the likes of married monogamous cis heteroromantic homosexuals. An additional complication here is that monogamy repulsion appears to be very rare with alloromantics but fairly common with aromantics. Whilst polyamory spaces tend to assume monogamy favourable. Privilege is intersectional, attempting to apply a one dimension scale easily leading to false equivalences.
  15. I don't want the likes of romance, coupledom or marriage with my characters. Not even as a backstory and certainly not as any kind of plot requirement. Nor would I be comfortable with a party who were mostly coupled. Anything sexual I'm fine with.
×
×
  • Create New...