Jump to content

Mark

Member
  • Posts

    1,014
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    56

8 Followers

About Mark

  • 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

6,375 profile views

Mark's Achievements

Beelzebufo

Beelzebufo (4/4)

  • Tadpole
  • Young Frog
  • Frog
  • Beelzebufo

Recent Badges

  1. With the possible exception of alloromantic asexuals, there's virtually no recognition that varioriented people even exist. As well as non-sexual romantic relationships often being socially acceptable whilst non-romantic sexual typically are not (especially any intended to be serious and/or long lasting).
  2. within the aro community the concept of platonic attraction can be rather lionised and romanticised.To the point that people end having to ask "Can I be aromantic if I don't experience squishes, want a QPR, relate to the concept, etc?" Thus it needs to be stated that "aromantic ≠ alloplatonic". Outside of aro spaces virtually nobody talks about "platonic attraction" at all. It's also notable that non-romantic forms of attraction such as sexual, physical/sensual, emotional and aesthetic which are well understood by mainstream psychology are often overlooked in aro forums.
  3. The best option would be to go with as few expectations as possible. Since how these kind of events actually play out can depend very much on the people there. Especially the organisers/facilitators.
  4. Since QPR is an umbrella term, it will end up being used to describe relationships which are romance like and/or pseudo-romantic as well as those which are different. Very often depictions of OPRs, especially in mainstream media, are of coupled relationships. Which especially if they are also hetero, mongamous, cohabiting/marital, etc have little to tell apart from amantonormative ones.
  5. It's notable that they didn't ask the preteens about romantic content. Especially given that romantic content falls out of the scope of classification/rating systems. With the result that it is as ubiquitous in children's TV and movies as anywhere else in popular Western culture. Also it's unclear if this asked about non-romantic sex. Thus may do nothing to address the lack of allo aro representation. Even, potentially, exacerbate the existing conflation of aro with ace.
  6. The essential problem with this is notion is reverse causation. It would be virtually impossible for anyone who lives, and grows up, in a highly amantonormative society who isn't highly romance positive to avoid negative experiences with romance. Since romance is ubiquitous to the point that it takes considerable effort to find novels, comic books, movies, plays, TV series, popular music, etc which are free of romantic content/propaganda. It's worth noting that this kind of quest for a reason why tends to be rather selective. Rarely is it asked "Why are cis people cis?"; "Why are heterosexual/allosexual people heterosexual/allosexual?"; "Why are heteroromantic/alloromantic people heteroromantic/alloromantic?"; "Why are perioriented people perioriented?". Possibly better questions to asked would be "Why do most people stop being quoigender around the age of three?"; "Why do most people stop being quoiromantic in middle childhood?" and "Why do most people stop being quoisexual at puberty?"
  7. Romantic coding. Non-romantic relationships outside of QPRs. Especially those involving sexual, sensual and aesthetic attractions. How a lot of "aro" terminology was coined by asexuals and/or in an asexual-centric community. Thus can have romance and sex conflation issues.
  8. The first question is an example of complex question fallacy. These are unanswerable when any of the assumed preconditions conditions are false. (These can go unnoticed when these assumptions are commonly true. Contrast "What kind of food do you buy for your pet cat?" against "What kind of food do you buy for your pet capybara?") The second one is is a false dichotomy, another common fallacy.
  9. The attitudes of people towards "love" in the past can be quite different to the lionisation of romance. Mania being seen as almost universally negative. Eros being seen as mixed. Philia, storge, ludus & pragma positive, but not necessarily obligatory/expected. Philautia highly positive. Agape also highly positive. In Christianity, and possibly other religious, associated with God. (A "nice person" could well be seen as expressing agape.)
  10. Just as problematic is the way in which it's not uncommon for many parts of the aro community to lionise (and romanticise) the likes of platonic attraction, squishes, Queer Platonic Relationships, Platonic Life Partnerships, etc. Often implying that "platonic attraction" is more than sexual, physical/sensual, other emotional, aesthetic, intellectual or other non-romantic attractions. With QPR definitions often using a notion of relationship/attraction hierarchy similar to that which underpins amantonormativity. Aromantic people can be aplatonic, quoiplatonic, greyplatonic, demiplatonic, etc as well as alloplatonic. Unfortunately alloplatonic can often be a default assumption, even though it may only apply to a minority of aros. Also far too common in aro spaces and material is the false dichotomy of "romantic or platonic". Which erases a large set of other possibilities. Especially in the contexts of attraction and relationships.
  11. This is somewhat different from the way regular psychology tends to define attraction: Romantic Sexual Physical/Sensual Emotional (of which Platonic is only a subset) Aesthetic Intellectual Most notably that both Romantic and Sexual are seen as entirely their own things rather than part of another attraction.
  12. Also possible confusion between romantic, sexual and romo-sexual attraction. Since the colloquial usage of "crush" does not distinguish between these attractions. Even though they appear to develop at different ages. With physical/sensual, emotional, aesthetic and intellectual attractions often being overlooked and/or conflated with romantic.
  13. In practice it's LGBTQ+ gatekeepers who tend to see aros as 'straight'. Even though they can experience homophobia. Since homophobes often look for an absence of hetero-romantic behaviour. (Romance tends to be public and sex tends to be private.)
  14. These links are also useful for debunking when teenagers are told they are "too young to know".
  15. The notion of "brain gender" looks to have been quite effectively debunked. Exactly, the post appears to have very little to do with romance. Which kind of ironic since the phrase "What women really want" has been used to sell the notion that (heterosexual) women should be hyper-romantic.
×
×
  • Create New...