Jump to content

Mark

Member
  • Content Count

    928
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    48

Everything posted by Mark

  1. Maybe have allo(romantic) characters who are portrayed as shallow, manipulative, abusive or creepy towards an aro lead.
  2. What matters to me is that so many activities are romantic coded.
  3. They might be "between relationships". There are also allos for whom promiscuity is their method to "find the one(TM)". It's a fictional cliché, maybe one which only makes sense in an amantonormative culture. Leaving aside the (cis) hetero stereotypes of this both of the characters involved have to be allo. Even allos tend to see romantic behaviour from people they are not romantically attracted to as creepy.
  4. There is also self perpetuation involved here. Something is unusual about the ace community is recognition of variorientation. Whilst in straight, LGBTQ+ and even many aro (and aspec) communities periorientation is assumed as a default. With it even being possible to find LGBTQ+ and aspec communities which variorientation is somehow an "ace thing". (It's also commonly the case with kink, polyamory, relationship anarchy, etc communities are "perinormative.) It's very hard to find information about aro-allos even when you know the right terms to look for. Even then it's still easier to turn up aro-ace and (even) allo-ace writings.
  5. Even assuming five types of attraction that still gives, at least. thirty one possibilities.
  6. Discussing romance can even be an expectation. In contexts such as celebrity gossip or "shipping" fictional characters. It's very much a normative to conflate sexual and romantic. With aro aces being just as likely to do this as other perioriented people. A part of this is that even with issues such as "marriage equality" the language used tends to be "sexual orientation". The experiences of aro aces are likely to differ, substantially, from those of either allo aces or aro allos. That we tend to have "ace communities" which tend to favour allo aces and "aro communities" which very much favour aro aces is another possible reason for greater asexual visibility and awareness.
  7. Periorientation both describes the majority of people as well as being the default assumption. You can even find "-sexual" used where "-romantic" could be a better description as well as being used to effectively mean "-romosexual". It's possible that someone who was "overlapping varioriented" may not even realise they had differing sexual and romantic orientations. It also must happen that peri-allos experience split attraction... The effects of non-compliance with amantonormativity differ between allo aces, aro allos, aro aces and allo allos who choose to remain single. Infantilisation (along with pathologisation, including dehumanisation) is common way to avoid questioning social normativities. There might also be a difference between "you'll grow out of it..." aimed at allo aces to "you need to grown out of it" aimed at aro allos. A likely related issue is that Infantilisation often comes with desexualisation included. Which may well be a non-issue to asexuals whilst being a huge one to allosexuals.
  8. Some of these ways include "being safe for work", acceptable to any age along with a general lack of concern in respect of appropriateness or consent in terms of romance. There's also ways in which romance is more "public" than sex such as getting "in a relationship", engaged or married being announced and celebrated. There are situations, such as religion, where non-sexual romantic relationships amongst adults can be considered acceptable. Which is not the case with non-romantic sexual relationships. Thus the situation of aros being dehumanised can be more extreme for allosexual aros, (Assuming aro aces don't get lumped with other aces and infantised.) It can be the case that queer communities are more interested in questioning heteronormativity than amantonormativity. Similarly kink and non-monogamous communities can question sexual norms whilst endorsing romantic norms. The effect of this "package deal" is to assume that all aces are also aro and that all aros are also ace., IME the ace community is better at challenging and debunking the former than the aro community is with the latter. I've even a fair few "relationship anarchists" conflate sex and romance.
  9. Having assumed default for a noun can make it important to use adjective (including prefixing "non-" to the assumed one) in order to avoid that assumption being made., It's also the case with "relationship" where "romantic" can be an assumed adjective.
  10. I see platonic friendship as being a subset, rather than entirety, of friendship. I'm very open to doing romantically coed things with friends or having non-platonic friendships. I don't see romantic relationships as more than. (If I had to rank rank them as less then.)
  11. Whilst this is something of a Bard stereotype it's not, at least IME, that common. In settings such as Barovia it's unliklely to be of much use at all. D&D have a specific seduction mechanic. Most common would be to use Persuasion, sometimes Performance. Other Charisma based characters such as Paladin, Sorcerer or Warlock can also easily have a high Persuasion modifier. Persuasion can also be used to rebuff another character's interest. Similarly for Intimidation, which is also Charisma based. Something I find more obviously indirectly arophobic in D&D is the Marriage option. Spells which, directly, change the behaviour of other player characters can easily result in Player Vs Player (PVP) situations. A possible counter to this would the Calm Emotions spell. One option is for your character to treat that as an attack. Though DMs should respect players' limits.
  12. IME perioriented people tend to conflate romance and sex. Often without being aware of it. There can also be conflation between romance and interest in other romantic coded activities. In theory allo-aces get this. Though practice not so much. Also worth noting that someone's feelings towards performative romance can differ from how they view romance in fiction or popular culture. Often "relationship" and "romantic relationship" are seen as synonyms. Thus there's little cultural context in terms of what a non romantic relationship (sexual or not) might look like. These don't work for everyone. I'm not sure any relationship is "no-strings-attached" more "no-romantic-strings-attached". Even for a non romance repulsed aro that "more" could equate to "less". This is where romantic privilege comes into play. Part of this is likely to be that whoever ended the relationship it's likely to be seen as the aro's fault. This assumes that a) all aros want casual sex. b) all aros can easily find people who they find attractive and are interested in casual sex with them. Which can also be expressed as "aros are satisfied with (platonic) friends". There's a lot of social interaction which is romantic coded. Someone being a romance-favourable aro does not mean that they know how to roll play being an allo. It's not that hard to find existing examples of non-sexual romantic relationships. Even involving allo allos Whilst it's hard to find examples of non-romantic sexual relationships.
  13. I'm not sure it's that much of a standard. There's also the issue that a lot of aro jargon originates from the ace community.and thus tends to assume a lack of sexual attraction. This definition appears to be from the Renaissance Conflation with friendship also appears to be misunderstanding of Plato. It also makes a nonsense of the term "platonic friend".
  14. Merriam Webster is the only definition which mentions absence of romance. Oxford says not sexual. Cambridge is much the same. Urban dictionary ditto. vocabulary.com says not sexual or physical. Even in the US that is the regular definition. With using it to primarily mean "not romantic" appearing to originate from the ace community.
  15. To add to this mess the term "queerplatonic attractioon" may also be used. It's odd that there should be a need for a term to describe "lack of interest in QPR" rather than "interest in QPR". Similarly for "squish" The definition of "nonamory" is also rather troublesome. This part "a lifestyle choice or relationship style that does not include intimate, long-term partnerships, whether romantic or platonic." contains the false dichotomy of "romantic or platonic". Consider that terms like "lifestyle (choice)" have in the past been used to erase LGBTQ+ orientations. The next sentence "A nonamorous person does not need or want a boyfriend, girlfriend or partner. They do not need or want a queerplatonic partner, or platonic life-partner, either." implies that this may not involve any "choice" at all.
  16. Looked more like, at least, six... It's far from the only such word. Maybe different words for "experiences platonic attraction", "has squishes" and "desires a QPR". All of these being different things. If "squish" is an analogy with "crush" then there's an implied "intense" adjective.
  17. The same applies to enjoying romantic relationships depicted in fiction. Also worth asking them what they mean by "a relationship", especially anything they think is "obvious". The idea that aros have somehow lost the ability to experience romantic attraction or are, otherwise, "broken allos" is rather toxic. It's effectively a form of arophobia which avoids challenging amantonormativity and romonormativity. With this kind of meme being directed at LGBTQ+ people in general. (As well as other minority groups.)
  18. The only kind of love that Medieval scholars could plausibly link to marriage would be "eros" or "pragma". There is literally no word they could have used to describe "romantic love" anyway. Regardless of if they were using Vulgar Latin, Classical Latin, Koine Greek, Classical Greek, Aramaic, Classical Hebrew or Classical Arabic. The most obvious cultural link between "love"and "marriage" being an American song from 1955. About the time of "peak marriage". Arranged marriages have been around a long time. To the point that their origin is unclear. Even ostensibly romantic marriage cultures can include coercion from parents and peers. One way in which romantic marriage cultures may be more coercive is an expectation that everyone, regardless of social class or profession, should marry. Something especially notable in contemporary Western cultures where married adults are in the minority. If anything matrimania within popular entertainment is inversely correlated with the proportion of married people. If anything that specific example would appear to show women getting the lesser-evil. Though so called Honour killing does appear to have a, strong, connection with arranged marriage culture. Her marriage to Philip the Handsome was definitely arranged. Arranged, even forced, marriages, can consider compatibility. Especially in the cases where a failed marriage could mean a major diplomatic incident (as happened in the 1530s) or even a war. (However nobody, at the time, would have considered "romance" to a factor.) They married in 1496 and he died in 1506. Thus were married for ten, rather than two, years. A large part of the propaganda appears to have been down to her father wanting her out of the way so he could continue to rule Castile. Possibly the story derives from a Castilian (Spanish) novel. Which would, technically, make it "romantic".
  19. It's possible for friendship to be based around sexual, sensual, aesthetic, romantic, etc attraction. Attraction and love are different things. Someone who "loves their friends" could mean in terms of philia, eros, ludus, romance, etc. Allos can use the phrase "more that friends" where there is just romance involved. There is also the way in which QPRs are often placed in this hierarchy. Without considering that at least some aros find non-romantic, including platonic, relationships to be "more than romance". Effectively inverting the hierarchy. Others may question the hierarchy concept.
  20. It's worth asking "how similar" as well as if the False Equivalence fallacy might apply here. The aromantic spectrum is quite diverse as are the asexual and aplatonic spectra. An "aros and aces" a-spectrum is more diverse. With the possibility of conflicting needs between allosexual aromantics and asexual alloromantics. An "aros, aces and aplos" being even more diverse. With more possible conflicting needs.
  21. I'm thinking that similar problems from different causes might require different solutions. I do miss friends. However I associate love for friends more with "philia" ...
  22. This is fairly close to what I've always wanted. Though in my case it would be a mix of platonic and intimate friends. Whilst many other things on this thread, especially cohabitation, are a definite NO for me. I'm very much more people to go out with rather than come home to. I can see quite a lot in common with Solo Polyamory. Subject to the caveats of my not understanding allos. Definitely I want a clear division between residential/domestic and social spaces. When I was younger I might have been more prepared to tolerate such a setup, though preferably non monoganmous. However in the last 10-15 years, no matter how lonely or socially isolated I have felt, even the idea of this has looked like far too much hard work and emotional labour to failo to get my needs met anyway.
  23. The complication is that TERF was coined around 2008 whilst LGBT dates from the 1990's and LGB dates from the 1980's. Thus they would have been called or identify as something else when this happened.
  24. I find "romantic", "sexual", "sensual", "aesthetic", "intellectual", "protective" or "social" to be useful and meaningful attraction concepts. Whilst for "platonic", "alterous", "queerplatonic". They make little sense used in that way. With the term "quoi" being a good description of how I feel about them applied to attraction.(With "emotional attraction" my feelings are more "too vague".) Something I can often struggle with is understanding how QPRs are non-romantic when they are described. Especially when they involve monogamy, co-habitation, financial entanglement, etc. I seems as though there can be a mis-assumption that everyone is using the same set of attraction concepts. As well as conflation between the "quoi" and "a" prefixes.
×
×
  • Create New...