Mark

There's this article about the matter. Though the author still seems to favour the romantic coding to touch to an extent.

It is stated here. However they seem unable/unwilling to provide links to the "stuff" in question. This kind kind of thing is more likely to work as a prefix, rather than a suffix. How that work when the rest of the resource mentions asexuality? e.g. identifying the author as "ace" or being on/from an ace website. (This can also happen implicitly through describing things which are common amongst aces than non-aces or omitting things which are more common amongst non-aces than aces.) I think a big part of the aro and ace conflation myth is the idea that aro ace experiences of aromanticism are somehow typical or baseline. This is also something I'd expect perioriented people to struggle to recognise and understand as being a problem. They have claimed both and This is exactly the issue. With those kind of biases and assumptions (which may be implicit) continuing to be part of the resource even if it is copied elsewhere. This is also likely to happen with resources authored by aro aces, regardless of where they were first published.

If it originates from an asexual site it will have everything to do with asexuality. Due to having been written by asexual people for asexual people. Please read up on intersectionality. Because it's essential for understanding here. Existing aro ace material already has these kind of #notallaros disclaimers. Which doesn't help because these memes, articles, etc mean little to other aros. The experiences of cis aro lesbians, trans aro lesbians, cis aro gays, trans aro gays, cis aro bis & trans aro bis differ even from each other. As well as differing markedly from those of aro aces.

What is this "aro stuff" you thinking of? Some links would help. If it's from an ace site then it's most likely to aroace in nature. Since the target audience of such sites are asexual people. How would you distinguish between information which is aro ace and that which is aro? Going back to @nonmerci's post The reason for this is that most "aro stuff", including that on a-spec and aro sites, is from an aro ace POV. Which, due to intersectionality, isn't likely to be something which non-asexual aros find relatable. It's also possible that these may be poor at explaining aromantism to non-asexual allos. What I think is needed here are resources which LGBTQ+ aros find relatable and which LGBTQ+ allos understand. An example of this would be an articles about "non romantic relationships" which mentions "purely sexual", "sexual attraction" and "lust" rather than one about "squishs", "platonic relationships" and "QPRs". The latter is likely to have the typical LGBTQ+ person, at best, confused and, at worst, complaining about "queer" being misappropriated.

I can't see how putting aroace information (which is what you typically find on ace sites) onto LGBTQ+ sites will help at all. At best it won't become any more relevant to LGBTQ+ aros. At worst it will encourage LGBTQ+ allos to conflate aro with ace and thus erase LGBTQ+ aros.

The term "aromantic crushes" could also mean those which involve sexual, sensual or aesthetic attraction, which may not be the intended meaning. It may even be the case that only a minority of aros experience squishes. Which makes the all/majority of aros do this kind of message all the more troublesome.

Another part of the long answer would include "What do you mean by spectrum?". Since not all spectra are one dimensional like the EM spectrum. Other examples would be quoiplationic, quoiaesthetic and quoisensual. It's in some ways curious that quoi isn't used more often when addressing false dichotomies.

Given that the trope is "cake is better than sex" does "X is better than romance" have to be confined to food?

I'd never, previously, come across it meaning other than "non sexual" (or "non physical"). I'd be interested to know where "platonic" is used to exclusively mean "non romantic", without any implication of it also meaning "non sexual". Especially if that predates AVEN (2001). If base things on Plato's writings then romantic relationships are rather "platonic" I suspect that a cause for confusion is that many dictionaries reference Plato. (Interestingly Collins Dictionary gives different definitions for the US.)

Virtually all "aro language" appears to have been coined by ace-spec people. Thus never considered allo aros. This is notable in the liberal use of "platonic" to mean "non romantic" rather than "non sexual/physical". (Especially outside of the USA.) I think this can hinder awareness and advocacy of aromanticism in spaces where allo allos are in the majority. e.g. LGBTQ+, polyamory, BDSM.

Do you have conversations about romance/romantic stuff? If so how do you address that some of your members may be romance repulsed? There's a guide here. Including using the likes of "allo aros" or "aromantics of all sexual orientations" in your publicity. Some who have engaged with online may have concluded that "a-spec" means "ace". The only people likely to see this are those who are visiting said "Queer Center". Which is going to exclude hetero aros. Likely the largest aro demographic. (An issue I have with much of the AUREA material is an over focus on QPRs.) Even without direct exclusionism allo aros could find the wider queer community to be too romantic/matrimanial/couple focused. (IME this seems especially to be the the case for lesbian aros.)

It might be worth organisers reading this. I think a big problem here is that many (possibly all) "aspec" organisations started off as "ace". Something previously mentioned in the & Aro thread. This is also likely to self perpetuate. Since allo-aros are unlikely to stick with such organisations. The latter is likely to be more difficult than the former. Possibly falling under "chicken and egg".

I though it would be worth asking what people here think about monogamy. Those who are ace might like to consider social, emotional or structural monogamy.

It might be the other way around. There is a lot of gender coding. With cis people typically unaware of it.

If it's something you want then it's solitude, if not then it's loneliness. There's another thread here. Something I think which can be a factor for many aros is that social opportunities in amantonormative societies can be either purely platonic or romantic (plus sexual, sensual and other "romantic coded"). Effectively a false dichotomy which happens to suit many allos. This is something I think the AUREA FAQ along with terms like "satisfied with friendship" overlook.

This also explains why there's "Platonic elements" in romantic relationships. e.g. the soul mate concept. The Romans assimilated lots of Greek culture and ideas.

Certainly this kind of questions are not often asked with sexual non-romantic relationships conspicuous by their absence in the likes of the AUREA FAQ. I've always been open to "short term", but never encountered anyone interested in doing these with me. What I ideally want are sexual, or other non-platonic, friendships. Which might well include other romantic coded activities. I've only ever found one person interested in anything like that with me. Who then dumped me for a normative relationship. (Even whilst identifying as "poly".) I've never found things like co-habitation, merger or most the rest of the relationship escalator remotely appealing. Definitely looking at different relationship models, paradigms and terminology. Possibly Relationship Anarchy. Though I find myself hampered by the way in which many , allos, in online RA forums conflate romantic and sexual along with the lack of any in person "community". We can find ourselves on one hand "slut shamed" for desiring non romantic sex and on the other hand desexualised for not being into (even repulsed by) romance. This matches my own experience The difficulty is that allos tend to see FWBs as more about sex than friendship as well as something for between (romo) relationships. As @Jot-Aro Kujo said if an allo "catches feelings" in such a situation then romo privilege means that it's your fault if you don't agree to an "upgrade". There's very much a maybe here. Even before the term polynormativity was coined there was a lot of focus on "opening up" amantonormative relationships. IME many poly communities are full of unchecked couple and romo privileges.

I found this quite an interesting article. For me there's more "name lists" than "relationship bins" for certain actions. With "bed sharing" being a "NO" for me. Initiating casual touch is something I find very difficult to do.

I feel that way in which the "commonality/frequent usage" displays misunderstandings of the term's origins and/or meaning or indications that it is controversial in nature mean that it is a poor topic for an introductory pamphlet.

I wonder if, given this thread If "Queer Platonic" should be given so much space on Introduction to Aromanticism. Maybe it would be better mentioned elsewhere. The" Common Misconceptions" section of A Beginner's Guide to Being an Aromantic Ally gets into fairly complex areas with the “can still love” and QPRs. whilst failing to mention that aros (including those who are also ace) can be interested in "romantic coded" activities such as kissing, hand holding, dating, candle lit dinners, etc, etc.

I think it's important that people know the origins so as to avoid the misinformation, misassumptions and misunderstandings surrounding the word. This is likely the case with other "aro terms" which have similar origins. It's important that "umbrella terms" not be too wide. Otherwise they can become uselessly ambiguous.

I think "perspective" or "worldview" is a better term than "lifestyle". The issue here (as it is in other cases) being that majority/privileged group has little reason to question the idea that what happens to suit them does not suit everyone.

The most common meaning of "platonic" is "non-sexual". About the only dictionary definition which mentions "non-romantic" is Merriam-Webster Which would rather imply that using it such way is an "Americanism".

It seems like allos can't avoid conflating sex and romance. Which in the case of flirting can translate into being unable to keep it sexual. e.g. looking for SEXUAL flirty memes easily finds the likes of this entirely romantic image.

What do they mean by "give up on romance"? What would this look like to them? Worth reminding them that abstaining from romance isn't the same as being aro.