Mark

On 12/19/2019 at 4:35 PM, LBMango said:

Also, my primary love language is touch, which, for men in American culture, at least, is pretty much limited to romantic relationships... 

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

On 2/19/2020 at 11:56 AM, bydontost said:

im not sure what would originate from an asexual site, what are you imagining?

It is stated here.

On 2/13/2020 at 4:53 PM, Morgenfluss said:

it's easier to find aromantic stuff on Ace sites,

However they seem unable/unwilling to provide links to the "stuff" in question.

On 2/19/2020 at 11:56 AM, bydontost said:

i appreciate that you're doing it so much! it's great that people can see that aromanticism exists in the first place. i think a better way of wording it would be "aromantic people can have any sexual orientation, i.e. bi-, a-, heterosexual, or may not have sexual orientation"

This kind kind of thing is more likely to work as a prefix, rather than a suffix.

On 2/19/2020 at 11:56 AM, bydontost said:

bc then it doesn't bring the reader's attention to asexuality and doesn't suggest that the reader should be especially connecting the two;

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.)

On 2/19/2020 at 11:56 AM, bydontost said:

I agree that sometimes debunking myths on a platform where it's possible that people come without having heard of those myths, can make them appear in their heads in the first place

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.

On 2/19/2020 at 4:13 PM, nonmerci said:

Im am confused. If there is no link and doesn't come from any website as @Morgenfluss said, how can it come from an asexual website? ?

They have claimed both

On 2/13/2020 at 4:53 PM, Morgenfluss said:

aromantic stuff on Ace sites

and

On 2/17/2020 at 6:27 PM, Morgenfluss said:

You don't need links for that.

On 2/19/2020 at 5:43 PM, LBMango said:

I think that the idea is that if it originates from an asexual website, then it was written from an asexual viewpoint, and will have asexual biases and assumptions... 

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.
 

23 hours ago, Morgenfluss said:

"aro stuff" would be like what is aromantism and what isn't aromantism. You don't need links for that. Again: It won't have anything to do with asexuality. 

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.

23 hours ago, Morgenfluss said:

Also, I like using memes to explain stuff, but I would most likely make most of them myself -- as I already do. And I distinguish that by saying stuff like you don't need to be asexual in order to be aromantic and many aros can still have relationships without romantic intimacy.

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.

4 hours ago, Morgenfluss said:

You must have misunderstood what I was saying. I was talking about putting more aro info stuff up on LGBTQ+ sites, not aroace information. 

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.

4 hours ago, Morgenfluss said:

 By doing so it may help them start to distinguish Aros and Aces, since I would be talking solely about aromantism.

How would you distinguish between information which is aro ace and that which is aro?

Going back to @nonmerci's post 

Quote

On 1/1/2020 at 9:58 AM, nonmerci said:

people here saying they didn't realize they are aro because they thought you have to be ace

 

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.

On 2/13/2020 at 4:53 PM, Morgenfluss said:

Therefore it's easier to find aromantic stuff on Ace sites, since aces face similar problems and because of aros and aces often getting tied together. I do plan to do some more aro information stuff on LGBTQ+ sites, but I don't expect anything to come from it.

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.

1 hour ago, Jot-Aro Kujo said:

I would like to clarify- If you're talking about squishes when you say "aromantic crushes", not all aros get those.

The term "aromantic crushes" could also mean those which involve sexual, sensual or aesthetic attraction, which may not be the intended meaning.

1 hour ago, Jot-Aro Kujo said:

I know a lot of people who are new to the aro community get confused by getting introduced to aro terminology and then thinking all aros use or experience such things, so just to set the record straight: No, not all aros get squishes, and that's ok. Yes, some alloromantics get squishes, and that's ok too.

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.

On 2/13/2020 at 4:46 PM, Coyote said:

Are quoiromantics on the aro spectrum?

Short answer: Some are, some aren't.

 

Long answer: Individual quoiromantics will have different answers to this question. Last year I conducted an informal survey and found that -- at least out of my respondent sample, which was noticeably skewed toward aces and aros -- a majority of wtf/quoiromantics answer "Do you identify on the aromantic spectrum?" with "Yes," but there was also a not-insignificant number who answered "No," "My answer is not yes or no," and "Unsure" (all together, these answers add up to more than a quarter for those who identify strongest with wtf/quoiromanticism out of a predetermined list). A number of these respondents like the word "aromantic," too, so any time you say something is for "aromantics," you should anticipate that you might have some quoiros show up.

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.

On 2/13/2020 at 4:46 PM, Coyote said:

Are there other kinds of quoi identities?

Yep! The quoi- prefix can be used on just about anything, which is how people have derived terms like quoigender, quoigenic, and quoisexual.

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?

On 2/6/2020 at 8:50 AM, nonmerci said:

But wasn't it the case well before the ace community?

I'd never, previously, come across it meaning other than "non sexual" (or "non physical"). 

On 2/6/2020 at 8:50 AM, nonmerci said:

 I remember that always thought it meant that, when I was a child

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).

On 2/6/2020 at 8:50 AM, nonmerci said:

and that I was very confused to discover it doesn't (and just thought what it meant for Plato and what it meant to day are completely different).

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.)

On 2/3/2020 at 3:06 PM, LBMango said:

I kind of wish that there were two terms: as-spec and ar-spec... Then we could talk about a*-spec.... but that isn't the language we have...

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.

On 1/29/2020 at 4:54 AM, HotRamen said:

So I run an aro/ace discussion group within my college’s queer center, and I want it to be a place where allo aros feel welcome too, I don’t think there’s any allo aros in the group currently I don’t know if they just aren’t in the area or if they feel unwelcome, I feel like there’s a pretty good balance between discussions about aromantic things and ace things, we don’t really have conversations about sex/sexual stuff tho because some of the members are sex repulsed, although I’m all for a topic like that, I usually go with what the members who attend want to talk about/ do. In addition to what I wanna talk about, it feels kinda strange to have a conversation about allo aros without them being there, although when we have discussions about aromanticism we don’t conflate it with asexuality, is there anything else I could be doing though?

Do you have conversations about romance/romantic stuff?
If so how do you address that some of your members may be romance repulsed?
 

On 1/29/2020 at 4:54 AM, HotRamen said:

although I’m all for a topic like that, I usually go with what the members who attend want to talk about/ do. In addition to what I wanna talk about, it feels kinda strange to have a conversation about allo aros without them being there, although when we have discussions about aromanticism we don’t conflate it with asexuality, is there anything else I could be doing though?

There's a guide here.
 

On 1/29/2020 at 4:01 PM, Jot-Aro Kujo said:

Make it explicitly clear in your advertising that allo aros are welcome. People are a lot more likely to show up if they're certain that it's an aro group where they're wanted, not just like,  an aroace group where they could potentially sneak in on a technicality.

Including using the likes of  "allo aros" or "aromantics of all sexual orientations" in your publicity.
 

On 1/30/2020 at 1:15 AM, HotRamen said:

Ya I’ve thought about changing it to a-spec but there are some people in there who don’t know what it is so that term can be inaccessible to some especially if they don’t engage in any a-spec communities online.

Some who have engaged with online may have concluded that "a-spec" means "ace".

On 1/30/2020 at 1:15 AM, HotRamen said:

I haven’t really done much advertising that’s something the queer center does but mostly people find out about it by actually going inside the center, I haven’t made flyers or anything, I do plan on making pamphlets or just using aureas and making a nicer looking aromanticism 101 poster to hang up in the queer center though. 

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.)

On 1/30/2020 at 2:24 AM, Jot-Aro Kujo said:

Many allo aros shy away from the wider queer community due to exclusionism/general fears about being seen as Evil Predatory Sex Maniacs Who Don't Care About Anyone, 

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.
 

On 1/21/2020 at 7:35 PM, sennkestra said:

Anyway, my advice for anyone organizing joint ace/aro meetups, is that it's important to at a minimum give all groups included equal billing in any event names or definitions, and to have active plans for discussion questions, icebreakers, etc. that can actively include all experiences (aromantic aces, romantic aces, aromantic allosexuals, etc.). 

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.
 

On 12/1/2019 at 1:06 PM, nonmerci said:

Sometimes I feel like there is more non-binary or trans people here, but maybe it's because I never met in real life (I think)? Sometimes I'm wondering if aromanticism or asexuality affect gender Identity.

It might be the other way around.

On 12/1/2019 at 1:06 PM, nonmerci said:

I Don't know, but I feel like some gender coded things are linked to seduction and gender-role in a couple Not everything, of course; but for instance, it seems for me that when it comes to clothes, a feminine style is often associated with seduction (like a boyfriend complaining because his girlfriend is not feminine enough, he thinks she doesn't seduce him without "feminine" clothes).

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.

On 1/13/2020 at 3:06 PM, LBMango said:

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.

On 1/2/2020 at 10:18 PM, sennkestra said:

As an aromantic person who is firmly on the asexual side of things, I've never really had to think about what navigating sexual relationships would look like without any romantic interest, so I'm curious to hear about what it's like from those who do. I feel like I see a lot of talk about how aromantic people navigate their more "platonic" non-romantic and non-sexual relationships, or how people navigate romantic relationships of various kinds, but I'm curious what non-romantic sexual relationships look like for people here who are interested in them, either as an ideal or in actual practice.

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.

On 1/2/2020 at 10:18 PM, sennkestra said:

For example, do you personally prefer sticking to short term arrangements like hookups, "one-night stands" or other short-term relationships? Do you prefer longer-term but informal relationships like "friends with benefits"? Or are you still interested in more formal "committed" relationships similar to serious dating and marriage, but without the usual romantic assumptions? Are these terms something you use or do you prefer different relationship models and terminology alltogether?

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".
 

On 1/3/2020 at 1:44 AM, Jot-Aro Kujo said:

Like, to be honest... Allo aros are stereotyped as having lots of one-night stands or whatever, but honestly? A lot of the allo aros I've spoken to haven't even had sex, myself included. Society makes it very, very difficult to safely access sex unless you're in a romantic relationship. "Hookup culture" mostly lives at parties and bars, which is no good for those of us who aren't very social or just don't like those kinds of activities.

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.

On 1/3/2020 at 1:44 AM, Jot-Aro Kujo said:

The concept of actually having a sexual relationship as an allo aro is basically a fever dream to those of us who aren't lucky enough to be very party-style social, and/or romance favorable.

This matches my own experience

On 1/6/2020 at 3:19 PM, LBMango said:

I think I WOULD like a FWB set up... at least if we were ACTUALLY good friends... 

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".

On 1/6/2020 at 3:19 PM, LBMango said:

 Or, I've considered looking into the poly community, where, if I can't satisfy all of a partner's needs, there are others who can do that... I'm not sure if that's a Thing either... but maybe?

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.

On 12/22/2019 at 6:22 PM, Coyote said:

• Intimacy Scales (about different ways of categorizing hand-holding, etc.)

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.
 

7 hours ago, Lokiana said:

Although I do struggle to understand how the issue of origin of QPRs affects the commonality/frequent usage of the phrase "QPR" and related terminology in aro communities.

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.

On 1/2/2020 at 1:25 AM, AUREA said:

Edit and update: HERE is some ASAW information up on the AUREA site. More to come when the ASAW-dedicated site launches.

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. 

15 hours ago, Coyote said:

Frankly, I don't think mentioning the origins is necessary, if the goal is just to put out a better infographic that doesn't reflect the same problems as Twenty's.

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.

15 hours ago, Coyote said:

This could just be me swinging too far in the other direction, but I associate this kind of breakdown of features with the attempts to define queerplatonic too narrowly as a particular kind of relationship style, rather than an umbrella term.

It's important that "umbrella terms" not be too wide. Otherwise they can become uselessly ambiguous.

On 1/2/2020 at 10:10 PM, honeypandan said:

I've been told that you would feel the "spark" if it's the right person, but also sparks don't exist because there is no right person. I'm not trying to defend or excuse what your mother's friend is saying, but allos don't usually have bad intentions when trying to "warn" you about labels and being aromantic (it sure hurts though!). They truly believe that any lifestyle different from theirs or society's norm is just unheard of, and they want you to have what they have. They don't understand that we can't and it's very frustrating.

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.

On 12/25/2019 at 5:31 PM, Holmbo said:

I agree. But it's not always larger. For example I'd consider platonic non-sexual. While a friendship could involve sex.

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.

12 hours ago, Fynnlee said:

So one of my alloro friends has recently had their heart broken, and they've decided to give up on romance as a result. Seems like a bit of an extreme reaction to me, but I'm just the aro, right?

What do they mean by "give up on romance"?
What would this look like to them?

13 hours ago, Fynnlee said:

Seems like a bit of an extreme reaction to me, but I'm just the aro, right?

Worth reminding them that abstaining from romance isn't the same as being aro.