Ch0c0

Everybody has the right not to be interested or to be interested in just friendship.

You don't have to come out as aromantic for this. I keep the 'aromantic' for very very persistant people.

They are both nice.

Hello Sajastar,

Welcome to the forum!

2

People need to stop thinking that bisexuals just go along with anyone. Nobody will just go with anyone, not even animals do.

I think that bisexuality is very 'noble' because you can in a way see the beauty/sexual appeal of persons from different genders. Almost spiritual. (Sapios should understand the appeal of the personality above the flesh considerations.)

You are valid, specially not a slut and should not feel that way. I'm very sad that you had to experience this.

I used to say "Don't act on something that happened after 2AM." The alcohol makes it even worse.

But of course you and your way to love are valid.

At that age everybody is so obsessed with love. Later people have other interrest (job, home, family, children, business) so it's nice if you can find at least one in common with them. Sadly most people don't go back to strongly valuing frienships, except maybe in the times that they breakup with their SO. I'm trying to find like minded people too.

Some nights my dreams are more vivid than usual.

I can get all my senses including taste but strangely not smell. There was never any reason scenaristic reason for odours to matter in my dreams.

I want to thank our aro militants active on other platforms for warning us about our bad visibility and the various unacceptable behaviours. They should be addressed but we should avoid overreacting. Useless venting about the queeragamic debate below...

AUREA, Coyote, nonmerci and all other members here working on the education (wiki, press,...) are also fighting by prevention the Tblr misinformation and inaccurate memes.Thank you all for this! Hopefully dissemination of clear ressources will help the aro and the non-aro.

 This seems like an important topic but sadly I can't contribute. The few pages that I have read have made me so confused about the QPRs... I thought it was simple when reading the platonic definition on Merriam Webster.

Not a very active follower on Tumblr and almost never on Discord, I don't get all the drama about aropolitics.

If there is any sensible and tolerant content on these platforms I can help promote it.

I have never really given a chance to a romantic or sexual relationship.

For a long time I have waited to feel both sexual attraction and romantic attraction for somebody. I believed firmly that having one without the other was a lack of respect (old fashionned and invalidating like hell, I know). I'm probably only good with platonic attraction so my original plan was doomed to fail.

Now I'm more open to alternative types of relationships but I feel fine on my own as well.

Hello and welcome here ?

Hello Sunflower8, welcome to the forum.

Being a God because you are not something seems a very weird argument to me. In my religion, God encompasses everything. Are you of buddhist confession?

Also I'd like to add that everyone is a (human) being of value. I've seen some supremacists in all domains (money, skills, sex, race, gender) and they all give me the creeps.

Hello Llamacorn, welcome to the forum.

The site will likely not shut down so don't worry. You can ask your questions and participate on the different threads as usual.

Welcome noImaginationWhatsoever.

6 hours ago, nonmerci said:

I think that seeing that aro felt not comfortable, the asexual community decided to be more inclusive. And that's why now, all ace events wants to be "ace and aro" : they fear that if they don't, they will be seen as not inclusive, or discriminatory against aros. This is well-intentionned. They are glad to share ressources for aros too.

But doing that, they don't get that the aro community wants and needs more independance, because they are trying to be inclusive. Probably, they don't get problematics like how aros will be seen as a subcategory of aces - probably because aces are sharing the fact that all aces are not aros, but don't realize that the fact that all aros are not aces is not known at all. They probably don't get that we have also our own problematics that have nothing to do with asexualiity (though we share things in common too), and that we need to discuss it.

 

So my point is : aces think they will stop intolerance against aro (in their own community) by being more inclusive. While it seems that aros are looking for the opposite : the recognition of their independance need and of their experiences. In that condition, it is impossible to talk because the two communities don't see the same problem.

 

That was just my thoughts on that. Sorry if I am wrong, that's just what I get this morning.

I second this.

Putting new borders around and subgroups (aro aces, aro allos, ...) help making these spaces safer and more confortable. But it will also push people into labels. If every online space does that there will be no place for the questionning anymore. I won't blame AVEN or others for trying to be aro inclusive and open. Because love is confusing some newbies think that they are asexual while they are mainly aromantic. Some people there have discovered aromanticism (me included).

I understand that allo aros are feeling unconfortable being bundled with the asexual community because the sexual part of me experienced it first hand. In the asexual community, I can unintentionally be triggering to others as a graysexual and feel highly unconfortable around romantic aces. I have seen more grays and aros in AVEN. Raising awareness to all is ongoing and needed.

As arocalypse decides to protect an independant aromantic space all aros should deffinitely find a safe place here. But pushing aromanticism out of AVEN is a bad idea I think since a lot of aromantics do belong there. I'm sorry if this sounds harsh for other parts of the aromantic community. I would think that more dialogue (like promotion of Arocalyspe from AVEN ) would be beneficial instead of being blocked in the past feuds.

1 hour ago, AllTimeBubble said:

Yeah, I get that too. For me, its more I see people in relationships and I'm like, I don't want that but what am I supposed to do in my future if not that? How do I prevent lonliness when it seems everyone in my life is going to leave me for a romantic partner. Its not like we get told about any other options.

I have felt that before, specially after getting invalidated by my therapist.

I know that there are other options for me to live happily but maybe I did not consider them before because too proud or too self-amatonormative. So now I try to be more receptive to change and possible solutions.

Controversial opinion: there are still some alloromantic people who fake romance or even love only for convenience. A relative agreed to live together with somebody for laundry...

If you have honnest feelings (even platonic) for somebody you have the right to try with your partner's consent a 'less perfect' type of relationship. The others don't agree? It's none of their business anyway so they don't even need to know the truth.

Thank you very much for your work so far!

I can't help with the technical parts but I can try to help with the funding if there is a fundraiser.

As a lot of people who are not completely romance repulsed I asked myself the same questions as Ashere.

After a lot of Why? and What would I like in a relationship? I understood better two things.

- What really made me happy. Also considering things from my own point of view, prioritizing reality to theory. Forgetting about amatonormative view. Was my vision of love idealized like a religion?

- What I though was really cool in a couple (which for me ended up being the deep platonic dimension).

I don't know if there is any shortcut or sure path to find this personal truth.

1910

31