techno

@Dodecahedron314 I think I may have found it for you, is this it? http://theasexualityblog.tumblr.com/post/146220597456/the-actual-meaning-of-the-word-aplatonic

This! Like... you're literally just changing how your labeling your relationship and doing more romantically-coded things. Why should that make you treat each other differently? Ugh that confuses me.

@comedyofaros consequently, not knowing how to turn them down and not hurt and lose them (if they're like a close friend) without coming out...

Why is it that, once people get into a romantic relationship, they only want to talk to their friends if they're significant other isn't around? Like, why do friends become second best? Why do people get back together even after they've had a really bad breakup and can never have a healthy relationship? WHAT ARE THEY GAINING Why do couples who are really excessive with PDA never understand that they're making everyone else around them feel weird? Do they just not pay attention??????? ? ? ? ?

Just joined! I'm techno-trashcan there too.

My female family members were saying how in high school they never had many female friends... I didn't get this because most of my friends are girls, so I thought maybe I just had really cool friends (and I do!) until they said, "yeah, they always stab you in the back as soon as you get a boyfriend!" So I smirked to myself. Aros have more fun.

I was raised Catholic, but when away from my family I choose not to label my religious beliefs both because they are rather nebulous and because of my own personal philosophical beliefs regarding religion. Mostly I guess I'm still vaguely Christian in some way or another, and frankly I would never come out as aro/ace to any super-religious Christian that I know (for all the same reasons as you guys mentioned already). The kinds of Christians who wouldn't accept aro and ace people are the kinds of Christians that I don't like; they're dividing people and spreading hatred when the way of God is supposed to be about love and peace, and those kinds of people in my opinion don't deserve to know something that personal about me. I get by with just saying "I'm not really interested in relationships" when confronted, I brush off the inevitable "you'll change your mind someday" because we've all heard it a thousand times, and then I move on.

Being totally oblivious if other people have romantic feelings for me...

Disclaimer: This got really long. Oops? I'll put a tl;dr at the end in case you don't wanna read the whole thing. I think the problem comes from -- and correct me if I'm wrong -- the tendency of many aros and non-aros alike to use the word "queerplatonic" as meaning "like a romantic relationship without the romance" or a "soft romo" or "romance light" so to speak, instead of using it as I believe it was originally coined, to refer to bonds of friendship that are different from what many romantics see as friendship. Because we can pretty much agree that many romantics view friendship as a far more casual, less exclusive or less important thing than many aromantics do (obviously I'm generalizing here, but if we're looking at it from a broad perspective). We have words like "queerplatonic" and "squish" to emphasize that platonic feelings are of value and importance and that platonic bonds can be very strong and deep. It's to show romantics that when we think of friendship, often we're thinking of something stronger than the more casual acquaintanceship that many romantics consider friendship. Because we all feel stronger bonds to some people than we do others, no matter what kind of bonds those may be, and words like "queerplatonic" establish that strong bonds don't have to be romantic, that there isn't an invisible ceiling between friendship and romance, that they are two separate things. And "queerplatonic" shouldn't even be reserved for partnerships. Who ever said you had to be someone's partner to have strong platonic feelings for them that don't fit the mold of what romantics call friendship? We all define words differently, and I personally define queerplatonic as really strong platonic feelings/love/attraction that's different from casual friendship. That's just me. But regardless of how we define it as individuals we can't confine it to this box of being basically dating without the romance, because that's really ignoring the vast spectrum of different types of bonds people can have and the forms they can take. The problem arises when we start to use these words not to describe something unique but to instead defend ourselves by trying to make ourselves seem more "normal" to romantics. It is not our job to conflate our experience with theirs in order to make them more comfortable with our existence. None of this "I'm aromantic, but I can still form queerplatonic relationships which is like dating without romance!" Being aromantic is beautiful, not something that has to be made up for by trying to act like we're anything like romantics. Let's change that to "I'm aromantic, and sometimes I form really strong platonic bonds with people that are unlike casual friendship. Sometimes we call that 'queerplatonic.'" tl;dr yeah, in some ways we dig ourselves into a hole by using these words, but not because of the words themselves, but because of the way we use them to conflate our experiences with those of romantics, instead of using them to define something all our own. We can combat unconscious amatonormativity by embracing our experiences instead of trying to make them seem worthy by comparing them to romantic ones. Because being aromantic is nothing to apologize for. EDIT: For some more reading about amatonormativity and queerplatonic friendship, this article sums it up pretty well, and is where I got a lot of my inspiration from for all of the above.

Ehh I like lowkey ship stuff? But not really romantically... like, on occasion, I'll be like, "yeah, I can get behind that!" but not in the way that fandoms are like really aggressive about it? Mostly I just look at characters and I'm like "their friendship/story/etc. is really interesting and I want to see more of that" you know? Though I feel like even when I ship stuff "romantically" it's still pretty platonic by most people's standards...

I remember like, never really having a crush on anybody?? And I didn't think that was weird until some stuff happened that kind of sparked my aro discovery... I've always liked to write, but I've never been good at writing romance, the few times I tried it. It was always just like, they were really close friends, and sometimes they kissed. And it was never the main focus of what I was writing, it was just kind of what you were supposed to do?? Elementary and middle school was a weird time. Like, I think there was ONE time I thought I had a "crush" on some kid (I was like 5 years old) but I really just thought he was nice and wanted a friend lmao I didn't understand crushes for the longest time... it was weird.