Apathetic Echidna Posted October 13, 2017 Posted October 13, 2017 Sorry if this was already posted somewhere, it is an older article (2014) https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/8gdkyz/aromantics-amelia-tait-322 this line was just so great Quote If you think of romance as a personal interest, like golfing or bondage, you’ll understand that some people just aren’t interested.
techno Posted October 18, 2017 Posted October 18, 2017 I'm surprised an article about aromanticism existed in 2014 and I'm just seeing it now! I'm absolutely here for this visibility, although the tone got a bit patronizing when they started talking about when is "too young" to identify as aro, and the article seemed to look down on the idea of QPRs a lot... but then again, it is from 3 years ago.
Apathetic Echidna Posted October 18, 2017 Author Posted October 18, 2017 8 hours ago, techno-trashcan said: it is from 3 years ago. I gave the article a pass, especially about not refocusing after the 'too young' bit, because it is an older one, but seeing it does bring up the question: why are some of the more modern articles worse? But I am just glad that I could add something old but new!
Mark Posted October 20, 2017 Posted October 20, 2017 Wasn't too keep on the headline. because of the word "just". Also "They're never gonna fall in love—because they don't want to." Could be read as being more about choice than orientation. Theres the venn diagram with "satisfied with friendships". Other than that I think the article covers things well. Especially agree with what Diana had to say on the subject.
sarcastic kitten Posted October 20, 2017 Posted October 20, 2017 Super interesting ,it's kind if refreshing to see there were people interested enough in aromanticism, back in 2014, to wrote an article about it without saying nonsense. Thanks for the sharing
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.