Jump to content

Quoiromantic Definition


HotRamen
 Share

Recommended Posts

Recent posts, as well as my own thoughts on my identity, and the current, most popular definition that mostly pops up when people search Quoiromantic: "unable to tell the difference between romantic and platonic attraction" have finally pushed me to ask this question for wider discussion. Do we need a different definition of quoiromantic? or maybe a new word?. lately ive been feeling that the attraction that i sometimes feel for people can't easily be put into these categories of "romantic" or "platonic" but its not that i cant tell the difference between these two because i can i just feel like they dont really apply to me. At first I thought that I felt no romantic attraction everytime i described my ideal relationship to someone they would say its platonic. Then when i went to college and was involved more in Queer spaces more people said stuff like that can be romantic if you want it to be. But basically it all comes down to what I want to call this attraction I sometimes feel and to be honest I don't care what its called  as long as my needs get met. So second question based on this experience could i be quoiromantic? Second question what do yall think about "feels attraction that can't easily be placed into the categories of platonic or romantic" as one of the definitions for Quoiromantic or would this need a different word?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, HotRamen said:

"feels attraction that can't easily be placed into the categories of platonic or romantic"

I don't think that's necessarily a good definition; it's too vague? Like...there's lots of types of attraction that don't fall under platonic or romantic, such as alterous.  Like, I know I don't feel romantic attraction so I identify as just aromantic, but I do feel other types of attraction which don't fit neatly into those categories and instead is a weird mix of platonic, alterous, and sensual.

Also, I wanted to link back to other thread and context provided there by @Coyote and @Mark
(am unsure how well quoting thing from different thread works, so figured would go ahead and post links)

On 4/9/2019 at 6:01 PM, Coyote said:

Since it sounds like some of your pages will involve definitions of terms -- I have a request to make. Will you please, please, please make sure not to define quoiromantic as "can't tell the difference between platonic and romantic feelings"? The linked post has some detailed information on its history and some suggestions for better phrasing. And more generally, I would like it if glossary makers at large would more regularly take umbrella crunching into account.

 

links: quoiromantic , umbrella crunching

Both of these are kinda long.....the first link seems to have a lot of history about the origin of the term and how it has changed over time; the second link is....about how terms have been redefined?

 

Quote: "We have and do and will need umbrella terms, not just specific terms, to hold open that sorely necessary space for gray areas of feeling, relationships, and identity. Crunch down one term, and somebody will eventually make a new one to take its place, starting the cycle over again. But we shouldn’t have to start over again. We should get to build on what we have instead of reinventing the wheel every three years with whole new terms to do the exact same semantic work."

 

(From what I understand, this is basically saying that we keep taking umbrella terms that are intended as umbrellas and we assign them highly specific definitions which results in us needing to make even more terms, which overall is confusing and unproductive)
 

5 hours ago, Mark said:

That's a very useful history, since the original definition of quoiromantic (and quoisexual) makes a lot more sense. At least to me.
Unfortunately the other definition appears on Urban DictionaryLGBTA Wiki and Aromantics Wiki. To name a few.

It appears that quoiplatonic does not, currently, exist.
How's this?
quoiplatonic; “what even is 'platonic attraction'? Divide by zero. Error 404 Plato not found”

Which seems to fit with the Note on Quoi

links: Note on Quoi (this is a tumblr post which seems to be on the same subject of the origin of quoi and how it has been redefined; this is a shorter format).

Definition from LGBTA Wiki: "Quoiromantic (also called WTFromantic or whatromantic) is a romantic orientation on the aromantic spectrum. Quoiromantic is an orientation for those who can't tell the difference between platonic and romantic attraction, those who are unsure if they experience romantic attraction or not, are unable to understand or define romantic attraction, or for those who are struggling to find another term."

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, HotRamen said:

But basically it all comes down to what I want to call this attraction I sometimes feel and to be honest I don't care what its called  as long as my needs get met. So second question based on this experience could i be quoiromantic?

 

What you have described in your post is absolutely something that "quoiromantic" is meant to be broad enough to hold. I won't tell you what you are, but the word is open to you.

 

The post Magni linked has some more links to people talking about personal reasons for identifying as quoiro/wtfromantic, if you're interested. For what it's worth, I've been identifying as quoiro for ~4-5 years, I know Cor (the coiner) personally, and I am pretty invested in dissuading people from simplifying "quoi" down to "can't tell the difference," which both of us (Cor & I) have objections to -- not least of which because it pushes us out of our own identities!

 

Here are some definitions which I think are better than the "can't tell" definition, based on Cor's own words:

  • applying romantic orientation doesn’t make sense here
  • not grokking romance, romantic attraction, romantic orientation
  • actively disidentifying with [any of the above] as sensible/applicable categories for yourself

And co also wrote

  • it’s open for everyone who finds it useful! :3 and please feel free to adapt its definition to your purposes as well
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Magni said:

I don't think that's necessarily a good definition; it's too vague? Like...there's lots of types of attraction that don't fall under platonic or romantic, such as alterous.  Like, I know I don't feel romantic attraction so I identify as just aromantic, but I do feel other types of attraction which don't fit neatly into those categories and instead is a weird mix of platonic, alterous, and sensual.

The reason I suggested quoiplatonic is that the concept of "platonic attraction" dosn't work for me. Nor does squishalterous, queerplatonic, etc.
I found some posts by Queer As Cat which also question the notion of “romantic” vs “platonic” as a dichotomy.
However the term "platonic friend(ship)" does make sense to me as describing a kind of relationship which is sexual, sensual or physical. (Non romantic by implication of the friend part rather than the platonic part. With it being possible for relationships to be both friendship and romantic. Including something called "romantic friendship".) An alternative adjective being "vanilla". Maybe this is different from the way others define "platonic friend".
 

I don't really have a good terms to describe attractions I experience which are not sexual, sensual or aesthetic. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...