Is this a QPR

[Guest Throwaway1232142]

I think I want a Qpr. I want a really close friend, also aroace, afab, roomate, who might sometimes "Expiriment" sexually. I.E. try sex, show eachother our Genatalia, see what a couple, especailly sexual couples, are like, but still be really close friends no matter the result. Is this a QPR?

[HelloThere]

Well qpr’s are really just non-romantic relationships, there’s nothing in the definition saying that it has to be non-sexual so label it as that if you want because that does fit the definition.

[Jot-Aro Kujo]

It’s not a QPR unless you and the other person involved have explicitly agreed to call it a QPR. The only thing that makes it a QPR is labeling it as such. 

[MulticulturalFarmer]

4 hours ago, Jot-Aro Kujo said:

It’s not a QPR unless you and the other person involved have explicitly agreed to call it a QPR. The only thing that makes it a QPR is labeling it as such. 

Is that "Are we in a QPR consent form" thing still on tumblr? There used to be one that broke it down and had nice pictures and everything.

Edited June 7, 2023 by MulticulturalFarmer
Added words

[Holmbo]

18 hours ago, HelloThere said:

Well qpr’s are really just non-romantic relationships, there’s nothing in the definition saying that it has to be non-sexual so label it as that if you want because that does fit the definition.

Aren't qpr generally non sexual though? It seems to me most people go by that definition. Because platonic relationship generally means non sexual and non romantic.

[HelloThere]

4 minutes ago, Holmbo said:

Aren't qpr generally non sexual though? It seems to me most people go by that definition. Because platonic relationship generally means non sexual and non romantic.

It’s really just lacking romance, sexual relationships can also be platonic, or can be labeled that way. They’re all just labels so it’s a completely personal choice to call it one.

[DeltaAro]

2 hours ago, Holmbo said:

Aren't qpr generally non sexual though? It seems to me most people go by that definition. Because platonic relationship generally means non sexual and non romantic.

QPRs aren't romantic in nature, that's all. It's neutral regarding sex.

Or maybe, phrased more carefully: QPRs were originally conceived to set arospec folks' closer relationships apart from romantic relationships.

Disclaimer: I personally don't really understand QPRs since from the outside they look way too romantic for me than I'm comfortable with.

2 hours ago, HelloThere said:

sexual relationships can also be platonic

Yes, though the rest of the world understands "platonic" very differently, i.e. it must be nonsexual.

[HelloThere]

16 minutes ago, DeltaAro said:

QPRs aren't romantic in nature, that's all. It's neutral regarding sex.

Or maybe, phrased more carefully: QPRs were originally conceived to set arospec folks' closer relationships apart from romantic relationships.

Disclaimer: I personally don't really understand QPRs since from the outside they look way too romantic for me than I'm comfortable with.

Yes, though the rest of the world understands "platonic" very differently, i.e. it must be nonsexual.

I still have some issues differentiating between a QPR and an actual relationship, after all the closeness can still exist so it just sounds like relationship minus kissing?

[Holmbo]

18 hours ago, DeltaAro said:

QPRs aren't romantic in nature, that's all. It's neutral regarding sex.

I don't feel there's a general consensus on that. When I used qpr to describe a fictional relationship several people on this forum replied they were confused why I used that because the characters had sex.

One of the first hits on Google for queer platonic relationship defines it as also non sexual. https://lgbtqia.fandom.com/wiki/Queerplatonic_relationship

I don't have any strong feeling about it myself because I don't find it a useful term for me personally, just noting that the definition seem to be a bit varied.

[DeltaAro]

4 hours ago, Holmbo said:

One of the first hits on Google for queer platonic relationship defines it as also non sexual. https://lgbtqia.fandom.com/wiki/Queerplatonic_relationship

I don't have any strong feeling about it myself because I don't find it a useful term for me personally, just noting that the definition seem to be a bit varied.

That's a new development, though. Like on the page you linked to, this requirement was inserted a year ago. See version from 29 April 2022.

[Jot-Aro Kujo]

Oh my god don't y'all be starting the whole "can QPRs involve sex" discourse again in 2023 my allo aro ass has had enough

[HelloThere]

Just now, Jot-Aro Kujo said:

Oh my god don't y'all be starting the whole "can QPRs involve sex" discourse again in 2023 my allo aro ass has had enough

Oh yeah, I just want that to stop, because the answer is YES. It’s just a label, it serves you not the other way around.

[DeltaAro]

30 minutes ago, HelloThere said:

Oh yeah, I just want that to stop, because the answer is YES. It’s just a label, it serves you not the other way around.

I guess, I'll never understand this line of reasoning.

Spoiler

‘When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean–neither more nor less.’
‘The question is,’ said Alice, ‘whether you can make words mean different things–that’s all.’
 ‘The question is,’ said Humpty Dumpty, ‘which is to be master–that’s all’

59 minutes ago, Jot-Aro Kujo said:

Oh my god don't y'all be starting the whole "can QPRs involve sex" discourse again in 2023 my allo aro ass has had enough

But you still have an opinion what the right answer should be, don't you?

[HelloThere]

5 minutes ago, DeltaAro said:

I guess, I'll never understand this line of reasoning.

  Hide contents

‘When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean–neither more nor less.’
‘The question is,’ said Alice, ‘whether you can make words mean different things–that’s all.’
 ‘The question is,’ said Humpty Dumpty, ‘which is to be master–that’s all’

But you still have an opinion what the right answer should be, don't you?

Yeah, it’s mostly the fighting that people are just done with.

[Jot-Aro Kujo]

57 minutes ago, DeltaAro said:

But you still have an opinion what the right answer should be, don't you?

I mean, yeah. I also have opinions on the right answer to questions like "should women be allowed to vote," that doesn't mean it's not a ridiculous topic to be bringing up lmfao

[HelloThere]

14 minutes ago, Jot-Aro Kujo said:

I mean, yeah. I also have opinions on the right answer to questions like "should women be allowed to vote," that doesn't mean it's not a ridiculous topic to be bringing up lmfao

Absolutely, yes.

[Holmbo]

9 hours ago, HelloThere said:

Oh yeah, I just want that to stop, because the answer is YES. It’s just a label, it serves you not the other way around.

Still it's useful to know what other people's understanding is of a word. One purpose of a label is to be a shortcut in communication.

For example if OP were to post on a dating site that they want a qpr different people will make different assumptions. They might be better of posting the longer explanation to actually connect with someone who's looking for the same thing

[DeltaAro]

On 6/9/2023 at 12:31 AM, Jot-Aro Kujo said:

I mean, yeah. I also have opinions on the right answer to questions like "should women be allowed to vote," that doesn't mean it's not a ridiculous topic to be bringing up lmfao

In my opinion, if an idea is still relatively common it's worth arguing about, no matter how wrong it is.

On 6/9/2023 at 7:53 AM, Holmbo said:

Still it's useful to know what other people's understanding is of a word. One purpose of a label is to be a shortcut in communication.

There's the implicit assumption that language encodes power relations and isn't just a neutral tool for communication.

On 6/9/2023 at 7:53 AM, Holmbo said:

For example if OP were to post on a dating site that they want a qpr different people will make different assumptions. They might be better of posting the longer explanation to actually connect with someone who's looking for the same thing

Such an argument can also be constructed regarding gender, e.g.: "you should always disclose your trans status on dating sites, since as a trans woman you may not fit other people's understanding of woman."

To which most users here would probably answer: "all the worse for those bad people who reject gender self-identification!"

On the other hand, the "standard picture" (implicit in your post) is that we have ideas which refer to the real world and words that represent the ideas.

Those two aspects of language are chronically conflated nowadays. And so it's often not clear if we talk about words, ideas, or the real world.

People get confused or feel manipulated, and productive discussions become very difficult.