So, its Aromantic Awareness Week

BTW my brother doesn't like romantic relationships. He had one once. (ish) With a lovely lesbian who is now happily married and sprogged up to her wife. It served them both well at the time. He got to try out a relationship (didn't suit) and she got to decide to tell everyone later.

No one gives a tiny shit he is, and will remain, single.

Believe me when I tell you I got more shit of all kinds about my life choices by stupid relatives than he did. And none of it was abuse.

I'm honestly embarrassed for Stonewall. And curious about the average age of its employees. Surely anyone over the age of 30, no matter how much koolaid they've drunk, is thinking, deep down, WTAF?

In some countries, forced marriages of aromantic/asexual women inevitably lead to rape and abuse.

What the actual fuck? What am I reading? This makes me so fucking angry. We need aromantics on a feminism board to tell us that forced marriage is bad? Do we fuck.

I'm not so sure people are actually oppressed for being aro, but there is an element of feeling they've made a choice about it rather than being born that way. But it must be irritating for them - imagine if you were happily in a faithful relationship and people kept saying, "Are you having an affair yet?" "Oh, you'll change your mind about staying faithful after a few years."

Well instant sexual attraction does exist, as much as deep and abiding friendship. It's perfectly possible to meet someone and fancy them hugely right off the bat and it be mutual. It's never happened to me, but Gillian Anderson hasn't met me yet.

FWIW, my best friend of many, many years is as close to me as any romantic partner, and there's never been a hint of anything sexual between us. She's the first person I phone when I'm upset or happy or have news.

The longest, most meaningful relationship in my life is with my best friend.. I've known her and loved her since we were 9 years old and, other than my DC, is the one person in this world I would kill or be killed for.

It is not romantic love, it is platonic love. It is strong and unbreakable and probably deeper than the romantic love I have felt in my life, but doesn't deserve a bloody label or make me some special person who is experiencing life in a way that makes me stand out and be oppressed. It is not an identity.

Any woman not in a romantic relationship is asked those questions... every single last one whether they're straight, gay, bi or any of the other million labels. It is not oppression - it's just how society sees women.

Gah - this just baffles me!

This thread is cracking me up, lol! No, they get married upon sailing back to the mainland. Prospero arranges for a nice engagement celebration on the beach though, and explicitly tells Ferdinand not to take Miranda's virginity before the "sanctimonious ceremonies" are completed.

In the Tempest, don't Miranda and Ferdinand get married as soon as possible on the beach?

If Miranda had had access to a lovehoney catalogue and been able to order things online, it would all have turned out very differently, I'm telling you.

When people hear 'platonic', they think: 'oh, they're just friends' (implication: relationship is non-sexual but not as deep or serious as committed romantic partnership).

I don't - honestly sounds way more serious to me as is, rather than bolting 'queer', or anything else , on front. I've already mention a really quite common long term platonic partnership type - pairs of unmarried siblings.

I work in HR. If our entire workforce became Aromantics next week and stopped shagging each other I'd be flipping delighted. Just saying.

@ErrolTheDragon When people hear 'platonic', they think: 'oh, they're just friends' (implication: relationship is non-sexual but not as deep or serious as committed romantic partnership). One's office colleague can be a 'platonic' friend; so can one's next-door neighbour, or one's yoga class friend. One does not necessary have a deep emotional soulmate-like relationship with all of these 'platonic' friends. i.e. In common usage, 'platonic' only means non-sexual/non-romantic, but nothing beyond that suggesting deep intimacy and level of commitment similar to a romantic partnership. The 'queer' prefix is meant to indicate a deep bond beyond a 'just' platonic friendship, one that conveys life-partner-like status. And such partnerships are NOT 'so completely and utterly normal' as you seem to think. (How many platonic best friends do you know these days who live together as working adults, sharing a life and commitment similar to romantic couples, and perhaps raising children together? Flatmates sharing a house / student accommodations, etc early in their careers before 'settling down' doesn't count, of course.)

I honestly think the 'queer' prefix is really daft...perhaps 'superplatonic' or 'ultraplatonic' would be etymologically more sensible alternatives to convey that 'more-than-just-platonic' relation? Better yet, let's get rid of all strange suffixes and teach society to recognise that 'platonic' relationships can be just as deep and important as romantic ones?

In the Tempest, the salient issue may be that Miranda isn't asexual. She's seen something that isn't Caliban or her father and she is jumping it as soon as possible!

I split from my abusive ex after 14 years. For the first two years there were a few individuals who would always ask me if I'd met anyone. It certainly wasn't abuse. It was misguided kindness. They wanted me to have that second chance of having a proper partner. I've been single since I left my ex, it's been ten years. I have no desire to have a romantic relationship, but I don't label myself aromantic! It's just a choice, as others have said personality. I'm really happy being single and people accept that now it they have given up asking!

Lol this is the one issue I have with the Tempest (it's not funny enough to compensate like Midsummer Night's Dream). I mean, the girl marries the first guy (besides her father) she ever sees? Seriously? She doesn't even know what kinds of people are out there in the world to make an informed choice!

If your limited romantic options are your Dad (ewww) and a newly arrived NotyourDad, you’re going to jump at the NotyourDad option aren’t you?

A lot of the grievances that this group seem to face have nothing to do with this identity and everything to do with being a woman in a patriarchal society.

There should be some kind of movement...
Exactly.
Ive been single for 5 years.
I get asked rude stupid questions and comments all the time.
Its not my identity ffs.
And im not oppressed by people asking me if I've 'met anyone yet' and telling me I'll 'find someone'
Honestly it does get quite irritating and some people do seem to find my single status offensive or threatening in some way.
Its still not an identity that needs a flag, answering nosy questions is not oppressive.
Being a poor single mother sometimes is.
Nobody made us a flag for that.

Ah. Bad news, mesdames. You've all given me an opportunity to talk about something that's been bothering me about a subtext to posts on tumblr and twitter (I know, I know, if I go there I can only blame myself when I see something that annoys me).

That forced marriage mostly affects aromantic non-binary peoplr, as if those boring straight, cis, whatever women fall in love with anything male in a suit, after the marriage ceremony.

No. Life is not a Mills and Boon novel, where the women are always falling passionately in love with men they're married to for Reasons.

Female people suffer when they are oppressed. All of them. Extra strands of oppressive circumstances may make situations for one woman worse than it is for another, but we need to stop coming up with excuses why some particular category of women can have their oppression disregarded.

I asked a man once if he'd considered prostituting himself to pay his student loan off, after a couple of his remarks about women having it easy. He exclaimed, with horror, that he couldn't because he wasn't gay. As if being a straight woman naturally means that you can turn on arousal for any straight man who offers you money, regardless of how poor his personal hygiene is.

And the tumblr blogs about aromantic oppression remind me exactly of that.

I love green curry too! Are we curromantic? Is there a flag?

Must, not may in final sentence.

I think the only real importance of having the special term "queerplatonic" is a way to signify to the rest of the world that a particular platonic relationship is just as serious as a romantic one would be, and that the platonic partners ought to be treated with the same respect and have the same legal rights (which they don't!) as romantic partners.

Why on Earth not just use the descriptor which has always been available, ie 'platonic'? No need to bolt 'queer' onto something so completely and utterly normal. Actually I agree re partnership rights; probably the largest truly discriminated against group, the only platonic but deeply committed partners who have no option of civil partnerships are cohabiting siblings. Couples who've lived in a loving relationship all their lives who are barred because of the strange assumption that partnerships may be sexual.

The abuse doesn't come from being seen in a platonic relationship, to be clear. It comes from family, friends, colleagues, etc constantly asking you why you won't marry, saying that marriage completes a woman, that all humans fall in love and to not do so is proof that something is seriously wrong with you.

Abuse? That’s not abuse, it’s just fucking rude. It’s also not abuse when the same thing is said to people without children (children complete you, you don’t know love until you’ve had a child, why don’t you have children yet etc etc).
Rude and insensitive is not the same as abuse and oppression.
To be clear. I absolutely think those things shouldn’t be said to people, I just don’t think abuse is the word to be used here.

[quote Star555]@BuntingEllacott The abuse doesn't come from being seen in a platonic relationship, to be clear. It comes from family, friends, colleagues, etc constantly asking you why you won't marry, saying that marriage completes a woman, that all humans fall in love and to not do so is proof that something is seriously wrong with you. Doctors and therapists misdiagnose you and tell you that you are abnormal and that you need to be fixed. In some countries, forced marriages of aromantic/asexual women inevitably lead to rape and abuse.[/quote]
It's not being aromantic that's the problem then. It's being a single female.

Star555, you're talking to a woman who was raped in religious conversion therapy. Tread carefully.

@BuntingEllacott The abuse doesn't come from being seen in a platonic relationship, to be clear. It comes from family, friends, colleagues, etc constantly asking you why you won't marry, saying that marriage completes a woman, that all humans fall in love and to not do so is proof that something is seriously wrong with you. Doctors and therapists misdiagnose you and tell you that you are abnormal and that you need to be fixed. In some countries, forced marriages of aromantic/asexual women inevitably lead to rape and abuse.