So, its Aromantic Awareness Week

[lionheart]

twitter.com/i/status/1363843446616719363

I've read around (a little) but I'm still not sure why this constitutes an identity to be championed by Stonewall etc.

Anyone shed any light on this and on the language (spectrum; allies) ...?

I’m finding this a bit baffling - I mean, I can absolutely understand the concept that some people have little or no romantic feelings.

But I don’t really understand why Stonewall is championing it. I find it difficult to believe that aromantic people face the sort of discrimination that someone who’s openly gay or lesbian might.

And surely if the platonic partners really, really want the same rights as romantic partners, they could have get married or have a civil partnership anyway?

But we really need to push back against slightly annoying things like someone assuming you will pair off one day when you are happy being single forever being termed 'oppression'. It's a dilution that reduces the significance of the realities of oppression.

Yes. This.

I'm for not being annoying and trying to fix up dates for people who are happy single. I'm against making up finer and finer categories of label for subtle degrees of does want sex doesn't want sex has sex but doesn't feel sexual attraction feels sexual attraction but doesn't feel romantic attraction feels romantic attraction but doesn't want sex, when they can't even agree themselves what it all means.

How's about everyone just says whether they are looking for a relationship, who they want a relationship with, and what kind of relationship they're looking for, and everyone else just takes their word for it? Seems a whole bunch simpler.

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...

Being lesbian, did you also feel the same about Twelfth Night?

I actually have a very bizarre relationship with romantic relationships in arts and visual media - as I grew up in the 80's and became aware of sexuality/romance, I ended up transposing a lot of my feelings into male characters, because same sex relationships were nigh-on invisible. So I still tend to find heterosexual representation quite compelling because I always manage to 'feel' the way the bloke does in romance stories. It's only as I've got older that I've realized that the way I felt about Han Solo, for example, that other people called a crush, was actually me wanting to be him, with all that swagger and confidence, and permission to have Princess Leia be in love with me.

Everyone is complicated and a bit weird once you dig in to it.

@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.

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

[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.

@BuntingEllacott

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

I'm so sorry to hear that! Nothing can erase that pain and trauma, but I hope life has been kinder to you afterwards. Thank you for your bravery and strength to speak out about it.

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.

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.

Must, not may in final sentence.

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

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.

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.

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?

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!

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!

@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?

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

@BettyFilous

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?

Lol I would have checked him out but waited to get to the mainland and check out other men before saying 'I do!' to the first one right away! Too bad Tinder didn't exist back then...

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.

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.

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.

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!