Aromantic things

May 3, 2012 7:33 am
moarhelenplz:

lizziegoneastray:

…
okay, this pisses me the fuck off.
what, so as an asexual who does experience romantic attraction, I’m supposed to just let people think I don’t exist?  Wtf are you expecting from me here, just to not talk about my own experiences?  Since WHEN is debunking myths in favor of greater inclusion a BAD thing?
This is what I hate about the asexual community sometimes: talking about your own experiences without including a disclaimer about the existence and validity of other experiences is often considered “erasure.”  Sometimes it’s even called erasure when you do include the disclaimer!  And now you’re trying to tell me that by saying “HEY, BY THE WAY, I EXIST,” I’m somehow being negative towards aromanticism?  That by pointing out that asexuality and aromanticism are NOT the same thing, I’m somehow saying that it’s BAD to be aromantic?  Well what the fuck else am I supposed to do?
Ugh.  I hate this kind of shit.

No, it’s the way in which it’s done. When people use it in that exact format, asexuality =/= aromanticism, it is OFTEN done in response to someone else being an asshat about asexuality and saying how it’s just people who can’t love, oh they’re so cold, blah blah blah. Because people assume asexuals are also aromantic, you know this.
This is the same as when people cry out, “But we can love too!~” because it always, always means romantic love. Using romanticism as a way to prove how human asexuals are is horrible, because it’s saying aromantics aren’t human.
So no, this post isn’t saying OH PEOPLE POINTING OUT ROMANTIC ASEXUALS EXIST, HOW TERRIBAD. No, it is the way in which it is done, which is always done with bias towards the orientation of the person speaking.
Yes, aromantics do it too. They sit there and do the same shit to romantics.
People need to remember they’re taking an educating stance, and try to remove the bias, and instead of putting in a disclaimer, actually talk about that shit. Disclaimers mean nothing. None of this applies as when you’re talking about your personal experiences, or your experiences as a romantic asexual. You don’t need disclaimers or to talk about aromantics then, because it’s not generalised.
But people say asexuality =/= aromanticism, in a negative, biased way, during educational monologues, and that’s the problem. Just the say as some aromantics shame romantic asexuals in their own educational monologues.
That’s the problem. When educating, one should be discussing all things equally, fuck the disclaimers, fuck the oh yeah and there’s this too, nbd, education should be equal, not biased.
By which I mean to say, calm the crap down.

Thanks moarhelenplz, that´s exactly my point. I don´t mean to say that being romantic asexual is bad thing or I don´t like you (in fact I think the asexual community is awesome!) I meant what moarhelenplz already said.
I´m sorry cos I didn´t explained this better in the first place. 

moarhelenplz:

lizziegoneastray:

okay, this pisses me the fuck off.

what, so as an asexual who does experience romantic attraction, I’m supposed to just let people think I don’t exist?  Wtf are you expecting from me here, just to not talk about my own experiences?  Since WHEN is debunking myths in favor of greater inclusion a BAD thing?

This is what I hate about the asexual community sometimes: talking about your own experiences without including a disclaimer about the existence and validity of other experiences is often considered “erasure.”  Sometimes it’s even called erasure when you do include the disclaimer!  And now you’re trying to tell me that by saying “HEY, BY THE WAY, I EXIST,” I’m somehow being negative towards aromanticism?  That by pointing out that asexuality and aromanticism are NOT the same thing, I’m somehow saying that it’s BAD to be aromantic?  Well what the fuck else am I supposed to do?

Ugh.  I hate this kind of shit.

No, it’s the way in which it’s done. When people use it in that exact format, asexuality =/= aromanticism, it is OFTEN done in response to someone else being an asshat about asexuality and saying how it’s just people who can’t love, oh they’re so cold, blah blah blah. Because people assume asexuals are also aromantic, you know this.

This is the same as when people cry out, “But we can love too!~” because it always, always means romantic love. Using romanticism as a way to prove how human asexuals are is horrible, because it’s saying aromantics aren’t human.

So no, this post isn’t saying OH PEOPLE POINTING OUT ROMANTIC ASEXUALS EXIST, HOW TERRIBAD. No, it is the way in which it is done, which is always done with bias towards the orientation of the person speaking.

Yes, aromantics do it too. They sit there and do the same shit to romantics.

People need to remember they’re taking an educating stance, and try to remove the bias, and instead of putting in a disclaimer, actually talk about that shit. Disclaimers mean nothing. None of this applies as when you’re talking about your personal experiences, or your experiences as a romantic asexual. You don’t need disclaimers or to talk about aromantics then, because it’s not generalised.

But people say asexuality =/= aromanticism, in a negative, biased way, during educational monologues, and that’s the problem. Just the say as some aromantics shame romantic asexuals in their own educational monologues.

That’s the problem. When educating, one should be discussing all things equally, fuck the disclaimers, fuck the oh yeah and there’s this too, nbd, education should be equal, not biased.

By which I mean to say, calm the crap down.

Thanks moarhelenplz, that´s exactly my point. I don´t mean to say that being romantic asexual is bad thing or I don´t like you (in fact I think the asexual community is awesome!) I meant what moarhelenplz already said.

I´m sorry cos I didn´t explained this better in the first place. 

(Source: arothings, via h-azmat)

May 2, 2012 9:27 pm
boolglunk:

Why would it? It’s just saying that being asexual & being aromantic isn’t the same thing, which is 100% true. It’s not like it means one is better than the other. 

I don´t mean it´s not true. In fact I like when people tells that, cos there is so many sexual aromantics too.I just mean that when people say that all the time it gives a bit negative feeling. :P I´m sorry if my explanation is still strange…
(And sorry for my bad english!) 

boolglunk:

Why would it? It’s just saying that being asexual & being aromantic isn’t the same thing, which is 100% true. It’s not like it means one is better than the other. 

I don´t mean it´s not true. In fact I like when people tells that, cos there is so many sexual aromantics too.
I just mean that when people say that all the time it gives a bit negative feeling. :P I´m sorry if my explanation is still strange…

(And sorry for my bad english!) 

(Source: arothings)

7:45 pm April 30, 2012 9:29 am April 29, 2012 11:52 am April 28, 2012 8:28 am April 27, 2012 10:57 pm

moarhelenplz & missgvader started following you

omg two followers in, like, 4 minutes! Love you guys all ready. Thanks<3.

10:33 pm 10:17 pm