fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #3254 ]

[ SECRET POST #3254 ]

⌈ Secret Post #3254 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

__________________________________________________

08.

__________________________________________________

09.

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 029 secrets from Secret Submission Post #465.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Probably??? Idk, all I know is that after I was told that asexual straight people are considered part of the LGBTQ+ spectrum, I put my hands up in the air and decided anything's possible.

person from below

Nah, I think it would still be "queerplatonic" because it's not the non-straight meaning of queer, but the original "weird/strange" meaning.

Not to say I don't think the word is stupid, though. I've seen some people use "quasiplatonic" instead which I think probably fits the concept they're trying to go for better.

Aahh that makes sense, but it also makes me wonder why they wouldn't use another synonym for strange. God knows there's plenty of them out there.

I have to say that I like "quasiplatonic" more myself. It definitely does a better job of fitting the concept.

I feel like there are two definitions that I've read of "queerplatonic" that I think describe two different things.

There are the cases where the people are basically just close friends and in those situations, it's like "you want to be considered queer because your best friend is someone of the same sex? Really?" I think they just want attention.

But on the other hand, there's the relationships that are what I would consider romantic ones, but people consider them "queerplatonic" for whatever reason (because they're not "traditionally" romantic with flowers and fairy tale Disney crap, or because they're not sexual). In that case, if the relationship is with someone of the same sex, I could see the person identifying as queer, or at least think it would make some level of sense if they did.

I think a large part of it is definitely a semantic issue. I mean, I've read about so many supposedly "aromantic" asexual people describing their ideal relationship, which sounds exactly like a romantic relationship, but they don't want to call it that for some reason, which...I guess goes back to the wanting attention thing.

I don't know, it's kind of confusing. And I guess it depends on how exactly you define what falls under queer (do asexual people who are romantically interested in the same sex count?). But a large part of it...yeah, people want attention.

The second definition you gave makes me think that the use of the word "queer" is justified in instances were it is a homosexual partnership of sorts, so thank you for phrasing it in a way that makes sense! And I agree, it really is an issue of semantics, probably more than anything else. Then again, I'm the type of person that tries to approach challenges from a linguistic perspective, so I'm definitely biased in saying that it's largely something to do with semantics.

I don't know, it's kind of confusing. And I guess it depends on how exactly you define what falls under queer (do asexual people who are romantically interested in the same sex count?).

That's probably another issue with it, as well. Asexuality seems to not be very clear, even within the ace community. It's kinda the reason why I gave up trying to understand sexual orientation, to be honest.

Yeah, where it's a relationship that's basically exactly like a sexual romantic one, just minus the sex, and it's between two people of the same sex, I think saying they're queer (or gay, or whatever word they want to use) and part of the LGBTQ+ community makes sense, since that's how the relationship will be perceived by others and they will most likely face the same issues that gay people do.

And I agree, it really is an issue of semantics, probably more than anything else. Then again, I'm the type of person that tries to approach challenges from a linguistic perspective, so I'm definitely biased in saying that it's largely something to do with semantics.

I agree. Even in this thread there are people using different definitions of the same word, or using different words to describe the same thing, so it's kind of hard to not think it's a semantic issue. It just seems to vary based on the individual person's own interpretation, which makes it hard to discuss when two people are talking about different concepts but using the same word for them, but I guess that's just how it is, especially when it comes to something as complicated as sexuality.

That's probably another issue with it, as well. Asexuality seems to not be very clear, even within the ace community. It's kinda the reason why I gave up trying to understand sexual orientation, to be honest.

It's not clear at all. There's the "official" definition which I think is kind of vague and hard to even define, and then there are the other definitions outside of that, and people use so many different ones. And just in general when it comes to sexual orientation, there are all these different terms, and people have different definitions of them and apply them in inconsistent ways...it makes things unnecessarily complicated. I've pretty much given up understanding, too.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

[ SECRET POST #3254 ]

Re: Question about a thread from yesterday...

Re: Question about a thread from yesterday...

Re: Question about a thread from yesterday...

Re: Question about a thread from yesterday...

Re: Question about a thread from yesterday...

Re: Question about a thread from yesterday...