fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #4022 ]

[ SECRET POST #4022 ]

⌈ Secret Post #4022 ⌋

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

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

__________________________________________________

08.

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 45 secrets from Secret Submission Post #576.
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

The difference between friendship and romance. I'm aromantic so I only know the friendship aspect but from what I've observed the only difference appears to be the physical stuff. No one's been able to explain it in a way that makes sense.

Yeah, I'm aro/ace (but I ship like a mofo), and I have never been able to understand how romance can be separate from sexual attraction for some people. To me, romance is love or fondness plus sexual attraction. If you subtract the attraction, it's just platonic love/fondness.

I'm not arguing that other people are wrong for separating romance from sexual attraction, I just don't understand it myself - and not for lack of trying.

Romantic asexual here.

Ideally, for a romantic person, a life partner or possibly a child would be would be the #1 top priority person in your life. Even the bestest best of BFFs, no matter how much you platonically love them, is not, generally speaking, going to be in that position. Again generally speaking, it's also unrealistic to expect that you are the #1 priority person in your BFF's life, because they too would probably have a family of their own and you can't expect them to ditch their partner and family for you in a crisis or, again ideally speaking, be there for you your entire life above everyone else.

This doesn't mean you love the friend any less platonically. But they aren't beholden to you or you to them in the way you and a romantic partner would be to each other. The expectations and priority levels are are different, and intimacy and trust levels change to suit the above. There are things you could trust a life partner with that you couldn't trust a best friend with and vice versa, but if you were going to adopt them into your family, one would be as a spouse and the other would be more as a sister or brother, and there is definitely a difference in a sibling-like partnership or a spousal partnership, even if you remove sex from it.

I guess it's the difference between "BFF, I love you platonically and want you to be part of my life and vice versa for the rest of my life, but recognize that you have your own life and priorities and we are like two sisters with families of their own" and "romantic partner, I want our lives to intertwine and move forward as a joint venture with each other as top priorities for as long as this lasts."

Emotionally speaking, friendship is parallel lines, and romance is a double helix.

Yeah I think this is a pretty good explanation.

For me, romantic love and familial/platonic love are two different emotions. It's hard to describe the differences between them, but the differences exist and can't just be chalked up to "one involves sex and the other doesn't." (Which is an explanation I've seen a lot, but it doesn't even make sense, since people can feel sexual attraction to people they aren't in love with, and people can be in love with people they aren't sexually attracted to. And both of those scenarios are so common that your average person wouldn't find them surprising at all.)

I hate to say it because I don't want to sound like I'm shitting on friendships, but for me and I think for most people, romantic love is way more intense and generally more "important" because of that. Like you said, the priority levels are different.

I guess for me the biggest difference would be, with a friend my brain is saying "I like this person we should keep them around" and with romantic love my brain is making a fucking commitment and going "RIDE OR DIE MOTHERFUCKER".

NYART (actually I'm the anon below) and I would say it's not actually that romantic love is more intense or more important for me, I have friends I consider equally as important to me as my romantic partner. And I'm sure for some people, they care about friends more than romantic partners, and other people care about romantic partners more than friends - so there isn't really a given or set priority of importance for everyone.

I would say personally I experience it like, to a friend I might go 'I care deeply about you!' and to a romantic partner I would go 'I care deeply about having you in my life forever!' Which is a lot more... intertwined. I wouldn't ask something like that of a friend, but I would for someone I was romantically involved with.

The way I see it, you can love and care for a friend but you also accept (generally!) that they have their own lives, in their own way, at their own time. You make the best decisions for yourself and your life fairly independently of their life choices, though there can be a certain degree of influence.

A romantic partner is someone that you love and care for and would also be willing to integrate into your life, or alternatively, you'd be okay with radically restructuring your own future plans to put them and their wellbeing into it.

Case study: moving!

If I have a friend who is moving to like, New York, cool! That's great, I hope they have a good time there. Maybe I'm also considering moving to NY for a job and I might ask if they want to try renting a room together - we get along so it should be fun!

If I have a romantic partner who is moving to like, New York, oh boy. I'll need to start thinking about how to leave my job, and what kind of place we'll share together, and our shared finances, and how about pets, also are they okay with supporting me for a while as I look for a job? Can I support them in turn? And in the event I can't be by their side then, what about in the years to come, how long is this for -

It's not that I like or love the romantic partner MORE than the friend. I might not! It might be about equal degrees of like AND love. But romantic love is just sort of different from friend love.

Also, if we're getting into definitions, part of the reason this might be confusing to people is because 'friendship' and 'romantic partnership' describe like, how people relate to each other, but 'friendly' and 'romantically' describe how people BEHAVE at each other. So I am very friendly with my romantic partner, but I can easily (for fun and because it's nice) behave romantically with my friends.

MORE CASE STUDIES

Pets!

A conversation I'd have with a friend:

'Lol in future I want a dog'
'Oo what kind'
'Poodle I guess! Standard, but not the froofy haircut'
'I'd like a cat I think'
'Haha get a dog AND a cat'

A conversation I have literally had with a romantic partner:

'So what pets should we get'
'At least one dog/cat, NO BIRDS though'
'Yeah birds are like, eternal toddlers'
'Sob they live too long and require too much attention and i dont think we could keep up with a bird it'd be bored and sad'
'ID RATHER WE ADOPT A CHILD than get a bird, children GROW UP'

Like - one of these is clearly more intertwined. I would not plan a friend's pets out for them. I might give them advise, or tips, or put them in contact with people I know who have similar pets, but the final decision isn't up to me, it's up to them! But the pets a romantic partner and I have would be shared, so it's both of us involved.

Also, frankly I'm not sure what sex has to do with it? Like, friends have sex and stay friends, romantic partners could not have sex or live separately or away from each other and still be romantic partners. Like, if people can be friends with benefits, they can also totally be romantic partners WITHOUT benefits.

Also, frankly I'm not sure what sex has to do with it? Like, friends have sex and stay friends, romantic partners could not have sex or live separately or away from each other and still be romantic partners.

I don't think having sex is a determiner, but I think the desire to have sex is an inherent part of romantic feeling, for a lot of people.

Like, I could be not having sex with someone I felt romantically for, while still feeling romantically for them. But if I didn't want to have sex with them, for me that would be someone I didn't feel romantically for.

That's likely valid too, but what I meant is more that for a lot of people, sex with friends or finding someone sexually attractive or wanting to bang them doesn't necessarily lead to wanting to plan a life together with them or even marry or date them. So while for some people the link may certainly be there, I wouldn't say it's a given or the only way to define romance.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

[ SECRET POST #4022 ]

Re: Things you straight up do not get.

Re: Things you straight up do not get.

Re: Things you straight up do not get.

Re: Things you straight up do not get.

Re: Things you straight up do not get.

Re: Things you straight up do not get.

Re: Things you straight up do not get.

DA

Re: DA