#QPRs

[alterouslyinlove]

oh to live with your qpp. oh to be in separate rooms or bunk beds but always join each other if we need to. oh to dance in the kitchen and make meals together. oh to cuddle while watching a movie. oh to have our time to our selves but still be close to each other. oh to be able to say i love you irl and any time you want. oh to own a cat together. oh to go grocery shopping together. oh to sit on the porch and watch the stars together. oh to simply be with one another. wouldn’t that be great.

[klavierpanda]

"QPRs and other non-romantic committed relationships are not inherently amatonormative because there existence challenges amatonormativity" and "the way that some people frame QPRs as inherently more than friends is recycling amatonormative rhetoric like 'they must be in a romantic relationship or at least a QPR because friends don't do that' and is no more helpful" are statements that can co-exist.

There are phrases like "romantic relationships for aros" that completely miss the point of QPRs and frames it like aros need to make up for not experiencing romantic attraction (at the same level as allos). Ignoring the way that some people treat QPRs and other non-romantic committed relationships as a stand in or a substitute for romantic relationships is ignoring the hurt this causes non-partnering people.

Notice the nuance in what I'm saying. I'm not saying that QPRs are amatonormative. I am saying that the way some people talk about them is. Also notice I'm not talking on an individual level, this isn't about people who feels their qpps are more important than their friends. I firmly believe everyone has the right to choose what relationships are important to them and how important they are. I am talking about people who make generalising statements that do a disservice to the point of QPRs and other non-romantic committed relationships and harms non-partnering people

[millionsfags]

"queerplantonic just means friends" well I dont know about you but if I bought a house with one of my friends, we took each other to visit our families on holidays, sleep in the same bed, and committed to sharing our lives to each other, I believe most people would assume that's a result of romantic feelings.

hence why there is terminology to describe that kind of relationship in the absence of romance. thank you.

[acexualien]

[themostfangtastic]

me resisting the aromantic urge to say “thats cringe” every time someone mentions being in a relationship (i am also in a relationship)

[our-polyamorous-experience]

my polyamorous experience is being aroace but having three queer platonic partners

I'll let you in on a little secret, anon: I'm also on the aroace spectrum but ive got a partner, three friends with benefits, and one queerplatonic partner.

[our-arospec-experience]

Queer Platonic Relationships:

A queerplatonic relationships is a close non-inherently sexual, non-romantic relationship that is beyond what most would consider to be a friendship. It consists of emotional commitment and prioritization that is typically seen in a romantic relationship without being romantic. People in queerplatonic relationships may be of any gender or sexual identity.

(https://lgbtqia.fandom.com/wiki/Aromantic_spectrum)

If you need more information @our-queerplatonic-experience is a great blog to go to!

[notabled-noodle]

it’s called a “queer platonic relationship” because it’s a relationship that is unusual from a conventional viewpoint. it’s not queer as in “all people who are in them are LGBTQ+ somehow”

you could be allocishet and still want a QPR, and that’s fine… it would still be a queer relationship even if the people within the relationship are not queer themselves

the whole point of a QPR is to have a word that allows people to openly embrace the unusual nature of their relationship. the specifics of the relationship can be anything you like. as long as you feel that your relationship is outside the amanormative ideals, you’re allowed to call it a QPR*

*in communication with your partner(s) of course

[nayadefenix]

fandoms could add more ''ships'' to QPRs Seriously, it's not just romance that has to be there, normalize QPRs ships!!

[noa-de-cajou]

My brainrotting ass playing the sweet demo of Our Life: Now and Forever after talking my partners and metamour into buying Slay The Princess like a lil bitch

[alterouslyinlove]

i love qprs. its just so anti rules. like we do what we want. we are best friends we are lovers we are all of it. i feel like platonic and romantic relationships are just so specific and rigid (it doesn’t have to be but it mainly is) so qprs being a thing is so freeing. one day we can be homeboys and the next we can be sitting in the candlelight with a nice meal. we do what we want. its pretty punk if you think about it.

[klavierpanda]

Not so friendly that two people can't accidentally be in a qpr and not know it. Qprs are committed relationships that you need to both agree to be in.

Yes, upon learning the term you can both decided that that is very similar to how your relationship is but you have to both agree. It's a subtle point but consider saying the same thing but replacing it with a romantic relationship. You can't accidentally be in a romantic relationship, just like you can't accidentally be in a qpr

[aro-bird]

There's something just so frustrating with the aro and ace communities with people either constantly focusing on getting relationships or trying to find some sort of replacement for allo relationships. It's not directly said, but a lot of posts comes with it the implication that QPRs are a way to replace allosexual alloromantic relationships.

On one hand, I get it. It's a different way of experiencing relationships from what is expected of our allonormative and amatonormative society and that's absolutely revolutionary to redefine what is a committed relationship based on your own terms in a completely aspec way, but I do think there should be some self-reflection here. There's a lot of people just yearning for a partner whether it be a queer platonic one or otherwise or people venting about how they want a relationship so bad or how they'll forever be alone because they're aro and/or ace or within the aspec and it's honestly such a downer to see so many aspec people who are upset with simply being aspec.

Why do you want a qpr or any kind of partnership exactly? Do you truly want to pursue a relationship because it's your authentic desire to be with someone or do you only want a relationship to try to achieve a sort of acceptable normalcy to the rest of society? Are you truly unfulfilled unless you have a live-in partner that would support you in similar ways as a marriage or are you simply responding to amatonormative expectations?

I guess this is one of the tougher questions that aspecs have to deal with and it doesn't help that existing as a single person in society is deemed as weird, strange, and even lonely. It also doesn't help that society is actively harder to live in as a single individual in a practical way as well seeing as single-income households struggle to meet basic needs. That isn't even getting into how much amatonormativity is such an inescapable force that makes it extremely hard to unlearn.

I guess for anyone still reading this, try to reflect. Is getting a partner really what you want for yourself or is it simply a desire to fulfill amatonormative expectations?

[justablah56]

my two best friends: *decide to go on a date* /romantic

me, aro-ace: wow I cant believe you guys are hanging out without me :(

[fallenrain40]

i was thinking about shadowroot recently and realized how much i love this pairing tbh, however, i personally see them as QPRs! though i don't mind seeing them as romantic too, i just really like the idea of aroace shadowsight and like to see QPR ships explored more! but, I also don't mind not shipping them, and just seeing them as friends <3 SO. I wanna know how everyone else feels on them! POLL TIME. (pls reblog for larger sample size btw)

[aro-culture-is]

Do you think an aroace person and a het person can be in a qpr together? Or does the “queer” in queer-platonic rule that out do you think

I mean obv anyone can be anything and that’s valid of them, but like does the label still stand? Thank u besties

i think this is sorta two separate questions: for one, yeah anyone can be in any type of relationship in terms of like, go for it, anything stands. in terms of the label "queerplatonic":

personally, i think if a het person is willing to be in a relationship and call it queer, they're already a better ally to queer folks than gay conservatives imho. they're cool with me.

there has been some previous discussion around a framing of "quasi-platonic" for qprs involving cis-heteroromantic-heterosexual folks, but honestly i think it's silly. the relationship itself is queer, the style of relationship is not going to be treated as more valid and less queer by the broader amatonormative society, and i honestly don't feel like "quasi" addresses the nature of the relationship well at all for some forms of queerplatonic relationships.

that said, I don't experience queerplatonic attraction, and I haven't seen this discussion in a while, so it's possible there's been some developments in communities that talk more about this kind of stuff. if others have more thoughts, feel free to contribute!