#aplaphobia

[the-indigo-symphony]

Honestly, I think a lot of people just don't realize how their social interactions, worldviews, etc. are soaked in friendship. Or at least the assumption of friendship. And I think this is in part due to how it's always framed as "just" friendship. Oh yeah it's "just" friendship, we're "just" friends, it's not like having friends is seen as integral to health and morality, it's not like everyone is assumed to have friends that play a large part in their life, it's not like people react poorly if you don't have friends or don't want friends or dare to show even the slightest exhaustion with the way that friendship is treated as a necessary component of being a good person, a healthy person, or even a person at all. Why would a person bother thinking about friendship and questioning the constant assumption of it, anyway? It's not like something that is assumed to be universal and integral to the human experience could ever have any significance.

To that end, I think a lot of people haven't really challenged this notion of "just friends" nearly as much as they think they have. You can't unlearn all your attitudes towards something just by giving it more importance in your mind, or just by acknowledging that some people think of it as being more significant than the average person. You have to actually think about that thing – and when you choose not to, it shows how you still think of it as just friendship.

It's just friendship. It's not that deep. You don't have to think about it too much.

It's not like friendship could ever be that big of a deal, right?

[aromantic-spinda]

Look. Buddy. I'm not going to go through all of this, but..

Trans identities are about gender, lesbian/gay/bi/pan/etc are about who you experience sexual/romantic attraction to, and aro/ace are about how you (do or don't) experience that attraction. But aplatonic is about friendship, about how you relate to people outside of relationships. It's not a romantic or sexual spectrum so it has as much to do with aro/ace as it does with Lgbt-etc and vice versa, right? I just feel like it would be better to view aplatonic as a separate valid thing.

This is fucking wrong.

Aplatonicism is about platonic attraction. It's about not experiencing a type of attraction that everyone is expected to have. It's not about "how you relate to people outside of relationships". Where did you get that from?? Genuine question. This is like if I said being asexual was about how you physically touch people. Being aplatonic is about how you do or don't experience a type of attraction that is subject to normativity, just like being aromantic or asexual. Because I don't know if you knew this, but a friendship is a type of relationship!! A platonic relationship is a type of relationship!!

Also. "Amatonormativity and platonormativity are mutually exclusive" is just blatantly incorrect. The way people are expected to desire and partake in romantic relationships (and to value those relationships above other kinds) is not in conflict with the way people are expected to desire and partake in platonic relationships. It just means that people can twist the argument against any of us at any time – if we value platonic relationships as much as or more than romantic relationships, we're weirdos and "destined to die alone", but if we don't want platonic relationships at all, we're mentally ill losers. Both of these forms of normativity work together to impress upon us a very particular way of how we "should do" relationships.

On that note, doing away with/speaking out against amatonormativity is not just about wanting platonic relationships to be on the same level as romantic relationships in society – it's about doing away with the expectation and demand for romance/romantic attraction. It's about giving people the opportunity to decide how they feel about different kinds of relationships without societal pressure. In this, speaking out against amatonormativity and speaking out against platonormativity go hand-in-hand.

It sounds to me as though you're basing your entire argument about why we should be excluded from the community on fundamental misunderstandings of aplatonicism and platonormativity (as well as amatonormativity), along with a side of "you just wouldn't get it" when we're telling you that you're reinforcing normativity and establishing relationship hierarchies on a community wide level. It's not about individual preferences – it's about how time and time again, people make assumptions of platonic attraction and a desire for friendship of anyone who is aspec in any way. It's about how so many positivity posts for aromantics assume the reader has/wants friends. It's about how other aspecs will come onto our posts to talk about how "sad" it is that we don't value friendship. It's about how the immediate assumption from others when someone values romantic relationships over platonic relationships is that we're not aspec, not queer, have never questioned any form of relationship normativity in our lives, etc.. It's about how the aspec community is rife with platonormativity and aplaphobia.

Also, anattractional means something different, and I have no interest in rewriting the definition of a term already in use when aspec is perfectly fine as an umbrella term.

My apologies if this comes off as aggressive, but it feels as though you're telling me I don't belong in my own community because you can't be bothered to actually understand our identities, terminology, and solidarity with other communities – something I have been subjected to many times over for being aspec in multiple ways. If you're here to learn more about aplatonicism, don't make assumptions about it.

being apl in aspec communties sucks sm. everything is all about how important platonic relationships are and "dismantling relationship heirarchies", while just building new ones. it feels super unwelcoming.

like yea sure to YOU sexual/romantic relationships don't mean anything/are devalued/etc, but not to all of us!! some of us LIKE those things, and MORE than platonic relationships. its like we rnt even aspec at all 2 these people, like sorry some of us go against the grain of society while still having certain ""non queer"" parts to our identity. i feel like we are seen as not aspec/lgbt enough to participate in those communities. so much about the aspec communtity is about how untalked about we are and how we are never included or thought about in discussions, but aro and ace communtities do the same to us!!!

.

[the-indigo-symphony]

When it comes to being aplatonic, I see a lot of posts comparing it to being aromantic, but honestly, I think it might help people understand it better if we compare it to being asexual

Friendship and sex are both seen as human necessities; if you are uninterested in one or both, that is treated as a strong indicator of mental illness, to the point it is considered a symptom of some disorders. Not having friends/sex is also associated with being a bad person, or at the very least, being a pathetic loser. However, friendship and sex are simultaneously put in this position where you must not care about them too much – you must not consider your friends genuine life partners, and you must consider sexuality shameful on some level.

There is also overlap with both asexual and aromantic experiences. This thing we are often uninterested in is absolutely everywhere. If we don't have it right now, it's expected that we are desperate to fix that. Children growing up with these orientations may feel confused, estranged, or broken. On and on and on

Aplatonicism is its own thing, but it has a lot of parallels with other aspec orientations, too

[the-indigo-symphony]

I am so tired of people somehow misinterpreting aplatonicism when they fully understand asexuality and aromanticism. Or, to make my point clearer, I am absolutely befuddled by people who know what "asexual" and "aromantic" mean, but somehow revert to half-baked understandings of aspec lives and identities when someone is aplatonic, as if it's impossible to take even the slightest guess at what this ~new, unfamiliar word~ means. I could understand it from someone who doesn't understand anything about any aspec identity but how and why is "It's just not wanting friends, right?" coming from the people who supposedly know a lot about aspec stuff and regularly participate in the aspec community. How have you gotten this far? It's not like the names for these things are confusing or extremely different – each of our identities is just "a" + (the type of attraction someone lacks). Maybe, just maybe, like how these other words you already know mean "experiences little to no (x) attraction", this other word that follows the exact same pattern also means that same thing. I didn't go through the trenches of "ace discourse" horseshit and the aspec community recovering from that hell for people to create the friend version of "asexuality is just celibacy".

[the-indigo-symphony]

I wish all "aplatonics aren't queer or aspec, they don't experience anything like us" aplaphobes a very "do everything 'right' in a friendship for several months on end only to feel nothing and wonder what the fuck you did wrong. when you look at your friend group you know they have something you don't, something that makes them actually enjoy each other's company and seek it out and just click, rather than having to make an active choice over and over and over again to do what friends are supposed to do, act like how a friend is supposed to, why isn't this working why don't you feel anything why is it that even your very best effort doesn't fucking work. what did you do wrong. what does it even mean to be someone's friend when you can do everything right and still not feel anything for the people you've tried so hard to be friends with? everyone says friends are important and your family keeps asking about if you've made any friends and you want to say yes you want to make them happy you want them to stop asking questions but you feel nothing. nothing. nothing. it's been months and you've been the perfect friend and you've done everything right and still you feel nothing. you still don't have whatever it is your 'friends' have and you're beginning to suspect you never will. you're beginning to wonder what they have and you don't. you're beginning to wonder why you bother at all when months of work fizzle out into nothing. you're beginning to wonder if you're the problem."

I wish all aplatonic exclusionists a very "learn about aplatonic hurt before you open your mouth".

[the-indigo-symphony]

Griping again. Sometimes I feel like aplaphobic aspecs have a "well you just don't get it" attitude when it comes to friendship, like if we could just feel platonic attraction we'd agree with their recreated relationship hierarchy where friendship is at the top and it's expected for everyone to have and immensely value friends and it's not a big deal to estrange all other forms of aspec folk other than ace and aro from the community and acting like all criticism of the shit apl people face is so silly and unnecessary and yadda yadda, all that shit. Like no, I'm demiplatonic, I have felt what you're feeling, I've gone so far as to consider asking my bestie to platonically marry me – that doesn't change how these things are Not Great™. Whatever you're basing this superiority complex on is flawed and you should quit it right now

[the-indigo-symphony]

I saw a great post about consent and amatonormativity earlier that made me think of how teaching consent and platonormativity are also at odds, but to avoid derailing that post, I'm making my own here

All statements about consent are muddled by platonormativity, because platonormativity depends heavily on a lack of consent. Friendships are established without consent or communication, only assumptions and personal decisions. Going without friendship, even temporarily, is seen as a horrible thing and symptom of great mental distress/a horrific mental state, and so people are pressured into them at all times from a very young age, if only to appear normal. The very idea of rejecting friendship baffles the minds of most – and when they get over that bafflement, they sling accusations and insults at the one who rejected it. There is no consent within platonormativity.

When people are raised in a culture that teaches them there is no need for consent in their relationships, they internalize that. Discussions of consent in relationships must acknowledge that most relationships are built on a lack of explicit consent.

Like what the original post that inspired this said, you cannot preach that consent is vital and "you can always say no" and then continue to live your social life in a way that completely disregards it as a necessity, always insisting that those without friends are "missing out" at best and "horrible, heartless people who are probably secretly serial killers" at worst.

[the-indigo-symphony]

Sometimes I feel like alloplatonics find it hard to conceptualize aplatonicism, especially aplatonicism as something queer, because of their own ignorance about anything regarding friendship in our society. It's just... not exactly questioned. It's not thought of as important, yet everyone accepts it as necessary. Friendship has a very particular role: you must have it, and you must keep it, but you must never value it too much. It's a delicate balance that so many have been brought up with – and now that people are challenging that role, people are changing how they see friendship without actually questioning friendship; they don't look into things beyond a courtesy in one direction. "Sure, maybe friendship can be something very important to a person – I could see it functioning like romance! People can have platonic life partners! And that's all the work I need to do with understanding platonic stuff, right?"

They don't like it when you say no, that's not all you need to do. There's more. Because then we challenge the other half of friendship's role: that you don't have to have it, that you don't have to keep it, and not doing either isn't a moral blunder. But moreover, we challenge the notion that friendship isn't just a block on the relationship hierarchy under romance, and that it's much, much more than that from a cultural standpoint. You can accept that friendship can be very important to some people and shouldn't be dismissed out of hand, yes – but can you accept that friendship is just as much of a social construct as romance? Can you accept that friendship, for all it is treated as lesser than romance, is still considered invaluable, important, and necessary?

Can you question the role friendship plays in society?

Can you question these associations of health and morality that we attach to friendship?

Can you question your own assumptions of how others feel and that friendship doesn't require consent?

Can you question the idea that always being shoved into relationships and activities you don't want doesn't matter if those relationships are platonic?

Can you question the way that not wanting friends is seen as an indicator of mental illness?

Can you question the person using their friendships as a reason for why they shouldn't be dehumanized?

Can you question the way it is difficult or impossible for many of us to access resources and help we need without being forced into relationships we don't consent to?

Can you question the reason why rejecting friendship is seen as a rude, awful, malicious thing to do?

Can you question the concern expressed by a parent when their perfectly happy and healthy child shows no signs of distress yet never talks about having friends or brings friends home?

Can you question the assumption that someone sitting by themself is lonely and in need of friends?

Can you question the assumption of friends being a major influence in one's life?

Can you question the way that someone who isn't outgoing and friendly with their co-workers is considered to be a detriment to the company?

Can you question the way you have been taught to see friendship beyond just placing it on the same pedestal you have been taught to put romance upon?

For people who emphasize queer friendships and going against the relationship hierarchy and all that... No one really wants to have a discussion about the role that platonic relationships play in our lives. No one wants to question it. And so, no one wants to accept us as queer – because to do so would be to accept that friendship has a very particular role in our society, and not fitting into typical expectations for it can other a person just as much as any other form of queer attraction can. To accept us as queer would be to accept that friendship is just as much of a social construct as gender, love, or romance – and that it, too, can play a part in oppression and current social hierarchies, forcing us into particular boxes with particular roles and particular ideas that we are taught to never question or challenge – and if you fall outside of that, it must be your fault; you must be the problem.

And really, who wants to talk about boring old friendships when they could talk about romance and sex?

And so platonormativity and amatonormativity frolic in the fields, holding hands.

[the-indigo-symphony]

Also not to gripe but no that post about friendship isn't automatically "aromantic culture" by nature of its subject matter you're just alloplatonic. Stop being shit to aro apls and implying they're not aro enough because they don't experience or value friendship like you