#im not going to talk about the loveless aro thing because that's way out of my wheelhouse but

[nerves-nebula]

Do you have any loveless/heartless characters? I think they're real neat <3

this post got superrr long lol. im avoiding my homework <3

so this is a complicated ask for me because my definition of "love" is intentionally different from a lot of more mainstream conceptions of it. love isn't a feeling to me, it's something you DO for people you care about, right? you make someone feel loved by doing things that show you care. you putting in that effort and correcting your behavior for their sake is love.

so in that way i don't consider any of my characters loveless. because to me Love is something you chose to do so nobody can really be loveless inherently, they're just choosing not to act loving towards someone.

HOWEVER, from what i've gleamed from a quick google search about loveless aros, it doesn't necessarily seem that being loveless is exclusive to my definition of love?

like, i'm seeing loveless aros talk about not having those kinds of feelings or doubting/opting out of western ideas of love that don't fit them. some talk about not forming that kind of "deep emotional bond" though I'm confused if they mean like.. in general, or just romantically. cuz i've never had a deep romantic bond but i've never really considered that an indictment of Love Itself so much as a type of love that I'm just not a part of.

some people are describing it as specifically romantic love that they know they can't feel. but then again some people are just using it to mean they reject "love" as a label for their emotions/experiences, so like. idk.

it feels like im on the exact same page as a lot of these people it's just that their conclusion was to throw out the word love and mine was to not accept the premise that romantic love is the highest or most important kind of love and focus on, like, other forms of love that are important to me. like my siblings and friends.

soooo i can't say any of them are loveless for sure, cuz i don't identify that way and i'm not sure i grok it yet.

HOWEVER,

I do have aromantic characters, if that's what you mean. though a lot of them are in weird psychosexual situations with each other (just cuz i dont wanna have sex doesnt mean its not fun for my characters to), though there's one or two healthy QPRs thrown in there.

tbh my understanding (or lack thereof) of romance seeps into all of my characters so even the ones who are supposedly in love are doing it with hints of aromanticism cuz like. i dont care what a crush is, yknow? there's only so far romantic tropes can take me before i tap out and just do my own thing.

but as for like canonically aro characters i've got Hondo & quinn, dotty, toasty, Thomas (you guys don't know Thomas yet lol she's a peach), Ezra and Pet (pet is a weird monster tho and Ezra is sort of dead so idk if that counts), Misha Mistaka, Pasiflora, and probably my new one, Benbeck.

I also consider Groe aroace but that's like, a whole thing. cuz Groe is mostly known for having been married to Maureno (one of my characters i explicitly consider allosexual, if not alloromantic) and their relationship takes front and center at every point sfsdf.

because even when i dont see it as romantic i LOVE to make characters lives intertwined and dependent on each other. due to my own personal issues. to be honest i dont think groe and maureno are "in love" i just think they're inextricable dependent on each other. i think their "romance" is an inherently aromantic one because it's not about romantic feelings its about their friendship and trust, which includes kissing and sex sometimes but isn't diminished when they don't do those things.

I don't think Groe feels romantic feelings but i get that two characters who ostensibly have their weird fucked up "romance" be the core thing going on in their life isn't exactly the aromantic rep that ppl are looking for. i mean, it is for ME, but not for everyone.

i guess im just not Good Aro rep tho, cuz im not interested in romance but i AM interested in finding a person who i know I can depend on for everything and share my life with, yknow? i want someone who i know will always be on my side.

and that looks the same to a lot of poeple as romance but the experience of it was way different. cuz i can be with them forever and never want to do more than kiss their forehead as a sign of affection and that'd be great for me, while i KNOW that's unthinkable for a lot of people.

but when writing my characters it's hard to really portray that internal difference. so i think ppl just assume it's romance, and like, that's fine i guess?

so like, groe and maureno fuck cuz it's fun and cuz they have unresolved issues but it's not crucial or even really important to their relationship- to the point that they care WAY more about who each other is hanging out with than who each other is having sex with.

but now i'm rambling about asexuality and stuff.. uhhh the point is YES i have aromantic characters NO I dont know if they're "loveless"

but if a character isn't aromantic or at least aspec that's probably cuz i made a concerted effort to think of them as such.

[aroapl]

Hi! I have heard of aplatonic people before and i used to be very involved in the aro and ace community (i used to identify as ace but i have realized that that label doesnt fit me). I'm just curious: what is being loveless or lovequeer like? I havent even heard the later term before, and i would like to hear about your experience. Im sorry if this is intrusive, you dont have to answer, im just curious about peoples life experience who have it different from me.

It’s not intrusive at all, no worries! I’m more than happy to talk about my experiences, especially since seeing other people talk about theirs is what led me to figuring myself out in the first place.

Loveless as our community uses it can mean a lot of different things; the meanings that I mainly identify with are straight up not feeling love and rejecting the ideas that love is required, always good/pure, and that it’s the greatest good or most meaningful thing in life. I genuinely just don’t feel anything that I would consider love. When people describe what love feels like or how they feel about people they love, it sounds so fantastical and made up to me. I’ve never felt anything like that and can’t even begin to imagine feeling that. I generally just don’t have very strong feelings like that, sort of in general but especially towards people. I care about the people I’m close with and enjoy having them in my life, but my feelings towards them are just so mild and loose compared to what a majority of people seem to feel. Like, if my closest friend of several years suddenly told me tomorrow that she was moving far away and was never going to see me or contact me again, I would be pretty unbothered. I’d wish them well and go on with business as usual, and I’d be just as content as I was before. And because of all that, I really disagree with a lot of mainstream ideas about love. It’s hard to believe or agree that love is the most important thing in everyone’s lives or that life is meaningless without love when it’s not something you feel.

Lovequeer is a label I identify with a lot more loosely/casually. I do consider myself lovequeer, but it’s not something I feel strongly about. Since you haven’t heard of it, being lovequeer is about rejecting the idea of love as it applies to romance, redefining what love means to you, and centering forms of love that are less talked about and respected. I consider myself lovequeer because despite not feeling love, I do still use the word love and enjoy love as a concept. For me, it’s about using the word love in whatever ways I want and finding my own meaning in the idea of love outside of society’s expectations of it. As I said in a different post, "loveless as in I don’t feel anything like what most people consider to be love and reject the idea that love is inherently good/what makes us good, and lovequeer as in I will use the word love however I damn well please and redefine what love means for me."

[amalgamezz]

About your aro post in your tags you said you don’t care for any loves (romantic, familial [<- I don’t feel that one too :D] etc.) does that go for friendships as well? Or are you more of a person who doesn’t care for connection at all? I hope I worded that right…

heya, thank you for this ask, and no worries, your wordings are fine! sorry, this will be a long one because my audhd demands that i should provide full contexts 😔

as i interacted and got to know more about aplatonic and loveless communities, i found a certain solidarity/kinship with them. ever since i was in elementary, friendship has never been something i actively seek myself. i still got along well with classmates. my relationships with coworkers are chill and good. i have mutuals and friendly acquaintances here and there to talk about our shared interests. i try to maintain a good relationship with my family because capitalism sucks ass, especially for single people. in a way, this, too, is how i practice relationship anarchy — to give each casual and non-casual relationship i have a function and learn to appreciate them instead of putting the burdens on one or two committed relationships. for me, friendship has become a label for happy coincidences born out of those relationships after long and frequent interactions, if both parties desire a name for it. i have some positive connections with friends who i trust with my life, and i would mourn intensively should i lose them, but tbh, im not sure if i would personally call it "love".

i was lovequeer before i am loveless. im actually still considering myself lovequeer in a way that i strongly believe that love doesnt have to be romantic and that no kind of love is superior to the other. my personal relationship with love is complicated, but mostly sour. as an aro, i am a fierce defender of non-romantic loves. it annoys me greatly when people casually throw amatonormative phrases such as "there is no platonic explanation for this" or "friends dont do that" around. it is usually a hopeless and lonely battle because people dont really care about "not all loves are romantic" until you reject the concept of love altogether. more often than not, it becomes a gotcha towards aros who express their frustration with obsession over love by society.

this frustration, too, drew me closer to the concept of lovelessness. lovelessness means different things to different people, but for me, its the rejection of love being a superior, necessary, or moral trait of a human being. i had a knee-jerk reaction at first when i learned the term, but the more i read about it and introspect, the more it resonates with me. i remember how my parents hit me when i was a kid. i remember my aunt chewed me out in front of my entire family for expressing my wish to stay single and childless. i remember being driven to tears as my dad sneakily threw out a gift from my friend that i hung on my car and replaced it with a rosary. when asked why, they said because they wanted what was best for me. because they wanted me to be happy. because they loved me. it all sounded contradictory, but i have been with them long enough to know that they were being genuine. i dont wanna think its not a real love because i dont find it useful and more often than not, it only makes me question myself if i have been a fair evaluator and get guilty when i think im not. instead, i just have to accept that good intentions dont always bring good outcomes. their love is real, but its like a sun that burns and hurts more intensively the closer i get to it. i started coming to terms with love being a neutral but strong emotional motive that drives humans to do something — just like pleasure, joy, anger, sadness, envy, etc. whether you do good, bad, or neither because of it solely depends on you. i can acknowledge that they love me, but that doesnt mean they should be able to use it as an excuse to hurt me. this applies to all kinds of love.

i have nothing against love or the people who cherish it, but as i start dissecting and understanding more about love, it becomes less and less significant in my life. i start to realise that i dont need to love someone to bring them happiness or do good for them. i dont need to love my friends to care for or emotionally support them when they need it. i dont need to love my mutuals or even strangers to consider donating for their groceries. i dont need to love the victims of war to condemn the hideous crimes committed against them by some certain govts. love doesnt make me human. i just simply am, and im happy with the loveless relationships/connections i currently have.

[aro--chaos]

I posted 379 times in 2022

That's 359 more posts than 2021!

35 posts created (9%)

344 posts reblogged (91%)

Blogs I reblogged the most:

@local--litporeon

@princessfaeron

@ghastspidergwen

@tooaceforthisspace

@aroaceblurryface

I tagged 194 of my posts in 2022

Only 49% of my posts had no tags

#vee talked here - 8 posts

#aromantic - 7 posts

#aro - 6 posts

#good art - 6 posts

#asexual - 5 posts

#aroace - 5 posts

#ace - 4 posts

#art - 4 posts

#lol - 3 posts

#netflix's wednesday - 3 posts

Longest Tag: 138 characters

#every time i am reminded about this i am shocked then proceed to forget about it because there’s absolutely no way this is an actual thing

My Top Posts in 2022:

#5

Completely insane TotK theory

first off, hi im running on like 6 hours of sleep and two slices of toast so please take everything I'm going to say with like five mouthfuls of salt.

What If Link Just Dies

We know that the logo is an ouroboros, and the broken master sword is included in the logo as well. Nintendo has also said that this sequel will be really dark, comparing it to Majora's mask. Well, what if Zelda and Link journey to face Ganondorf's corpse, wake up Revenge Corpse Ganon, and can't beat the source of the malice plaguing Hyrule? What if the new hair-down Link that we see is a new incarnation or some sort of incarnation saved from the dead? Since the logo is an ouroboros, it's safe to assume that this new game will have something to do with cycles. And what's a more classic cycle in the Zelda franchise than the cycles of chosen heroes? on top of that, getting our hero out of commission for a bit would be a great way for the newest of demise's battle buddies for our hero to have an even bigger, cooler party at Hyrule with his super dope new Evil Tendril Powers.

anyway im going to go eat, come back, and decide if this is sane or not so enjoy.

5 notes - Posted September 14, 2022

#4

To the probably five people who have the same brain i do:

You do not need to figure it all out. Life is hard and complicated and there is no one solution. You are literally not out of school yet. You cannot live on your own yet legally.  You cannot drive a car on your own or drink.  It is ok if you struggle with making friends and don’t know what you want to do with the rest of your life. It’s ok if you can’t figure out and pin down every single feeling you have. It’s ok of you need help healing from things, or arent in a place where you can heal from them completely right now.  Healing takes time, it is painful. It is good, but you need a support system and if you do not have that it is ok.  All you need to do is your best, whatever that looks like each day.  Add the simple little tasks to your checklists.  Buying that fancy cookie is ok as long as you have the money.  Just keep living and caring for other people, that’s the most you can do right now. And honestly, that’s the best thing you can do. 

6 notes - Posted November 29, 2022

#3

ok ok so i am hype for the new trailer and I'm sure this has gotten pointed out but...

do you see that flying thing??? do you see it???? do you think there is any possibility there are going to be some sort of mutated loft wing or smth????

See the full post

8 notes - Posted September 13, 2022

#2

me 2019: oh, well I’m ace, so i dont like having sex but i can still love like a normal straight cisgender person!! i can’t wait to get a boyfriend :)

me now: i am a loveless aro(ace) and a lesbian on some level not really sure also I'm full of gender however that gender tends to change anyway l-ve is not required to be human, to be human is to live and enjoy life

8 notes - Posted October 13, 2022

My #1 post of 2022

Clancy is a vessel theory

With the update of dmaorg.info and the release of the outside mv, I’ve seen a new theory going around that Clancy is not a person, but rather the name of a vessel that the bishops are using to spread vialism. This makes a lot of sense to me actually, and as far as my casual lore knowledge goes it clears up some stuff! Iirc, in an interview, Tyler stated that Clancy is his way of giving fans a look into the world of Trench and DEMA. We’ve never known much about (the old) Clancy, besides that he resided in DEMA with Keons as his bishop. If Clancy is simply the name of a vessel that the bishops exploit, it would first off, help tie the incorporation of Vessel music, lyrics, references, etc into the music video and Vøldsoy. It would also explain why on dmaorg.info Clancy details his first-hand account of events that we have seen Tyler doing/performing (the Livestream show, the outside, and Saturday mvs) while previously we had received secondhand accounts of Clancy watching Tyler from a cave, possibly the one seen in the video, during the jumpsuit mv. When I read the letters detailing the show and the events of the mvs I was confused as to how Clancy would have recorded these things if Tyler was the one doing them, and why Tyler chose to show himself in the events detailed by Clancy's letters when as far as I was aware the two were separate people. But if Clancy is not one person and is instead a vessel, Tyler becoming Clancy makes his appearing in both the Livestream and the MV(s) much more logical and sensical. And while Tyler’s role in the MV(s) and Livestream is the most concrete evidence I have, there are also a couple little things I want to bring up. One thing that Tyler started doing during the SAI era is covering/obscuring his face. This seems like an odd detail to bring up, but we've seen one other person who covered their face in lore, the unidentified child from one of the images on dmainfo.org. 

[ID= a grayscale image of a child, presumably a young boy. the child has a hand over their face. /end ID] This image's filename is "se__elf" which I assume means that it is a picture of the old Clancy as a child. Tyler only began covering his face in scaled and icy era appearances, and if 'clancy is dead' and Tyler is now the new Clancy, the new vessel that the bishops have chosen to exploit, this would explain the covering of his face. The recent updates to dmaorg.info detail how Clancy was forced to create the Good Day DEMA show, his constant surveillance by the bishops, and how in his words "...they wouldn't let me write anything down. Well, at least not without them present" Surely, if Clancy is now Tyler we would have some evidence or hint at their watching of Tyler, their constant surveillance hinted somehow. And sure enough, there is. This evidence is none other than Trash the dragon. Trash is the dragon that appeared on the cover of SAI and is featured on nearly every single promotional image or merch since then. Tyler has stated in an interview that "trash dragon" is slang for vultures in DEMA. Vultures, symbolically, are practically joined at the hip to the bishops and vialism. During his Christmas Livestream, a tiny trash could be seen on his desk, as if watching what he did during the stream. This very well could be Tyler trying to show the ever-watching eyes of the bishops, their constant surveillance of Tyler. Is this true? I have absolutely zero clue. But if it is it's a fascinating turn in the events of the story and one that I really hope we get to delve into more soon!

38 notes - Posted March 20, 2022

Get your Tumblr 2022 Year in Review →

[juiceastronaut]

(I'm neither aro nor ace so if I overstep pls let me know, I don't mean to attack anyone with this just pointing out some use of terminology here)

In light of Jaidens coming out video (which I'm super proud for her and could tell that wasn't easy!) I was looking thru ppl talking about it. And I saw the word "representation" thrown around a lot. And saying that they got Lilith in the time span which is means to celebrate. (Like people reference both her and Lilith in the posts at the same time)

And it's great that people are seeing themselves more in the things they watch! Not saying it's a bad thing at all, and it's a good thing people are seeing more people like them in the world (I haven't seen the Lilith episodes so hopefully this isn't word of god but not the point). Which normalizes it.

But what does bother me is to take a real, living and breathing person coming out to their fanbase and calling it "representation" and putting it in the same vein as a *fictional* character being said identify. Saying that you're being "fed" by her being such and such identify.

JaidenAnimations is not "representation." She is a real person who made a discovery about herself and made the incredibly personal decision to share that in the hopes to try to educate others about what being aroace means when they might not have previously.

It's okay to relate and feel seen by the video! That's not what I'm talking about. It's reducing her to being content that one consumes, and a new checkmark to be crossed off that has bothered me about this. It's unfair to her experiences to put her in the same category as fictional people. To reduce her down to a fictional character when she's not.

Support her like the real life person that she is and not throw her in the same pile as you would characters that also fill those same traits