#like saying ''ooo ppl don't love/respect you if you don't love/respect yourself'' (a) why not? (b) yeah ofc ppl Should be able to be happy

[unproduciblesmackdown]

some threads woven together flawlessly. or fumbled with intently until it's like Look [holds out a cat's cradle] but no. it's good & real

smthing "i can't believe it's this Telling!" about Romance(tm) being multiple times hearing this sentiment like. "okay talking about relationships right. dating has always come easily to me / i've been lucky / i'm Good At romance: i was not single for more than 5 consecutive days from the autumn of '34 to Now. but it wasn't until my late twenties 90 yrs & dozens of Romantic partners into it that, for the first time ever: one of those relationships was actually like, good." and it's like damn i can't believe it's that Telling. that the remarks have this would be twist / punchline (not actually delivered as such. it's not unexpected to them?) that still gets framed thusly as being Successful in dating. spending eons with a bunch of people involved in bad relationships, but you weren't Not dating

also reminded in terms of [i don't really have any podcasts i'm listening to] like one i was like "hm i've heard some episodes. i'll put this one on in the background" then dropkicking it out the window like 10 min in b/c irrelevantly this Guest was like "real talk. ugh it's sooo cool to be poly nowadays 9_9 everyone has to be poly but i'm Naught into it!!! i guess i Feel too much. i want PASSION and DRAMA!!! this is just like how pop in the late '00s / '10s was all 'feminist' telling you to be independent sluts well i care about true LOVE" and like. i don't remember but i don't think they were a man, i'm quite surer they were queer, it was just so fucking lmfao like would you get thee fuck out of here. we actually don't live in "it's like it's illegal to be monogamous :(" world you're not Edgy now b/c you're insecure about what you see as "trendy" but don't Get / don't want in on. you're not going against the grain for being like "maybe i Do want to settle down with my soulmate" like great news that's normative. pick another queer group to Project on b/c they'd rupture your idea of the Bounds of queerness where you're like "ugh they're so mainstream & ruining it for us True queers disrupting the cishet agenda (arguing for queerness to be on The Terms Of said cishet agenda)" e.g. ohh the cishet agenda is pro asexuality!!! (it is not. even if it was? is the Queer Agenda for some people to have to deny their own sexuality & "have" to have sex a certain kind of way with certain people? up next "bi women: gender traitors, why not Choose to (have to) have only certain kinds of sex w/certain people :)" trans people gender traitors We decide what everyone's gender is, bit fucked up of you to be deciding your own huh, what Assumptions are you making you sicko?? you Have to identify / present xyz certain ways or you're failing to be the gender vanguard like we are) like what if the queer agenda was about everything we Can do. we Can have this sex w/these people sure, & we Can: Not do that w/them. like oh no what if cishet men were able to get their hands on the gay resources only when we recognize Aro/Ace identities can ppl Say "yeah i'm....hehe....Not cishet"? legitimate question Yeah What Then. oh no. god's wounds What If you can just say you're trans now & change your pronouns every day. like yeah let's let everyone do that. what if we all did. oh no lol. oh my god more people are talking about polyamory like they're allowed to talk about polyamory & if my monogamy isn't Assumed ""normal"" & i might feel like it's thus more in question?? well don't mind me as i get defensive by way of Derisive & start scoffing & spitting at the queers making the rest of us look bad but we're Really fighting the fight out here (doing what we were already doing but now feeling extra smug & self satisfied about it?)

like "ohh i have too much Emotion for that" like who said you didn't. why do you think polyamory involves less emotion or passion or desire or commitment or whatever. it sure doesn't posit it necessarily requires More either. it posits that it is not monogamy. & like christ Congratulations then. congratulations on having too much of a heart. that is then used to sneer & backbite like i forgot that this person on this damn podcast also brought this up b/c a friend or acquaintance who was poly made whatever kind of proposition & here they are on some podcast going Ugh & talking about how they have too much passion, despite years of top40 telling them, according to them, that feminism is sluttiness now (again this is. according to them. Groundbreaking circling back to bog standard misogyny) & isn't it so groundbreaking in turn if a woman were to sing love songs? imagine. you can have emotions & passion & drama taking the parking spot a stranger wanted. You could've brought the monogamy with a poly partner, when the Agenda for it is always distilled to Exclusivity, like, bring your own, huh? like your own Feelings & Passions & Commitment. but obviously it is the assumption that the poly partner is the Inadequate one there who would be causing any relationship to be Lacking. b/c they sure didn't frame it as some matter of fact Mismatch or else try to start being outright about how poly people are, like the bisexuals, these sluts (feminists!!) who are only giving you Part of themselves when you deserve All Access to your exclusive, locked in partner!!! & like good lord do you ever? with your Reliable kinsey endzones binary gender soulmate for life, do you?? locking them in what, why. excluding what, why. accessing all of what, why.

Romance(tm) being defined by Exclusivity defined by entitlement to as much of this other person as you want, to ensure that exclusivity: compare w/the boundless potential Threats or already Violations to thee proper romantic relationship. spending too much time with other people, sharing too much with them, getting too much support, feeling too much towards them, valuing them too much, to say nothing of what could be considered "intimacy," which then yeah sure includes "well no kissing or sex" but yknow again that does need to be a bound you even accept, monogamy style, & even if you do, that All Thee Rest of it can be attributed to "well you shouldn't be talking to them / having these friends / doing these other things b/c that's a slippery slope to Romance (kissing, sex)." that the exclusivity is so often inevitably defined by, when pushed to it, Exclusion, e.g. like if everyone i loved was held at gunpoint & it's like only One of them could be Not Shot baby it'd be you like tf is this scenario?? gee it'd suck if everyone else died but baby as long as it's not you like The Hell. that it's about Everyone Else being shut out & Less & Lacking & deprioritized thusly in specificass hypothetical winner take all tournaments of disposing of loved ones like what in the christ. & this being an Isolating logic like well that soulmate should be Enough. & the instruction like, yeah any & all feelings passions desires wishes wants needs hopes dreams? file that away under "to be fulfilled by the One True Romance." it'll fulfill Everything in your life!! if it doesn't umm cough must've been doing it wrong. turn your discontent into Passion. philosophically muse on how Fulfillment may have eluded you but maybe just maybe we all still come closest in struggling through a marriage for a few dozens of years & also perhaps parenthood! surely. and don't even think of considering if this cosmos of the nuclear household is not in fact the distilled essence of all that one's life can possibly contain

of course two people can have a long term intimate relationship w/each other exclusively & it not all necessarily play into some nuclear family cisheteropatriarchy agenda moment lmao, but this is just the same as like. yeah people Can exist in ways that some rando today could look at & deem "are they not cishet" but where this is also not of the cishet agenda(tm). b/c ppl Have to be cishet(tm). & Have to be finding their monogamous cishet lifelong spouse. & sure Have to Not do otherwise, so why Wouldn't there be the narrative that all passions & emotions & desires & wants & needs & chance of fulfillment is a matter of the domain of Romance(tm)? the idea like oh you enjoy talking with someone? Love. you're excited / interested / affectionate? Love. you're dtf? either Love or else held to be the other side of the same coin: marked Lack of love(tm). wild that Stimming in enthusiasm is used in this Romance framework lmao as like a recognized Normal nd moment. love the enthusiasm. you could be stimming even more, about more. you could be enthused even more, about more. you Could. you don't Have to, But You Could. you don't Have to be involved in a way you consider some degree of intimate enough to have a particular classification on that basis, but you Could. you don't want to? alright awesome how many versions of a person there can be on this earth. why would one want to define it as "having" to be monogamous though b/c you're Too Legit to be poly. Too Legit queer to respect asexuality. Too Legit trans to respect someone's gender expression/identity being a casual, dynamic, easy experience.

also always noticing like "oh right, another day's work giving Others' feelings legitimacy & priority, & not my own" back in college times when like a couple of times having to outright or gradually* deflect acquaintances whom i'd interacted with trying to go for the dating route. & then nominally having to presume that they are the uniquely burdened one here like oh way to go (did not do fuckall), what is more Legitimate than disappointment re: Romance right. except it's like now hang on i'm also the one going "i thought someone was interacting with me trying to be friendly :/" like lol, no. & as though then taking on this impossible unilateral responsibility to demur from seeming [i want to hang out & interact] interest now on the terms of both neurotypicality (also normative) & amatonormativity. & being like "??" like what would someone even have particularly strong feelings about when i prommy i did not yet feel comfortable bringing even like most of the range of my personality, or comfortable in general w/what i Did bring, what's the basis of this lol. making up a guy. & like we are all performing we are all perceiving & interpreting without a direct channel into someone else's interiority. but like where's Any genuine intimacy leading into this lol? like still a No even if so but at least it'd be less perplexing. & if there isn't even expected to be any then also still No. tf was this one guy trying to start shit over buying textbooks & by start shit i mean keep trying to talk to me when crossing paths on (community college!) campus until i'm like no i don't wanna go to a movie b/c i don't really know you from adam, & he's like "well isn't that the point of dating, to get to know each other" like No this isn't cishet amatonormative marriage speedrun "i'm so good at dating i wasn't single for 93 years! each relationship was shit btw!" central get out of here. luckily he did. rando guys in public & semi public barely count yet also fully count

another thing that's different but the same is it's kind of jarring like another thing you Can do but it rankles within me like i hope to just like. someone being like framed as Superlative Exceptional....like great lmao such a broad thing & common thing & i am fully aware like "Uh Oh Eesh when i am imagining it applied to Me. i do not like it" like how we are [it takes all kinds]ing and [no accounting for taste]ing & all these things we sure Can do. but i do tie it to just like. arguing for people's worth as A Thing on this bitch of an earth where some people get to see others' lives as less than theirs & the supposed cure for this appealing on Merit. where even the Personal, Individual protection against this is "well, just find the one person who is like 'you're Everything & btw i'd drop dead without you like what would be the point of Anything'" like now what tf is reassuring about that lmao....this Other audio experience i forgot where i was already just not that interested but it grated hearing someone assure us that like oh this person's webpage is so Intriguing i Have to talk to this person. another thing much more formal & established being this ode to someone being like So undeniably extraordinary & incredible & superlative etc, like, lovely ode to someone, but i do reflect like eesh i just really do not want that. no ironic "xyz would've hated this!!" like just do not. i'm so Not about merit(tm). i'm so not about anyone Needing to be considered superlative or extraordinary by even One other person. so not about rising Above anyone else as the evidence of worth. so not about praising anyone by assuring people they're Not "Just" [another xyz. a victim. passive. content to abc.]....so not about being stuck in isolation with the immediate Family as one's only support (against The Family: as like. a political deal) until the only other way to exist is to escape, &/or be pushed into, the marriage, aka thee romance (against Romance: also a political deal)

where in romance(tm) is there Not this narrative about how you'd better find all the support & fulfillment you need in your whole self & life & being in This. where is there not "ideally" isolation. where is there not exclusivity as the definition. with this also ofc assuming the "correct" monogamous approach. & the cisheteropatriarchy. like yeah sure people Can do xyz that would resemble like ah the cishet lifelong monogamous partnership, & Not be of that agenda. like there Can be ppl who would be perceived cishet by someone to whom "cishet" has any meaning but like, without that agenda. we had & can have all our phenotypes without the concepts of white supremacy / antiblackness around which to categorize "race," we have all our bodies w/o there necessarily, inevitably being ableism. & in the meantime against the [we Have to xyz] & the Normative & the assertion of "merited" deservingness & the isolating & authoritarian & controlling & extractive & prescriptive & limiting, & plenty of other things....polyamory like supposed "opposite" of aromanticism but it's peak harmonious when like, it is also very much outside how romance is "supposed" to be, to the extent of like ohh it doesn't count b/c it is so uncontained by any Definitions. ohh i could never be polyamorous b/c they're Diluting themselves (there's the Isolating & Exclusivity definitions....the Most romantic relationship? baby idgaf if everyone else in my life died. you wouldn't either re: all your loved ones, right. why are you talking to them again. or hanging out with them again. or saying Love to them again or changing your plans for them or listening to them or etc etc. & of course you couldn't kiss anyone else, why Wouldn't this relationship crumble away if that weren't the case??? lol) like okay you're not polyamorous, that others Are is good for you. ppl being trans is good for cis people; no genders as constraining classes. ppl being ace is good for allo people; no compulsory sexuality. people being bi is good for everyone; same. etc etc etc. that They can exist as themselves unhindered = you can; that they can't, you can't. you're not Too Good to be them; acting/doing Better than someone else is acting/doing is like, about choices lol. versus [oh it's not even a choice i Couldn't be poly....b/c i'm too good for that] like. now what does this do for anyone exactly. but make you feel more secure through feeling superior b/c you're hearing more often more casually more proximately about different choices people are making for themselves

anyways surfacing from [my god. writing a post now] & i would like to emphasize "aromantic sure but & also anti-romance i mean it. like politically" & "lovelessness let's gooo. politically as well like can we Not with the affective-centric"