#i can't even explain why this particular thing is a dealbreaker for me | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

not-poignant · 1 year

Note

Hi Pia! Hoping you can help explain something. Ash is aro in the canon and I understand what aro is (though maybe not, if I'm asking haha). I'm struggling to really understand what's termed "romantic attraction" since I see what Ash is doing as being friendly but sometimes I feel like it's what I should expect as being romantic. I did look up the definition of romantic attraction but it left me with more questions. It's such a vague definition! I guess, how does Ash explain it, if asked?

Aro anon, forgot to finish. I looked up signs up of how to tell when you're in love or feeling romantic attraction and even those just seemed like regular friend things. Thinking about a person often, feeling happy around them, wanting to do things with them. But I guess it's really the intent that matters or something along those lines? Thanks for letting me ramble on about this, it's been eating at my thoughts for months.

Hi anon

With this kind of stuff, you might not like the answer, but it's self defined.

You can look up as many definitions as you want, but ultimately the final arbiter of what is and feels like a romantic act, is you.

As an example, the guy I live with takes all of his friends out to one-on-one dinners at nice restaurants or cafes. He's aromantic as fuck, and he would take all of his friends - guys, girls, nonbinary - to cafes and restaurants for long chats, delicious meals, and that kind of conversational intimacy.

Some people might think that's romantic. He doesn't. His definition for the difference is: 'I would do that for/with any of my friends.'

On the other hand, he doesn't tend to care about or remember anniversaries, think flowers are important, care about receiving gifts at important events from a partner etc. For him, these things are romantically loaded a lot of the time, and while he'll do them for a romantic partner, he won't get any romantic satisfaction personally from performing these acts. To him, these are the acts that he feels are romantic: Celebrating and marking anniversaries, Valentine's Day, giving presents at 'expected' times of the year, particular kinds of presents.

To him, being expected to share a bed with the person you live with is 'romantic' - so he doesn't do that. It doesn't fit who he is as a person, and he doesn't think it adds anything meaningful or special to a relationship and can even detract from it. He can spend the night with a partner, but he wouldn't want that to be a defining aspect of a relationship. I.e. if a partner demanded it, that would be a dealbreaker for him.

It's up to you to define what you think of as romantic, and why. And it will be different for each person, and it can be strongly influenced by culture. It can even change from person to person. I'm gray-aromantic. So I like being in romantic friendships, but I usually prefer (not always) aromantic / queerplatonic relationships.

Sometimes the question 'would I do this for a friend, or do I only expect to do this for a partner' can help (but not always, obviously what we do for some friends is not what we'd do for all of them), sometimes the question 'do I want to engage in this romantic social ritual / does this feel meaningful to me / does this give me the ick' can help. Sometimes the question 'what feels romantic to me, and do I want that in my life' can help.

I can't answer this from Ash's perspective because he hates labels, and so he wouldn't call himself romantic or aromantic or any of those things. He just knows what he likes. But I know he's aromantic, so you're getting my response, lmao.

Also a lot of it comes down to what Ash feels is romantic. Ash would hug and cuddle all of his friends. (And strangers, let's admit it). He'd also fuck and kiss them. To him, all of those things aren't romantic. They're intimate, but that's not the same. And they're expressions of love, but that's also not the same.

If you feel like those things are romantic, then like, that's your definition for you, and that's awesome.

Romantic orientation is self-defined, because we decide what is romantic as we grow up, and we decide our feelings about it when it's time to form (or not form) relationships. It can be fluid, like all of the orientations.

#asks and answers #personal #ash would never call himself romantic or aromantic #he'd very much use his glamour to avoid talking about labels #but just because someone sees him as romantic #doesn't mean he isn't aromantic #it just means he's doing things that the other person would find romantic personally #and ash doesn't #and ultimately he decides #not the other person

16 notes · View notes

dreamsatdusk · 10 months

Note

Hmm for the ask game how about 1, 2, and 20? And also I see Alexander the Great mentioned in your bio. Can I ask why? :)

Apologies, missed this one earlier! Thank you for the ask!

book you’ve reread the most times?

Probably either The Black Company, by Glen Cook or Ninefox Gambit, by Yoon Ha Lee. I've also ready Diana Wynne Jones' Howl's Moving Castle at least a few times. As a kid, I probably reread The Boxcar Children the most.

2. top 5 books of all time?

I couldn't decide even sort of, so this turned into a selection of favs that I think are rather different from each other.

The Phantom Tollbooth; Norton Juster: Disillusioned kid finds a toy tollbooth setup has appeared in his room, builds it, drives his toy car through...and winds up in The Lands Beyond! It is extremely weird in a very matter of fact sort of way that I adore in books to this day. I was particularly amused by the wordplay and such even as a kid.

Machineries of Empire; Yoon Ha Lee: Okay that's a trilogy and a short story book all together, so I suppose I will say Ninefox Gambit is my favourite of them all, but there's so many key points in the other books too, so! The consciousness of an undead general is installed into the head of a soldier chosen to defend against a rebellion opposed to the dystopian space empire she lives in. It is far far more complex than that little description makes it seem. One of the books where my mind latched on at high speed and very intensely to a particular character (Jedao).

Deathless; Cathrynne Valente: A retelling of The Death of Koschei the Deathless, but set during and after the Russian Revolution. It follows the life of Marya Morevna, Koschei's chosen bride. Another one that is complicated to try to explain, because there is an immense amount going on. I suspect it might be easier to follow if you know at least a bit about the relevant faerie tales and Soviet Union history, but I've heard that even people without that backgound enjoyed it.

The Etched City; K.J. Bishop: Beautiful and utterly bizarre. I'm not sure how to describe the plot. It starts out with two...hmm, friends? war buddies? who are ex-soldiers and on the search for a new home after being on the losing side of a civil war. They resettle in a city with very peculiar stuff going on. Steampunkish in a way. Wikipedia informs me it's considered part of the 'New Weird' genre, so I should look into that and see what else is on that list.

The Lord of the Rings; J.R.R. Tolkien: I really loved LotR when I read it as a child, but then I also got into the History of Middle Earth collection and it's fascinating how much work went into all of it, how much the story (and that of the Silmarilion) changed as they were shaped. And then there's also hilarious things like the proto-versions of the 4 hobbits having a debate about eating dinner on the second floor of a house and throwing the (wooden) plates out into the front yard and never cutting the grasss so you can't see them.... This is all so you needn't bother carrying the dirty dishes DOWN the stairs mind you.

20. what are things you look for in a book?

I tend to be put off by overly simplistic use of language. Not always, but there have been cases where something was really bothering me about a book here or there and I figured out that's what was up.

Characters that interest me. This doesn't mean they have to be 'nice' or 'good' characters, but someone needs to interest me somehow. I've found it a struggle more than once to stay engaged with a book where I get to the point of just not caring what happens to anyone in it. Again, not a hard rule, but one that has recurred more than once.

Vivid descriptions that paint a strong picture in my mind are a delight, but yet again, not a dealbreaker. (One of my favourite authors actually sucks at this*L* I think we were 7 or more books into a series before the narrator of the first 3 books was ever actually described at all?)

Strong worldbuilding, moral complexities, a sense of epicness - all further interests. And I have to admit, I have a soft spot for eccentric military geniuses.

Alexander the Great

Bonus round! Alexander has been one of my historical interests for a long time and I have two shelves of books about him and related topics (e.g., the Successors to his empire, a book about his mother, one about his grandmother, etc.) I'd almost forgotten I put something in profile notes. I think I did so when I was trying to come up with some stuff to mention as interests, like fandoms and such.

In the spirit of the book ask theme, I will recommend A Very Short Introduction to Alexander the Great by Hugh Bowden as, indeed, a good short intro. It's solid and detailed in spite of its brevity, but it also included some information that some older books about Alexander have ignored in my experience, so I found it an enjoyable read even beyond my original objective (which was to find out if it was actually a good intro book to suggest to people who asked).

Thank you!

#Ask Game Response #fairy-anon-godmother #Books #Machines of Empire #Alexander the Great #Glen Cook

2 notes · View notes