gurenhiiragis:

the comment on queerplatonic relationships/shipping being “as close to romantic monogamy as possible without being that” is really gross though

you’re fundamentally still attributing a certain degree of closeness and commitment with romance, and still coding specific actions and relationship behaviors as romantic – that’s just amanormativity still, and it’s not helpful to an aspectrum people who have those wants and enjoy those things.

you’re basically always saying, “this might as well be romantic”, and that’s extremely uncomfortable and bordering on erasure in my eyes.

no, it definitely might as well not be. there’s a big difference; the “without romance” part is, uh, pretty key haha.

and i really don’t think there’s anyone who DOESN’T benefit from getting rid of the rigid coding of affection as romantic, as it only encourages closeness, and it helps get rid of the stigma towards casual sex and whatnot, i’d think.

so… no. it’s not some ~imitation~ of romantic monogamy. it’s what the parties involved make it and are comfortable with.

i think you can certainly critique this with shipping and say, like, “why does this type of relationship, this two person, committed relationship with kissing and cuddling, seem so like what society pitches as romantic? are we all still experiencing amanormativity here?” that’s legitimate! questioning why we want  that or find that appealing is very valid – but i think it’s really offensive and unfair to act like aspectrum people who do want those acts “might as well” be doing something romantic. that’s gross.

(Source: miyugoof, via spinsaround)