Like Gandalf. Space Gandalf.

...or the little green one in Star Wars *whum*

Our language, tiger: Wow, the "queerplatonic" post has over 70 notes

zincfingers:

kazaera:

zincfingers:

Oh no, some people were telling you not to use a homophobic slur to describe straight platonic relationships. HOW DARE THEY

Because. You know. The relationships I - nonbinary identifying as in between female and neutrois and presenting as/passing as female in RL - have with two women. Both of whom I love very much and where I really, really want to permanently live with at least one of them (both is looking pretty unlikely :( and this would require a transatlantic move in both cases), maybe raise kids with them, maybe marry one of them if legally possible - because of tax/visa/citizenship stuff and because if I’m ever going to marry *anyone* they’re at the top of the list-

Those relationships are totally straight platonic relationships.

Not even going to touch the rest of it, just. JFC.

Edited post for clarification. Didn’t mean to call you straight. Words I would use to describe those relationships based on your description: romantic, deep, close, partnerships, etc. Plenty of words. There’s really no need for new terminology, which was the second point of my post: nobody’s relationships are that special. People who think otherwise, who think they’re doing something totally new and groundbreaking, need to get over themselves.

I don’t think anyone’s said that they’re doing something “new and groundbreaking”. In fact, I shall say the opposite, here and now: these kinds of relationships have probably been around as long as humanity. What we are saying is that our language does not contain words suitable to describe these kinds of relationships. For the words you suggested: they are not romantic relationships, so I’m confused as to why you suggested that one. “Deep” and “close” could indeed be used to describe it, but that’s not saying much: they’re adjectives that can refer to pretty much any kind of relationship. “Partnership” is the best option of those four, and one I’ve used on occasion - but that is also vague, and always leads people to assume it refers to a romantic and sexual relationship. If a word can technically be used to refer to you but everyone assumes it means something else, it’s not really a great option.

  1. jasonalanjr reblogged this from aseofspades
  2. aseofspades reblogged this from minionier
  3. dawnavis reblogged this from greenchestnuts and added:
    I seriously don’t understand what the problem is. I have a friend who I have no romantic or sexual attraction to, but I...
  4. bessibels reblogged this from greenchestnuts
  5. greenchestnuts reblogged this from minionier and added:
    This is a tangent to the original post, but whenever I hear things like the statements in the paragraphs I excerpted, I...
  6. n0th1ngt0s33h3r3 reblogged this from minionier
  7. minionier reblogged this from street-howitzer
  8. lynnliz13 reblogged this from weesleyisourking
  9. mi-na-to-rise-up reblogged this from weesleyisourking
  10. rattyhugs reblogged this from captainheartless and added:
    that second post, jeez, giant gpoy. Queerplatonic is a good word to have. To some people it may seem like splitting...
  11. zincfingers reblogged this from likespacegandalf and added:
    Oh, wow, you mean like all these fuckers are using ‘queer’?
  12. likespacegandalf reblogged this from zincfingers and added:
    I don’t think anyone’s said that they’re doing something “new and groundbreaking”. In fact, I shall say the opposite,...
  13. kazaera reblogged this from zincfingers and added:
    … … Because. You know. The relationships I - nonbinary identifying as in between female and neutrois and presenting...
  14. foucaultisourking reblogged this from spinsteraunt and added:
    is something I definitely agree with. There is something to be said about reclaiming such a strong slur with a...
  15. weesleyisourking reblogged this from likespacegandalf and added:
    My friend foucaultisourking reintroduced me to “romantic friendship”, which is a term originating from the 19th century...
  16. street-howitzer reblogged this from weesleyisourking and added:
    I would add, but this is perfect as it is.
  17. spinsteraunt reblogged this from weesleyisourking and added:
    Do you not see the irony of citing a dictionary definition in defense of an argument that “words mean anything I want...