Side note: I am not alloaro, I’m ace. If you’re looking for posts
that have brought up good points on queeragamic from their viewpoints
specifically, I recommend @queeragamic-info.
1.] What is queeragamic?
Queeragamic was a label that was created in the earlier months of 2020. It was met
with negative responses relatively quickly, and from there, it all slid
downhill. Nowadays, the term is hardly used, but it is still a term that
exists in some small pockets of the aspec community.
Queeragamic means a QPR (queerplatonic relationship) that is nonsexual.
Stems from “queer”, and “-agamic”, a suffix that implies asexual reproduction.
The creator coined it because they were uncomfortable associating with a term that could involve sex, depending on the person using it. Queeragamic can be used alongside queerplatonic, or it can be used on it’s own.
2.] The problems
A. The coining, and responses to criticism.
And lately, “queerplatonic” just hasn’t been feeling right. I think this is
almost entirely because of the resurgence I’ve seen of people saying
queerplatonic relationships can be sexual. And, I mean, that’s valid.
That’s something a big chunk of people in our communities have decided
is a thing, and a thing that they want. But it also means I’m just… not
comfortable with the term anymore. I know that I could choose to
conceptualize my (future) queerplatonic relationship differently, or
that I can still use the term, but it’s just not resonating with me.
This is from the post coining the word queeragamic. A few things might jump out at you first: Notably, the notion that people “suddenly decided” that qprs could be sexual, as if from thin air, or for no reason. Secondly, the notion that someone is suddenly uncomfortable with a term because it can be sexual is something I can understand as an ace person. However, QPRs are extremely personal, broad, and flexible. Nobody assumes they are inherently sexual, because they aren’t, and they never were. Furthermore, contrary to how it sounds in their post, this… isn’t a new thing. Though, I cannot choose how the OP feels, so it’s not proper criticism on it’s own.
Just as a note:
I’m not going to be answering anymore anon messages from aros who are angry about me using the term queeragamic.
I
don’t know how else to state what I’ve already stated: allosexual
aromantic people are valid. Sexual qprs are valid. Sexual qprs have
always existed. Sexual qprs are not new. Allosexual aromantic people
belong in our communities.
The fact that I don’t want to use a
term that doesn’t resonate with me is not inherently arophobic. And I’m
not going to engage with people who are dedicated to not engaging with
me from a place of good intentions and respect.
#if me expressly and repeatedly validating allosexual aros but still using the term queeragmic #is enough to make you feel that I’m arophobic #then this blog might just not be a good space for you
This is where things turned from bad to worse. Firstly, “not going to be answering from any more angry aro people about using the term queeragamic” says a lot about the coiner. If you make a term, and a group of people say “hey, no, this isn’t cool”, you shouldn’t ignore it, you shouldn’t shut it down, and you should be willing to listen to groups you are not a part of, especially when that group has a history of being mistreated and sectioned-out of aspec terms, by the group youare a part of. The OP of the term did not do this, and instead refused to listen to criticism. Worst part is, they said they’re not going to accept criticism from aros anymore. Not criticism in general- criticism from aros specifically, even though they’re the ones primarily affected by this word, and if anyone should be listened to on the topic, it should be them.
They also note that sexual QPRs have always existed, despite the fact that in their very last post on the matter, they spoke about it as if it were a new phenomenon that we’ve recently decided on.
It’s also worth pointing out that stating “alloaros are valid. alloaros belong in our community” does not mean you can’t be arophobic. Saying things like that is the bare. minimum. of what you should be doing, it is far from the only things you should be doing. Thinking a group is “valid” does not mean you cannot hurt them or do things that harm their community and labels. “Validating” alloaros does not erase the fact that you are being arophobic.
B. The terminology.
“Queeragamic” is a term that is supposed to be for any nonsexual QPR, but evidently, this term was made specifically for asexual people, given it’s suffix. It conflates being ace with not having sex, which isn’t good for multiple reasons. There are ace people who have sex, and allosexual people who do not, but the term quite literally has “-agamic” in it, which means asexual reproduction. It was made for ace people like me, and yet it couldn’t define what being ace is correctly. Reminder: The creator refused to listen to criticism on the term. Even if people brought it up to them, it’s likely they would refuse to even consider it.
(Also, asexual reproduction jokes, ie being “plants” etc., are classic acephobe jokes.)
C. What this means for QPRs.
If people start using queeragamic, a nonsexual term, then people will begin to associate queerplatonic with being inherently sexual in turn. The entire point of queerplatonic is, in part, to not share things like that with other people unless they choose to disclose it. With specific sectioning off in this way, it removes that choice.
This is harmful for every type of aspec person. It breaks queerplatonic into chunks and splits off people based off of how much sex they have. It’s no secret that ace and aro people are currently very divided community wise, largely in part because of the mistreatment of non-ace aros. Things like this will inevitably make it worse, to the point where we can’t even share the term QPR. Ace people like me would likely have to start using this term in order for people to not assume I’m in a sexual QPR, and that is ridiculous. I do not want to share information like that with people, and neither do a lot of other ace people. Even if the term wasn’t obviously made specifically for ace people, if alloaros tried to use queeragamic, they will by definition still have the word asexual applied to them simply because their QPR does not involve sex. Alloaros being branded as ace despite not being so is something they’ve faced for a very long time, and it’s terrible that this is something that would be permissible to happen again.
D. What this means for alloaros.
Why are we specifically making a QPR that doesn’t involve sex? Are we going to make one that doesn’t involve cuddles, one that doesn’t involve kissing, one that doesn’t
involve… anything else? I suspect not. Relationships generally are not structured around what you do in them, as these labels are broad. Furthermore, there are many romantic relationships done by alloaces that involve no sex, and yet the ace community does not seem to mind the idea of using that label. As the term is broad, it simply isn’t necessary. So, why is it when it’s QPRs?
The truth is, queeragamic is a part of a
bigger trend of issues in our community, and we need to talk about it.
Treatment wise, alloaros are “at the bottom of the barrel” in the community, and are mistreated even by other aspec people. Frequently they are “othered” in aspec spaces, or seen as outsiders with minimal support and solidarity with other aspecs due to not being asexual. Creating terms like this, and refusing to listen to the criticism, will harm their community. It is extremely frustrating that some people refuse to listen to the people who have spoken up about it. It speaks volumes when the creator dismisses concerns from an entire group of people for the sake of not changing or removing their new label, and the last thing we should be doing is backing terms and creators that do things like this.
E. The ace case.
I have a very close connection to the term queerplatonic, and I’m sure plenty of other ace people feel the same. It’s been a term the community as a whole has used for a long time now, and it’s used by all kinds of people for all sorts of different relationship structures. Let me make this clear: I do not want to be forced to use queeragamic. I do not want to give up that anonymity. I do not want to tell people how much sex I’m having with my QP based on which label I use. I do not want to use this new label made by a creator dismissive of alloaros, a label that divides me and alloaro people, people in the aspec community like me, who need support more than ever right now.
But, and this should be kinda obvious, if this label became heavily used, people would begin to use queerplatonic for sexual qprs, and queeragamic for the ones that are not. We cannot pretend this wouldn’t happen. I would not have a choice in it. Alloaros wouldn’t have a choice in it either. I am very, very sex repulsed, and I wouldn’t be able to use a term that has been so utterly sexualized and removed from it’s original meaning and anonymity, but there is a very good chance that would happen. It both forces ace people to use another label, and forces alloaros to use a term that is now associated with inherently including sex, even if they never have it.
3.] So… what do we do?
There are multiple things we should do in response to this term being made.
A. We should not use queeragamic.
I do not think we should attack or otherwise harm the creator, but we shouldn’t permit this or platform it. Simply put, we need to keep it out of our spaces. We should not platform ideas that back harmful beliefs already present in our community.
B. We need to go to the source of this.
Queeragamic did not come from thin air. It could be better described as a symptom of existing alloarophobia in the community. In order to keep this from happening again, we need to listen to, and trust, alloaros on their own issues and concerns. We need to communicate and work with them. They may not be ace, but they are still aspec, they are still aro, and they still belong in discussions regarding aspec terms just as much as ace people do. They are not a lesser tier of aspec, they are equal, and we need to weed out things that suggest or support otherwise in our community.
C. Proper education on terminology.
People cannot understand why queeragamic is bad if they do not understand what a QPR is to begin with. We need to talk more about QPRs, need to talk more about the variations within them and teach others what these terms mean.
D. Speaking up.
We need to open dialogues about issues we are facing in the community, and when terms become harmful. We need to stand by our alloaro siblings and help them on things like this. We need to side with them and believe their experiences so that they are not scared to speak up when something is harmful to them. Create a space that is open for discussion and fair criticism.
4.] Epilogue
It is important to note that I will not have gotten everything perfect. I am not alloaro and despite the length of this post, the most valuable discussions come from those the most affected by this term. If I’ve gotten anything wrong, you’re welcome to let me know.
Regardless, I hope this was a decent analysis of the term and it’s issues. I’ve been against it since it’s creation, but I’ve been putting off writing in detail about it for a while now. This term is still in usage, though, so it’s important that we continue to talk about this.
lgbtqiarchive 