anyone else feeling rather... annoyed at the way ppl have come to define and use queerplatonic and qprs? So many times I see ppl talk abt qprs saying they're "friendship but Deeper" or "a relationship strictly between friendship and romance" or "essentially romance lite/romance for aromantics" and like. A qpr definitely can be all that if the participants want that, but to say that this is THE definition of queerplatonic is actually going directly against the very goal for which the term was created. Queerplatonic was supposed to give us a word to be able to talk about relationships that don't fit neatly into the "romantic" and "platonic" boxes, whilst also deconstructing the relationship hierarchy and the idea that friendships are fundamentally lesser than romantic relationships. So can we please stop using qprs as a way to once again make friendships seem like a lesser form of relationship and to reinforce the relationship hierarchy? Please?
Afaik the original definition of a qpr was smth along the lines of "a relationship that doesn't fit the traditional boundaries of a friendship". By that definition? A loveless friendship would be a qpr. A "friendship" between two aplatonics would be a qpr. A friendship where they specifically feel less emotionally connected to one another than is expected of a "normal" friendship would be a qpr. Just like how queerness isn't fundamentally about love, queerplatonicism, i.e. queering the platonic, isn't fundamentally about "putting more love" into friendships. It can be, but it doesn't have to be.
To 'Yes, and' some situations out of those examples:
Imagine these with any combination of apl+apl, allopl+allopl, apl+allopl, and all the other aspec/allo-spec, etc.
the "not platonic or romantic, but Neighbors" post I made is queerplatonic
Conversation partner/s: like a book club (or similar) with regular meet-ups, but where it becomes 'unusual' is its just 2-3 people and they dont want anyone else to join, that'd ruin it. Theyre not involved in anything else in each other's lives: No birthday parties, no connection-focused Winter Holidays, theyve never seen each others' other friends (if they have them)
a "kinky-first, platonic-second" relationship, kind of like a 'friends with benefits' situation. Could be sexual or non-sexual, since sfw kink is a thing.
who only get together to go to things like musicals, or the movies, or out for lunch. Experiencing things because they want to experience things and having company makes it feel different. theyre both mainly there for the Activity. Maybe they call it an 'adventuring party' setup.
"fair weather friends" but on purpose.
mutual confidants: neither/none of the participants really need/cant really afford therapy but theyve got stuff to get off their chests and hey, its a lot easier to be a listening ear when you arent deeply personally invested in the other person's life like that.
the relationship is for company, to stave off loneliness. Maybe there's a little solidarity/camaraderie-flavored respect there, maybe they feel sympathy or empathy for each other and want to help for the sake of helping, but they still dont really want to get *close*
another one, based on my own experiences:
a relationship with deliberately reduced together-time, e.g. only seeing each other on weekends, or for 3-4 days of the week.
