"the concept of queerplatonic relationships originated from the asexual community" and "anyone of any orientation can be in a QPR" and "it's weird to give an overview of QPRs that mentions asexuality without mentioning their significance to so many aromantic people" and "QPRs don't need to be non-sexual" are all true statements that can easily coexist
moreover:
it's certainly not "repackaging amatonormativity" for individual aro and/or and ace people to want QPRs, or want to talk about their QPRs in a-spec spaces
it is, however, repackaging social norms when all aros and aces are expected to have or want QPRs, and when their acceptance as aro and/or ace is made contingent on the notion of "well they can still partner platonically đâ¤ď¸"
