Category: mod britt

parzivalcreations: When you find one of your …


When you find one of your old diaries and realise the signs were there from the beginning

Sorry, kiddo, don’t think you’ll get that crush 

(also I’m so sorry I haven’t been posting recently a lot is going on!! but I have a lot planned!)

doodledream: Pride Sheep Icons! Please credi…


Pride Sheep Icons!
Please credit to me if you use! If you’d like a flag that isn’t listed here, feel free to ask me!

Flags in order: Gay, Lesbian, Transgender, Bisexual, Pansexual, Asexual, Intersex And Genderqueer!

(They’re transparent!!)

storyofarts: 今年には、皆成長しますね。



Ace umbrella identities, not specific to sexua…


I got requested by quite a few people for ace umbrella identities that look at human sexuality from an activity or philosophical point of view, so here’s the most “popular” terms out there.

Keep in mind this is as of January 2018. Some other terms might exist, but if they’re not on this list (as of Jan 2018), it could be that the terms are extremely rare, new, or “lost” to the pages of internet history (or the ace community overall doesn’t feel comfortable with the words).

You can find a list of ORIENTATION/ATTRACTION ace umbrella IDs here:

So onto the list!

  • Parasexual: Being asexual (NO sexual attraction) and having sex ONLY to make babies/reproduce. This is the ONLY reason you have sex.
  • Placiosexual: Wanting to do sexual acts on others but has little to no desire to receive sexual actions
  • Lamvanosexual: Wanting to RECEIVE sexual actions, but has little to no desire to do it to others
  • Autochorrisexual/Aegosexual: A disconnection between one’s self and target of sexual arousal
  • Apothisexual: Someone who is asexual and sex repulsed
  • Pothisexual: Someone who is asexual and sex positive (open to discussions about sex, willing to debate on subjects about sex, overall having a positive mindset in regards to different subjects regarding human sexuality)
  • Agensexual: Someone who is asexual and genitalia repulsed
  • Sanssexual: When there’s no trend line in the attraction and basically it’s a very fluid orientation. Like aroflux, but all orientations, not just aro scale. It means no orientation (sans means without).
  • Aprocreationist: someone who doesn’t feel the need to procreate in any way at any time in their lives. Someone who has no desire to have children in any way at all.
  • Aceflux: believing your sexual orientation constantly changes between allosexual (not asexual) and the asexual umbrella (this is one of the possible definitions I’ve found for this)
  • Dissociatsexual: Whenever engaging in sexual activities, you dissociate on a regular basis and therefore are often very confused about what exactly your sexual orientation is. This is NOT an excuse to not see a professional if you feel this negatively impacts your day-to-day life. 
  • Epicaderesexual:  Feeling sexual attraction only in response to sexual thoughts or feelings expressed by a person one is (potentially) attracted to. (another term for this is “incisexual”, but some ace community folks feel this term is too dangerously close to the word “incest”, so this was an alternative term for it, epicaderesexual)
  • Apressexual: The belief that you only experience sexual attraction, after another form of attraction is felt (platonic, romantic, sensual, etc.)

I’m pretty sure I covered MOST of the more philosophical/actions related ace umbrella terms.



if you’re not aware

unaligned nonbinary a-specs are great

The QPR/Soft Romo Guide for Defining the Relat…


mod fitz here.  I have noticed that we have been getting a lot of asks that basically all go “I am (or my [potential] partner is) greyro, and I am maybe interested in being in a relationship, but how would that even work?”  So I decided I would create a masterpost on defining the relationship in non-amatonormative relationships.  

So let’s start with types of relationships.  A typical romantic relationship is just that–a typical romantic relationship.  It is what you see in the movies, what society pushes in your face constantly as something you need to have to be “complete.”  The most common type of non-romantic significant relationship is a QPR, or queerplatonic relationship (quasiplatonic for those who do not wish to use the word queer). 

The basic idea of a QPR is that it is something that goes beyond what you consider normal friendship, but it is not romantic in nature.  What exactly a QPR is can be tricky at first, especially if you don’t have any real examples to base your understanding on (thank you amatonormativity).  Really the idea behind QPRs is that they deviate from typical narratives of both friendship and romance, or in other words, they are “queering” what we think a significant relationship entails.

Another type of relationship is a soft-romo relationship, which is somewhere in-between a QPR and a romantic relationship.  These often occur when one partner is romantically attracted to the other and the other is not, or when one or both partners have fluctuating levels of attraction or tolerance for romantic activities, or boundaries that make a typical romantic relationship not realistic. 

While communication is important in any relationship, amatonormative relationships have a script to follow, which helps greatly.  (A DTR talk may be as simple as, “so are we doing this?” or “would it be okay if I called you my boyfriend?”) Those who desire QPRs or soft-romo relationships do not have this tool, and often at least one of the people involved do not have the language to even begin defining what it is their relationship is, which can make defining the relationship a daunting task.

So here I am to give you some tools to use to help you define the relationship you want or the relationship you are currently in!

One of the simplest is a Want Will Won’t list (adapted from this video from sexplanations on Youtube).  Basically what you do is create three columns on a piece of paper.  One column is “Want,” or what you want from the relationship (ex: I want cuddling, hand holding, kissing (not mouth-to-mouth), commitment, emotional intimacy, understanding and patience with my mental illness).  The next column is “Will,” or what you would be willing to do if your partner wanted, but aren’t necessarily driven to it yourself, or it isn’t important to you (ex: I would go on dates, closed-mouth kiss on the mouth [maybe some tongue, ask first], call you my boyfriend/girlfriend/datemate, sex [maybe, definitely ask first]).  The last column is “Won’t” or what you do not want from the relationship (ex: no tongue kissing, daily texts, sleeping together, nudity).  As you can see from my responses, the Want and Won’t parts are relatively cut and dry, but some items in the Will column may need some explanation.  Once you make your list, compare it with your partner’s.  You can make this in post-it notes if you think your feelings may change over time (which may be especially helpful for aroflux people).

Another post that may be helpful is this post
which lists many activities a significant relationship may entail,
which may be helpful if you are having trouble thinking about what you
can put on your Want Will Won’t list, or you can just use the post by

Another option, especially if when I described QPRs and soft-romo relationships your reaction was, “What?!” is queenieofaces​‘s Five Factor model of relationships

The Five Factor Model relies on five factors (thus the name) to
categorize relationships: commitment, intimacy, time, exclusivity, and

Go check out Queenie’s original post if it looks like this may be the model for you.  Queenie linked to a few more similar models, and I am going to link them below with the different factors they explain:

  • The Anatomy of Relationships: Sexuality, Touch, Limerance, Emotional vulnerability, Thought-sharing, Resource sharing, Commitment, Prioritization, Time, Common interests, Group membership, Exclusivity, Negotiation.
  • David Jay (part 1, part 2): Time, Feelings, and Promises [this one is really simple and quick and geared towards how to make the relationship progress, especially in part 2]
  • Minerva: Love, Intimacy, and Commitment

Minerva’s post is very similar to Sternberg’s Triangular Theory of Love which has the factors intimacy, passion, and commitment, and can be explained well through this diagram [x]:


EDIT: I just found this post which discusses the Sternberg theory in relation to aromanticism. Check it out!

I hope one of the resources provided on this post helps you figure out your current relationship or what you desire from a future relationship.

Full disclaimer:  I do not have any personal experience with actually defining the relationship with another person (hence why I am only quoting others), these are simply tools I wish I had in the past and tools I currently use to help think about what types of relationships I may potentially want to be in.

-mod fitz

mygayisshowing: Be respectful.


Be respectful.



me: i want a partner so bad

my greyromantic ass: lol k





Just because you aren’t romantically attracted to someone, doesn’t mean you can’t love them.

It doesn’t mean you can’t be in a relationship.

It doesn’t mean that you can’t enjoy traditionally romantic or romantic-coded things.

It doesn’t mean that you’re limited in any way.

Your identity says nothing about what you enjoy, who you are with or how you feel about someone.

You do you, and let labels come later.