dear fellow asexuals

[krait]

Hey, fellow asexuals, can we just steal the term "moirallegiance" from Homestuck fandom? :D

I mean, i-it's okay to co-opt a minority culture's term if that minority culture is 1. not a minority on their home planet, and 2. fictional. ...Right?

Comments

[valmora]

I'm not anywhere near the ace spectrum, but I don't see why not. (besides in their own society trolls aren't a minority.)

[krait]

Heh. :D Yeah, that parenthetical bit is why I threw in the "they're not a minority on their planet!" And as they've never been on ours...

Actually, come to it, they're not even a minority in their canon -- 24 trolls and 8 kids, humans are definitely the minority there! :D

My far more realistic worry is that, well, as some anon on a kinkmeme once pointed out in a prompt that intrigued me enough to keep me from forgetting it: moirallegiance has overtones of "restraining influence" that, though fandom seems to forget it sometimes, isn't quite in line with the norms of human relationships; we tend to look for/praise relationships where people encourage each other.

Because of that, I have this underlying disconnect between "moirallegiance: sounds so much like asexual romance, how cool!" and "wait, do I really want to suggest (even just to people who are also in the fandom) that asexual relationships are based on KEEP YOUR PARTNER OUT OF INSANITY instead of MAKE THEM HAPPY like the human norm/ideal?" *makes face* Aces have enough people telling them there's something wrong with their heads already.

...Sometimes I suspect that I would out-analyse Rose Lalonde in a no-holds-barred analytical gymnastics match. *facepalm*

[valmora]

Reacting to your thoughts in bullet-point form because that's how I think:

- I cannot tell you what to think. I am also not ace, so my responses are based on a non-first-person understanding of the asexual spectrum. I've done some reading, but that is no substitute for the plurality of experiences of actual asexual-spectrum persons.

- that said, I agree that as far as canon provides, moirallegiance is about reining in, calming down, etc.

- however, canon does not really provide us any really detailed models of what a flushed romance is supposed to look like

- nor do I necessarily believe that all moirallegiances are the same, and all matespritships are the same. this is obviously ridiculous.

- although there are a plurality of portrayals of moirallegiance that ARE positive, reinforcing, etc in fanfiction

- however, in the troll context, I don't see why there shouldn't be people on an ace spectrum who are in "non-concupiscent" (ie they don't have sex) flushed or caliginous relationships. yes, it might be statistically rare. but I don't think that that would be impossible.

- just as humans can be in "ostensibly sexual" emotional relationships without sex, I imagine that trolls could (in a non-culling world) maintain red/black relationships that are emotionally within the range of red/black relationship experiences, without sexual activity.

- that said, I think you have the right to describe your relationships in whatever way seems appropriate and correct to you

- and if you wish to view whatever relationships you might be in or enter as "moirallegiance", the more power to you

[krait]

Heh, nah, never fear, it's all strictly theoretical for me; I don't have a maybe-moirail or any intention of acquiring a maybe-moirail, so. No worries about my right to name my own relationships here! :D I'd totally call him whatever I wanted (with his approval, of course), if he existed, but as he doesn't exist and probably won't ever exist, it's all just fun games in my head. The twinges of concern and second-guessing I have are more for the wider ace community, i.e. would they really want to adopt the term, and would it backfire on them with people who knew the term's origin.

Which, yeah, can be boiled down to "every individual ace can call their relationship what they want", on one level. I guess what I was more thinking of was widespread acceptance of the term, within and without the community: Could we ever reach a point where I could ask a just-met asexual "Oh, do you have a moirail?" and they'd know what I meant. It would be kind of cool! ('Moirail' is also awesome because it's nicely genderless, unlike "do you have a boyfriend or girlfriend?" and less silly than "significant other"...)

(You think in bullet points! You are so organised! Me, I think in long paragraphs with too many subclauses; I have a semicolon addiction. Not to mention an unhealthy codependency with parentheses.) :D

[valmora]

would they really want to adopt the term, and would it backfire on them with people who knew the term's origin.
I don't think it would necessarily "backfire", but I don't think it will ever achieve mainstream adoption, no, sorry. =(

re:thinking in bullet points:
It's less organized than it seems. It's more that bullet points allow me to have a thought, get it out there, and go on to the next - whether that thought is a child-thought of the previous thought or a sibling-thought of the previous thought - without having to actually create any sort of segue into it.

(parens are the best.)

[krait]

don't think it will ever achieve mainstream adoption

Alas! D:

have a thought, get it out there, and go on to the next

Ah, so they're like... the little proto-paragraphs I used to make when writing for Lit assignments. :D Sensible.

(parens are the best.)

(They so are!)

[krait]

In a much more fannish vein:

I have often thought that what Tavros needs is a human 'moirail' the way it's most commonly interpreted; the 'enabler' aspect of human friendship could only do him good, and, as I think he would have little need for someone to keep his murderous tendencies in check for him, a traditional moirallegiance could feel uncomfortably unbalanced, which might undermine his confidence further.

[valmora]

he would have little need for someone to keep his murderous tendencies in check for him
I am definitely in the class of people who subscribe to an "every relationship depends on the individuals in it" view of romance, especially quadrant romance. So "pacifying" can be more than just "now now it's not necessary to actually kill them." It could also be:

Tavros: hNNNNNG, i REALLY WANT THIS, aYAGAMI REI ACTION FIGURE,

moirail: Are you sure? It's pretty expensive...and I mean, what would you do with it?

Tavros: lOOK AT IT,

moirail: How long do you think you're going to be obsessed with [Other media series than Evangelion whose juxtaposition with Evangelion is hilarious]?

Tavros: a COUPLE OF, sWEEPS, i GUESS,,,,

moirail: And you won't really use it much, will you?

Tavros: bUT, iT'S,,,,

moirail: I thought not. *pat pat*

Or in a fic I'm writing that's Sollux♦Feferi, his "pacifying" behavior is closer to "having the pessimistic viewpoint" - persuading her to be less trusting, or to make choices and take actions to protect herself more. In that situation, Sollux's duty as Feferi's moirail might be less "pacifying" and more "preventing them from making stupid or potentially self-damaging decisions". But that's more headcanon than anything else. *shrug*