[Grey Matter]

I have posted earlier this month that I am now in a platonic partnership. We are not romantic. We do not engage in sex. We do the typical hand holding, telling each other we love you, etc. But there are no romantic feelings. I feel emotionally intimate with her as she knows the most about me. But there isn't romance. And when we explain this to people, they tell us "Just be romantic! Why can't you admit you are romantic?" "I mean... what's the difference between being best friends and what you are? Romance is...higher than that."

It angers me to no end. Why does Romance = true love, but Platonic = lesser? I have never loved so greatly, or felt so loved by another. And I HAVE been in romantic relationships. They were uncomfortable to me, too filled with drama and "what ifs".

I just don't understand. I guess I am just wondering why people value romance over platonic relationships and friendships? (queerplatonic partnerships are a thing by the way for those curious).

[winter4me]

I don't know either. What you have sounds enviable to me. When I was young, I had a relationship like you describe and, it is one of the best I ever had; and I remember it with great fondness. And, I know (since we kept in touch for years) he felt the same.
It is exactly what I would wish to have now.

[healingme4me]

I'm stumped on this. Ideally, a romantic relationship, is about what you describe, barring the sex aspect. It's about being best friends, first.

Mutual admiration, respect, fondness, acceptance, affectionate gestures(hand holding/saying I love you).

I'd say, don't let others expectations, define what you have.

Playing, advocate here...are these questions, perhaps ill equipped to ask, the right question? I know you are on the younger side of the adult/late teen spectrum, so perhaps those asking, lack the ability to use tact?

My question, is there chemistry? In the sense, that a 'romantic' relationship, involves chemical attraction. What you have is, pure, and a wonderful thing, to have. And perhaps, it's striking a nerve, because, that's not what either of you desire? I'm not sure, and I don't want to offend, nor really pry. Just trying to say, that I don't feel they need to push their own preconceived ideas on you and your friend.

Why can't what you have, also be a true love? It's honest and pure.

[unaluna]

I would guess because society had an interest in children being born and raised in stable families? So your friends might not realize they are echoing this interest, but that's all I can think of.

[IndieVisible]

I think people can be romantic and still platonic. And I also think people can be romantic without sex. That's the difference between best friends and platonic. The romance. You don't need sex to feel some thing special, and that some thing special I would call romantic.

You can be romantic and platonic
but not best friends and romantic.

Platonic relationship must be some thing special or really what's the difference between best friends and platonic? I think imho it is the romance where we stumble because many people feel you need sexual attraction or sex for romance, I don't believe so.

Just my 2 cents

[Grey Matter]

Healing; We have our own sort of chemistry. But it doesn't fall into the hetero-narrative of modern day society. We call each other "partner" because I am not especially willing to call anyone more than a friend, ever, as people are fickle. So for me to accept her not only as a best friend, but to identify her as a partner, is rather huge for me. Yet, there is no romantic spark. And she feels the same. I do believe it is true love. It feels like there is more love, respect, and acceptance than I have felt in any romantic relationship I have been in.

Hankster; that really does make sense.

Indie; I don't understand how one can be romantic and platonic? I am not debating or disagreeing I am just actually curious haha

[IndieVisible]

Originally Posted by Teen Idle

...

Indie; I don't understand how one can be romantic and platonic? I am not debating or disagreeing I am just actually curious haha

Well for example, I had one female friend. IMHO we were more then just friends but was a platonic relationship, I loved her, but not the way for sexual purposes, yet not a way one would love a brother or sister either, or a best friend.

The problem with the english language is we only have one word for love when in fact there are many flavors or variations of love.

The way you love your favorite color is different then the way you love your mother which is different then the way you love your friend which is also iMHO different then the way you love your platonic friend. I consider it romantic only for shortness of words/ways to express it's uniqueness. It has to be different or otherwise it would be the same as one of the other expressions of love. It's romantic in that it's special. You don't need to have sex to have a romance which is simply another flavor of love.

[winter4me]

romantic can be holding hands, giving/receiving special gifts/hand picked flowers/a candlelit dinner, sharing intimate feelings/thoughts/experiences. sex is just sex, it is the act of copulating &/or other related activities, it may or may not involve romance.

[Grey Matter]

Okay, that makes sense Indie, thank you.

Yeah I personally don't believe sex is always a romantic act, and plenty of platonic partners do have sex. It just seems like something I wouldn't do with her.

[unaluna]

Originally Posted by Teen Idle

Okay, that makes sense Indie, thank you.

Yeah I personally don't believe sex is always a romantic act, and plenty of platonic partners do have sex. It just seems like something I wouldn't do with her.

And again in the olden days, and even for some modern folks, people dont just have sex like they were having french fries.