View Single Post
  #16  
Old 07-12-2012, 08:47 PM
mercury mercury is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 84
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CielDuMatin View Post
I think it has a lot to do with personal insecurites, but I disagree with you that the rest necessarily follows. If everyone is perfectly happy with this rule in place, then it's most certainly not inherently unfair, no more than monogamy is.

I strongly disagree with you on this one. For one, the definition of "true poly" is a very dangerous thing to try to nail down - it might not conform to YOUR ideas of what poly is, but I think we have to be careful of trying to speak for the entire poly community, and to imply that something that everyone involved may well be happy with isn't "true poly".

I don't like OPPs, and don't have one myself, but to say that those that have them aren't "poly enough" is pretty offensive.
I agree that people have a right to define their own relationships. Yet, I do think it's fair to call one couple more poly than another, or more 'truly poly' than another. There's a spectrum.

The general definition of polyamory is more than one loving relationship with the consent of everyone involved. It's true that if a wife has a girlfriend plus her husband, and the husband has a girlfriend plus his wife, they each have more than one loving relationship, even if the OPP policy is in place.

I would call them polyamorous. But there's also a general understanding of freedom in polyamory too. Polyamory means multiple loves. I think a couple who allows these many loves to happen pretty freely without a lot of restrictions is more poly than the kind who's carefully crafting approvals, what's allowed, etc. The latter is still poly, just a less free version of it. They apply the "consent of all involved" only in certain cases (and maybe very selective cases even), therefore their poly doesn't stick to the definition as closely, on the grounds that consent doesn't happen as easily or freely. Hence, they're less poly.

Last edited by mercury; 07-12-2012 at 09:11 PM.
Reply With Quote