View Single Post
  #108  
Old 12-30-2009, 11:46 PM
Ravenesque's Avatar
Ravenesque Ravenesque is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 297
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dakid View Post
cieldumatin, i really don't see that i or anyone else is o"bfuscating" the meaning of the word "polyamorous" AT ALL.

the disagreement is clearly as has been stated, around meanings of the word love. some seem to think you can only love someone within a certain kind of relationship - let's call it an ongoing partnership for now. others like me want to acknowledge and include the love i/we feel for our FB's or others who we share intimate sexual and loving moments with outside of an ongoing partnership.

yours and others insistence that in doing so we are changing the meaning of the word polyamory is insulting, frankly. have you not been reading our posts?

nobody is changing the word's definition from any previous usage, we are challenging limited concepts of love is what we are doing.

ygirl i do agree largely with your points about nouns and verbs. i eat a vegan diet, and prefer to put it in that way rather than saying i AM vegan - because what i am is human actually!

however being human i do sometimes forget and lapse into majority-speak, declaring myself to BE vegan, which is kind of wierd but there you go.

similarly i prefer to say my beliefs/ideals and interractions are polyamorous rather than that i am, but again that is subject to lapses at times.

habits sure are hard to break sometimes!

x
Habits are hard to break. I am constantly trying to live consciously, aware of learned behaviors and perspectives we are indoctrinated with from a young age. I do this in order to break the cycle and not perpetuate oppression. Perhaps helping to create a more open world.

I am in complete agreement with you dakid.

I have encountered this insistence in other places as well. I believe love is broad and encompassing of many things. There are those who seem invested in sitting in judgment of relationships which do not take the form of their own and say "this is not poly. This is not love." I have witnessed the definitions of various forms of non-monogamy being heavily policed and restricted just for the purpose of excluding those individuals whose relationships sit at non-monogamous intersections and include activities some poly folk would not include in their lives. I find it insulting as well but more counterproductive and divisive than anything.

I find the reclamation of the word slut interesting, sex-positive and affirming of the different forms love can take.

I enjoyed Tristan Taormino's opener on Polyamory in her book Opening Up. I feel grateful that there are those who do see polyamory in a broader context and full of possibilities as to the forms polyamory and love can take.


Quote:
To distinguish polyamory from swinging and partnered nonmonogamy, poly relationships are usual characterized as "sexual and loving," a shorthand way of saying that polyamory involves not just sex but emotional relationships. But based on my research, "sexual and loving" doesn't capture the nuances and complexities of polyamorous relationships, or the way in which polyamory not only rejects mainstream models but expands our ideas about what constitutes a relationship. I would define polyamory as the desire for or the practice of maintaining multiple significant, intimate relationships simultaneously. These relationships may encompass many elements, including love, friendship, closeness, emotional intimacy, recurring contact, commitment, affection, flirting, romance, desire, erotic contact, sex, and a spiritual connection.

Now, some swingers and partnered nonmonogamists might argue that while their outside relationships are primarily sex- or BDSM-based, there is also an emotional connection or some other element from the list above. Setting up false dichotomies such as sexual versus emotional, casual versus committed, or playful versus serious just gets us into a huge heap of trouble. Some people I interviewed conceptualized and constructed their relationships in all the ways I've just discussed but say they aren't polyamorous. Two people may define their relationships in very similar ways, yet one calls herself nonmonogamous and the other polyamorous. Remember: don't get stuck on the labels if they feel confining to you; define your relationships on your terms.

"Polyamory" Chapter 7 Opening Up by Tristan Taormino
~Raven~
__________________
Are you a polyamorist or non-monogamous individual between the ages 18-35? Are you located in New York State or the Northeast?
Join us at The Network, a social and socially aware network which connects young polys and progressive polys of all ages.



~Open up your mind and let me step inside.
Rest your weary head and let your heart decide. It's so easy.
When you know the rules.
It's so easy. All you have to do is fall in love.
Play the game.
Everybody play the game of love. Yeah...~
Reply With Quote