Originally Posted by LovingRadiance
BUT-my daughter IS part white-part Puerto Rican.
She refers to herself as white.
She LOOKS white and she doesn't want any "special treatment" for being technically Puerto Rican.
That doesn't mean she's promoting a prejudice towards Puerto Ricans.
That can't be decided until one actually knows her and how she lives her life.
She's more than happy and willing to actively fight for the rights of "her people". But you couldn't know that if the only thing asked was if she chooses to self-identify as Puerto Rican.
If she chooses not to self-identify as Puerto Rican because she doesn't feel that identity, then that's definitely a valid choice for her. If she chooses to not identify as Puerto Rican because lots of Puerto Ricans are drug dealers or in gangs and she doesn't want to be seen with that, then I have several Puerto Rican friends that would have something to say about that. (I'm not saying that this is what she's doing, I'm just illustrating the analogy)
Likewise-I prefer definitive understanding of a word-before using it.
Polyamory-seriously LACKS definitive understanding of it's meaning.
As does CHRISTIAN.
Therefore I don't prefer to use either to self-identify. If I have to explain what I am ANYWAY-I'd rather just do that, instead of prefacing the explanation with a word that my listener doesn't comprehend anyway.
Which-is what I have been saying all along.
The thing is, both polyamory and Christianity have pretty clear definitions. We as a society for whatever reason have decided to merge EXAMPLES of the definition with the actual DEFINITION itself. We also seem to think that because lots of people misunderstand the definition, that there isn't a clear one. The same thing happened with the word polygamy. I prefer to dispel the misunderstanding rather than contribute to it by saying that the word doesn't apply to me because of the misunderstandings of the word, not the actual word itself.
The thing is, choosing not to use the specific word ISN'T the issue. It's choosing to take on the same assumptions around that word that most of the non poly world takes on that causes problems for everyone.
Just the other day, someone told me that they couldn't be poly because they're not promiscuous. I spent some time explaining that being promiscuous isn't the definition of what it is to be poly. Sure there could be poly people who are promiscuous and proud of it. (There are lots of monogamous people who are as well). But I won't say that I'm not one of THEM because I'm not promiscuous. I'm just going to say that we both practice it a different way.
I don't care WHAT the meaning is-I just don't wish to self-identify using a term that doesn't HAVE an agreed upon meaning.
I wonder how many words that describe identity truly have an agreed upon meaning across cultures. I'm willing to bet not many. It's just what cultures assume to be behind that. Society has always progressed by dispelling assumptions, not by enabling them.
How is that promoting prejudice?
If the people who use the word can't say what the hell it functionally means-only conceptually, what use is it anyway?
How is promoting myself as loving two men simultaneously, respectfully and openly in anyway promoting prejudice against someone who identifies as poly (or someone who identifies as mono for that matter?)
By saying I love two men in a secure healthy loving relationship but I don't identify as poly because I'm not promiscuous like those poly people (this is just an example) I am promoting the idea that identifying as poly means being promiscuous. In such, I'm actively working against the clear definition that already exists.