Clarification in a new thread, as I my unclear words should really have been a new topic rather than a long winded comment that resulted from this thread http://www.polyamory.com/forum/showthread.php?t=46186
Sure, I can focus a little bit more. What I am saying is that this site has a lot of people bashing two of the three people in triads. The two they bash are the "unicorn hunters" , the couple who decide they desire to open up their relationship and specifically look for a female to form a poly triad.
I don't feel it's necessary to restate the potential problems that can arise from a couple looking for a third, any post tagged with unicorn, unicorn hunters, or couples privilege reiterates the possible pitfalls of the triad dynamic. That is good to point out the pitfalls, but the vilifying of a couple and ridiculing any couple desiring an addition to form a triad is the part that baffles me. And it seems to come from a set of very anonymous, extremely passive aggressive group of tech savy people who have a much exaggerated presence online as opposed to the real world as online what looks like four or fourty people can be the work of only one individual. This attitude I am speaking of is one where they attempt to use very logical and sometimes even a scientific strategy to examine poly relationships as if math equations where A + B = C therefore C - B = A and I feel that their attitude is not at all based on facts, but more based upon whatever crazy notion of the month had the most persuasive bloggers and public debators prove their logic. So they end up with logical sounding reasoning that has nothing to do with the actual assertions or points they are trying make. It is a problem that stems from forgetting that all of the subsets they break a relationship down into do not actually exist on their own, they are an aspect of the dynamics of relationships.
It's the villifying of certain sexual dynamics as if anybody who engages in them are bad people or not poly because they engage in casual sex. From my experience, not only do some poly people engage in very casual (and very pleasureable ) sex on occasion, but they would also never consider the relationships "poly" that are described on this site. When your spouse has a completely separate life involved in a relationship that their OSO is completely removed from they wouldn't call it poly. Any Vee styled relationship where the metamours didn't get along or meerly tolerated each other wouldn't be poly either. Nearly everyone goes through a messy transition as they figure out whether or not they can love more than one person freely. And If they can, what sort of a lifestyle will be tolarable or better yet, enjoyable that works for them and those they choose to share their life with.
of course when I say "love freely" I am not talking about familiar love that people have for their kids, parents, siblings and other blood related family. I don't know anybody who is not poly in that sense of being poly, so it really is kind of pointless to draw conclusions or parallels from familiar love and equate those relationships with the love you feel for those you have a sexual relationship with.
And for the record, there are few "styles" or frameworks of relationships (which may or may not include sex) that are wrong when all involved are honest, of legal age, explicitly desire the acts or behavior and give full consent. It's hard for me to not say something when I see others attacking people because the style of relationship does not suit them. Sure there are always aspects that can make any relationship morally and ethically wrong, but attacking unicorn hunters or telling them it's wrong to have a causual threesome before they hear the unicorn's side of the story, they are speaking from an utterly ignorant viewpoint because it is entirely possible that it is the unicorn who is in the wrong (if if fact there is anything wrong about the dynamic.
Doing so is as ignorant as claiming BDSM dynamics as abusive
Doing so is as ignorant as labeling certain strategies as "victim blaming" when they are attempting to educate women so that they are hip to situations that predators and rapists can easily take advantage of
There is nothing logical or "matter of fact" about it
When intentions and desires are fully disclosed yet later on there ends up being a discrepancy, it isn't always the couple who are at fault. There are instances wherein the couple gets burned by the unicorn as it is possible for the Hot bi-babe to be less than forthcoming for selfish reasons. To automatically attack or blame the couple claiming that it's typically they who are guilty and the unicorn innocent, is honestly a very ignorant or inexperienced opinion.
Quite frankly, the unicorn hunter bashing mentality is not one I have seen anywhere offline, and even online I have never encountered it anywhere but Franklin Veaux's empire of linked sites, the only other exception is here. So that is the connection I was making and I know it's not easy to follow my writing. If I seem a little furstrated, it's because I am. I keep thinking that polyamory dot com is too similar to that empire of sites in that there appears to be a large anti-"unicorn hunter" following here which is irritating because from my view, it does not accurately represent real life demographics. Anytime an attitude that isn't present among poly people offline appears to be significant attitude online, I get suspicious of sock puppet accounts as that is typically how an attitude of a few individuals can appear as the general consensus of an overwhelming majority online.
Is not wrong for any style of non-monogamy to not be right for you, but bashing or ridiculing others for having the courage to ask for and persue the life they desire is not only ignorant, but it is disrespectful. There is nothing wrong with genuine concern for peoples emotional well being and reminding others of how easy it is to set right into the pitfalls of non-monogamy. AnabelMore does a great job illustrating how one can reach out and try to be helpful to those looking for advice whereas others take every opportunity to attack any flavor of non-monogamy that doesn't align with their political ideology as if they are scoring points for a red or blue team.
It is very possible that I am flat out wrong, it wouldn't be the first site I got excited to contribute or be a part of, only later to find out I didn't fit the mold and was out of place. That most of my problems stemmed from where I was and the people I attempted to socialize online with, I was out place. It wasn't me or the attitude they adopted as acceptable behavior, we just didn't mix well.
In full disclosure, I should admit that much of my disliking of certain attitudes, for me is personal. I have trouble with the online explosion and new school, young online people who consider themselves veteran polyamorists as I had a bad real life experience with new, younger ideology of what is or is not "poly"
It's all non-monogamy in my point view unless we are talking about specifc details, I feel it is a mistake brand people without knowing their specific details. Once you do know, go ahead and strike when the iron's hot. But you might not want be in the business of branding others anything if you refuse to hold yourself accountable for your actions