View Single Post
  #108  
Old 05-25-2010, 04:56 PM
rpcrazy's Avatar
rpcrazy rpcrazy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 171
Default

this thread is huge, thank you love(RedP) for starting it way back :P.

CielDuMatin talked about a sort of flowchart like idea of relationship topologies.
That is generally how I think, and i'm going to go from their. First off...
<Relationships>
Monogamy>non-monogamy
non-mono>ethical>non-ethical
ethical>swingers>polyamories(or whatever)

A major debate was, coming up with a definition of what a poly person or relationship is. However the major consensus seems to be that you can't define something ubiquitous, and most people put a subjective spin to it since it's so out of norm as we can see on our relationship dynamic chart there, it's hard to explain.
Unfortunately for us, our hippie friends Morning Glory and Oberon Zell were not English majors and to my knowledge had to formal training in linguistics. Though i'm definitely a hippie with a similar spirit as theirs.

So in saying "polyamory" is this vast relationship dynamic, with it's own subcategories, it falls on us to make our own terms for our own relationships knowing that they all fall under a umbrella of "poly". We've coined topologies liked "triad" "vee", terms like polyfidelity, multiamory, etc etc and I think that's great. So let's keep it up.

So how exactly would you "divide" the line between say a relationship I have with a wife and openness to have boyfriends and girlfriends but not in any meaningful way (like having 2 fathers for children and etc) VS. a relationship where we're actively looking for another grown member or members of the family, but obviously starting out as normal relationships? Or what would you the relationships that are already positioned like the above concepts?
__________________
---------------------------------------------------\\\
-"There hasn't been a person i've been with that I didn't love for 10 seconds to 10 years." David Duchovny
Reply With Quote