Originally Posted by kazokujin
Um... I don't want to jump to any conclusions either, but the tone of your post seems to be jumping to a lot of conclusions.
This could go 'round and 'round in circles but maybe you're jumping to conclusions about my jumping to conclusions. As I wrote the 2nd time,
As I wrote, I really don't want to jump to any conclusions, and maybe you're already questioning these shams
[underlining added this time around]
I was posing some questions that I thought might be interesting for you to consider if you hadn't already. I'm glad to read that you have.
If what you now envisage is a large(r) 3-parent family without a romantic attachment between either you or your wife and the other woman, I would consider that co-parenting rather than polyamory. And no, I didn't write sexual just now, I wrote romantic. For me, the love involved in polyamory is much more important than the sex, but the "flavour" of that love is defining. I'm not saying that sex is a prerequisite for consideration as a polyamorous group. But - to take an extreme example - in a large, happy, nuclear family it`s possible that every member loves every other member very truly and very deeply (filial, maternal, fraternal love). But I would hardly consider that a polyamorous group. To take a less extreme example, I lived for a while with a couple and their 2 daughters. I cared for (felt the love of friendship for) the couple. The children were - and now as adults continue to be - among the most important people in my life. I was - and am - a part of that family. But that wasn't a case of polyamory either, it was co-parenting.
Since you wrote of polyamory ("and to see if there's room in it (and a partner in it) for us"
) - and that you've studied the matter academically - perhaps I did
jump to the conclusion that you were writing about considering a romantic and/or sexual attachment.
I stand corrected.