Division in the poly community

This thread gives some really interesting insight into the possible history of poly. When I read it my confusion lifted a little. Some people are purists I think and others enjoy divisions...
 
How is the other thread a possible history of polyamory? It discusses how the terminology LGBT came about, gay rights, etc. I didn't see anything about polyamory's history in that thread, other than the poster's personal experiences as related to feminism and GLBT rights.

?????
 
...
But as I got older, I have come to enjoy my solitude and independence, although there are times I am quite lonesome. A poly tribe, or big poly family, is nothing I would ever want, whether there were kids in the equation or not. Maybe if I were still in my 20s or 30s, I'd be into it - but now in my 50s?
...

In contrast, I am a broody bloke, and in my 50s I want more than ever to live in a big family with lots of kids around, one or two of them mine and lots more kids besides.

So is there division between me and nycindie? I hope not, and certainly not from my side. Remember the 3d: diversity delights in difference.

One thing that has delighted me about meeting polys is the complete lack (in those I have met so far) of the sort of inter-faction hatred and hatred of majority groups that we are talking about over on another thread.

When I went to my first poly meet (only a few weeks ago) I was very nervous, would I as a male hettie get some of the same crap I had in the 70s and 80s? Arriving, it soon became obvious I was another majority as well, who'd have thought that poly would attract so many kinks? But there they all were. And here was me in the evil majority role on all counts... Well if they qare going to be bastards lets get it over with and go somewhere else before the entire day is ruined...

Only it wasn't like the 1980's any more, thank God. This young female gay/bi kink made it totally obvious none of that would be an issue. My day wasn't spoilt at all, I spent some six hours in the company of the group, maybe half of that talking to to that same woman.

And maybe we have a diversity of polyamories (and I could start another with my tendency to type polyamoury, the european spelling) reflecting the fact that we all have different lives to live: but lets not allow it to form divisions. And being poly, there it is easier for us to cope with honest differences: two monos with a difference over whether they wanted children are not going to have a fully happy relationship for both of them; two polys with the same difference could quite well enjoy being in a relationship that represented a 'child free' secondary relationship for the broody one.

May we celebrate diversity, may our differences become solid between us, but always as a bridge and never as a wall.
 
Last edited:
...

For me, the ethical aspect of polyamory - honesty, communication, that everyone involved with me knows about the other people I'm involved with - is paramount in defining polyamory. The ethical aspect is what makes polyamory different. Without openness and honesty, it's cheating.%
 
Last edited:
I think it is a tiresome exercise when people struggle with "am I poly or not?" Well, I don't think that's as important as asking what kind of relationships you want in your life and how to create them.
This is brilliant. There have been plenty of insights in the thread, but I think this one really cuts through all the semantics and gets to the heart of the matter.
Sorry I didn't thank you, SoCal, for your comment sooner. I do love it when my "brilliance" is acknowledged! :p

Divisions I have noticed first hand;

. . . Interestingly enough, married folks vs. co-habiting folks. Specifically, some people who are co-habiting have little understanding towards poly folks co-habiting and deciding to marry despite having other relationships.

. . . People with children and people who hate/fear children
I'm a little confused by your "married vs. cohabiting" statement. Could you elaborate?

Also I hope you don't consider all people who are childfree by choice, as I am, to be hateful toward or afraid of children.
 
When I say I do not identify as polyamorous, I mean that I don't see people as wired that way. I'm just saying that I choose to live polyamorously. That's all.
agree with you this far...
I disagree that polyamory is something you identify as, like a gender or sexual orientation.
and here I part from you. The fact that it is a choice does not stop it being an identity. I chose to become a Quaker, but that is now part of my identity. Likewise I more recently chose to identify as poly: the word represents a whole set of choices I have made since 1985 (many of them before the word 'polyamory' even existed).

But I found it was much more than that. Having made the transition wthin the last four weeks from being someone with all the poly beliefs to being someone who says "I am poly" has made a much bigger difference that I ever would have imagined. It is easier to think about the ways I am similar and different to other polys from inside the identity than it was from outside; it is easier to relate my ideas to others outside the identity as well.

Choosing to take on poly as an identity (and it certainly was a choice, in the way that being male, say, wasn't) has had an empowering and unifying effect on me as a person.
I think it is a tiresome exercise when people struggle with "am I poly or not?" Well, I don't think that's as important as asking what kind of relationships you want in your life and how to create them.
Here I agree with you again. If someone is struggling with "am I poly?" then the most helpful response is "well do you want to be?".

If they are struggling with putting that answer into practice, that does not mean they are not poly (or not mono), but that they still have stuff to learn about the decision they made.

In short, for those who like academic soundbites: being poly is a chosen identity, not a determined one.

River~~
 
Polyamory differs from various other forms of non-monogamy in that it explicitly emphasizes loving relationships, as contrasted with sex and sexuality. This distinguishes poly relationships from "f**kbuddies" and most which go by the term "friends with benefits," as well as "casual" ... "one night stands".

Most poly folk are not happy to have the term "polyamory" eroded or degraded to mean just anything anyone wants to use this term for.

As a Quaker I would say "my Friend speaks my mind"

@River: you share my thoughts on this, as well as sharing my name :)
 
In short, for those who like academic soundbites: being poly is a chosen identity, not a determined one.

Have to disagree with you, here. (And NYC's similar sentiment; can't be bothered to multiquote on iPad.)

I do believe it is possible for someone to choose to be poly, structure their relationships in a poly fashion, or identify as poly. However you'd like to put it.

But there are some for whom it is not a choice. What proof do you want? Well, me. Unless you are referring to choosing poly over cheating or serial monogamy for the rest of my life. That's about the only choice I have over how I deal with falling in love ALL THE FRICKIN' TIME.
 
...
I do believe it is possible for someone to choose to be poly, structure their relationships in a poly fashion, or identify as poly. However you'd like to put it.

But there are some for whom it is not a choice. What proof do you want? Well, me. Unless you are referring to choosing poly over cheating or serial monogamy for the rest of my life. That's about the only choice I have over how I deal with falling in love ALL THE FRICKIN' TIME.

I meant my post personally, from my perspective; I find poly was a choice I made and I am glad I made it. When I was in a mono relationship I was able to honour the mono committment I made.

I totally accept that your experience differs; if you adopted the soundbite approach I guess you'd be happier saying that for you poly was a determined identity not a chosen one.
 
I'm a little confused by your "married vs. cohabiting" statement. Could you elaborate?´

I was a bit surprised this by myself. I went out on a date with a guy who was quite anti-marriage, and argued that especially in a poly context, marriage didn't make sense. He thought that marriage as a sign of commitment is useless, since people should commit to long-term relationships anyway, married or not; or that the fact you are in a long-term relationship with someone requires commitment, so it should be self-evident without the need for any public ceremony. I hope I caught his reasoning right.

Also I hope you don't consider all people who are childfree by choice, as I am, to be hateful toward or afraid of children.

Nope, that's why I thought the division isn't really between child-free people, some of whom don't mind hanging out around kids at all and some who like kids, even. The actual problems in my congif for example are not that Moonlightrunner had kids and VanillaIce doesn't, but that Vanilla is scared of kiddies (it's almost a phobia, really). So people who honestly have a problem with kids and are poly probably are not interested in attending events where there will be a lot of families etc.
 
Have to disagree with you, here. (And NYC's similar sentiment; can't be bothered to multiquote on iPad.)

I do believe it is possible for someone to choose to be poly, structure their relationships in a poly fashion, or identify as poly. However you'd like to put it.

But there are some for whom it is not a choice. What proof do you want? Well, me. Unless you are referring to choosing poly over cheating or serial monogamy for the rest of my life. That's about the only choice I have over how I deal with falling in love ALL THE FRICKIN' TIME.

What she said. My choice was to try to bottle it up and repress it and stuff this square poly peg into a round mono hole (please excuse the language--I didn't intend for it to be dirty), and it made me intensely unhappy, guilty, and ashamed for a long time.

For me, being poly is every bit as much a wired orientation as someone else being wired gay or lesbian. "Coming out" to me has the same significance--and the same relief--as it does for someone who was closeted and trying to live unhappily as a straight person.

I readily admit that, as with sexual orientation, poly vs. mono probably has a spectrum: some are hardwired mono, some could choose to live either way, and some are hardwired poly.
 
...
I readily admit that, as with sexual orientation, poly vs. mono probably has a spectrum: some are hardwired mono, some could choose to live either way, and some are hardwired poly.

I'd go with that. I identify as hardwired polyflexible. ;)

Poly is me, I am poly, but not to the extent that I am unable to commit to mono and then keep to it...

Thank you to all the people who have contributed to this thread: I have had to think about this carefully, and that has been useful. If you think I have changed position during this thread, well, I think I have too :)


And from earlier in this thread:
The comparison that comes to mind is the reluctance of some of the gay community to accept bisexuality. There are gay folks out there, for whatever reason, who do not readily accept bisexuality. Lets not forget a few of the ignorant heterosexual crowd who believe bisexuals are just "confused" and haven't made up their minds yet. The community strives for acceptance because they still face a great deal of prejudice. Showing the world how "normal" they are perhaps means rejecting some of the variation that comes with sexual identity. It's sad really and I don't know what the solution is.

Let's not have any of this amongst poly people? We can accept those who are poly, polyflexible, by identity and those who feel it as a conscious choice, surely? None of these is "better" than any other, nor are any of us "better" than mono peope. Just different.
 
Last edited:
Let's not have any of this amongst poly people? We can accept those who are poly, polyflexible, by identity and those who feel it as a conscious choice, surely? None of these is "better" than any other, nor are any of us "better" than mono peope. Just different.

Well THAT would be nice ! I think they call that 'Live, and let live.'
 
I call it "minding my own fucking business" but that's because i'm negative and cynical and hypercritical, and don't any of you ever forget that.

Of the choices available, I`d rather be the hypercritical one, then the hypocrite. ;)

I`m negative and forgetful, so you`ll have to keep reminding me.
 
I hope there is a divide

Amen.

Awomen.

Otherwise how do you tell the difference from the assholes/bigots/mindfuckers from the ones who aren't?

LOL

But seriously,

Seriously, everyone knows right from wrong, and those who claim they don't, are full of shit. Unfortunately with the internet, it is extremely easy for one person to give the appearance of an overwhelming, convinving, dominant majority

fuck them, let them live in their fantasy realm, let them divide a community if they feel like it. You cannot stop people from making a conscious decision to choose wrong when there is a right way to behave

What I am talking about is universal, and it doesn't only apply to mono or poly, or non-monogamy or any dynamic of relationships (intimate or not) or people as islands with as close to zero interactions like Tom Hanks with his buddy Wilson

For instance, when someone told you

" that the only reason that they hung out with me was because there is no one else to hang out with... that small communities have to manage on their own and those that are in them just kinda have to put up with each other "

I would consider that person an asshole as I assume you are using ellipsis properly and there is nothing missing from the jist of it. I can think of very few situations where I would not consider that person an asshole, we all have days when we can be mean, spiteful, and rude. If they didn't come back and make amends there would be very few people I would tolerate that sort of behavior if done on a regular basis.

If he wasn't trying to be funny, I would consider that being an asshole, I would not feel obligated to tolerate his presence and if he was part of a group I "hung out with" if I couldn't completely avoid him during meetings I would seriously consider not associated with the group.

It is not going to be an easy transition from underground to being able to live as you choose without hiding it. It isn't wrong to not want to get involved as it will undoubtably invite much negativity into your life. So it isn't recommended to be out loud and proud unless you are brave and well supported. The way that everyone can help is by doing nothing more than speaking out when you witness persecution or affliction by anyone simply because a person is poly (or LGBT or any person who is being wrongfully discriminated against) You might find yourself having to make some tough decisions that you wouldn't have to make if poly were to stay underground. Some people like dysfunction, it's their comfort zone and it's convenient, but it doesn't stop them from bitching about the dysfunction and pretending to hate it

It's my view that it is the right move to work towards polyamory no longer being persecuted, such persecution is nearly identical to the unrecognized hatred known as racism. It's wrongful discrimination, it's bigotry, and yet there may always be places in the world where it's tolerated just like there are places in the U.S. that tolerates community racism.

Poly people that don't want poly to be legally/socially acceptable (ie no longer persecuted) are not bad, but they become a problem when they interfere with the process of obtaining equal rights. Hopefully there will not be many polies who work against the rights movement, but there will probably be a few.

Of those polies who want to keep it underground, you may find some who desire that because, if it wasn't for the need to be underground, you wouldn't "have to hang out with them" . They may be poly but racists, they're poly but cannot help being bigoted towards LGBT. I hope that those who are like that, would be able to learn why it is not OK to treat others like that, but you cannot force them, and it's not your fault nor any communities

it won't fun if you have to cut people out of a group, or secede from the main group, but it may be necessary if you cannot come to some sort of agreement about respectful behavior

there is a huge difference between people with different beliefs who show respect for the opposition and those who refuse to be respectful. People are not always honest about their intent, and sometime rules need to become more and more detailed which usually happens before a split. It doesn't matter how details and explicit laws can be written, when it comes to treating people with respect it simply cannot be enforced. There will always be motherfuckers who refuse to be respectful and employ the use of subtlety to communicate there disrespect. People have been abusing languages since humans first began communicating. There is a difference between employing subtlety and speaking with words you don't say because the speakers are oppressed, and when it's done because the speaker is a coward and simply doesn't want to be responsible for being an asshole/bigot

It's been my experience with these types of situations that trust is necessary, honesty plays an important role. It is not worth the time and effort into making more and more rules and having to enforce said rules by moderating/policing so I find people with integrity who honor their word ideal to work with, no matter what their beliefs. Conversely people who are dishonest will never be helpful, not even with shared beliefs

As far as the poly and cheating thing goes, they are just that, cheaters. I guess they could be called "poly cheaters" but is there really that much difference between a mono cheater and a poly cheater?

Languages usually don't waste much time labeling things past the lowest common denominator, they would just be called "cheater" and not "middle-aged male hetero brunette brown-eyed HWP poly cheater"

As for the whole "is poly an orientation?"

fuck that, don't even go there because it doesn't matter, that would be to get dragged down into the realm of bigotry. While it is extremely sad that people can be so full of hatred that the only way they will treat others with respect is if it is not a choice, that is exactly the mentality that has kept the world stuck in hell as opposed to earth.

It's been almost 250 years since The United States Constitution was written and we have dragged our feet at the dispensation of the rights for all citizens, nearly 250 years since those brave men and women fought, sacrificed, died, and won the Revolutionary War and then Civil War.

Remember there was a Civil War, so while it's always good to hope for the best, it is almost inevitable that there will be gnashing of the teeth for some, but that no reason not to continue on

I have no choice, many of us are committed to carrying on, and we will

It is sad, but if everyone minded there own fucking business since the the human races first appearance, think of how much evil would still be tolerated in the world

just like most everything, there is a wrong way and a right way to mind your own fucking business, and people who use that the wrong way should not be catered to

in my humble opinion
 
Last edited:
So much information and opinions here. A great read all the way through.
I am going to try and summarize a few things here, please feel free to correct me if I have missed the mark.
There seems to be different camps or schools of thought on the subject of poly and what is or is not poly.
It seems to me that some people are of the opinion that any non monogamous relationship is poly, where others, purists so to speak only accept poly in its defined form. This I understand as I am a car guy and a Pontiac purist, which means that I only think real Pontiac were built before 1981 when the were equipped with Pontiac engines. In fact I jokingly call 1982-2002 firebird cross dressing camaros (no disrespect meant to crossdressers). Essentially a Pontiac is only a Pontiac in original form. This being said, I have nothing against the other car guys and really respect them as such. My thing just is not their thing.
The whole kids vs no kids, we'll to each their own. We have kids. Have friends that both have and have not. We really don't care if someone does or does not. Think it would be pretty shallow to choose people based on that. You would miss many opportunities to meet and get to know good people. Sounds silly to me.
In closing I would like to say that I hope the mere semantics of the meaning of a word would not cause a rift in a community like this. The mutual support and information shared here is valuable. Especially for new folks like us.
Thank you to all members here, enjoy reading and learning.
 
Back
Top