View Single Post
Old 01-31-2016, 07:02 PM
Ravenscroft Ravenscroft is offline
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: NW Minnesota
Posts: 1,724
Lightbulb "No. But YES."

Originally Posted by kdt26417 View Post
there's a lot of people out there who don't know the first thing about polyamory/ethical nonmonogamy, and there's plenty of need for the "tired old basics" to be put out there.
Umm... okay, yeah, but that would kinda be the
we need to not fall into the trap of constantly re-inventing the wheel
part, right...?

All that time, all that energy, all that bandwidth, never to be used productively because those darned imaginary Some People might never have heard of -- hm Wikipedia.
Originally Posted by kdt26417 View Post
Relatively advanced and varied poly topics can be found easily enough, you just have to explore this forum.
Yah, sure, if you know what you're looking for before you begin digging. Or, alternately, there's the "panning for gold" strategy, where you read EVERYTHING in hope that some random little nugget will catch your eye.

Problem there is that you'd have to keep up with HUNDREDS of sites. Not so long ago, there were only a scattered few where the term "polyamory" even appeared. Now, it pops up in pretty much EVERY post-magazine site & TV chat & so on. Practically no effort is being made to track these as has been done in the sciences for centuries with published summary abstracts.

Does Green deserve an attaboy? Certainement!! And I betcha she'd be a LOT more beneficial to this community if someone would direct her toward something beyond the throughly burned-over kindergarten topics. That would be the
Green ... needs (as a self-described educator) to spread the word that MAPS EXIST. Instead, she gives short shrift to the likely sources of her "original" ideas
part. She could've perhaps mentioned THIS site...?

She's half-decent as a sex-ed teacher, well-known & an excellent series of media platforms; if "the kids" listen to her, & she gives good advice, then all is hunky-dory. But I can't see where that qualifies her as any sort of significant authority on polyamory, not dissimilar to Penn Jillette. She might have nice, informative things to say about lesbianism, but perhaps a lesbian voice would be even more authoritative...? So too for poly.

IMNSHO, her Tumblr site is just a bunch of strung-together snippets spotted online, so I'll actualy do something to help out here & fill in blanks:

Surely, Green's a voice for her generation -- her & a few million others. Yet she's saying nothing new about nonmonogamy, & largely parroting stuff that has been said for decades & even centuries.
Reply With Quote