Men vs. Women and "poly"

[TL4everu2]

Ok, it has been my and my wife's observation that MOST men view polyamory differently than most women.

SINGLE men (in our experience) are pigs. They get on poly sites or CLAIM to be poly, simply to get laid. They figure that since a woman's "poly", she's easy. (So not true) Once they get what the woman has, they move on to the next conquest. Leaving the woman a mess afterward.

Single women who are poly or at least open to it, on the other hand, are hard to find in the poly world.

Now, I've even noticed this in MARRIED men also. They claim to be "poly", but what they are REALLY saying, is that it's ok to have a 3-sum with two women, but no men are allowed to touch their mate. To me, thats not poly. Thats selfish. If their mate finds another man attractive or mentally stimulating, the guy freaks.




Why is this? Has anyone else noticed this?

[GroundedSpirit]

Originally Posted by TL4everu2

Why is this? Has anyone else noticed this?

TL - I suspect you know the answer to this as well as anyone.

So - you need someone else to say it ?

Simply that a huge percentage of people can't see the world except through a filter of "SEX". "Poly", as we all reiterate frequently, simply makes a convenient tool.

Fortunately, that 'tool' is pretty easy to spot - even for the uninitiated.

GS

[Ariakas]

Is this any different than monogamy? The genders do view sex vs love as different. Or I guess in opposite directions.

Men want sex -> build connection - if "sex" (this can be everything from raw attraction to lust to "good" sex) isn't there, they move on.
Women want connection -> build to sex - if connection isn't there, the women move on.

While this doesn't hold true 100% of the time. It doesn't make all "men" dogs and doesn't make all "women" non-sexual. It just makes us different. Once everyone involved can work within those difference, it would sure make things easier

For the record, I know women that do EXACTLY what you define as the male role. I am sure I could find them in poly (in fact, I have met a couple) Its just another one of those nuances of "people" that you have to get used to. Some poly people just try to see things through rose coloured glasses called polyamory, when in fact its not at all.

Poly is not black and white, poly simply means the capacity to love more than one. Everything else, people try to build around it, is their own construct. Being unethically poly isn't any less poly than ethical polyamory...its just unethical (and really, who defines those ethics anyways, like religion thats pretty individual too).

The world would be pretty boring if we all practiced everything the exact same way.

[DaylightStirring]

Ariakas has a great point!

and to add my own thoughts on your question, I believe polyamory is a lot like unconditional love. Just because some one claims to be in love with their partner doesn't automatically mean that their love is with out condition. For example 'I love my husband as long as he doesn't cheat on me' or 'I love my wife as long as she doesn't get fat' Which begs the question, "Was it really love or was it the idea of being in love?" (PF) In a round about way, is it 'polyamory or the idea of polyamory?' that we see in these people? And can it ever be pure unadulterated love?

Until the people practicing the act of love realize what unconditional means, it may never really be love.

[MonoVCPHG]

I don't believe in unconditional love. I believe in unconditional concern for people, but not romantic love. That tie can be severed.

[NeonKaos]

Originally Posted by MonoVCPHG

I don't believe in unconditional love. I believe in unconditional concern for people, but not romantic love. That tie can be severed.

I don't believe in unconditional romantic love either, but I believe there is such a thing as unconditional love. I'm not talking about co-dependency, which people often mistake for unconditional love. I'm talking about the kind of love a parent may have for a child. i'm not even sure I can think of any other examples. I don't think that the love I have for my husband is unconditional, either. It's definitely based in certain benefits I get out of being in a relationship with him. However, even if I ceased to be romantically and sexually attracted to him, I think I would still love him as a person. But it would be because I get something out of it, not because of who we both are intrinsically.

[Jade]

Originally Posted by MonoVCPHG

I don't believe in unconditional love. I believe in unconditional concern for people, but not romantic love. That tie can be severed.

Oooh, there is wisdom in that!

[Jodi]

i've been discussing this very topic w/ my bf..who coincidentally, won't let his wife have another, but ok for him. fuck that. i wouldn't stand for it.

but, he also says all men are pigs. i find this sad...bcz, i grew up hearing this from my mother. and my therapist, well when i told her that i discovered that men can have emotions and can write & express themselves...she was like, yes, there are those kind of men out there too.

it's confusing, how do you weed thru?....this is comign from me, a single female w/ a poly mentality.

[Danny40179]

It's sad but true, but most men are pigs. A frequent topic of convo in our home. I think that the internet has made it even worse. Broadens the "hunting ground" for those predators.

The only way to sort through who's real and who's not is by really getting to know them and trusting your gut. I think a lot of women have stopped listening to that intuition thing that they're typically so good at!!

[Tonberry]

It's weird, but it seems to me men are more likely to be the one saying "men are pigs". Self-loathing much?