Top Read Story on BBC 1-21-12

I read these after my husband told me. Very interesting. I was talking with a friend about it yesterday and he said, well that's a very self-centered way to live. I never thought about it that way. He said, "Yeah, you get your cake and you get to eat it." I guess the glass is either half full or half empty. :)

Very interesting that these came out in the news.
 
Moonglow said:
I read these after my husband told me. Very interesting. I was talking with a friend about it yesterday and he said, well that's a very self centered way to live. I never thought about it that way but he said...yeah you get your cake and you get to eat it. I guess the glass is either half full or half empty. :)
Click to expand...

True, laugh :). I don't think there's anything wrong with being self centered, which I suppose is the polite way of saying selfish, with one caveat; it all depends on how you define self. Someone who defines themselves as only their own bodies would generally be defined as the most "selfish". But what if you were to define yourself as you and your family? Not so selfish anymore. If your sense of self encompasses your community, one is seen as even less selfish. When one gets to the point that one feels that everyone on the planet is a part of their selves, the difference between "selfishness" and "altruism" become meaningless.

Anyway, back to what you were saying about your friend's comment :). Basically, that's only true from a limited perspective; that is, one can certainly imagine that many men would like to be able to be with more then one woman at the same time, but for anyone who's seen a certain amount of "Big Love", trying to keep more than one woman happy at the same time can frequently be quite the challenge. And this is only taking into account things like an FMF relationship. As people familiar with poly know, that's certainly not the only way it can happen.

Personally, I wouldn't feel right about wanting to share myself if I couldn't share my own (theoretical) partner, but I know that different people have different tastes. On the note of different types of non monogamous relationships, has anyone seen this?:
nonmonogamy2.5.1.gif


I thought it was awesome when I first saw it :)
 
I find that chart mildly offensive. Then again, I find many of Franklin's points lacking.

According to this chart, anyone 'like me' is wandering around in some abyss that does not exist. It also has a vibe of 'If it ain`t poly, it`s crap!'
 
I get what you mean. I thought the same when I first saw it. People like me, Sward or Lin are completely missing on it. The mono/poly is doomed, it seems. But it covers a certain range. I found it amusing. But far from being completed, many aspects of poly relationships are missing or portrayed in a not-so-favorable light.
 
Phy said:
I get what you mean, I thought the same when i first saw it. Someone like me or Sward an Lin is completely missing on it. The mono/poly is doomed problem as it seems. But well, it covers a certain range and I found it amusing as well.
Click to expand...

So did I, laugh :). Ok, maybe it can mildly offensive too.. I have a feeling that I might not see this so much because I'm a guy. But we could make our own chart.

Phy said:
But far from being completed, many aspects of poly relationships are missing or portrait in a not so favorable light.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I think even Franklin sees it as a work in progress. Hopefully we could make one that is more agreeable to everyone here. I've created a new thread in the General Discussion Section to discuss this, since this clearly isn't a News Item. Here's the thread:
Poly Map
 
Last edited:
Phy said:
I get what you mean. I found it amusing... Many aspects of poly relationships are missing...
Click to expand...

I definitely see the attempt at humour, but maybe I am a little jaded on the amount of people who promote his version like the bible. I roll my eyes a bit. :rolleyes: It all starts feeling cult-like sometimes, watching people with their one-true-franklin-way. Which really isn`t his fault. He`s just another bloke with an opinion. He went to the extensive trouble of creating an in-depth site and opinion, which, I think, is what people find satisfaction in.

Like most things, not all people and all situations can be accounted for. My response is based on the fact that my experiences have led me to realize, most people feel pushed to chose either poly or swinging. The reality usually is that most people either land 'in the middle' or find things to be specific to the people involved.

I`ve read all the arguments for years, over how we are either like some horny monkey, or some loin-cloth breeder-tribe. :rolleyes: I agree with neither. Environment tends to dictate our reactions. If you cage/corral any animal, (forced monogamy being our default cage) and one day show them the door/gate is open, most are going to run through it. A few might hold back in fear.

Eventually, those that held back sniff around and make decisions, and those who ran through the gate, many of them realize the pasture wasn`t any greener, it just offered different scenery. Some realize they are monogamous. Some realize they want to hang out around the gate, others feel full-blown poly pride. It`s actually quite divided.

So, seeing that happen with people on a regular basis, I ask myself, how is the chart not flawed? If he has 'open' labelled for people who fuck, but dont have feelings, then where is the umbrella portion of non-monogamy? Shouldn`t the whole thing be enveloped in a large circle that says non-monogamy, at least? Then you could at least fit your situation in there.

"All you complicated folks go here-----> X"

I`d say it doesn`t because much like his other supposed tongue in cheek stuff, the humour is boiled in his own truths.

Not a bad thing. People just need to remind themselves of that.

This was not a rant at you, Phy, just me babbling about something I have long wondered.
 
SourGirl said:
This was not a rant at you Phy, just me babbling about something I have long wondered. :D
Click to expand...

No offense taken, don't worry. And as a matter of fact: you are quite right from my point of view ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top