Polyamory.com Forum  

Go Back   Polyamory.com Forum > Polyamory > General Poly Discussions

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #231  
Old 06-02-2012, 02:16 AM
kdt26417's Avatar
kdt26417 kdt26417 is offline
Official Greeter
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Olympia, Washington
Posts: 4,769
Default

Re (from feelyunicorn, Post #13):
Quote:
"I simply think some people are monogamous, and some others (a minority) are polyamorous."
LOL, damn ... I thought the "debate" was over whether the majority or *everyone* was intrinsically polyamorous (or nonmonogamous). Kind of refreshing hearing a different viewpoint indeed, thanks for posting that.

As for me, the jury is out. I simply don't know what approximate percentage of intrinsically monogamous or polyamorous people there are. I can't prove that all monogamous/closed relationships are not, well, an abusive form of slavery. But I'm also a big believer in the vast uniqueness of individuals, so I'm usually really skeptical about blanket statements.

I should also note that my sitch is poly-fi; that is, no sex is allowed outside the three-person circle. It's possible that the circle could become a four-person circle, but that would be a painstaking process, and in the meantime, casual hook-ups (or any hook-up without a huge commitment and intro to the circle) are a big no-no (for us). That's kind of another definition for the word "closed."

So, are we abusively subjecting each other to sexual slavery? I guess I can't "prove" we're not, but I can say I don't feel like a slave (or abused).

Anyway, I reckon there's many kinds of closed and/or monogamous relationships. Some are dysfunctional, some not. I'd hesitate to throw out any percentage estimates, you'd really have to be a mind-reader to know for sure.
__________________
Love means never having to say, "Put down that meat cleaver!"
Reply With Quote
  #232  
Old 06-02-2012, 11:57 AM
Klayton Klayton is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 12
Default

Everyone's different. For some a monogamous relationship will be perfect and for some it will be restrictive and painful. Equally for some a polyamorous relationship will be ideal and for others it will cause suffering.

I guess the possibility of "abuse" (if you want to call it that) can arise when one partner forces the other into a type of relationship that they explicitly do not want. But that's another thing altogether...
Reply With Quote
  #233  
Old 06-02-2012, 12:31 PM
feelyunicorn feelyunicorn is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Brazil
Posts: 151
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kdt26417 View Post
Re (from feelyunicorn, Post #13):


LOL, damn ... I thought the "debate" was over whether the majority or *everyone* was intrinsically polyamorous (or nonmonogamous). Kind of refreshing hearing a different viewpoint indeed, thanks for posting that.

As for me, the jury is out. I simply don't know what approximate percentage of intrinsically monogamous or polyamorous people there are. I can't prove that all monogamous/closed relationships are not, well, an abusive form of slavery. But I'm also a big believer in the vast uniqueness of individuals, so I'm usually really skeptical about blanket statements.

I should also note that my sitch is poly-fi; that is, no sex is allowed outside the three-person circle. It's possible that the circle could become a four-person circle, but that would be a painstaking process, and in the meantime, casual hook-ups (or any hook-up without a huge commitment and intro to the circle) are a big no-no (for us). That's kind of another definition for the word "closed."

So, are we abusively subjecting each other to sexual slavery? I guess I can't "prove" we're not, but I can say I don't feel like a slave (or abused).

Anyway, I reckon there's many kinds of closed and/or monogamous relationships. Some are dysfunctional, some not. I'd hesitate to throw out any percentage estimates, you'd really have to be a mind-reader to know for sure.
I`m going by people`s own definitions (as opposed to what`s allegedly intrinsic). I think of social forces as being "natural" if you`d excuse the word. Or, rather, of nature being "unnatural." So, the back-to-nature argument doesn`t vibe well with me.

I know what is. What coulda shoulda woulda been if <insert utopia>, I couldn`t tell you. Nor, could anyone else, I would think.

Among bisexuals there`s the same deal, everyone should be bisexual. Do I really need the whole world to bestow verification upon my sexuality? About those who do, I can`t help but ask myself, "Are they any good in bed?"
__________________
Independent, sex-positive, bi-curious, private, atheist, elitist, athletic dude.

Last edited by feelyunicorn; 06-02-2012 at 12:40 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #234  
Old 06-02-2012, 05:28 PM
Magdlyn's Avatar
Magdlyn Magdlyn is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Metro West Massachusetts
Posts: 3,574
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by feelyunicorn View Post
Do I really need the whole world to bestow verification upon my sexuality? About those who do, I can`t help but ask myself, "Are they any good in bed?"
LOL!

It's obvious from reading ancient literature, or even old lit, such as Shakespeare, the Bible and Victorian/Edwardian lit, that marriage was a form of slavery for a long time. Women were considered to be outright chattel of their husbands, in a class with the children and the owned slaves, to be done with as the man willed, including imprisonment, rape and beatings.

This is still true in many parts of the world where these traditions still hold. Of course, it might not even be monogamy, but polygyny, with attendant punishments meted out upon the wives and the men that prey upon them.

Our Western culture still holds onto vestiges of these practices.
__________________
Love withers under constraint; its very essence is liberty. It is compatible neither with envy, jealousy or fear. It is there most pure, perfect and unlimited when its votaries live in confidence, equality and unreserve. -- Shelley

me: Mags, 59, living with:
miss pixi, 37
Reply With Quote
  #235  
Old 06-02-2012, 06:19 PM
feelyunicorn feelyunicorn is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Brazil
Posts: 151
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Magdlyn View Post
LOL!

It's obvious from reading ancient literature, or even old lit, such as Shakespeare, the Bible and Victorian/Edwardian lit, that marriage was a form of slavery for a long time. Women were considered to be outright chattel of their husbands, in a class with the children and the owned slaves, to be done with as the man willed, including imprisonment, rape and beatings.

This is still true in many parts of the world where these traditions still hold. Of course, it might not even be monogamy, but polygyny, with attendant punishments meted out upon the wives and the men that prey upon them.

Our Western culture still holds onto vestiges of these practices.
Fair enough. I would agree.

Of course, women were also rescued out of sinking ships and burning buildings before men. Nor did they have to burrow through granite to make the New York City subway grid. Inferiority seems to have its advantages.
__________________
Independent, sex-positive, bi-curious, private, atheist, elitist, athletic dude.

Last edited by feelyunicorn; 06-02-2012 at 06:27 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #236  
Old 06-02-2012, 06:34 PM
kdt26417's Avatar
kdt26417 kdt26417 is offline
Official Greeter
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Olympia, Washington
Posts: 4,769
Default

Re (from feelyunicorn, Post #17):
Quote:
"Among bisexuals there's the same deal, everyone should be bisexual. Do I really need the whole world to bestow verification upon my sexuality?"
I've noticed a certain amount of that coming from the "pansexual community," something along the lines, "You're hung up on genitalia, whereas I love people as a person." Sigh, okay. Arguing does no good in that scenario, nor reasoning. Trust me; I've tried.

Re (from Magdlyn, Post #18):
Quote:
"Our Western culture still holds onto vestiges of these practices."
Agreed, we do.
__________________
Love means never having to say, "Put down that meat cleaver!"
Reply With Quote
  #237  
Old 06-02-2012, 07:55 PM
feelyunicorn feelyunicorn is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Brazil
Posts: 151
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kdt26417 View Post
Arguing does no good in that scenario, nor reasoning. Trust me; I've tried.
qft. As though intellectual persuasion ever convinced anyone to fuck anyone else. I wish it did...or do I?

Either we`re in the same league or we aren`t. Full stop.
__________________
Independent, sex-positive, bi-curious, private, atheist, elitist, athletic dude.

Last edited by feelyunicorn; 06-02-2012 at 07:58 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #238  
Old 06-04-2012, 05:08 AM
kdt26417's Avatar
kdt26417 kdt26417 is offline
Official Greeter
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Olympia, Washington
Posts: 4,769
Default

__________________
Love means never having to say, "Put down that meat cleaver!"
Reply With Quote
  #239  
Old 06-04-2012, 06:32 PM
redpepper's Avatar
redpepper redpepper is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 7,634
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CielDuMatin View Post

The whole purpose of a committed relationship is commitment - a set of promises are made with an expectation that those will be honoured by everyone involved. Too many people make promises without really thinking what they mean, and even whether they can really honour that commitment. This is, to me, what is what is primarily wrong with marriage today. "Defence of marriage", rather than being about who should marry whom, should be about enforcing the idea that a committment made for life is exactly that, otherwise the commitments should be phrased differently.

If I make a monogamous commitment to someone (which I wouldn't, just sayin') and that person gets very, very sick, then my commitment to that relationship trumps any desire of mine to get laid.

This is (obviously! ) a subject I feel very passionately about - it's showing me that others have a lot more flexible idea of what ethics, integrity and honour mean. So it's showing me that I need to have a few more detailed discussions with my current partners and in future with any potential partners, to find out where they stand on this.
Yes, I understand this. I agree. Monogamous marriage is a broken system for many. I am also big on integrity and honour too. I am also passionate about this topic, especially right now in my life. All I am trying to convey in sharing the story I did is that its a struggle. This man has so much left to give and to live and a wife that is out of reach mentally and physically. He struggles to do the right thing by her and the right thing by himself. To me its just all around sad and hopeless... I don't at all feel I can be preachy when faced with stories like his.
__________________
Anyone want to be friends on Facebook?
Send me your name via PM
My blog
Reply With Quote
  #240  
Old 06-05-2012, 01:12 AM
CielDuMatin's Avatar
CielDuMatin CielDuMatin is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Upstate New York, USA
Posts: 1,456
Default

Oh I agree that it can be a struggle. Sticking to the promises we made isn't always easy, but in my opinion that doesn't lessen the promise. I can't say what I would do if I found myself in a situation like that, I don't know if I could be strong enough or have the fortitude to see it through.

But I think that a lot of people get themselves into situations like this because they absolutely don't think about the promises that they are making, and are, effectively, setting themselves up for failure.
__________________
Please check out The Birdcage - an open, friendly Polyamory forum for all parts of New York State
http://www.thebirdcage.org/

"Listen, or your tongue will make you deaf." - Native American Proverb
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
affairs, agreements, casual sex, cheaters, cheating, cheating and poly, dadt policies, dating friends, dating issues, deceit, deception, dishonesty, drama, encouraging cheating, ethics, fuck buddies, fwb, honesty, meeting people, mono, mono / poly, mono-poly, mono/poly, monogamy, monogamy and polyamory, one true way, poly, poly vs. mono, poly vs. open, polyfidelity, sneaking around, std's, sti's, swingers, swinging

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:52 AM.