Polyamory.com Forum  

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

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #121  
Old 12-02-2009, 11:08 PM
Joreth's Avatar
Joreth Joreth is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 62
Talking

LOL I now have this image in my head of Spock standing there saying "that's highly illogical" and someone jumping up and down, red-faced and sputtering, calling him a loose cannon.
Reply With Quote
  #122  
Old 12-02-2009, 11:08 PM
MonoVCPHG's Avatar
MonoVCPHG MonoVCPHG is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: In Redpepper's heart
Posts: 4,742
Default

I know Ceoli. Perhaps it is just me. My loss I guess.

Take care...I'm giving you all the distance I can my friend. Our energy is just not positive either I think...we were getting it back though.
__________________

Playing the Game of Life with Monopoly rules.
Monogamy might just be in my genes

Poly Events All Over
Reply With Quote
  #123  
Old 12-02-2009, 11:11 PM
Ceoli Ceoli is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: London, UK
Posts: 900
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LovingRadiance View Post
Blunt, confrontational, rude, polite, kind, cruel.
Whatever.

Unproductive is the term I chose.
I guess I think if people spent a bit more time listening to what she had to say instead of hammering how she's saying it, we'd probably be more "productive".

Nobody seems to have this trouble when YGirl posts in this tone.
Reply With Quote
  #124  
Old 12-02-2009, 11:22 PM
Joreth's Avatar
Joreth Joreth is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 62
Default

I'm always amused, and a little confused, when people mistake "blunt" and "pragmatic" and "unemotional" language for "angry" and "hostile".

I can be hostile, just ask my sister about the fights we've had as kids (one involving slamming a door through a wall ... yes, through). I've never gotten anywhere near that feeling here, nor have I used the internet conventions that are typical for expressing such feelings.

But people's reactions to emotionless text tend to say an awful lot more about the person reacting than about the text itself.
Reply With Quote
  #125  
Old 12-02-2009, 11:29 PM
LovingRadiance's Avatar
LovingRadiance LovingRadiance is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Alaska
Posts: 5,353
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ceoli View Post
I guess I think if people spent a bit more time listening to what she had to say instead of hammering how she's saying it, we'd probably be more "productive".

Nobody seems to have this trouble when YGirl posts in this tone.
Oh no-I do have that issue with Ygirl as well. I just generally choose not to reply to any of her posts that do that to me.

I agree on your first paragraph strongly-that was PRECISELY my point to Joreth about Mono. But saying so go me nowhere. So I stopped trying.
__________________
"Love As Thou Wilt"
Reply With Quote
  #126  
Old 12-02-2009, 11:30 PM
Joreth's Avatar
Joreth Joreth is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 62
Default

I did listen to what he said, I quoted it several times. That was necessary when pointing out the logical fallacy in his argument.

Refer to http://www.theness.com/neurologicablog/?p=1327

Quote:
confuses, perhaps, sharp scientific criticism with emotion. This is a common mistake among those who are not adequately familiar with the scientific process – it is a relentless meatgrinder of criticism and does not abide illogic or sloppiness – and that’s a good thing. Beware of those who confuse scientific analysis and criticism with being mean.

Last edited by Joreth; 12-03-2009 at 08:14 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #127  
Old 12-02-2009, 11:47 PM
LovingRadiance's Avatar
LovingRadiance LovingRadiance is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Alaska
Posts: 5,353
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ceoli View Post
I guess I think if people spent a bit more time listening to what she had to say instead of hammering how she's saying it, we'd probably be more "productive".

Nobody seems to have this trouble when YGirl posts in this tone.
Maca is on the phone-but made a good point.

It was precisely the issue of HOW Mono said the first sentence and everyone hammering on that which got us to this point to begin with.

So in a significant way-it's perfectly reasonable to expect the same BACK.
If everyone wants to hammer on Mono for HOW he says things-they should EXPECT to be hammered on for how they say things as well.

Right?
__________________
"Love As Thou Wilt"
Reply With Quote
  #128  
Old 12-02-2009, 11:49 PM
Ceoli Ceoli is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: London, UK
Posts: 900
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LovingRadiance View Post
It was precisely the issue of HOW Mono said the first sentence and everyone hammering on that which got us to this point to begin with.

So in a significant way-it's perfectly reasonable to expect the same BACK.
If everyone wants to hammer on Mono for HOW he says things-they should EXPECT to be hammered on for how they say things as well.

Right?
Actually, no. It was indeed what he said that I took issue with, not how he said it. It's been covered in the thread.
Reply With Quote
  #129  
Old 12-03-2009, 12:31 AM
LovingRadiance's Avatar
LovingRadiance LovingRadiance is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Alaska
Posts: 5,353
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ceoli View Post
Actually, no. It was indeed what he said that I took issue with, not how he said it. It's been covered in the thread.
So if he had said "I think that this book is wrong in blah blah way and that most of hte mono people I know would be happier with this one."

You still would have had issue with it?

I thought you were upset becuase he made a statement that put all mono people under one umbrella with no proof that they ARE all under that umbrella?

He has since acknowledged that not ALL mono people feel that way and changed what he said-and that seems to have been acceptable by you (and ygirl) among others...



So am I misinterpreting what you are saying here?
__________________
"Love As Thou Wilt"
Reply With Quote
  #130  
Old 12-03-2009, 03:45 AM
Ceoli Ceoli is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: London, UK
Posts: 900
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LovingRadiance View Post
So if he had said "I think that this book is wrong in blah blah way and that most of hte mono people I know would be happier with this one."

You still would have had issue with it?
Ok, I'll try to explain it again.

If he said, "I don't like this book and most of the mono people I know I don't like this book," then that would be fine. Instead he said that it was *because* of his mono wiring that he saw the book in a different light than poly people. He did also say that not all mono people see things his way, but still, claiming that wiring for one trait is responsible for another trait (in this specific case, a poly mind perceiving something as new agey where a mono mind might read the same words differently). So even with that disclaimer, it doesn't change the basic premise...that somehow being wired mono is responsible for outlooks in life that stretch beyond how many people someone can love at at time. It implies that mono wiring is also responsible for other life outlooks. Since there is just as much of a variation of life outlooks among mono people as there are between mono and poly people, I don't accept that view

Why do I think that's important? Because that type of opinion on wiring is responsible for creating divisions between groups of people that don't actually exist. Actually, Joreth explained it pretty eloqently.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LovingRadiance View Post
I thought you were upset becuase he made a statement that put all mono people under one umbrella with no proof that they ARE all under that umbrella?

He has since acknowledged that not ALL mono people feel that way and changed what he said-and that seems to have been acceptable by you (and ygirl) among others...
Ok, first to clarify: simply because I don't accept or agree with an assertion and choose to challenge it does not mean that the assertion upsets me. It means I see the damage such assertions are capable of making and feel the need to do what I can to avert such damage. I've been pretty clear about my reasons for calling it out.

Next, when you say that wiring is responsible for a certain outlook but then qualify it with "but I realize not everyone thinks my way" it's a self contradiction and leaves the issues of the initial premise unanswered. If not everyone who shares that wiring has the same outlook then it would follow that that wiring is indeed *not* responsible for said outlook.

Here's a couple of examples of how that falls apart:
  • I'm a red-head. My red-headed nature makes me rather short tempered. Though not all red-heads are short tempered like me.
  • I'm a woman. It's my feminine nature that makes it difficult for me to take authority, though not all women have difficulty taking authority.
  • I'm polyamorous. It's my poly nature that gives me a higher than average libido and makes me want to have sex a lot, though I realize not all poly people are like that.

All of these statements do two things. First, they claim that one trait causes another trait that has nothing whatsoever to do with the first trait. It is making that claim as an objective fact. Then, they attempt to make the claim subjective with a disclaimer that people who have that trait aren't all the same.

The two simply don't go together.

And not only do they not go together, but claiming that mono wiring is responsible for outlooks on life that aren't about how many people you love, you are then implying that being poly wired is a completely different outlook, and therefore a completely different culture or "kind" of person is poly. That's simply not the case.

As Joreth said, the state of being monogamous is hugely varied. The state of being polyamorous is hugely varied. The variations that exist AMONG each group are far larger than the variations that exist BETWEEN each group. So to attribute differences in outlook to mono or poly wiring is creating a divide that isn't there. Those divides might exist elsewhere, such as more poly people showing up in progressive communities than in conservative communities, or the fact that you won't find many openly poly people in Mexico, but the factors that create those differences have nothing to do with poly or mono wiring.

(I haven't forgotten the issue you raised about what I said about dominant culture. I'm trying to come up with a good way to explain what I mean, but probably won't get to it till tomorrow if things don't derail further)
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
mono/poly, monogamous

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 08:53 PM.