Polyamory.com Forum  

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

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 08-02-2011, 08:41 PM
TruckerPete TruckerPete is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 999
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by serialmonogamist View Post
What about like a Will & Grace type sitcom but with poly? That show actually could have incorporated poly with all the different relationships that went on. They must just not have thought about it. Although, could Will have been described as having Grace as a platonic primary while dating until he found that guy that he ended up with (policeman)? It was all very monogamy oriented, wasn't it? (been a while since I've seen it)
This is the second time today I've read you using the term platonic primary/secondary. Can you explain what you mean? Because to me, it's sounding suspiciously like trying to pass off friendship as a special subtype of poly.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 08-02-2011, 08:49 PM
nicothoe's Avatar
nicothoe nicothoe is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Montgomery, IL
Posts: 64
Default

I read that as meaning that not every relationship needs to have a sexual component to it.

My girlfriend and....I suppose....my other girlfriend, have lived together for over ten years and classify their relationship as polyamorous. One is bi, the other is not. So technically, they are each other's primary.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 08-02-2011, 08:53 PM
nycindie's Avatar
nycindie nycindie is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: The Big Apple
Posts: 7,108
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TruckerPete View Post
. . . to me, it's sounding suspiciously like trying to pass off friendship as a special subtype of poly.
Oh, I wouldn't put it past him, since he still insists that monogamy is a type of poly.
__________________
The world opens up... when you do.

Oh, oh, can't you see? Love is the drug for me. ~Bryan Ferry
"Love is that condition in which another person's happiness is essential to your own." ~Robert Heinlein
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 08-02-2011, 08:55 PM
nicothoe's Avatar
nicothoe nicothoe is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Montgomery, IL
Posts: 64
Default

but surely monogamy is just polyfidelity between two people!!!!
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 08-02-2011, 08:59 PM
nicothoe's Avatar
nicothoe nicothoe is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Montgomery, IL
Posts: 64
Default

As it happens, I also stumbled across this post today:

Adam Sandler Doing A Gay, Polyamorous Three Men And A Baby Remake?
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 08-02-2011, 09:33 PM
serialmonogamist serialmonogamist is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 164
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TruckerPete View Post
This is the second time today I've read you using the term platonic primary/secondary. Can you explain what you mean? Because to me, it's sounding suspiciously like trying to pass off friendship as a special subtype of poly.
Ok, please enlighten me. I've been working on understanding platonic love and non-platonic love as both forms of love instead of hierarchizing them. My idea is that platonic polyamory is licit and common in mainstream culture because monogamy is/was primarily designed to control sexual reproduction.

It may sound like I'm just playing with definitions, but think of it in context. When you're a single person hanging out with someone else's (monogamous) partner, they are likely feeling concerned if you start spending a lot of time as friends together. It is also likely that when you're not around, your friend's partner is going to be asking a lot of questions about why you're such good friends and where it's leading. Even if you promise that it's just friendship, there's likely to be some insecurity and jealousy. So making it explicitly "platonic polyamory" would hopefully resolve the tension of monogamous expectations and fears. Especially if the couple you were dealing with already had an open relationship, it would be that much less problem for you to develop a strong friendship, don't you think?
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 08-02-2011, 09:35 PM
serialmonogamist serialmonogamist is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 164
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nycindie View Post
Oh, I wouldn't put it past him, since he still insists that monogamy is a type of poly.
No I don't. You don't care enough what I think to understand it deeply so could you at this point stop clarifying your strawman of me to others as if you're an expert?
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 08-02-2011, 09:39 PM
nycindie's Avatar
nycindie nycindie is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: The Big Apple
Posts: 7,108
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by serialmonogamist View Post
No I don't. You don't care enough what I think to understand it deeply so could you at this point stop clarifying your strawman of me to others as if you're an expert?
Oh, it's such a cop-out to say someone doesn't care or understand when they simply disagree.
__________________
The world opens up... when you do.

Oh, oh, can't you see? Love is the drug for me. ~Bryan Ferry
"Love is that condition in which another person's happiness is essential to your own." ~Robert Heinlein
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 08-02-2011, 09:46 PM
TruckerPete TruckerPete is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 999
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by serialmonogamist View Post
Ok, please enlighten me. I've been working on understanding platonic love and non-platonic love as both forms of love instead of hierarchizing them. My idea is that platonic polyamory is licit and common in mainstream culture because monogamy is/was primarily designed to control sexual reproduction.

It may sound like I'm just playing with definitions, but think of it in context. When you're a single person hanging out with someone else's (monogamous) partner, they are likely feeling concerned if you start spending a lot of time as friends together. It is also likely that when you're not around, your friend's partner is going to be asking a lot of questions about why you're such good friends and where it's leading. Even if you promise that it's just friendship, there's likely to be some insecurity and jealousy. So making it explicitly "platonic polyamory" would hopefully resolve the tension of monogamous expectations and fears. Especially if the couple you were dealing with already had an open relationship, it would be that much less problem for you to develop a strong friendship, don't you think?
Buh????

Platonic love is non-sexual and non-romantic. Since polyamory is being open to or cultivating more than one romantic relationship (ethically, of course), I don't understand this "platonic polyamory" you're defining.

In the scenario you've given, I'm sure that making words up to describe the friendship one person has with another is really only going to confuse their partner and create more tension and suspicion in what is already an unhealthy hypothetical situation.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 08-02-2011, 10:04 PM
Indigomontoya's Avatar
Indigomontoya Indigomontoya is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 107
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by serialmonogamist View Post
When you're a single person hanging out with someone else's (monogamous) partner, they are likely feeling concerned if you start spending a lot of time as friends together. It is also likely that when you're not around, your friend's partner is going to be asking a lot of questions about why you're such good friends and where it's leading. Even if you promise that it's just friendship, there's likely to be some insecurity and jealousy. So making it explicitly "platonic polyamory" would hopefully resolve the tension of monogamous expectations and fears. Especially if the couple you were dealing with already had an open relationship, it would be that much less problem for you to develop a strong friendship, don't you think?
Not at all. I have a very good female friend with which I spend a lot of time, and I don't think it is a supposition to say that TP has ever been jealous, and I have brought up with this friend how her fiancée feels about our friendship and have asked him directly; both answers (to preclude him placating me to escape an awkward question) were the same, he's not jealous and never has been.

Your example assumes that jealousy and suspicion are certain as a result of a platonic (and I'm using the commonly accepted definition, not your contextual one) relationship.
__________________
Polyamory is wrong! It's Multiamory or Polyphilia. Mixing Greek and Latin roots? That's wrong.
Reply With Quote
Reply

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 03:27 AM.