Polyamory.com Forum  

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

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 08-22-2011, 08:12 PM
nycindie's Avatar
nycindie nycindie is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: The Big Apple
Posts: 7,375
Default

Huh? Yeah, you do sound grumpy. I was looking forward to a good discussion with you about it. Oh well.
__________________
The world opens up... when you do.

"Oh, oh, can't you see? Love is the drug for me." ~Bryan Ferry
"Love and the self are one . . ." ~Leo Buscaglia "
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 08-22-2011, 08:27 PM
redpepper's Avatar
redpepper redpepper is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 7,639
Default

I'm not grumpy, you sound grumpy just kidding

Seriously, discuss away, just please don't think I am preaching my way or the highway... I find it a bit insulting at this point,,, thanks for calling me on sounding that way though. I never intended to as I have no investment in ANYONE doing as I do. Why would I? That's far too boring a goal. My goal is to bring up shit that hasn't been talked about yet. To me that is interesting. If you find it also interesting then please, by all means, discuss.
__________________
Anyone want to be friends on Facebook?
Send me your name via PM
My blog
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 08-22-2011, 08:35 PM
nycindie's Avatar
nycindie nycindie is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: The Big Apple
Posts: 7,375
Default

I might be grumpy -- I'm broke and out of coffee!

I'm sorry it sounded like I was attacking you. I didn't mean you were irritating. I meant the idea that I was interpreting from your statement was irritating to me. I'm sure I'm a bit sensitive about it. I just felt that there was a bit of a dismissive tone toward people who see polyamory as a choice rather than an identity. But I could have just read into it. And yes, I edited that post from saying disrespectful to dismissive because I knew "disrespectful" wasn't it. I don't think of you as disrespectful. I brought it up because it's something I've been wanting to address, since it's come up a few times recently, and your post seemed the perfect opportunity to respond with my take on it. But I did elaborate some more in the "Division" thread.
__________________
The world opens up... when you do.

"Oh, oh, can't you see? Love is the drug for me." ~Bryan Ferry
"Love and the self are one . . ." ~Leo Buscaglia "
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 08-22-2011, 08:47 PM
redpepper's Avatar
redpepper redpepper is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 7,639
Default

Actually I find the omni thing to be kinda part of it. I have noticed some dismissive all around lately. Maybe that is not such a bad thing... It gets kinda tiring to ALWAYS be on ones game with this stuff. So much easier to fade away into being dismissive maybe?
__________________
Anyone want to be friends on Facebook?
Send me your name via PM
My blog
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 08-23-2011, 12:39 PM
bella123456 bella123456 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 180
Default

It's strange...I drafted at least 2 or 3 responses to this initial question...and then I couldn't really make a commitment. I think that is largely because I don't really care how people label themselves. It will sound harsh...but I don't really have any interest in what words people may choose to describe themselves...as it's so often the case that I use a particular word differently to the way they use them. In the end...I'll get a feel for someone based on their behaviours they exhibit around me..

I had a long term relationship with someone who would certainly describe himself as poly...he lived with his girlfriend. But basically the level of deceipt involved made the situation way outside my loosest definition of "poly".

Now...I do LOVE words..really...I love them..

The way humans use them...well...not so keen

I have a very good male friend, who defines himself as gay...I've known him to sleep with women on occasion. Do I care ? No...not really...who he sleeps with and the words he feels comfortable with are his own. Yeah, so he's gay but occasionally fucks a chick. Who cares ? Is it useful..not to me...or to him either (his words)

I don't label myself as poly or mono...I run my personal relationships within my personal ethical framework. I live very close to my values. I don't need a word or a label to justify the way I live. I live happily and honestly...


In any case. Omni meaning "all" or "every"...could be a confusing term...maybe that suggests you could be be all and every love style at the same time.

Mono and poly always and all. I'm being silly obviously

Is there a reason someone would find this word useful ?
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 08-23-2011, 01:20 PM
Derbylicious's Avatar
Derbylicious Derbylicious is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Victoria BC
Posts: 1,603
Default

If you were omniamorous I would think that would include the potential to go through phases of being asexual/aromantic. I think that many polyamourous people have the potential to be satisfied in a single relationship. Just because one has the ability to love more than one does not mean that they need more than one love at all times throughout thier lives.

I think that it would still be important to have the discussion that you are poly when entering a single relationship if you are aware of your ability to love more than one at a time. Even if at the onset of the relationship you have no desire for anyone else and can't imagine ever wanting another relationship again. Things change over time and the other partner is going to feel decieved if down the line you connect with someone else.
__________________
Everything will be ok in the end. If it's not ok it's not the end.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 08-23-2011, 09:00 PM
bella123456 bella123456 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 180
Default

Derby - You so smart !!
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 08-24-2011, 02:24 PM
BlackUnicorn's Avatar
BlackUnicorn BlackUnicorn is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 906
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AutumnalTone View Post
One can identify as polyamorous, meaning one has a preference for having multiple romances at once, or one can simply engage in polyamorous arrangements without having any strong preference for such.
Is the above a qualitative difference that would warrant a differentiation in terms?

I've heard people in the bisexual movement putting forward "no sexual preference" (actually, "no gender preference" would be a more apt term) as a fourth option that is needed to cover accurately the spectrum of identity and behaviour from straight to bisexual to gay, reserving bisexual for people who actually feel desire/attraction both to male and female gender styles.

I understood "omniamorous" to refer to someone who just doesn't care about the relationship form (has no strong preference either way). From a mono POV, it would be very different to become involved with a person who strongly prefers polyamorous arrangements compared to involvement with a person who doesn't care. If somebody strongly IDs as poly, then indeed it would be ill-adviced to get caught up in NRE and forget to mention this tiny little detail to their mono partner.

The word "omniamorous" doesn't catch this difference, but it would be interesting to know if some neologism out there could.
__________________
Me: bi female in my twenties
Dating: Moonlightrunner
Metamour: Windflower
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 08-24-2011, 04:02 PM
NeonKaos NeonKaos is offline
Custodian
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: new england
Posts: 3,221
Default

I put forward the term "milque-toast-amorist" for people who don't give a crap.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 08-24-2011, 05:14 PM
trueRiver trueRiver is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Manchester, England & Tain, Scotland
Posts: 85
Default poly already includes zero and one

Quote:
Originally Posted by TruckerPete View Post
But I thought poly was simply the ablity to love more than one? So if they can do that, then they're poly. No one says you HAVE to love more than one ...

I have to admit, when I see new, super-specific terms coined I can't help but think, "Yes, let's make it even more difficult for the world at large to understand us ... "
agree totally, TP.

and I would go further: by saying poly MUST mean more than one relationship,we seem to be critical of monos who have chosen awarely to be mono.

If we assert that poly includes the abiltiy to accept any number, this has two benefits:
- makes us easier for others to understand
- makes us less threatening to them

And zero partners is also a valid poly number, for poly people who are temporarily celibate by choice.

This point is addressed, in different ways, by posts linked from my sig...

Instead of omniamorous, I prefer polyflexible for those of us (I am one) who are open to the idea that our next primary relationship could be mono or poly. This choice of word keeps 'poly' in view, and makes it clear that this particular poly is open to a medium/long term mono relationship as one of a range of options.

So I think polyflexible does most of what RP wanted, but without the disadvantages.

And is easier to understand and remember.
__________________
River~~

There are two Rivers here now: which one is this?

see
quaker poly experiences and poly: a quaker perspective

I hope other British Quakers who are poly (or wonder if they are) will contact me here, thanks, Friends.

Last edited by trueRiver; 08-24-2011 at 09:34 PM. Reason: clarity
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
celibacy, definitions, descriptions, omniamorous, omniamory, polyflexible, terminology

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 05:35 PM.