Division in the poly community

To me, it means being committed to working on loving relationships in multiples. There is a lot of work, and a process, no matter how you go about it, or what your personal belief, on those processes are.
***
To me, 'Open' means you are literally open to a wide variety of non-mongamous scenarios. This could include a 'mix' of dating, caring, sex, LTR, with all, or some people that come into your life. That is where I place myself.

I like your definitions and intend to shamefully plagiarize them in the future.
 
Nycindiie,

I'm confused.... one post you say you don't identity as poly..... a couple postings later you feel exasperated and offended when someone see's you as just dating ( and not being poly). How can you have it both ways....

I did not say I was offended, just exasperated. I have more self-worth than to feel offended by someone's comments. And my words were directed to the issue of division in the poly community.

And I'm not sure what you mean by "both ways." What are the ways, identifying as poly and not? Or identifying as poly and practicing poly?

When I say I do not identify as polyamorous, I mean that I don't see people as wired that way. I'm just saying that I choose to live polyamorously. That's all. I disagree that polyamory is something you identify as, like a gender or sexual orientation. Human beings have a wide capacity for relating to each other, and whether or not they are more aligned with polyamory or monogamy has to do with culture, societal conditioning, their belief systems, and how their personalities have developed. I simply see polyamory as a relationship structure and a practice, and I am a human being who strives to live polyamorously. I think it is a tiresome exercise when people struggle with "am I poly or not?" Well, I don't think that's as important as asking what kind of relationships you want in your life and how to create them.

So, I can refer to myself as being polyamorous because that adjective describes how I choose to live, just like saying I am separated describes the status of my marriage. I do not describe myself as polyamorous to say that it is my nature/wiring/identity. I've always described myself as childfree because that is how I chose to live, even though I had a functioning womb with which to produce offspring.

I've talked about this before. This is from the "lifestyle vs. identity in polyamory" thread:
I am a human being who chooses to live polyamorously. I see relationships as poly or mono, not people. My happiness, sense of fulfillment, self-esteem comes from my own internal work on myself, self-knowledge, etc., but is not dependent upon the structure of my relationship(s).

Polyamory is a possibility, and a container for which to develop relationships. If I say "I'm polyamorous," I don't mean that being polyamorous is my nature. When I say that, I mean that is how I choose to live. If I were to say, "I'm single," no one would ask me, "oh, are you hard-wired that way?"
 
Last edited:
I think it is a tiresome exercise when people struggle with "am I poly or not?" Well, I don't think that's as important as asking what kind of relationships you want in your life and how to create them.

This is brilliant. There have been plenty of insights in the thread, but I think this one really cuts through all the semantics and gets to the heart of the matter.
 
Ah, christ, please.

When the word "polyamory" was being coined, it was due to a need. The folks who coined it needed a term for a form of nonmonogamy for which there was no accurate term. Both swinging and open relationships had been in long use and had known meanings when referring to those forms of nonmonogamy.

Why were folks searching for a new term? Because what they needed to describe *is something different than what the terms "swinging" and "open" describe.* They needed a different term to describe a different way of doing nonmonogamy.

So, what do we know about the meaning of this new term, "polyamory?" We find that the it was coined specifically to describe a subset of nonmonogamy involving romantic relationships, and approach that the terms "swinging" and "open" do not describe.

As for the living language argument, I'll observe that the term qualifies as jargon and is not subject to the same sort of frippery that general language is. As technical terms in engineering or law or jewelrymaking or any of a multitude of fields show, jargon is held to different standards than general usage words so that the meaning is constant and useful. So, while "awful" may have some common connotations today that it didn't have 150 years ago, there are many terms that have the exact same connotations now as they did then. (I won't bother getting into how such slippage appears to happen primarily to adjectives....)

I would argue that, at least where marriage is concerned, you have to be "open" in order to be active swingers or polyamarous.
 
When I say I do not identify as polyamorous, I mean that I don't see people as wired that way. I'm just saying that I choose to live polyamorously. That's all. I disagree that polyamory is something you identify as, like a gender or sexual orientation. Human beings have a wide capacity for relating to each other, and whether or not they are more aligned with polyamory or monogamy has to do with culture, societal conditioning, their belief systems, and how their personalities have developed. I simply see polyamory as a relationship structure and a practice, and I am a human being who strives to live polyamorously.

nycindie summed it up for me.

This is what i wanted to write and it's also why i think it's hard to ask or talk about a poly community. Although it's viewed negatively in US society, I don't think it has the same pull of bringing folks together as other identities because of what she noted. And, for me, just because someone practices polyamory doesn't mean that I will have anything in common with them beyond that. We can see this in the diversity of practices associated with it here and also the claims for territory of the words itself. I'm not trying to say that there aren't and can't be communities among people who are polyamorous, but they're not natural. The idea of going to a poly festival or gathering doesn't appeal to me at all, but I'd be inclined to go out with a group of poly folks who I meet who I have other things in common with as well as being poly.
 
Ding, ding, ding,.... yep to all. :)

******

To me, it means being committed to working on loving relationships in multiples. There is a lot of work, and a process, no matter how you go about it, or what your personal belief, on those processes are.

***

To me, 'Open' means you are literally open to a wide variety of non-mongamous scenarios. This could include a 'mix' of dating, caring, sex, LTR, with all, or some people that come into your life.
That is where I place myself.

I think I'm confused by these definitions. Why couldn't poly include some of the things you're including under "open"? You could have multiple loving relationships and dating, sex, etc. etc.

I guess I don't really think it's so easy to separate how people use these two words -- poly and open.
 
To me, 'Open' means you are literally open to a wide variety of non-mongamous scenarios. This could include a 'mix' of dating, caring, sex, LTR, with all, or some people that come into your life.
That is where I place myself.
I think I'm confused by these definitions. Why couldn't poly include some of the things you're including under "open"? You could have multiple loving relationships and dating, sex, etc. etc.

I guess I don't really think it's so easy to separate how people use these two words -- poly and open.
Well, you can be poly AND open, or poly and NOT open. Open doesn't necessarily equate with poly, because many polyfolk are polyfidelitous and, hence, NOT open. Polyamory having a focus of loving relationships and open being, well, open to non-monogamous liaisons that don't necessarily involve love or an ongoing commitment.
 
Last edited:
Well, you can be poly AND open, or poly and NOT open. Open doesn't necessarily equate with poly, because many polyfolk are polyfidelitous and, hence, NOT open. Polyamory having a focus of loving relationships and open being, well, open to non-monogamous liaisons that don't necessarily involve love or an ongoing commitment.

Yes, but I suppose the issue for me becomes all these labels and their microlabels, etc. and where we fit all the practices. In my mind polyfidelity is closer (*not the same*) to monogamy than some other poly practices.

Whew. Just reading all this makes me want to just say "open" even though how I live and structure my relationships fits under the way people define poly.
 
A poly tribe of 20 people all involved with each other could be poly-fi, and that is definitely nowehere near monogamous! Just sayin'. :D

So true ;)

I suppose what i was trying to say is that it's interesting how our own perceptions shape how we understand and categorize different practices. I think poly as a term has to be somewhat fluid.
 
So, non-monogamy is more the umbrella term than poly then? Sometimes I hear that polyamory is an umbrella term for anything between swinging and poly fi. It seems that poly is more on the latter end maybe and all of it ia non-monogamy.

"Nonmonogamy" refers to all forms of nonmonogamy. Swinging, open relationships, and polyamory are all forms of nonmonogamy. Polyfidelity is a subset of polyamory.
 
I'm quite enjoying this thread, very interesting stuff!

I think "poly" is a convenient term as it's the word many of us put out there, specifically "polyamory". In truth, I think a more simplified definition is "non-monogamy". Perhaps we are reluctant to use this definition as it can be associated with mono folks as swinging, cheating, fucking everything that movies, etc.

Our desire to be included with our heterosexual, monogamous brethren means many poly folks will strive to point out similarities between their lives and mono lives. Poly folks have jobs, children, spouses, pay taxes, etc. just like their neighbours. May I suggest that any divide between parents and child-free poly groups is that child-free folks can be viewed as those deviant, fuck-everything-that-moves types because if you aren't in a relationship to produce offspring, then your relationship is based purely on sex, right? (I'm being sarcastic by the way...) This is a very broad generalization and by no means intended to offend anyone. It's based on my own personal experiences with my own child-free status, coupled with being poly, I've had certain people question why I choose to be legally married.

The comparison that comes to mind is the reluctance of some of the gay community to accept bisexuality. There are gay folks out there, for whatever reason, who do not readily accept bisexuality. Lets not forget a few of the ignorant heterosexual crowd who believe bisexuals are just "confused" and haven't made up their minds yet. The community strives for acceptance because they still face a great deal of prejudice. Showing the world how "normal" they are perhaps means rejecting some of the variation that comes with sexual identity. It's sad really and I don't know what the solution is.

Poly is a big word really, with so many variations. I enjoy being able to openly discuss my partners with fellow poly folk and have attended some get togethers. The sense of "community" is nice to have, but in all honesty it's tolerance from my greater community that I would appreciate more. The day when being poly isn't viewed as something deviant, freakish, a source for gossip, and cause for judgment, would be a welcome day indeed.
 
I think "poly" is a convenient term as it's the word many of us put out there, specifically "polyamory". In truth, I think a more simplified definition is "non-monogamy".

"Nonmonogamy" refers to all forms of nonmonogamy. Swinging, open relationships, and polyamory are all forms of nonmonogamy.
 
Divisions I have noticed first hand;

1) Poly vs. "open", or more specifically, "open to sex outside the primary pair bond", not open to having more than one relationship at a time (secondary or otherwise).

2) Interestingly enough, married folks vs. co-habiting folks. Specifically, some people who are co-habiting have little understanding towards poly folks co-habiting and deciding to marry despite having other relationships.

3) People with children and people who hate/fear children :).
 
"Nonmonogamy" refers to all forms of nonmonogamy. Swinging, open relationships, and polyamory are all forms of nonmonogamy.

To clarify, I believe the term "poly" is not unlike "non-monogamy". Polyamory is typically viewed as the "multiple committed, loving relationships" while just "poly" in itself can include different relationship types. It is my own personal belief that poly is responsible non-monogamy, which includes polyamory, polyfidelity, swinging, friends with benefits, etc. I guess it can make it difficult to form a community when there are poly folks who don't want to be lumped in with swingers, etc. I don't want to get overly hung up on defining what poly is and isn't. I don't expect people to agree with my views of poly or non-monogamy, or whatever.
 
Saying "poly" is just a shortened version, or diminutive, as it were, of the word polyamory. It's a lazy nickname. It doesn't change the meaning to say poly rather than the entire word.

Non-monogamy means any relationship that is not monogamous. That includes cheating, swinging, and polyamory ("poly" for short). There are clear differences between all of them, but non-monogamy is the umbrella term, for sure.
 
Last edited:
Polyamory differs from various other forms of non-monogamy in that it explicitly emphasizes loving relationships, as contrasted with sex and sexuality. This distinguishes poly relationships from "f**kbuddies" and most which go by the term "friends with benefits," as well as "casual" ... "one night stands".

Most poly folk are not happy to have the term "polyamory" eroded or degraded to mean just anything anyone wants to use this term for.
 
Polyamory differs from various other forms of non-monogamy in that it explicitly emphasizes loving relationships, as contrasted with sex and sexuality. This distinguishes poly relationships from "f**kbuddies" and most which go by the term "friends with benefits," as well as "casual" ... "one night stands".

Most poly folk are not happy to have the term "polyamory" eroded or degraded to mean just anything anyone wants to use this term for.

I'm not sure I agree that most poly folk would feel that the term is eroded or degraded by including other forms of responsible non-monogamy. I find it really very sad that anyone would feel their community is at all degraded by including people with differences into it.
 
I'm not sure I agree that most poly folk would feel that the term is eroded or degraded by including other forms of responsible non-monogamy. I find it really very sad that anyone would feel their community is at all degraded by including people with differences into it.

No one is saying that the poly community is degraded by its differences, nor that people can't be poly and ALSO engage in other types of liaisons. You can be poly AND open AND swinging AND whatever, but that does not negate the fact that polyamory is a subset of non-monogamy just like those others are, and is distinctly different from them (in that its focus is on loving relationships and the others focus on sex). Just because people include other activities in their lives does not change the meaning of a word. And using the word polyamory to represent whatever one wants it to, does erode its meaning, plain and simple.

What would probably be better for the poly "community" is to stop trying to change the word or invent new ones, because people out there who are just learning about it will be confused. It only prevents poly from being more accepted when it's not clear what it is.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top