poly or swinging

Every person has a different set of values. I can understand why someone would value their children more than their other stuff, but I think it's sort of pompous arrogance to assume that children MUST be the center of someone's existence.

Well I have to agree that it would be particularly silly (in my mind) if someone who had no kids and wasn't really involved seriously in the lives of of children made the idea of kids the center of their existence.... well and a waste of time too.

For me-they are certainly the most important part of my life-until they are grown-as they had no choice in being in my life and I need to ensure that my decisions don't damage them if at all possible.

My sister has no children-but she's helped in the raising and day to day care of mine, so she would also say that they are the most important thing in her life for the same reason.

However-I have friends who come and go and don't have kids. They only make the kids a priority when the kids are around them, because again-they are innocent (the kids) and dependent. But when they are not around-they have other things that are their priority and being around FOR the kids isn't a priority either. :)

I get what you are saying. I look forward to the day all mine are grown and I can spend time with them on my schedule around my dreams and desires. :) But for now-it's all about them.
 
The thing is, even if she's not saying it, and even if it's prefaced with "in my opinion", she is still implying it. Her website is giving a great example of saying something that marginalizes people intentionally or unintentionally. Sure she starts with the phrase "to me" , but later goes on to say that "poly partners want X" as if this is indeed the case for being a poly partner.

If she said "this is how I define the poly people in my life" and left it at that, then that would be fine. But she went on to say something to the effect of "Poly people want x, so I define my poly relationships as having x" It completely invalidates all the poly people who want a-w and y+z.

And sure, it's just her opinion, but that is an opinion I would challenge for those very reasons.

And it's also a great example of how she is entitled to have that opinion but is not entitled to have that opinion unchallenged.


Just maybe she's not educated to a point of comprehending that her words could be interpretted that way and it's not that she is trying to imply that at all-but that she doesn't know how to say what she means?

I think that is a common issue around here.

I think Ygirl actually commented on what the language is called that works better. But even though I am educated and have worked hard to learn how to properly communicate my thoughts, feelings, needs, desires, opinions in such a way as to ensure the other person knows I'm not presuming anything about anyone else-I had never heard of it before she mentioned it.

I am all for trying to help people understand a better way to communicate (thus why Maca and I are doing communication counseling together as he struggles with this) but assuming that they mean the worst possible thing when they speak isn't going to help clear up the confusion.

Assuming the worst of anyone's meaning only breaks down communication and relationships. If we really want to improve it we need to consider all the possible meanings and seek to find the true one based on the information we have and that we can gain.

I tend to think that it's better to presume someone INTENDS the better meaning and help them find a way to better express it
then to presume they intend the more negative meaning and tell them why they are full of shit.
 
No, not really. I apolgize if it comes across that way. I tend to be fairly blunt and to the point in my writing ... it's not meant personally.

No offense, just a discussion.

No problem, just checking. So much negativity on the board right now. I don't wish to contribute to making anyone feel judged or unwelcomed.

I want to be sure that if I am misunderstood-I clarify myself asap. :)

Thanks for sharing in the discussion.
 
It was a response to DrunkenPorcupine's post. I keep forgetting that not everybody uses the hybrid or threaded display to see what post responds to what other post. If I don't quote the post I respond to, my posts can appear to be apropos of nothing. Sorry!

Giggle-I got told that my first day or two here and didn't know what they were talking about. I don't use the hybrid or threaded display, but I hadn't figured out how to quote either. ;)
 
Although I have never engaged in swinging as a practice I have engaged in random play that certainly was without a desire for closer emotional connection.

"To me, the distinction between swinging and polyamory is a depth of emotional involvement in each other's lives. Swinging partners, to me, would seem to have a greater emotional distance from their partners, and prefer to keep it that way, while Poly partners want to grow closer in their relationships with others"

This part of her statement sums my own interpretation of swinging vs Poly pretty accurately.

Leaving it there would suffice for me and I might even be comfortable using it to explain the differences between poly and swinging to friends who are new to the concept of polyamory. If I were to use the word polyamory that is. I prefer to simply explaining the dynamic. That leaves little room for interpretation or Google confusion :rolleyes:

Yeah-really I'm coming to think that I don't care to identify as poly anymore then anything else. So often if we identify as anything people use their interpretation of that thing to define us-and my experience is that it's rarely correct. I'd prefer to not identify and take the extra time to really share who and what I am with someone.....
 
I think perhaps the example she uses is being taken too literally.

As Poly, and a Swinger, I am very aware of the difference between them. And her example truely sums it up for me. Not because my children are the center point of my poly life though. It's merely an example.

The way I interpreted her example, it could have been applied to anything. When I engage in a poly relationship, that partner has some interest, if only informational, in my life. From what I do for a living, where I work, what my hobbies are, what some of my favorite foods/drinks/colors/etc are.

When I engage in a swinging situation I don't feel the need to share any of the above information with the person I'm with. They don't need to know any of it. If employment, for example, comes up, it is kept to vague answers like "I'm in IT" which really could mean anything :) They don't even get to know my surname... and honestly, a week down the line I will most likely have forgotten their name.

Thanks for piping up. I saw your post on the other thread about doing poly and swinging and was very interested in hearing your thoughts here. I took her to be giving an example too.

I don't swing but as I said-have friends who do and like you said-their "swinger acquaintances" are simply not as involved or interested in any part of their lives as their FRIENDS or poly-relationships.
 
I tend to think that it's better to presume someone INTENDS the better meaning and help them find a way to better express it
then to presume they intend the more negative meaning and tell them why they are full of shit.

I agree, however, it's been my experience when you try to make a person aware of the unintended consequences of saying such things, it is often interpreted as an attack. I think assuming good intent needs to happen on both sides.
 
I agree, however, it's been my experience when you try to make a person aware of the unintended consequences of saying such things, it is often interpreted as an attack. I think assuming good intent needs to happen on both sides.

I don't disagree-but I think that it's important for everyone to remember that anytime you are trying to teach someone something that they haven't been asked to be taught-you are already crossing a "boundary" into their personal space and their security-which puts the obligation on you to quiet their POTENTIAL fears and concerns first.

On the other hand if someone says "hey I want to understand this" and then you answer-then THEY need to realize that they have asked you to enter their personal space and impact their security by sharing information that is potentially contradictory to what they already believe.

Each person needs to be aware before they take the first step as to which position they are in, and if you are the one taking the first step and you haven't yet taken the other persons feelings into consideration and ensured that they know you want to invade their personal comfort zone-they haven't been given the chance to allow you in without being defensive and in fact haven't even been given the chance to prepare themselves to not be defensive...
 
I don't disagree-but I think that it's important for everyone to remember that anytime you are trying to teach someone something that they haven't been asked to be taught-you are already crossing a "boundary" into their personal space and their security-which puts the obligation on you to quiet their POTENTIAL fears and concerns first.

On the other hand if someone says "hey I want to understand this" and then you answer-then THEY need to realize that they have asked you to enter their personal space and impact their security by sharing information that is potentially contradictory to what they already believe.

I agree. On an online forum, people make statements and arguments that others haven't asked to hear all the time. When a person makes a statement, the very act of posting it subjects that statement to scrutiny, whether they've been asked to be taught about that scrutiny or not.

In person, the dynamic is entirely different.


Each person needs to be aware before they take the first step as to which position they are in, and if you are the one taking the first step and you haven't yet taken the other persons feelings into consideration and ensured that they know you want to invade their personal comfort zone-they haven't been given the chance to allow you in[ without being defensive and in fact haven't even been given the chance to prepare themselves to not be defensive...

The trouble is, a personal comfort zone is an entirely subjective thing. In person, this is something that can be gauged with a certain amount of skill, and something I do often in my trainings.

However, I don't believe that applies online in an open public forum. If we were to take this forum and turn it into a "safe space", that would require quite a few things. It would require that every member agree to a much more detailed covenant about what this forum is for and why people are here. It would also require a set of guidelines built by and agreed to by the whole community. We don't have that on this forum. It is a public space for anyone to post. Now of course relationships form in their own ways on such forums, but since the main connection is what is typed onto a webpage, each person has to take responsibility for their own comfort zone.

That's not to say that people shouldn't take other people's feelings into consideration when posting, that doesn't change that people will still read things differently and take things on personally when it may not be necessary to do so. And the nature of the communication medium makes it difficult to differentiate such things when there is no personal frame of reference.

The best advice I ever got about posting on open online forums (that are not intentional communities or agreed safe spaces) is to not take anything personally rather than try to justify reasons for taking it personally. 98% of the time, it was never intended personally, and in those few cases where it might have been intended personally, does it really matter that much?
 
Last edited:
I would just substitute the word "people" for "relationships" since people could partake of both practices should they want to.

That's a good distinction, I think. I often say I do poly. Even when I say I am poly, what I intend to communicate is that I do poly, in that I engage in multiple loving, romantic relationships.
 
When a person makes a statement, the very act of posting it subjects that statement to scrutiny, whether they've been asked to be taught about that scrutiny or not.

In person, the dynamic is entirely different.
Brilliant.

I can't count how many times on a forum I've heard someone say "I didn't ask for your opinion." or "you shoudl get out of my thread" or words to that effect (not necessarily directed at me personally, but just in general).

The thing is .. when you put something out there in public on a public board, you need to expect people who read it to respond to it. If you don't want it responded to, then don't put it out there.

When it's in person you have much more control over who hears you. When you post on a message board or a blog, you are defacto giving the world permission to form an opinion - and you'd better be prepared to deal with the fact that some people may not only disagree with you, but disagree vehemently.

If you're not prepared to deal with that, then you should rethink whether or not you're emotionally able to handle socializing on the Internet.
 
RolyPoly: Your posts almost made me cry...not in a bad way. It is refreshing to know that there are other people out there that feel the same way. Currently facing a new couple that defines as swingers/openmarriage/poly and it is frustrating me to no end!! (another post maybe) I do need that connection with people...love caring openess....before things get sexual and I tire of having to explain it to others and often feel somehow broken.
 
I guess in my mind even if you are able to handle the criticism blah blah-it's reasonable to practice making the effort to communicate in such a way as to esure the other person continues to be capable of sensing your respect for them as a person online.
Sure it IS easier in person. But if we choose to communicate where its more difficult (online, with someone who doesn't speak our language, with someone under severe medical duress) are we not still responsible for making sure that the point we ARE making is the point we were INTENDING to make when we are trying to communicate?

Yes it is also our responsibility to ask "did I understand the point you were intending to make" as well. But I think it goes both ways within each individual. Just because we think we made ourselves clear... doesn't mean we did and doesn't let us off the hook for trying a little harder.

IF it's obvious that we aren't communicating with one another-then isn't it BOTH parties who are responsible for either trying harder or stopping? No more so the person who is being offended, than the person who is doing the offending....
 
Definitely not broken!

It was such a relief for me to discover that I was on the same page with my new friend - both of us need a lot of time to get to know each other before being intimate. The times we spend together have been wonderful!

What about your new couple frustrates you? (Yes, another post if you like)...
 
Here's my issue: If a person is holding another person responsible for their emotions in a conflict, it is usually very difficult to address it without taking on that responsibility for that other person's emotions. And that's just plain not healthy.

Here's what I mean:

Holding the other person responsible:

A: You're attacking me.

B: I'm not attacking you.

A: Yes you are attacking me and I can't deal with that.

B: But I'm not attacking you and here's why I don't see it as an attack.

A: You have no right to tell me how I feel.

B: I'm not telling you how you should feel I'm just saying that I'm not attacking you.

A: Why do you feel the need to hurt me like that?

etc etc etc.


Being responsible for your own emotions:

A: When I read that it makes me feel attacked.

B: I'm sorry it does that, but I'm not attacking you with that.

A: I realize that, but I still have that feeling of being attacked.

B: What is making you feel attacked about it?

A: Well, A, B and C.

B: Ok, let's talk about that.



My point is conversations and conflicts tend to break down easily if anyone involved holds the other person responsible for their feelings. This happens doubly so in an online conversations because 95% of the context is missing. And the thing is, there is usually nothing that can be done when that dynamic is set up, because it's all reactionary to a completely subjective standard. Some things may hurt feelings, some things may not. Entering into a dialogue about such feelings coming up when that dynamic is in place makes it very difficult to get anywhere and usually enables pretty unhealthy communication patterns.

It's a lot harder for such things to break down when people take responsibility for their own feelings, especially the negative ones.

I think there is often confusion between being compassionate and feeling responsible for someone else's feelings. For me there is a huge difference and I cannot think of taking on such responsibility as an act of compassion.
 
Last edited:
lack of clarity

pretty briefly, rolypoly, the new couple is frustrating me because they seem to use a lot of terms interchangably...swingers, poly, open marriage...I think that I have tried to make my/our position pretty clear because I don't want to end up in a sticky situation with my 'feelings' if they are unwelcome. Just coming out of a relationship where my feelings of love and connectedness were too much and want to try to really get a read on things before I jump into this new thing but they seem unclear about their own boundaries.

eg. "yes we need to feel connected, caring and close to our partners but if there was ever love it would have to be shut down..."

in my understanding swingers really aren't interested in emotional connection if they are just swinging and poly people strive for just that...so frustrated that they can't be clear about the direction that they are going...
 
I see now. Ugh, I wouldn't want to be in that situation, "if there was love it would have to be shut down". Ouch!!

Poly is so juicy.
 
I talked with my husband last night on some of the points in this thread.

It occurred to me that while I like sex as recreational fun sometimes I don't ever cum under those circumstances. I wonder how many women do? It seems that sex with anyone who I am not connected with (I am not using terms such as swinging etc because I think what I am saying crosses all kinds of situations and relationships) is more visual and about a theatrical act rather than reaching a climax. Sure it feels sexy and I get something out of being looked at and admired, but not enough to really get off.

I have changed how I think about how I have sex. I really need a connection to be able to be entirely satisfied and happy... to be able to link orgasm with happiness, connection to my spirit and to the spirit of another, to feel like its entirely right somehow and to feel entirely like the situation is about give and take and honouring my partners needs and mine, rather than giving them my body. I need sex to be sacred more than I did before. Does this make sense?

Perhaps I can fulfill my needs for sexy drama play with SM play. For me that doesn't necessarily have to involve sex. It seems to give me the same sense I get from when I was swinging and having sex related hook ups. It's a bit of a game and a bit of drama. Yet, with the component that sex doesn't actually have to happen. I also like to flirt and be looked at. I have discovered that that doesn't have to end in having sex with someone either and can be quite fun also. It can be a part of any friendship as added humour or play.

these thoughts are new to me so bare with me.... I'm trying to figure out what it is I was attracted to swinging for and I think I have got on to something. Thoughts?
 
Does this make sense?........
Thoughts?

Makes PERFECT sense to me RP. Even with Maca, if it's just a "playtime" sex moment-I often won't get off. I still LOVE to do that with him. I love the... control, the power I feel when he gets so excited and so overwrought with desire. Seeing his face, feeling that intensity.

Of course when we connect it's often like that as well-except I don't feel the power.. it's more OUR power. Sometimes I like to feel like I "gave it all" instead of wanting to recieve.

Before we married I was much more of a "player" and I never got off when I wasn't emotionally and spiritually bonded with someone. But at the time I also didn't WANT to be connected with someone-becuase I didn't want anyone taking any part of me...

I am very much a natural flirt. We have made friends with a couple, and I've been clear and honest from day one with them, that I'm not up to having any more lovers. But I LOVE to flirt with the man. He's a lot of fun to flirt and tease and he doesn't seem to take it wrong. He can flirt right back and just have a great time.

I love knowing I have someone (man or woman's) full attention and that they are excited by me and find me desirable. I don't need to take it to a full sexual level to just enjoy the moment. :) One of the things I love best about the "dating" scene is that time BEFORE you actually get serious with someone (AT ALL) but there is that intensity of desire. Once you "consummate" it by having sex, some of that is lost.... I enjoy having relationships with some people that never get consummated. Being able to keep that moment full of desire and a sense of need-forever.

I think your post made perfect sense RP. Perfectly clear as day to me. ;)
 
Back
Top