Polyamory.com Forum  

Go Back   Polyamory.com Forum > Polyamory > Poly Relationships Corner

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #151  
Old 01-04-2010, 02:25 AM
HappiestManAlive HappiestManAlive is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Vegas, Baby!
Posts: 348
Default

Raven - in the previous exchange, you were right to react to that statement. I, too, was propagating the "multiple monogamy" version of poly, even to defend that against others who talked about the term applying to swinging and other forms of ope relationships.

In many talks with many people here and at home, I have discarded that POV as pointless, divisive, and not even applicable to my own situation. I was also absent from these boards for a while. WHen I came back, I was astonished at the way some posts here attacked different POV's, and when I began to post again those 'attacks' quickly turned to me and my new POV as well.

No, they're not always direct, personal, attacks (though some are). But when people post that your relationship does't qualify as poly, or that certain behaviours 'don't count' and 'aren't poly' on a board where people are looking for support in poly relationships, it's going to be taken harshly whether or not it was intended as such.

To answer all of the above - because the terminilogy is different to different people, lol. PLAIN AND SIMPLE. Not hard to grasp. The word 'fuck' is't even derogatoryu or offensive to a lot of people anymore!
Reply With Quote
  #152  
Old 01-04-2010, 02:27 AM
Ceoli Ceoli is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: London, UK
Posts: 900
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by crisare View Post
And where did I say she had to use the same term?

What I said was that *I* would consider the relationship she described to be that of a lover. I then asked her to explain what she considers a "lover" if this isn't it.
After she clearly explained what the term means to her, you have continued to address the fact that she's using a different word than you would. That would suggest that you're more concerned about the word she uses than the meaning behind the word. I could be wrong.

Quote:
I'm getting really frustrated with you telling me what I can and can't ask and what I can and can't say, Ceoli. This isn't the first time you've done it to me.
Please feel free to provide examples of when I've told you what you can or can't ask or say and I'd be happy to address it and/or clarify.
Reply With Quote
  #153  
Old 01-04-2010, 11:51 AM
dakid dakid is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 191
Default

crisare - i would tend to call a lover someone that i go on dates with and hang out with at times other then just when we are having sex.

however, having thought about it a bit since reading your question i am now thinking that actually a fuck-buddy probably is a form of lover, as is a partner. fuck-buddy describes a very specific type of lover though, someone i only spend time with having sex not generally hanging out with or dating.

i tend not to call a fuck-buddy a lover because it is too vague and as i say it tends (over here in the UK) to be understood as someone you are dating etc.

my perception on these boards (correct me if i'm wrong people!) is that lover tends to be used to mean at least someone you may fall in love with if not someone you are in love with already. i always knew i was never likely to fall in love with guy, for reasons i am reluctant to go into here, and i certainly never have done. but as i have described i do care about him and i personally call that love. "in love" for me is a more romantic, loving every part of them, kinda thing. whereas love is a very broad thing encompassing the love i have for my friends, sisters, dog, etc.

for me the best comparison really is the love i feel for my close friends, i would prefer to use a phrase that links him to them than to my lover-partners, with whom i am truly madly deeply in love in a quite different way.

that's just me, i have no need for others to replicate my way of thinking, only to respect our differences.

let me know if you need further clarification i am only too aware of the limitations of language, especially across cultures and nation-states.

i am curious now to ask you - would you feel there is a difference for you between a partner and a lover, as you use these words? if so what is that difference for you?

i think for me a partner is another form of lover, but again quite a specific kind, but i am curious to read your thoughts on it.

also i am quite curious about your thinking about fuck-buddies, and your own experiences.

how do you manage to have regular sex with somebody without developing any level of love for that person?

seeing them regularly, possibly talking with them about your sexual desires/boundaries, sharing time and touch with them, on a regular basis, but never feeling any love for them of any kind. at least that's the picture i am forming of fuck-buddies relationships for you, please do tell me if i am wrong. i ask not in judgement or as criticism but because for me that would be very difficult and so i am simply curious how it works.

x
Reply With Quote
  #154  
Old 01-04-2010, 11:52 AM
dakid dakid is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 191
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ceoli View Post
Having lived in both the UK and the US, I can say that the difference in slang is part of it. There are also differing attitudes towards sexuality and sexual expression. In general, America tends to be pretty conservative about the role of sex in relationships and between people. This is far less so in the UK and other European countries. Basically, I've found that people are far more open to a far more diverse view of what constitutes a loving relationship than I've noticed here in the US.
i must add this is my experience too, of one of the many differences in culture (very very broadly speaking and with obvious exceptions) between the US and most of western europe.

x
Reply With Quote
  #155  
Old 01-04-2010, 12:01 PM
dakid dakid is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 191
Default

crisare, i think what ceoli and myself have at times found challenging with some of your posts and the posts indeed of several others have appeared to discount views which are not immediately understood or which are different to yours (plural).

while it is fine by me if you (again plural) want to ask questions to aid your/our further understanding of each other, i would say that not enough care has been made at times to avoid that sounding like a negative judgement or even denial of our reality.

none of us is perfect and i have made mistakes too. however with some folks here i am at the moment lacking the faith that it is always a mistake. i am not saying this includes you necessarily, right now i am not entirely sure to be honest, but it does seem some folk on here are unwilling to accept and welcome into the community folk who have different/broader definitions of love than they.

there are undertones of "sex is bad unless its in a committed relationship and i don't want to be tainted by association with people who have sex outside of a longterm relationship which is leading some people to say that the only way to practise polyamory is their way - in exclusive and ongoing partnerships/relationships, which some might describe as multiple-monogamy or polyfidelity. i accept that as one way of practising polyamory but i do not accept it as the only way.

this denies the reality of some of us here such as me and ceoli (i think) and as such is a form of rudeness and is very divisive. whilst we can respect their way of life it does not always seem to work in the other direction and that is sad (and can be very hurtful).
Reply With Quote
  #156  
Old 01-04-2010, 04:06 PM
Ravenesque's Avatar
Ravenesque Ravenesque is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 297
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HappiestManAlive View Post
Raven - in the previous exchange, you were right to react to that statement. I, too, was propagating the "multiple monogamy" version of poly, even to defend that against others who talked about the term applying to swinging and other forms of ope relationships.

In many talks with many people here and at home, I have discarded that POV as pointless, divisive, and not even applicable to my own situation. I was also absent from these boards for a while. WHen I came back, I was astonished at the way some posts here attacked different POV's, and when I began to post again those 'attacks' quickly turned to me and my new POV as well.

No, they're not always direct, personal, attacks (though some are). But when people post that your relationship does't qualify as poly, or that certain behaviours 'don't count' and 'aren't poly' on a board where people are looking for support in poly relationships, it's going to be taken harshly whether or not it was intended as such.

To answer all of the above - because the terminilogy is different to different people, lol. PLAIN AND SIMPLE. Not hard to grasp. The word 'fuck' is't even derogatoryu or offensive to a lot of people anymore!
*hugs*

Quote:
Originally Posted by dakid View Post
crisare, i think what ceoli and myself have at times found challenging with some of your posts and the posts indeed of several others have appeared to discount views which are not immediately understood or which are different to yours (plural).

while it is fine by me if you (again plural) want to ask questions to aid your/our further understanding of each other, i would say that not enough care has been made at times to avoid that sounding like a negative judgement or even denial of our reality.

none of us is perfect and i have made mistakes too. however with some folks here i am at the moment lacking the faith that it is always a mistake. i am not saying this includes you necessarily, right now i am not entirely sure to be honest, but it does seem some folk on here are unwilling to accept and welcome into the community folk who have different/broader definitions of love than they.

there are undertones of "sex is bad unless its in a committed relationship and i don't want to be tainted by association with people who have sex outside of a longterm relationship which is leading some people to say that the only way to practise polyamory is their way - in exclusive and ongoing partnerships/relationships, which some might describe as multiple-monogamy or polyfidelity. i accept that as one way of practising polyamory but i do not accept it as the only way.

this denies the reality of some of us here such as me and ceoli (i think) and as such is a form of rudeness and is very divisive. whilst we can respect their way of life it does not always seem to work in the other direction and that is sad (and can be very hurtful).
Very eloquently said and heartfelt. It covers many of my feelings on some of the interactions here and elsewhere within the poly community.

*hugs* I feel in quite the hugging mood. Hugs to dakid and HappiestManAlive. And Ceoli too *hugs huggly huggly hugs*

~Raven~
__________________
Are you a polyamorist or non-monogamous individual between the ages 18-35? Are you located in New York State or the Northeast?
Join us at The Network, a social and socially aware network which connects young polys and progressive polys of all ages.



~Open up your mind and let me step inside.
Rest your weary head and let your heart decide. It's so easy.
When you know the rules.
It's so easy. All you have to do is fall in love.
Play the game.
Everybody play the game of love. Yeah...~

Last edited by Ravenesque; 01-04-2010 at 04:10 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #157  
Old 01-04-2010, 05:49 PM
dakid dakid is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 191
Default

hugs back at you raven, in fact i think this huggy mood is infectious because i too would like to send hugs out to HappiestManAlive, Ceoli, and the many other wonderful people out there, i hope you know who you are!



xxx
Reply With Quote
  #158  
Old 01-04-2010, 05:50 PM
dakid dakid is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 191
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by quila View Post
I also hope you stick around. I saw everyone ganging up on you, and I started writing my reply to clarify what I'd said, and my husband leaned over and read everyone else's reply and told me it sounded like I didn't need to bother responding because you were full of it and everyone had already pointed that out. But I decided to ignore him, and clarify my statements. I'm glad I did, because you were patient enough to read it and give me a second chance.
i am glad you did too, quila, and send a hug your way (hope that's ok!)

x
Reply With Quote
  #159  
Old 01-04-2010, 07:00 PM
redpepper's Avatar
redpepper redpepper is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 7,634
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by quila View Post
I also have to agree that I've always thought there was something missing from "friends with benefits," because it implies other friendships don't have benefits.
I am not sure I like the term "friends with benefits" for this reason also. I am not so sure having sex with friends is always a benefit actually. Sometimes it hinders friendship I would think. I prefer the term "intimate friends" when referring to friends I have sex with as a part of our friendship. Somehow it seems to add more respect for the connection that sex gives a relationship. "Fuck buddy" for me is something I have done while drunk with someone and had no connection to myself or the person. Such as when I was swinging (although I know some actually have friendship relationships with those they swing with, I never did, hence my belief here for myself). Anyone I have slept with otherwise I know intimate things about in some way, from their body or how they respond sexually. That to me denotes an intimacy that is not a "benefit" because they are not "giving" it to me but sharing and I with them.

Maybe "intimate friend" is just a bit deeper than "fuck buddy." for some it may be. I will have to think more about what I think on this... I think for now I see the terms in order of no connection to friendly connection as such; "fuck buddy," "friends with benefits" and then "intimate friends."



Actually, it seems to me that I have a scale from "fuck buddy" to the relationship depth I have with my husband and boyfriend. Each time I go up that scale with someone the other is not left behind but they all become a part of the relationship. Once a "fuck buddy" for me turns into a "friend with benefits" the latter is not lost kind of thing. I have just gained more depth I think. For me and my two men we do all of the above it seems, just depending on the mood or quality of intimacy we wanting to engage in.
__________________
Anyone want to be friends on Facebook?
Send me your name via PM
My blog

Last edited by NeonKaos; 01-04-2010 at 07:07 PM. Reason: merge posts
Reply With Quote
  #160  
Old 01-04-2010, 07:59 PM
dakid dakid is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 191
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by redpepper View Post
Anyone I have slept with otherwise I know intimate things about in some way, from their body or how they respond sexually. That to me denotes an intimacy that is not a "benefit" because they are not "giving" it to me but sharing and I with them
i couldn't agree more redpepper.

x
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
casual sex, definitions, one night stands, sex

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 02:13 AM.