Polyamory.com Forum  

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

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old 12-20-2009, 12:16 AM
crisare's Avatar
crisare crisare is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 172
Default

Quote:
In our case, a one-night stand can be and is VERY "poly", becuase it has positive emotional implications for us as a couple regardless of the what went on with the 3rd party. If it becomes more than "just a fuck", then the "poly-ness" extends to the 3rd party I guess, lol - THEY aare now engaged in a poly-style relation on some level to be determined in time.
IMO, that's like saying "I'm a vegetarian, but I eat chicken."

If you start defining the words the way YOU want them to mean, rather than the way the majority of the community accepts them to mean, then the words become meaningless.

You can say that a one-night-stand is poly, but it's not.
You can say that the person you had the one-night-stand with is poly, but he or she is not.

All you're really doing by applying the word "poly" to something that isn't, is placing your own moral judgements on the words involved and making it more confusing for those who don't understand the difference.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 12-20-2009, 12:49 AM
AutumnalTone AutumnalTone is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Kansas City Metro
Posts: 2,186
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by crisare View Post
All you're really doing by applying the word "poly" to something that isn't, is placing your own moral judgements on the words involved and making it more confusing for those who don't understand the difference.
Right. Although polyamory is a form of non-monogamy, all non-monogamy is not polyamory. Saying "poly" when one means "non-monogamy" only confuses matters.
__________________
When speaking of various forms of non-monogamy...it ain't poly if you're just fucking around.

While polyamory, open relationships, and swinging are all distinctly different approaches to non-monogamy, they are not mutually exlusive. Folks can, and some do, engage in more than one of them at a time--and it's all good.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 12-20-2009, 01:17 AM
HappiestManAlive HappiestManAlive is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Vegas, Baby!
Posts: 348
Default

I think this discussio in the thread is proof that this 'majority' of yours isn't quite so settled on this rigid definition of yours. :shrug:

I'm with you guys BTW, look at the *how many now* other threds about this very topic. I DO believe in preserving the difference of the term and it's conotations. I just don't see this big majority agreement on the definition that you do.
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 12-20-2009, 01:58 PM
glowinthedarkstars glowinthedarkstars is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Somewhere under the rainbow
Posts: 156
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SeventhCrow View Post

If you tell me you're poly, I'm not going to assume that you're open for casual sex or swing. If you tell me you have an open relationship, I'm not going to assume you're poly or that you swing. If you tell me you swing, I'm not going to assume it's an open relationship or that you're poly. You tell me you're poly and I assume that you engage in more than one romantic relationship at a time--that's it.
oh man thanks seventhcrow. as simple as this is i finally understand a helluva lot better ^^
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 12-20-2009, 07:15 PM
dakid dakid is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 191
Default

i don't know how we could measure what the majority people who identify as poly would define as poly, and anyway i don't support majority-based decision-making. i work through concensus.

clearly there is no concensus about what poly means so we may have to accept that polyamorous people are diverse in their thoughts and practises.
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 12-20-2009, 07:25 PM
HappiestManAlive HappiestManAlive is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Vegas, Baby!
Posts: 348
Default

^what he said
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 12-20-2009, 08:29 PM
dakid dakid is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 191
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HappiestManAlive View Post
^what he said
you mean she
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 12-20-2009, 09:32 PM
HappiestManAlive HappiestManAlive is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Vegas, Baby!
Posts: 348
Default

Oops. Can't keep track of all these new people, lol! Sorry!
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 12-23-2009, 01:24 PM
dakid dakid is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 191
Default

no worries
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 12-25-2009, 10:14 PM
LovingRadiance's Avatar
LovingRadiance LovingRadiance is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Alaska
Posts: 5,431
Default Thread hijack

I guess the part I find annoying and frustrating is this...


MANY words in our language have been used (and abused) to the point that even reasonably intelligent people can't COMMUNICATE with one another using them, without first going over definitions. Something that requires a LOT of time to lay out a "language" before they can even have a productive conversation together.

Part of the reason this happens is because people choose to define words as they want to.

I don't give a damn about "majority" or "concensus".


What I do care about is that "poly" HAS A DEFINITION that has been accepted for YEARS AND YEARS (fucking comes from WHAT language before English ye educated ones?)

AS DOES "amory"... Again-a word with a definition from a language prior to English.


When one takes a term that ALREADY has an accepted and understood definition (or two) and create a new compound word-it is unreasonable to decide that you will redefine one or both of the base words in the compound word in order to create a NEW definition for the word you are creating.
This is a blatant abuse of the language and is one of the primary causes of miscommunication between people...

IN the "polyamory" world, it is said that communication is one of the MOST important things for us to focus on....

So why would ANYONE who wants to claim to be polyamorous ALSO want to intentionally make themselves part of a movement that CAUSES miscommunication???

Feel free to either consider that question rhetorical-or start a thread on the topic.


Please resume your normal broadcasting now....
__________________
"Love As Thou Wilt"
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 06:06 PM.