Polyamory.com Forum  

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

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 02-07-2010, 12:24 AM
GroundedSpirit GroundedSpirit is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: New England USA
Posts: 1,231
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by redpepper View Post
I guess I would have a better chance if I were a nymph as pan likes to date them... could they possibly be nymphamorous perhaps or nymphsexuals.
You AREN'T a nymph ??????????????
And all this time.................
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 02-07-2010, 02:16 AM
CielDuMatin's Avatar
CielDuMatin CielDuMatin is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Upstate New York, USA
Posts: 1,456
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GroundedSpirit View Post
sorry - that was plain naughty - but too hard to resist. Simply a moment of weakness
I hope that you are feeling suitably sheepish!
__________________
Please check out The Birdcage - an open, friendly Polyamory forum for all parts of New York State
http://www.thebirdcage.org/

"Listen, or your tongue will make you deaf." - Native American Proverb
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 06-10-2010, 11:53 PM
River's Avatar
River River is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: NM, USA
Posts: 1,897
Default

I just "googled" the term "biamory" and found that it is in increasing use.

Here's an interesting discussion on the matter (Ther are many):

"It seems to me that the need to define bisexuality (or sexuality in general) by willingness to enter into long-term relationships is probably a holdover of the attitude that one should only have sex inside of marriage. Sex outside marriage (or at least a long-term relationship) "doesn't count." Of course, what it boils down to is that we're discussing two separate subjects entirely (sex, and long term relationships) and getting frustarted at out inabilities to ram both into the same pigeonhole ("bisexuality"). There is a term, "biamory," which specifically describes the willingness to be in a loving relationship with either gender."

http://www.okcupid.com/forum?low=61&...90891115628378
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 06-11-2010, 12:50 AM
phoenix762's Avatar
phoenix762 phoenix762 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 48
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MonoVCPHG View Post
Thank god I am simply straight and mono You people are soooo complicated
i'm with you...my brain hurts. however, it's utterly facinating, i am rather enjoying this thread
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 06-11-2010, 05:47 PM
rpcrazy's Avatar
rpcrazy rpcrazy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 171
Default

hrm...this topic is kind of funny, lol

Personally, i don't think we need a term. bi-sexual is fine, you can add whatever additive definition you want really. It's a loose term to begin with, look it up.

The dichotomy of human relationships can be compared to musical chords or radio frequencies. Everyone has a certain bandwidth or musical clef, that allows them the capacity for a specific level of sexual and emotional interactions outside of themselves. You can be on note, or one frequency, and then with a change in thought you can be another.
Everything else from that point is preference :/
__________________
---------------------------------------------------\\\
-"There hasn't been a person i've been with that I didn't love for 10 seconds to 10 years." David Duchovny
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 06-13-2010, 10:09 PM
River's Avatar
River River is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: NM, USA
Posts: 1,897
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rpcrazy View Post
hrm...this topic is kind of funny, lol

Personally, i don't think we need a term. bi-sexual is fine....
"Bisexual" is a "fine" term for those for whom the sex part is more crucial than the -amory part. For others, the -amory part is more crucial, and the sex part only really has its meaning within the -amory part. Since we exist, this term is important for us -- especially when there's so much "casual sex" on offer ... and so little -amory being offered to go with it.

P.S. -- I had a bunch of kisses a couple of years back with a guy who, it turned out, took those kisses more than gave them. He shortly thereafter abandoned our friendship with such ease that I later realized it was never really there to begin with.

Last edited by River; 06-13-2010 at 10:11 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 06-14-2010, 01:34 AM
River's Avatar
River River is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: NM, USA
Posts: 1,897
Default

He-he. All this stuff about people having feelings is kinda funny, houh. Yup, funny. He-he.

No wonder I don't show up here all that often.

"you can add whatever additive definition you want really"
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 06-14-2010, 06:31 PM
rpcrazy's Avatar
rpcrazy rpcrazy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 171
Default

whoa, I didn't mean to offend River, I don't know if you're mocking me or my diction. I was merely stating that the thread was interesting and amusing. forgive my word choice.

I myself am a pansexual, and I generally agree that a re-making of terms for all the grey areas of life is definitely needed. However bi-sexual has it's roots in biology and later evolved. I don't feel there's anything wrong with the term, if just properly understood. heterosexual, bisexual, and homosexual are scientific terms for sexual orientation. Sexual orientation describes the pattern of sexual attraction, behavior and identity that we have individually. It doesn't HAVE to mean all those negative things are associated to it. I feel remaking the word so it doesn't have "sex" in it is impractical.

Also an "additive definition" is a definition liberally attached to an existing intensional definition as a work around. What wrong with that word?
__________________
---------------------------------------------------\\\
-"There hasn't been a person i've been with that I didn't love for 10 seconds to 10 years." David Duchovny

Last edited by rpcrazy; 06-14-2010 at 06:35 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 06-14-2010, 08:32 PM
River's Avatar
River River is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: NM, USA
Posts: 1,897
Default

Rpcrazy,

I like the term biamory as a self-description precisely because it emphasizes emotional and spiritual connection, relationship, bonding, loving... over sex. Sex is secondary in importance to this loving -- "-amory" for me and for most folks who prefer to call themselves biamorous.

You can go on calling yourself bi-sexual if you prefer. This doesn't matter to me, and may well better describe how sexuality and amourousness fit into your life. Nobody said you had to adopt the term for yourself.

Sex is something I sometimes share with people I already feel close with, so only happens in the context of building and growing a loving relationship. For millions and millions of "gay" and "bi-" folks, sex is a casual form of recreation. So what's wrong with me choosing to emphasize who I am in my self-descriptoin? I do not find this need "funny". I find it rather painful and challenging-- tragic.

Last edited by River; 06-14-2010 at 08:36 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 06-15-2010, 01:54 AM
rpcrazy's Avatar
rpcrazy rpcrazy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 171
Default

Quote:
So what's wrong with me choosing to emphasize who I am in my self-descriptoin?
I feel you mistook my opinion posted as a direct attack on your choice to present yourself in a comfortable manner. I wish for you to understand that was not my intention, as I too have felt pain and agony because of words that are attached to stereotypes and misconceptions.

In any case, there's nothing wrong with you describing yourself as such. More specifically I was replying to the idea in a previous post that the word "bi" needs to be replaced. More power to you though! I feel for you, I really do...
__________________
---------------------------------------------------\\\
-"There hasn't been a person i've been with that I didn't love for 10 seconds to 10 years." David Duchovny
Reply With Quote
Reply

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 05:22 AM.