Poly Map

[Scott]

Originally Posted by km34

That would be another reason to want to learn about it.

:-)

Originally Posted by km34

And I still think of this as a discussion on non-monogamy, not on sex work in general.

Ok...

Originally Posted by km34

When I said I wasn't interested in learning more about it, I meant the day-to-day practices and such.

Ah. I may not be interested in that either. Not really sure what that would entail.

Originally Posted by km34

Also, when I said relationship, I meant a romantic relationship. I have relationships of varying degrees with everyone I work with, for, and around but it doesn't make it romantic. I would think it is much the same for sex workers.

I think you (or someone else) agreed that a romantic relationship can develop between a client and a sex worker, but that the transaction should then be called something else.

However, I don't think you need to be a client of a sex worker to like or even love one. I think that's pretty much where I stand; you might say that in my physical life, I'm much more of an observer then a participant. Part of the reason for this is that I live in a remote area where I know next to no one. I only go to the city once or twice a month.

Online, however, I've managed to find places to talk to people. And I must admit these poly places have really given me some good times in that respect. Which is why it was pretty hard when I was removed from my last poly group.

[Scott]

Originally Posted by km34

I can't get the quote to do what I want (I'm a bit of a dunce when it comes to technology stuff lol), but based off of nycindie saying sex workers could be thought of as non-monogamous since they have sex with different people I was wondering...

Would most sex workers identify themselves as poly/non-monogamous (assuming they were aware of the options)? I doubt it. Most I've met would love to find "the one" and get married and do that whole monogamy thing. Having sex with person after person is a JOB for them, not a LIFESTYLE. I'm not counting them as a product or forgetting that they are people, I'm counting what they do as a service and not a personal interaction.

Ok. I just met one that identified as poly, which is probably why I brought this up in this poly forum to begin with.

[Scott]

Originally Posted by nycindie

You don't need to educate me, dear.

Ok.

Originally Posted by nycindie

You have no idea of my background.

True.. which is why I did couch my point with a "not sure" in it...

Originally Posted by nycindie

I do have some familiarity with this arena, but that is all I will say.

Alright.

Originally Posted by nycindie

Furthermore, I see prostitution as one specific "job description" within the realm of sex workers, so chill. I don't really need to be PC for anyone else.

Alright.

Originally Posted by nycindie

I wasn't demonizing, so I don't appreciate the implication.

Sorry about that. It's hard to know where people are coming from when you've only had limited time to interact with them.

Originally Posted by nycindie

Why should this discussion help anyone?

I like creating discussions that have the potential of helping people in some way or other. I definitely think this subject is one that should be discussed sometimes, although I know that it can be a very emotional one.

Originally Posted by nycindie

People are entitled to their opinions and to express them.

As long as they don't express them where such expression isn't wanted, laugh :-). I'm referring to myself here; I'm clearly the newcomer.

Originally Posted by nycindie

I think the sex act as commodity is directly comparable to a dildo being sold. That is not to say that the people who sell sex and the people who sell dildos are not human beings. But to be able to sell the act of sex separates that act from the person and any "soul" involvement, much the same as many people who can have recreational sex without emotional attachment. I see selling a fuck the same as selling a dildo. So, shoot me.

Lol :-). I'm fine with your view on the subject. I could simply never share it. Someone who sells a dildo accepts a person's money and then forgets about the whole thing. Someone who sells a sexual service.. that's something else, atleast as far as I'm concerned. I'm someone who places great value in touch. At the same time, I'm very afraid to touch, even in social settings; the thought of a hug not being wanted generally prompts me not to give them out unless I'm almost sure that it will be, or if I feel that a person deserves one from me to the point that even I'm willing to risk a rejection. I'm not sure who was mentioning sacred sexual priestesses, but I think whoever came up with it had the right idea in mind. A dildo is.. a piece of plastic. It just doesn't compare in my mind.

Originally Posted by nycindie

I don't really feel the need to present any data to prove a point here; this conversation has already become tedious for me. Suffice it to say that it sounds like your experiences have been limited.

Could be.

Originally Posted by nycindie

I'm probably much older than you and have more experiences to draw from.

Quite possible. I'm 36.

Originally Posted by nycindie

In my own personal life, most women I know, including myself, do not seek out a man who makes more money than they do, nor expect a man to support them.

Ok.

Originally Posted by nycindie

And valuing their own independence has nothing to do with how much money a woman makes. I am just barely surviving financially right now, and my bf is poorer than me. I don't care how much he makes, and I never base my attraction to someone on that. In fact, another guy I'm interested in is very unemployed right now. I don't care one iota. I've never really known many women who have that as a criteria. 'Nuff said, I'm done.

Well, you certainly don't seem to fit into the type of women that I've met, although my ex girlfriend was financially independent. Anyway, thanks for sharing. I'm sorry you found some of what I've said to be tedious. It's just that sometimes, people come from very different places and have a hard time understanding each other. Time can help here though...

[Tonberry]

Lots of responses since last time I posted. Let's see if I can sum up my reactions.

Nycindie: yes, I do know his chart and do like it better. I thought of linking to it myself. I think the main difference is that it focuses on relationships, which is only one aspect of Veaux's map, while including monogamy and celibacy. Basically it's broader and more restrictive at the same time, meaning it fits different needs.

Scott: the second graph doesn't include commercial because it focuses on relationships and the types thereof. While you can have a business relationship with a sex worker, it isn't the same kind of relationship. It doesn't include friends with benefits either, even though it includes friends without benefits. It's obviously focused less on the sexual aspect itself and more on the kind of relationships.

SourGirl and dingedheart, if I understand correctly you are talking about fisting. Not sure what that has to do with the chart, I'm pretty sure every category makes room for it while not making it compulsory.

General comments: I didn't see the quotes as "this is what THE WHOLE CATEGORY" is like. More "this chart is confusing, I'll add a few examples here and there to help you out". Previous versions didn't have quotes, presumably for that reason.

One thing I really don't like is that the "Religious/Social polygamy" is completely detached from the Polyfidelity block. As though it was impossible for it to be actual love with actual consent if religion or society is involved. There have been arranged marriages that resulted in happy, loving unions. I believe the same can be said of religious or social polygamy. I believe they should overlap.

[SourGirl]

Originally Posted by Tonberry

SourGirl and dingedheart, if I understand correctly you are talking about fisting. Not sure what that has to do with the chart, I'm pretty sure every category makes room for it while not making it compulsory.

No, my response to you is back on Page #2. The verbiage between DH and I, is just his way of struggling with his 'coming out' party. AKA cracking jokes at each others expense.

[Tonberry]

Aaaah, okay then

[Scott]

Originally Posted by Tonberry

Lots of responses since last time I posted. Let's see if I can sum up my reactions.

Nycindie: yes, I do know his chart and do like it better. I thought of linking to it myself. I think the main difference is that it focuses on relationships, which is only one aspect of Veaux's map, while including monogamy and celibacy. Basically it's broader and more restrictive at the same time, meaning it fits different needs.

How would you say it's more restrictive?

Originally Posted by Tonberry

Scott: the second graph doesn't include commercial because it focuses on relationships and the types thereof. While you can have a business relationship with a sex worker, it isn't the same kind of relationship. It doesn't include friends with benefits either, even though it includes friends without benefits. It's obviously focused less on the sexual aspect itself and more on the kind of relationships.

Ok. I like the idea you have above, that the charts fit different needs. I think that there should be a poly map out there that mentions sex workers, if only because you can certainly form relationships with them; perhaps generally business ones, but it can go further. I may be mistaken, but I think that a fair amount may also be with one for their first time, which was my particular case atleast.

Originally Posted by Tonberry

One thing I really don't like is that the "Religious/Social polygamy" is completely detached from the Polyfidelity block. As though it was impossible for it to be actual love with actual consent if religion or society is involved. There have been arranged marriages that resulted in happy, loving unions. I believe the same can be said of religious or social polygamy. I believe they should overlap.

I agree.

[dingedheart]

tonberry, you are absolutely right it is cover with in other categories. Its that some people like to see things in print. "See look I'm in there" finger pointing to chart. And part of the problem is that in somebody's head it is compulsory...or just a compulsion I'm not sure which.

Scottie ...did you you get kicked out of the ofter forum for not properly footnoting ?

SG ...WOW WOw wow and ouch I can't believe you could go that low. (I'm not even going to go for the obvious joke here) YOU.... know better than most I hate Brett Farve. And the comparison is hurtful...very hurtful. First he used a cheap cell phone and ambient lighting. I use an actual camera and good lighting ...granted not studio quality much better then that hack.
Go ahead release them to the world I dare you ...I have nothing to be ashamed of..... did I mention it was cold that day ...I believe in keeping the thermostat low ...save the planet and all that crap.

[Scott]

Originally Posted by dingedheart

Scottie ...did you you get kicked out of the ofter forum for not properly footnoting ?

What are you talking about, laugh :-). That does remind me of one forum I was in once though; I didn't get kicked out of it. I can't prove it, but I think the moderator decided that, aside from the usual strict standards he had on formatting, I personally had to be super precise in my formatting, and suppressed posts if they weren't just so. I decided it wasn't worth the trouble. Death by formatting -.-

[SourGirl]

I had no idea that sex workers in poly would be such a hot topic. Out of curiosity, what would people define the rising number of people that hold,.ummm,..'sexual/tantra/magikal/whatever 'workshops' ? They provide a sexual service in exchange for money, under the guise of 'teaching' ? Does that make them a 'sex worker', and if so, and they then meet poly-interests through their sexual work,.....does that count on the chart ? There have been quite a few stories on forums over the years of people hooking up with their 'teachers' in such environments, so maybe it`s legit.

I really don`t care if the chart includes clown porn. The hypotheticals are amusing.

Originally Posted by dingedheart

SG ...WOW WOw wow and ouch I can't believe you could go that low. (I'm not even going to go for the obvious joke here) YOU.... know better than most I hate Brett Farve. And the comparison is hurtful...very hurtful. First he used a cheap cell phone and ambient lighting. I use an actual camera and good lighting ...granted not studio quality much better then that hack.
Go ahead release them to the world I dare you ...I have nothing to be ashamed of..... did I mention it was cold that day ...I believe in keeping the thermostat low ...save the planet and all that crap.

You suck at faux bruised ego. On that note, if we SELL the pics,...and a few girls like what they see,...you too, can be part of the poly sex trade.
( I require 50% of profits. My idea. )
So I`ll be pimpin' pics. They say it ain`t easy.