Is it just me, or is this becoming more about sex only?

[nycindie]

Yes, I re-read your post and saw that you did not mention swinging. So, it looks like some incorrect assumptions were made and open was lumped together with swinging, in how Mr. FFR expressed his views. Still, I didn't think he was referring specifically to you with the other stuff (after saying you brought it up)... but now I am even more confused. I guess we'll find out next time he logs in.

[AutumnalTone]

Originally Posted by MrFarFromRight

is I've seen posts with titles like "Kansas Couple Looking For Another Female For A Threesome".

That is perfectly fine in the personals section, as we've not been overrun with swinger ads (although I don't check those boards often). I'm wondering if I've missed threads on the discussion boards that most distinctly aren't about poly.

[CielDuMatin]

I'm not sure that the posts are explicitly only about sex... There have been a few (and this is me all arm-wavy and vague, because I don't recall the exact threads) where I wondered whether these people were just looking for a sexual threesome without anything else, or whether this was what (I think) most of us call "polyamory".

I think I made a mental note to ask for clarification (and to try to do it not in a snotty way) to find out what the motivations are (and are not). I don't want to push folks out - I think that a lot of folks start out by thinking that the only way to open up their relationship is with casual sex, and they may well have a lot more going on than just that, but the other stuff is difficult to express in typed words...

I appreciate everyone's feedback on these thoughts.

[MrFarFromRight]

Originally Posted by nycindie

Yes, I re-read your post and saw that you did not mention swinging. So, it looks like some incorrect assumptions were made and open was lumped together with swinging, in how Mr. FFR expressed his views. Still, I didn't think he was referring specifically to you with the other stuff (after saying you brought it up)... but now I am even more confused. I guess we'll find out next time he logs in.

First off, apologies to Mya for my apparent bunching together of open sex and swinging. I'm sometimes in a bit of a rush when here on the board - or connected to Internet in general - and compact concepts. What I should have written was: "There are some - as Mya was the first on this thread to point out - who mix a bit of not-emotionally-committed sex with a bit of poly; and there are others are on this board who mix a bit of swinging with a bit of poly (and for me the two ARE definitely different)." I'm sorry that my being lazy about typing that out caused upset. But when you write that

And when you say I mix "swinging" with "a bit of poly" that makes it sound like I'm only a bit poly, but not really.

I have to reply that it's you who are [unintentionally] bending what I wrote. I DIDN'T write that you 'mix "swinging" with "a bit of poly" '. I'll admit that I shouldn't have appeared to aim the description I DID use at you, but you've misquoted the description. It wasn't 'mix "swinging" with "a bit of poly" ', it was 'mix "a bit of swinging" with "a bit of poly" '. This may seem like hair-splitting on my part, but you accuse me of weighting that description as if there's more swinging than poly, and I never did that. Compare the 2 sentences "I'm Scottish with a bit of Welsh" and "I'm a bit of Scottish and a bit of Welsh", and you'll agree they have different meanings.

I insist on my right to differentiate between "couple relationship + not-emotionally-committed sex" and "poly". Both of these, as well as swinging, are examples of open relationships. I wouldn't consider a relationship based on "You can have sex with whoever you want as long as you don't get emotionally involved" as poly. And Mya has made clear that her situation IS poly. The personal choice to have non-emotional sexual relationships is a PERSONAL one: not one imposed by a partner.

Final point. As to whether I'm being condescending.

You know, when you say things like "if they need to talk about issues to do with the loveless-sex aspects of their whole poly-friendly existence, I think that's fair enough", you sound quite condescending.

Would you have preferred "I have no problem with that"? Just what's your objection? This thread was started by someone apparently worried by a slide towards a bias on sex issues as opposed to emotional ones. This board is a forum, an interchange. We bring our problems here hoping for support or at least understanding and acceptance. What I meant to say was that - in my opinion, and as my contribution to this topic - it's "fair enough" for anybody to bring up non-poly aspects of their life for general consideration and/or comment/advice. What's condescending about that?

[laughingowl]

While I am new to this forum I will also say by their very nature Poly's generally are more accepting of alternate lifestyles then many others.

So for many they might not know the difference, and for others, even if they understand 'open sex', 'swinging', etc is not really 'Poly', there are also alot of friendly Poly people that can share experiences....

Perhaps a 'non-Poly' advice section.

New posters, could be politely informed what Poly is (and is), though pointed out if they still want a friendly place to try to discuss their issues, 'Non-Poly advice' (or whatever section is titled) is where it should be posted, and noted that it is not the main focus of this board.

If we say we are open and trusting and communication is key... should we practice what we preach, when others ask questions.

Peace

[Mya]

Thank you for the clarification, MrFarFromRight. And my apologies for misinterpreting you. I can't say much more about the comment I thought was condescending, because it's not the specific words, but the tone of the comment that made me think that. But I do believe you if you say you didn't mean it like that. I might have reacted too harshly because you used me as an example and I had a feeling of being wrongly portrayed. But all is good now on my part, I understand better where you're coming from and sorry again for the snappy comments.