Polyamory.com Forum  

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

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #81  
Old 05-14-2010, 08:02 PM
capricorny capricorny is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Sub-ultima Thule
Posts: 65
Default Why would you not use "multiamory"?

Quote:
Originally Posted by CielDuMatin View Post
Yes, you are correct. I went back and re-read what RedPepper quoted from you.

Then I guess I am done with this discussion, having stated my case.
One last question:
Why would you not use "multiamory"?

In practice, we do the same things, have very like views etc. I think it would be much easier if we could agree on some basic foundational things, and using "multiamory" as the more general term would, in practice, resolve a lot of issues, I think. Why not take the simplest approach here?
Reply With Quote
  #82  
Old 05-14-2010, 08:05 PM
MonoVCPHG's Avatar
MonoVCPHG MonoVCPHG is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: In Redpepper's heart
Posts: 4,742
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by redpepper View Post
Then I realized that I just need to make sure that anyone coming into my life knows what my poly is and that I find out what theirs is. ..
Nicely put Lilo
__________________

Playing the Game of Life with Monopoly rules.
Monogamy might just be in my genes

Poly Events All Over
Reply With Quote
  #83  
Old 05-14-2010, 08:12 PM
rpcrazy's Avatar
rpcrazy rpcrazy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 171
Default

well continuing along with the semantics, here is my argument and hope that we change the focus of the thread, and future threads like this as well.

You have the semantics of a title and the semantics of the definition of an idea...Arguing the title of a polyamorous relationship, or the "principles" or law of when you call a relationship poly, is FAR LESS important than debating what RULES make a poly relationship WORK.

The semantics of a title is one thing. In the previous examples it would, "discussing the laws of WHO a poly person is, or WHAT a democratic nation is, or WHAT a poly relationship is"

The thing is...these aren't really up for debate. Discussion yes, and maybe eventual change of definition, but fundamentally not debatable. For instance, the argument that the u.s isn't "really" democratic, it's a republic. But technically it's a grey area, because a representative democracy(us) is like a republic. And basically(since only whites could vote), we were a republic. What made it us into a democratic republic were the MASS AMOUNTS of amendments over hundreds of years.

Those amendments weren't made by asking "what makes us democratic". They were made by asking, "what makes us a better democratic society"

Same thing goes for polyamorous relationships. We shouldn't be asking what makes a relationship poly. But rather, when multiple people engage in a romantic relationship, what are rules of conduct to make it work, according to the "polyamorous" model? The polyamorous model being, when in relationship with multiple people you must have, love, honesty, and trust(etc, etc). Going back to my U.S government example, they kept going back to the constitution, and made amendments for the better(or worse when some crooks got in). In this way, I think we as a community should discuss what makes poly work in the way of laws like the constitution.

another u.s government example...
"Democracy is about communication. Communication power is political power, because the power to influence the beliefs and perceptions of populations has proven to be the most effective political weapon of the century. That's why democracy works, but though it can range from positive and negative, it by far the least destructive form of government seen to this day, and therefore has lead way to the most effective evolving of society we've seen in thousands of years."

So given the above example, that argument for what makes poly and what kinds of "laws" we should have for it would be...
"Polyamory is about...this is why polyamory works."

Hell, maybe we should have a poly constitution hahaha. Anyway, i'm just saying...don't get so caught up on titles, jeez.
__________________
---------------------------------------------------\\\
-"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
  #84  
Old 05-15-2010, 10:02 AM
capricorny capricorny is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Sub-ultima Thule
Posts: 65
Default Why polyamory is wrong ;)



On a somewhat more serious note, that linguistic hybrid

1. Guarantees that nobody can say what the term "really" means. There is no such meaning. It is a construction, and the meaning is up to us users to decide.

2. Makes room for more "proper" non-hybrid terms. Like "multiamory" to denote the more general "multiple love with no strings attached whatsoever". The issue is not whether such forms can work or not, for they clearly do for some, but whether the terms are useful for what we are struggling with. And because I don't think we can make a poly foundation work without the "my poly is not your poly" principle, i think we will make communication extremely difficult for ourselves if we can't assume a "poly" built on - for example - communication.

Original link: http://kat-feministfatale.blogspot.c...age-trois.html

Last edited by capricorny; 05-15-2010 at 10:06 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #85  
Old 05-17-2010, 10:09 PM
redpepper's Avatar
redpepper redpepper is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 7,677
Default

I think I have been thinking of this in terms of poly love rather than relationship. If someone is mono in the relationship then it doesn't matter if the poly partner is able and wanting to love more than one. The fact of the matter is that they need support to do so.

I would say that the foundation of poly relationships is not only the capacity to love more than one, but the ability to not take ownership and possession over ones partner.

This includes compersion, but I'm not sure that is a foundation but a result of a good foundation. Does that make sense?
__________________
Anyone want to be friends on Facebook?
Send me your name via PM
My blog
Reply With Quote
  #86  
Old 05-20-2010, 05:20 AM
LovingRadiance's Avatar
LovingRadiance LovingRadiance is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,508
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by capricorny View Post
When you explicitly don't identify as polyamorous yourself, I can't really understand why you keep on insisting on definitions of polyamory that quite a few polyamourous people, me including, think are plain wrong.
I think partly why is that there are so many of us who are poly that do define it exactly that way, me including and I daresay his Lilo also.
Obviously if his Lilo who is poly defines herself that way-and he's her mono partner, it's a good thing that he defines it the same as she does.
__________________
"Love As Thou Wilt"
Reply With Quote
  #87  
Old 05-20-2010, 06:21 AM
Tonberry Tonberry is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 1,415
Default

I like the word multiamory. I wouldn't be against using the words "multiamory" and "mono(?)amory" instead of polyamory and monogamy, respectively. Although mono is greek, isn't it? What would it be in Latin?

But really, I'd rather use words that most people understand than words I like best. Why? Because words are just tools to communicate. What you want to communicate is meaning, not certain letters or sounds in a certain order. If I suddenly decide that black means white, I can't go around using the word and expect everyone to understand me.
Reply With Quote
  #88  
Old 05-20-2010, 05:34 PM
CielDuMatin's Avatar
CielDuMatin CielDuMatin is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Upstate New York, USA
Posts: 1,464
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tonberry View Post
What would it be in Latin?
Multiamory or polyphilia would be the latin and greek-derived words.

So, mixing and matching, we also have polyamory and multiphilia. Not sure how well that last one would go down, considering the other words that end in -philia.... *grin*
__________________

"Listen, or your tongue will make you deaf." - Native American Proverb
Reply With Quote
  #89  
Old 05-20-2010, 05:41 PM
capricorny capricorny is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Sub-ultima Thule
Posts: 65
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CielDuMatin View Post
Multiamory or polyphilia would be the latin and greek-derived words.

So, mixing and matching, we also have polyamory and multiphilia. Not sure how well that last one would go down, considering the other words that end in -philia.... *grin*
Maybe "multiphilia" would go in the direction of "Casanova syndrome"? Like with "polyamory", there's no "correct" meaning in hybrides, they are new creatures..
Reply With Quote
  #90  
Old 05-20-2010, 06:00 PM
capricorny capricorny is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Sub-ultima Thule
Posts: 65
Default The Creator's view

A little background info, from www.patheos.com

Quote:
Morning Glory Zell-Ravenheart coined the term "polyamory" in this pioneer article, which originally appeared in 1990. She has been a priestess of the Church of All Worlds since 1974, travelling extensively to teach about C.A.W., Paganism, Polyamory, and the Goddess. She currently hosts "Great Goddess Weekend Retreats" in her home in Northern California. For the past 37 years she has been in a happy poly-relationship with her husband, Oberon Zell-Ravenheart, with whom she forms a triad with her dear friend and lover, Julie Epona. Morning Glory and Oberon sell their God and Goddess statues and jewelry through their website Mythic Images.
Here it is:http://original.caw.org/articles/bouquet.html

Just for the record, I don't subscribe to the Ravenhearts' religous ideas, but when someone invents a new word, I think it is good to follow the intentions when using it. Otherwise, we should invent a new one for our intentions, if they deviate.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
best practices, boundaries, foundations, guidelines, mono, mono/poly, monogamous, monogamy, principles, rules

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 12:24 PM.