Polyamory.com Forum  

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

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old 07-22-2010, 06:33 PM
DharmaBum23 DharmaBum23 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 96
Smile

Quote:
Originally Posted by YGirl View Post
I always thought it was about loving PEOPLE, not loving "types of relationships"... maybe that's what is lost on the people doing the "dragging" and being "dragged into".
I am sure that does make a practical difference but I'm not quite sure how. From my understanding poly is about loving more than one person in a romantic way. If you love that style of relationship then you are signing up for loving more than one person(or at least setting that as your goal).

I know what I think you might mean, but I won't guess and risk putting words in your mouth.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 07-22-2010, 06:57 PM
NeonKaos NeonKaos is offline
Custodian
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: new england
Posts: 3,223
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DharmaBum23 View Post
I am sure that does make a practical difference but I'm not quite sure how. From my understanding poly is about loving more than one person in a romantic way. If you love that style of relationship then you are signing up for loving more than one person(or at least setting that as your goal).

I know what I think you might mean, but I won't guess and risk putting words in your mouth.

Why don't you just say what you think I mean and ask me if that is what i mean? The word for that is "communication". It's only "putting words in my mouth" if you go around saying I said something I never said.

I did not say to myself "Gee I want [this type] of relationship, therefore I must resign myself to the fact that I will have to love more than one person in order to achieve that goal." Instead, I experienced the reality that I have been able to feel the feeling for more than one person in the same time frame. It does not disappear for one person in the presence of the other. This has nothing to do with having a "goal" to achieve a particular "relationship style". I am not making concerted efforts to "be poly" or to "be in a polyamorous relationship".

Last edited by NeonKaos; 07-22-2010 at 06:59 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 07-22-2010, 07:15 PM
DharmaBum23 DharmaBum23 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 96
Red face

Quote:
Originally Posted by YGirl View Post
Why don't you just say what you think I mean and ask me if that is what i mean? The word for that is "communication". It's only "putting words in my mouth" if you go around saying I said something I never said.
I'm sorry. The reason I didn't is because I didn't want to be disrespectful and give the impression that I know what you mean better than you do. My apologies.

Quote:
Originally Posted by YGirl View Post
I did not say to myself "Gee I want [this type] of relationship, therefore I must resign myself to the fact that I will have to love more than one person in order to achieve that goal." Instead, I experienced the reality that I have been able to feel the feeling for more than one person in the same time frame. It does not disappear for one person in the presence of the other. This has nothing to do with having a "goal" to achieve a particular "relationship style". I am not making concerted efforts to "be poly" or to "be in a polyamorous relationship".
Ahh. That makes more sense and I think it goes back to a difference in perspective.

I think that the ability to love more than one person at once is actually not that rare(monastics do it all the time) and that the ability to do so does not, necessarily, make one poly(a loving person, yes, but not poly). I think that it is that ability plus the willingness to make the necessary sacrifices to engage in a romantic relationship with more than one person at the same time that makes people poly.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 07-22-2010, 07:22 PM
marksbabygirl marksbabygirl is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Squamish, BC
Posts: 790
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by YGirl View Post
There seems to be an awful lot of "dragging into" going on. That would seem to suggest that quite a few people who "are" poly are not really that enthusiastic about it.
I use "dragging" in the cheekiest sense.

If he wasn't comfortable with it - if he wasn't ok with it - I wouldn't be doing it.

As he put it - we are on the journey together. But I want to run and he wants to walk. My "dragging" has more to do with me being more enthusiastic than he is. I choose to slow *my* pace down to match his.

Oh wait. I've been reading lots. Isn't that what healthy poly relationships are about?
__________________
Some believe in destiny, and some believe in fate
I believe that happiness is something we create


My Journey to Health and Fitness
My Journey as a Widow

Jane
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 07-22-2010, 07:29 PM
NeonKaos NeonKaos is offline
Custodian
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: new england
Posts: 3,223
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DharmaBum23 View Post
I think that the ability to love more than one person at once is actually not that rare(monastics do it all the time) and that the ability to do so does not, necessarily, make one poly(a loving person, yes, but not poly).

Well, of course. I wasn't talking about the love I have for my cats, or the love I have for platonic friends. I was talking about it in a sexy-romantic way. That ought to be a given. This isn't a forum for monastics, it's a forum for polyamorous people and those who are involved with polyamorous people. If I were to suddenly switch to using the term "love" in an all-inclusive sense, I would have specified so. I'm not going to put footnotes every time I use the word "love" saying "in the polyamorous sense, not the monastic sense". That's just absurd.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DharmaBum23 View Post
I think that it is that ability plus the willingness to make the necessary sacrifices to engage in a romantic relationship with more than one person at the same time that makes people poly.
What sacrifices are you referring to?

Quote:
Originally Posted by marksbabygirl View Post
I use "dragging" in the cheekiest sense.
That's cool. I believe three or four people took part in the use of the "d" word, and I'm sure they all didn't mean it the exact same way.

Last edited by NeonKaos; 07-22-2010 at 07:37 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 07-22-2010, 08:04 PM
DharmaBum23 DharmaBum23 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 96
Smile

Quote:
Originally Posted by YGirl View Post
Well, of course. I wasn't talking about the love I have for my cats, or the love I have for platonic friends. I was talking about it in a sexy-romantic way. That ought to be a given. This isn't a forum for monastics, it's a forum for polyamorous people and those who are involved with polyamorous people. If I were to suddenly switch to using the term "love" in an all-inclusive sense, I would have specified so. I'm not going to put footnotes every time I use the word "love" saying "in the polyamorous sense, not the monastic sense". That's just absurd.
Touche. However, that doesn't negate my point. Just because someone loves more than one person at the same time doesn't mean that they are poly any more than thinking about painting makes someone a painter. Without the willingness to act on those feelings a person is someone who is emotionally capable of being poly but doesn't choose to be.

Quote:
Originally Posted by YGirl View Post

What sacrifices are you referring to?
Good question. With the understanding that not all of these are universal and for some people there are very few sacrifices needed, if any(I suspect you might fall in this category, but I could be wrong).

Increased frequency of breakups(more relationships can equal more breakups)
Increased confrontation(three way arguments are rarely fun)
Coping with insecurities that would otherwise never come up(how often do you hear of monogamous people having to work with jealousy compared to poly people?)
Decreased spontaneity

I'm sure there are more examples, but I can't think of them at the moment.

Last edited by DharmaBum23; 07-22-2010 at 08:05 PM. Reason: Correcting formatting
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 07-22-2010, 08:23 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 DharmaBum23 View Post
Just because someone loves more than one person at the same time doesn't mean that they are poly any more than thinking about painting makes someone a painter.


.
To me that is like saying you aren't gay unless you actively involved with someone of the same gender. It implies that the default is monogamous and you have to be involved with people to actually be poly. It makes it an action based "label" as opposed to a "nature" based one. I see poly and mono as orientations for many people. Now the idea of a "functioning" poy person is different. Just because you can love more than one person at a time doesn't mean you can manage more than one relationship...that's where actually needing to act on the ability comes into play for me.
__________________

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

Poly Events All Over
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 07-22-2010, 08:30 PM
DharmaBum23 DharmaBum23 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 96
Smile

Quote:
Originally Posted by MonoVCPHG View Post
To me that is like saying you aren't gay unless you actively involved with someone of the same gender. It implies that the default is monogamous and you have to be involved with people to actually be poly. It makes it an action based "label" as opposed to a "nature" based one. I see poly and mono as orientations for many people. Now the idea of a "functioning" poy person is different. Just because you can love more than one person at a time doesn't mean you can manage more than one relationship...that's where actually needing to act on the ability comes into play for me.
True. That's why I specified willingness to be involved, not actually being involved. A person can be fired up and 100% sold on the idea of being involved with the two people they love but can't for whatever reason. I would say that they are still poly because the desire is there. They just are a poly person with rotten luck, inadequate skills, or whatever it is that is keeping them from being with more than one person at the same time.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 07-22-2010, 08:34 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 DharmaBum23 View Post
They just are a poly person with rotten luck, inadequate skills, or whatever it is that is keeping them from being with more than one person at the same time.
Now I got it. Thanks
__________________

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

Poly Events All Over
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 07-22-2010, 08:38 PM
Edward Edward is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 40
Default

Let's see....Men, actually talking about inner feelings and relationships? Are you mad? Yes, there are some men out there who can do this; probably even some who feel comfortable about it. I suspect the majority of men, mono or poly, find it difficult to talk about or express their feelings verbally or in writing...myself included.

The interesting thing about polls is that they're really difficult to do accurately.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
gender, male/female

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 03:09 AM.