Polyamory.com Forum  

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

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 09-21-2010, 09:58 PM
RGee91 RGee91 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 96
Lightbulb

I think it speaks more to a swingers insecurity in their umbrella term for them to WANT to be included in polyamory, more than it speaks to their need to be included. In my eyes, it would seem as though they were ashamed of being a swinger, and would feel better about their social position if people believed they were poly, even if in reality they would still remain swingers. To me it would seem as though the swinger thought poly was better. Just as if a percieved unattractive person used a percieved 'sexy' person's pictures on their online profiles. They know they are not that person, but believe if people believed they were, they'd get better responses. It's the same mindstate really.


Swinging has it's own culture that lifts restrictions on sex, it allows a committed couple to honestly explore their sexuality with other(s) as freely as agreed upon.
Polyamory lifts restrictions on relationships and allows partners to explore other relationships as freely as agreed upon.
Neither is better, neither is worse.

I honestly think labels and defining terms can be great, when used correctly. Trying to stretch a label to be all-inclusive however, can only cause confusion, as he said in the article.
__________________
When one limits themselves in terms of love, they have missed the point of love altogether ~ RazeGeneration
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 09-21-2010, 10:05 PM
Ariakas Ariakas is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,872
Default

I think, and I may be misinterpreting but I keep coming back to this thread. I think the premise is just plain incorrect. Both swinging and poly are subsets of non-monogamy or open relationships. There is no poly umbrella...or swinging umbrella..imo..
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 09-21-2010, 10:09 PM
redpepper's Avatar
redpepper redpepper is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 7,660
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RazeGeneration View Post
Swinging has it's own culture that lifts restrictions on sex, it allows a committed couple to honestly explore their sexuality with other(s) as freely as agreed upon.
Polyamory lifts restrictions on relationships and allows partners to explore other relationships as freely as agreed upon.
Neither is better, neither is worse.

I honestly think labels and defining terms can be great, when used correctly. Trying to stretch a label to be all-inclusive however, can only cause confusion, as he said in the article.
oh I love this!
__________________
Anyone want to be friends on Facebook?
Send me your name via PM
My blog
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 09-21-2010, 10:48 PM
RGee91 RGee91 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 96
Cool

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ariakas View Post
I think, and I may be misinterpreting but I keep coming back to this thread. I think the premise is just plain incorrect. Both swinging and poly are subsets of non-monogamy or open relationships. There is no poly umbrella...or swinging umbrella..imo..
I agree, to an extent. Non-monogamy seems to be the actual umbrella term, but the terms in it umbrella other varying relationship types. Poly describes certain relationship configurations, swinging describes others, they are "similar" because they are under the same umbrella, but not the same.

To explain further, lets say there are 2 people, ones name is "Polly" and the other's "Swing". Its raining outside, and they both have things they need to keep dry, so they decide to share an umbrella, just so happens the umbrella has "NON-MONOGAMY" written all over it (coincidence I swear ). Now the umbrella may cover both Polly and Swing, but the things each person is trying to keep dry are different. Just because Polly and Swing are under the same umbrella, doesn't necessarily mean they are both covering the same things

did anybody follow that analogy? lol. Maybe I should get back on the PSP, without a limitted character count, I could ramble for days XD

__________________
When one limits themselves in terms of love, they have missed the point of love altogether ~ RazeGeneration
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 09-21-2010, 10:52 PM
Ariakas Ariakas is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,872
Default

Nothing I said disagrees with your analogy. Just that I think the premise of the article is built incorrectly. By trying to make your polly or swing person overlap each other but calling them the umbrellas is inherently incorrect

good analogy btw.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 09-21-2010, 11:08 PM
RGee91 RGee91 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 96
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ariakas View Post
Nothing I said disagrees with your analogy. Just that I think the premise of the article is built incorrectly. By trying to make your polly or swing person overlap each other but calling them the umbrellas is inherently incorrect

good analogy btw.
I agree that was my original point, Polly and Swing should both be happy being themselves, no need to fuse them.

and you're right, they are more subsets, than umbrellas themselves
__________________
When one limits themselves in terms of love, they have missed the point of love altogether ~ RazeGeneration
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 09-21-2010, 11:20 PM
Ariakas Ariakas is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,872
Default

Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 09-22-2010, 02:16 AM
Tonberry Tonberry is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 1,397
Default

I really like this picture, although I think I'll try to make a simplified version for people I want to introduce the idea of non-monogamy.
For instance, while BDSM is common in polyamorous relationships, it seems, I don't think it's inherently tied to non-monogamy (you can certainly have a monogamous BDSM relationship) so I might remove it. And I feel Con Sex is really specific and I'd probably remove it too.

You know, just to get a "non-monogamy for beginners" kind of graph rather than dump this one on them directly

Last edited by Tonberry; 09-22-2010 at 02:30 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 09-23-2010, 12:20 AM
MindfulAgony's Avatar
MindfulAgony MindfulAgony is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 192
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ariakas View Post
Nothing I said disagrees with your analogy. Just that I think the premise of the article is built incorrectly. By trying to make your polly or swing person overlap each other but calling them the umbrellas is inherently incorrect

good analogy btw.
I agree with your basic point about non-monogamy being the appropriate umbrella but disagree with your lead in that the core premise of the article is therefore wrong. Seems to me the author would agree with your point of view. Seems to me that the author is responding to an ongoing dialogue on polyamory and swinging and whether or not they have a super-set/sub-set relationship. In responding to that dialogue, his pointing out the exact flawed premise that you are referring to and calling it flawed too.

So, I don't see how you differ in purpose, even if you differ in style of how to reject the argument.
__________________
Male, Straight, Poly

OKC Profile

Blogs:
Mind Crush
sloetry

“Instead of getting better and better at avoiding, learn to accept the present moment as if you had invited it. And work with it instead of against it. And making it your ally rather than your enemy.”
-Pema Chodron
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 09-23-2010, 03:51 AM
Ariakas Ariakas is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,872
Default

you are right, when I read that, I must have misread something. I had read the first sentence as saying one was inclusive of the other. Not sure how I missed it.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
labels, poly, swinging

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 11:28 PM.