Polyamory.com Forum  

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

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 10-04-2010, 10:01 PM
Ariakas Ariakas is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,872
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bimblynim View Post
Although my gut instinsct is to agree that "sexual orientation, relationship style and love style"are not the same i'm not entirely sure they are as independant as we assume so not yet convinced of your three scale suggestion. I'd be interested in how you (and others) define and see the interrelationships between (though would that be a seperate thread? - forgive my inexperience in forum structure)
ok to look at this from my point of view. You have a single scale of poly. Because I am straight, my poly is not as poly as your poly because you are bi/pan whatever orientation.

So I bring in my bdsm side, does this increase my polyness on your scale? And do pansexuals get a higher score than bi's do because of their total openess.

So a pansexual polyamourus kinky person is a 10? and a 0 would be straight mono.

Thats where have merging scales becomes not only complex but creates natural confusion.

Sexual orientation - the gender or genders you like (please anyone let me know if I have those terms wrong)
Relationship styles - the structure of the relationship you partake in (poly, non mono, mono, swinging etc)
love style - how you love someone and what you can handle...

Yes there is some overlap but as you can see, it will leave people out. It become exclusionary to try and include to much in your relationship style. Hell you could even split the relationship styles into multiple scales too.

Mono -> nonmono

if nonmono

swinging -> poly

See where this becomes infinitely more difficult to merge into one scale ...

Throw kink into the mix and you could really mess with peoples heads...

again, if it works for you, thats great, I have been in this discussion before on other forums. But polyamory doesn't work as a sexual orientation for most people. Its as much a sexual orientation as monogamy is.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 10-04-2010, 10:44 PM
bimblynim's Avatar
bimblynim bimblynim is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Oxford (uk )
Posts: 62
Default

ok, I get that you don't think poly is a sexual orientation, fine. would you like some salt for the chip on your shoulder? (Sorry if that made me sound like a dick, obv no offense meant. I just REALLY wasn't going down any this poly is more poly than that poly Bullshit) or trying to include/exclude anyone. scales (like i said about labels) are only ever of limmited use, it was just an idea to kick about.

My question was intended as purely and specificly about how important people feel polyamory-monogamy is to them and their sexuality which (thank you for brining up) is potentially a more complicated question than I realised, I don't think that invalidates the question.

"Its as much a sexual orientation as monogamy is." If someone was so comitted to their love they were impotent at the prospect of cheeting how would you account for that?


Take it easy

Nim

Last edited by bimblynim; 10-04-2010 at 10:51 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 10-04-2010, 10:55 PM
Ariakas Ariakas is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,872
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bimblynim View Post
ok, I get that you don't think poly is a sexual orientation, fine. would you like some salt for the chip on your shoulder? (Sorry if that made me sound like a dick, obv no offense meant. I just REALLY wasn't going down any this poly is more poly than that poly Bullshit) or trying to include/exclude anyone. scales (like i said about labels) are only ever of limmited use, it was just an idea to kick about.

My question was intended as purely and specificly about how important people feel polyamory-monogamy is to them and their sexuality which (thank you for brining up) is potentially a more complicated question than I realised, I don't think that invalidates the question.

"Its as much a sexual orientation as monogamy is." If someone was so comitted to their love they were impotent at the prospect of cheeting how would you account for that?


Take it easy

Nim
No chip and I was taking it easy, just open for discussion. I can delete my posts if you like, since you weren't actually looking for another opinion I come from a debate background so I gave my opinion and the grounds for which I base my opinion.

thanks and have a good day.

Ari
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 10-04-2010, 11:17 PM
bimblynim's Avatar
bimblynim bimblynim is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Oxford (uk )
Posts: 62
Default

Please don't delete your posts unless you think you were off toppic. I am open to suggestions, I'm just having difficulty understanding. From my perspective you took a sharp detor from my question. I understand that "sexual orientation, relationship style and love style" can be viewed as different but related entities. I am coming at this from the perspective of trying to understand my own experience in which sexual orientation labels (straight/bi/pan) haven't ever been particularly helpful in connecting to my sexuality, where as poly has been. I wonder if it is analogous to people brought up in a straight society and not feeling "right" untill they realised they were gay. If you can be bothered to clarefy your position in response to this, that'd be great, I have no problem disagreeing with people, I just like to be sure what we're dissagreeing about, glad you're froody Night X

Last edited by bimblynim; 10-05-2010 at 05:17 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 10-05-2010, 01:21 AM
Rarechild's Avatar
Rarechild Rarechild is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: SW Michigan
Posts: 600
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bimblynim View Post

Ari, Fair enough, I put it in fairplace coz i thought it was a bit random poleish (Sorry) sure, will move to general discussion, do I need to message a mod to move it? (did a quick serch and couldn't find how to do it myself *blushes*)
Tis moved, and yes, you have to ask a mod, I just happened upon it this time.

-R
__________________
"Rocks will open and make a way for the lover."
~Hazrat Inayat Khan


I love Catfish and Charlie.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 10-05-2010, 03:47 AM
redpepper's Avatar
redpepper redpepper is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 7,637
Default

So, having discussed this before on this forum, last time I discovered that for me there is not so much a scale but a bubble. I move around the bubble depending on who I am with and what stage of my life. Depending on what I learn about myself. I don't think anything is set in stone in life. I have changed so many times and thank god! Each change brings new and wonderful things.
__________________
Anyone want to be friends on Facebook?
Send me your name via PM
My blog
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 10-05-2010, 05:41 AM
bimblynim's Avatar
bimblynim bimblynim is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Oxford (uk )
Posts: 62
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rarechild View Post
Tis moved, and yes, you have to ask a mod, I just happened upon it this time.

-R
thanks R, btw love the signature


RP the bubble idea's interesting, I totally agree nothing is set in stone. I wasn't trying to make a unifying/all encompassing thing. I was asking how people feel they are on an imagined spectrum in order to explore that dimension.

From what i've understood. Ari answered 5 on the mono-poly dimension though he hasn't yet said why, (he thinks isolating monogamy-polyamory may be unhelpful) I think He's saying that he doesn't feel non monogamy is related to sexual orientation, and that many factors affect sexuality, which I can see, however I am interetsered in how they relate because my experience and (from what he's said) mono's are that sexuality and relationship style are quite deeply connected (all be it we appear to be opposites) I am also aware because were so opposite, normal distribution would suggest we would be minorities. I'm interested in others ideas on and experiences arround this,(how relationship style connects with sexuality for them) if this has been covered before please signpost me. If you (anyone) don't think its a helpful idea to explore, fair enough. I'm really not looking to pick an argument.

Sorry seemed to get side tracked, Rp Why do you prefer the buble conseptualisation over sliding up and down the mono poly spectrum? Is this connected to ari's point about different factors, bdsm etc?

X

Last edited by bimblynim; 10-05-2010 at 07:20 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 10-05-2010, 07:11 AM
redpepper's Avatar
redpepper redpepper is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 7,637
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bimblynim View Post
RP the bubble idea's interesting, I totally agree nothing is set in stone. I wasn't trying to make a unifying/all encompassing thing. I was asking how people feel they are on an imagined spectrum in order to explore that dimension......

Why do you prefer the buble conseptualisation over sliding up and down the mono poly spectrum? Is this connected to ari's point about different factors, bdsm etc?
I was answering for myself and not about BDSM. To tell you the truth I skimmed what others say due to lack of time. Perhaps I should read back?

I got that you weren't trying to set anything in stone. Maybe I should read back.

To answer your question I think the bubble works for me... I like the idea that it is filled with me and who I am.. and floating.... I like the filled part I think. It's filled with sexuality, commitment, attachment to others, love, passion, friendship. The whole lot. Not just one specific thing such as non-monogamy or sexuality. I think it reflects that we are all unique and different, yet the same in so many ways also.

I imagine a whole bunch of us as bubbles floating around touching each other at times and bouncing off or touching and clinging on... I just like the visual. I'm that way inclined I guess. The scale feels clinical and formulated too much maybe. Like I have to commit to always being that way.

I will have to think how BDSM fits in this, if at all...
__________________
Anyone want to be friends on Facebook?
Send me your name via PM
My blog
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 10-05-2010, 03:53 PM
Ariakas Ariakas is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,872
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bimblynim View Post
t
From what i've understood. Ari answered 5 on the mono-poly dimension though he hasn't yet said why, (he thinks isolating monogamy-polyamory may be unhelpful)
On a relationship scale, if we think of mono and non-monogamy as opposing interests on a scale. 1 to 5 lets say. I would be a 5. I am non-monogamous, but have been know to be monogamous. Polyfi is within a scope of what I can do, for example.

On a non-monogamous scale if we look at the range as 1 to 6 (1 being swinging and 6 being poly I would be a 4 or 5. I have and probably can still enjoy a casual romp with a friend even though I know I am poly, as I can love more than one.

Quote:
I think He's saying that he doesn't feel non monogamy is related to sexual orientation, and that many factors affect sexuality, which I can see, however I am interetsered in how they relate because my experience and (from what he's said) mono's are that sexuality and relationship style are quite deeply connected (all be it we appear to be opposites)
Is it really? Or is it connected because thats how we simply view it. I don't believe this to be true. You can be monogamous and non sexual (priests, a-sexuals etc) or you can be monogamous and really sexualized, you can be monogamous and ONLY have a bdsm relationship. Sex, while overlapping is not a piece of monogamy. How many couples do you know that have been together for a whole crap load of years and sex falls to the wayside.

Quote:
I am also aware because were so opposite, normal distribution would suggest we would be minorities. I'm interested in others ideas on and experiences arround this,(how relationship style connects with sexuality for them) if this has been covered before please signpost me. If you (anyone) don't think its a helpful idea to explore, fair enough. I'm really not looking to pick an argument.
Debate and argument are healthy. Anything I say I tend to simply table. I am not trying to preach, just simply laying out my point of view. I have been through this talk in my head and on other forums too. I went through a serious debate on this early on when I first found poly.

Thanks for the interesting discussion. I do find it facinating. I am curious how the bubble idea works. So I will keep reading and see if it can fit into how I see things
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 10-05-2010, 04:23 PM
Derbylicious's Avatar
Derbylicious Derbylicious is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Victoria BC
Posts: 1,603
Default

I like the bubble visual. I find that how I define myself at any particular time has a lot to do with who is connected to my bubble. As I meet more people and am able to articulate more about who I am my bubble expands. I was comfortable in my smaller bubble when who I defined myself as was mono and straight, I could have most likely stayed happy living that life. I've been fortunate to meet people in my life who give me freedom and challenge me to question what I think about who I am. I now consider myself to be poly and bi. There was a long time that I didn't consider myself poly and rather defined myself as "open".

I'm not sure that once your bubble has expanded that it can be taken away from again. Trying to do so might burst the bubble. I think that I would be able to move around within my bubble but I don't think that I could deny things that I believe to be true about myself now. What I mean is that in the right situation I could be happy in a monogamous, heterosexual relationship again but I would still be a bi, poly woman choosing to be in that relationship.

I'm not sure that I can rate myself as a number on a scale. I wasn't good at doing that with the Kinsey scale either because it all depends on the person and the situation for me. I don't think I answered your question at all!

-Derby
__________________
Everything will be ok in the end. If it's not ok it's not the end.
Reply With Quote
Reply

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 04:08 PM.