Polyamory.com Forum  

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

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 09-28-2013, 06:03 PM
SweetOne SweetOne is offline
New Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 3
Default

WOW!!

So I posted here for the first time to help someone out, and the response is "hi SweetOne, welcome to the group!"

Oh. Wait. That's not what happened.
Instead, I was called a controlling hypocrite. Nice.

Way to hijack a thread, in order to put someone down.

The amount of negativity and intolerance is so high, I thought I stumbled into a fundie group, for a minute there.

Anyway, have fun ripping the next newbie to shreds. I've had enough of other people telling me what is okay and what isn't in my life. I don't need the intolerance.

Finley, good luck finding the non-judgmental advice you were looking for. Stick with GalaGirl. From what I read, she seems nice and actually tries to help, along with a few others.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 09-28-2013, 07:02 PM
Marcus's Avatar
Marcus Marcus is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Haltom City, TX
Posts: 1,289
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SweetOne View Post
The amount of negativity and intolerance is so high, I thought I stumbled into a fundie group, for a minute there.
If you only want coddling support from people who agree with everything you say then you might have some difficulty when you open yourself up to the world wide web. Out here in the real world you might find that some people do not agree with your views and may even have the audacity of saying so. I've been nothing but courteous and constructive. You view that as judgmental fundamentalism... that's... interesting.

Good luck in your search to find a group of coddling yes-men.
__________________
Independent (Anarchist) Non-Monogamy

Me: male, 40, straight, single
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 09-28-2013, 07:31 PM
pulliman pulliman is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Eastern US...
Posts: 182
Default

Hey SweetOne,

You're right - some people on the forum are a bit more open and seeking of understanding, and have the mindset of helping you ask better questions, while others know the answers and present their understanding as the One Way. I try to find and follow the people I like, read the rest with respect, and not worry about it too much. Sorry you got bit.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 09-28-2013, 07:42 PM
Marcus's Avatar
Marcus Marcus is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Haltom City, TX
Posts: 1,289
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pulliman View Post
while others know the answers and present their understanding as the One Way.
No one here is doing that. I don't know what conversation you guys are involved in but the one I am trying to have is a perfectly civil disagreement of ideals. It is healthy to discuss difference in point of view and to try and suppress that by calling someones approach "fundamental", "offensive", or "judgmental" is the opposite of open dialogue.

Fear of differing opinions is the enemy of enlightenment.

"the One Way"... lol please
__________________
Independent (Anarchist) Non-Monogamy

Me: male, 40, straight, single

Last edited by Marcus; 09-28-2013 at 07:46 PM. Reason: I said "progress", but I think "enlightenment" is more precise
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 09-29-2013, 01:19 AM
WhatHappened WhatHappened is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 555
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Finley View Post
So I am just looking for some non-judgemental people
!
Quote:
Originally Posted by PolyInWA View Post
I thought the poly community was supposed to be a very non- judgemental group of people. Comments such as this are not only judgmental, they offend me because they could just as easily be said about my wife.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SweetOne View Post

The amount of negativity and intolerance is so high, I thought I stumbled into a fundie group, for a minute there.

Anyway, have fun ripping the next newbie to shreds. I've had enough of other people telling me what is okay and what isn't in my life. I don't need the intolerance.

Finley, good luck finding the non-judgmental advice you were looking for.
Can we define judgmental? Intolerant? Offensive?

What if someone finds it judgmental to get angry and call names in response to hearing someone else's opinion? What if someone finds it offensive to use 'fundie' as an insult? I would think fundamentalists might find that offensive, intolerant, and judgmental. Are you going to reconsider that and stop treating an entire group of people like that?
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 09-29-2013, 02:42 AM
Dirtclustit Dirtclustit is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Middle of Oregon
Posts: 431
Default respectable is respectable

but as often the case on the internet, certain authors egos cannot handle being anything less than the most correct of any particular thread

such authors begin to employ subtlety after they get butt hurt and as soon as it goes underground like that I have absolutely no respect for such authors, even though in though in their eyes they may honestly believe it is a matter of civility

fuck all that, I would rather get banned than listen to some butt hurt author need to indirectly inject a spin on how others choose to manage their relationships, You do NOT do this and you don't start with subtle personal attacks that only those familiar with private information would catch.

It's called gas lighting, mind fucking, and even if people have need to resort to sock puppet profiles because they can only get away with the extremely subtle jabs such as Marcus does, but he is just disagreeing, not trolling, but a few of us, actually I should only speak for myself so I will say I don't stuff it and pretend it doesn't piss me off online and then go kick one of my pets, So I will go ahead and speak my mind here, even when it seems like I am loosing my temper or stomping my feet throwing a tantrum, because the threads where it happens is where it belongs

so yes I believe all of this you spoke of :

Quote:
Originally Posted by WH
Can we define judgmental? Intolerant? Offensive?

What if someone finds it judgmental to get angry and call names in response to hearing someone else's opinion? What if someone finds it offensive to use 'fundie' as an insult? I would think fundamentalists might find that offensive, intolerant, and judgmental. Are you going to reconsider that and stop treating an entire group of people like that?
obviously you are capable of discerning the line, just like every single other person that replies is knows very when they cross that line.

if authors deny it, play it off like they are confused, I for one have no problem with insults much worse than "fundie"

others are just as capable of observing when another member is too proud to own their shit -- even if they say nothing -- even if they publicly oppose my view and and chime in to disagree with it. If PolyinPractice, Marcus and anybody else needs to needs to behave like a chump and insult another member without actually stating it, it doesn't matter to me whether they are the longest most respected moderator and they are subtlely slapping an arrogant new poster.

If they need to hide behind subtlety and act like a chump, I would rather have people call it, let it blow up, get banned. I would rather have some punk hack into my computer and embarrass the fuck of out me and intimidate me and black mail me, than be afraid to cal a chump a chump due to their status in any community real or online.

I say harmless things like chump, punk, and fundie are more respectable than anything cowardly underhand subtlety

but that's just opinion

Last edited by Dirtclustit; 09-29-2013 at 02:46 AM. Reason: typo
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 09-29-2013, 03:28 AM
Numina Numina is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Texas
Posts: 139
Default Dirtclustit, Hear Hear!

Quote:
Originally Posted by SweetOne View Post
Just try to be as fair as you can to everyone involved, including yourself. You have to decide if you can live your life monogamously, if your fiance doesn't want to go poly. Don't force yourself into a lifestyle that doesn't feel natural for yourself, or someday you might look at your fiance (husband) and resent him, even though you're the one who made the choice. You also want to consider, if he DOES want to try poly...are you willing to share him?

I, personally, cannot share my husband. I know I'm just not made that way. I would never, ever be doing poly right now if I thought he wanted to be open, too, because I know I can't handle that, and it wouldn't be fair for me to say "hey, I can have a boyfriend, but NO WAY can you have a girlfriend." I'd just stay monogamous instead. But then again...I feel at this point that I'm poly by choice, not by nature or need (I'm still discovering myself). It sounds like you might be naturally poly, to have fallen in love with two people, while loving your fiance. So you have a lot to think about.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marcus View Post
Hypocrisy: "the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform; pretense."

Do as I say, not as I do is hypocrisy. You can "see it" however you want.

If you find a general statement assessing the value of an ideal to be offensive and judgmental then perhaps you are being overly sensitive.
(Dictionary source) Hypocrisy
1. a pretense of having a virtuous character, moral or religious beliefs or principles, etc., that one does not really possess.
2. a pretense of having some desirable or publicly approved attitude.
Consider that what Sweetone actually said is that she would NOT practice Poly right now IF her Husband also wanted to practice Poly BECAUSE:
Quote:
wouldn't be fair for me to say "hey, I can have a boyfriend, but NO WAY can you have a girlfriend."
This is NOT hypocrisy. It is a discussion on what each person in the relationship is OK with right now. I say “right now” because sweetone also says that she is “still discovering” herself.

Hypocrisy would be (per the definition) if sweetone had said to her husband something more like, “DH I’m poly, open minded, and very comfortable with people loving more than one person.(that is the “pretense of having a virtue). Oh and by the way I forbid you from ever being poly yourself, cause I will never be ok with you loving more than just me.(this is where the previous stated virtue is actually missing)”

In Sweetones actual wording she admits to still be discovering herself, which leaves room for growth, and room for a future where her DH could also be poly. She also stated that she would stay mono versus being hippocratic.
__________________
Bi-sexual female

Married to my high school sweat heart (20 year relationship). Talked about Poly, but put the idea off and had a kid instead. Stumbled into an FFM (Vee) that became an FMF (Vee).

No longer dateing my husbands Girlfriend.

Airyn: My husband (Straight)
Chipmunk: My x-GF, My husbands GF (Straight)
Wolf: my Daughter with Airyn
Boots: Social/Friend dating (Bi) Married
History: Social/Friend dating (Bi) Married
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 09-29-2013, 03:55 AM
Marcus's Avatar
Marcus Marcus is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Haltom City, TX
Posts: 1,289
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Numina View Post
This is NOT hypocrisy. It is a discussion on what each person in the relationship is OK with right now. I say “right now” because sweetone also says that she is “still discovering” herself.
Hypocrisy does not require coercion. I understand that her husband agreed to the terms, but coercion is not a prerequisite for the terms being considered hypocrisy. They merely must be a double standard - "do as I say, not as I do"

Though, I do appreciate your actually attempting to respond to the assertion.

The fact remains that, while I consider this double standard to be hypocrisy and controlling, it is still technically poly. (my initial statement which caused various people to call "offensive", "judgmental", and "fundie")
__________________
Independent (Anarchist) Non-Monogamy

Me: male, 40, straight, single
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 09-29-2013, 06:11 AM
Numina Numina is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Texas
Posts: 139
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marcus View Post
/rant

Discussion boards on the internet are a great place to vet out ideas, challenge thought processes, learn from our fellow man, and a great place to become infuriated with the entire species.

On boards like this, communication is put to the test in every post because we are at a severe disadvantage. All we have to go on is what is actually written and how we filter the information on our end. Often times the message intended is not the message received, as LR put it "this miscommunication thing just IS". We don't have the benefit of personal context, expression, posture, tone of voice... all we have are these little black letters sitting on a white screen.

That being said, many of these topics seem to be halted by the same catch phrases: "just a semantic argument" and "language is fluid".

SEMANTICS, to put it simply, can be defined as "what words mean". It is apparently a bit more complex if you are well versed in that particular field of linguistics, but for us laymen that is the gist. So, to say that we are "just having a semantic argument" would seem to mean that "we are just discussing the nuances of different, yet correct, ways of using a word". Some words have a number of correct ways they can be used: "respect", "committed", and "love" for example. These words are fertile ground for misunderstanding simply because there are so many correct ways to use them... for the most part these broad category words should probably be avoided when possible, simply to keep a semantic argument from coming up.

Again, note that a semantic discussion is centered around multiple correct uses of a word. What many people on these forums seem to mean by "it's just semantics" is "I don't want to use the word for what it actually means. I will continue to use it incorrectly".

LANGUAGE FLUIDITY, is referring to the tendency of cultures to shift what is viewed as correct usage of words and sentence structure over time. Over time (sometimes over centuries, generations, or rarely within a few years) cultures can so consistently misuse or clarify the use of words and sentence structure to such a degree that the "accepted" rules actually change. Over time we have ended up with some really silly language shifts, but we have also ended up with more refined and concise language shifts (though I expect this is rare). With the more broad use terms as mentioned above this has a much higher chance of happening over time, I suspect, because there is more room for interpretation.

What language fluidity does NOT mean is that definitions and sentence structure have no meaning. It does NOT mean that words mean whatever we want them to because it is "fluid". Insisting on using words incorrectly is simply willful ignorance.

We live in the information age. I can tell you what the GDP of Nepal was in 2001 by simply doing a quick search. Information is so readily available that the idea of disagreeing on what "interfere" means is asinine and is in no way related to "language fluidity"... look it up.

Any of my fellow posters who have experience in linguistics and have something to add or disagree with, please feel free to do so. I actually find language to be pretty fascinating.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marcus View Post
Hypocrisy does not require coercion. I understand that her husband agreed to the terms, but coercion is not a prerequisite for the terms being considered hypocrisy. They merely must be a double standard - "do as I say, not as I do"

Though, I do appreciate your actually attempting to respond to the assertion.

The fact remains that, while I consider this double standard to be hypocrisy and controlling, it is still technically poly. (my initial statement which caused various people to call "offensive", "judgmental", and "fundie")
You are right hypocrisy does not require coercion. What it does require is action, for one thing Sweetone has to actually date someone outside her marriage, and then also tell her husband he can not do the same. Since her husband has no desire to date she will never have to say that. Since Sweetone isn’t actually dating there is no hypocrisy, and by the time she actually does decide to start dating she may find that she IS ok with her husband dating as well. Thus she would still not be a hypocrite in that case either.

To be a hypocrite you have to actual break your own rule, until then you are not a hypocrite. Sweetone is here to learn. Give her the opportunity to learn what poly is, and what might work in her life. Once she has learned what poly is how she feels/and what she is ok with for her husband may very well change. It is better not to speculate on what will actually happen, I'm not able to predict the future.

Shutting someone out of the forum because they are new to the idea of poly is basically elitism, and cliquish. It would be more appropriate to offer sweetone the resource (education cures a lot) to overcome her icky feeling around the thought of her husband dating someone else.
Education. This forum, and the people here should be offering education, not deriding someone, and leaving them feeling like shit. Instead of stomping on someone offer them new ways of thinking, inform them what poly is, offer educational resources. Many of us have come here to LEARN, and what many find instead is that they get here and get beaten down by certain posters, It turns people away, it does not bring them into the world of poly.

I tend to offer help and resource via PM, because I have seen this happen SO many times here, where a question or discussion turns from having potential to help someone learn a new skill grow as a person, and instead becomes a select few posters pointing at someone who isn’t as elite as they are because they don’t “know” what poly is.
__________________
Bi-sexual female

Married to my high school sweat heart (20 year relationship). Talked about Poly, but put the idea off and had a kid instead. Stumbled into an FFM (Vee) that became an FMF (Vee).

No longer dateing my husbands Girlfriend.

Airyn: My husband (Straight)
Chipmunk: My x-GF, My husbands GF (Straight)
Wolf: my Daughter with Airyn
Boots: Social/Friend dating (Bi) Married
History: Social/Friend dating (Bi) Married
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 09-29-2013, 06:21 AM
london london is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: UK - land of the free
Posts: 1,635
Default

This, to me, is a bit like the guy who wants a OPP because he believes a woman would be unable to replace him as a partner and/or he could replace a woman who currently fulfilled that role. There is a chance that he will meet a bisexual woman who desires or can only manage a limited amount of relationships anyway and so it seems as though they have compatible needs. The problem often arises when the man realises that the woman is just as likely to form deep emotional connections with women as she is men thus women are still the threat that men are as metamours and then they attempt to control and restrict their relationships.

You also get the monogamous people who restrict their partner's interaction with others they may be attracted to due to insecurity about being replaced or simply betrayed. This works well if the restricted partner is of the thought camp that feels that kind of possessiveness and jealousy is a sign of love; an inherently unhealthy perception, in my opinion. Should, over time, this opinion change and the restricted partner start to see this as I do, a sign of low self esteem, insecurity and severe trust issues, the relationship suddenly becomes a whole lot less desirable. A sizable amount of restricted partners never reach that conclusion though: they never experience the necessary personal growth to do so.

Last edited by london; 09-29-2013 at 04:00 PM.
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 09:57 AM.