Polyamory.com Forum  

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

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old 11-14-2013, 06:58 AM
InfinitePossibility InfinitePossibility is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 348
Default

Good to hear that you're feeling a bit better. Long may it continue.
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 01-08-2014, 09:07 PM
scrasher87 scrasher87 is offline
New Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 1
Default

FYI: A bigot has chosen to write about this thread on a Christian extremist website.
Poly Is Not Always Jolly
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 01-08-2014, 09:51 PM
opalescent opalescent is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: US
Posts: 1,277
Default

A fine reminder that this site can be searched and used in ways not originally intended. Thanks for the link scrasher87.
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 01-08-2014, 10:46 PM
london london is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: UK - land of the free
Posts: 1,635
Default

Fucker didn't even quote me.
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 01-08-2014, 10:46 PM
YouAreHere's Avatar
YouAreHere YouAreHere is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: SoNH
Posts: 790
Default

The Internet is a great place to find anecdotes to support any viewpoint you could ever have. It's not a study, it's not even a good cross-section. It's cherry-picked data.

People who don't want to think will believe what's told to them (as evidenced by all the talking heads on TV, regardless of your political leanings - people listen to the loudmouth they agree with, nod their heads, and get righteously indignant over all these issues they only know one side of). People who are interested and curious will look deeper and realize there's more to it, and that there are selfish people everywhere, in Poly, and in Mono Christian marriages as well.

What *is* interesting about this article is how much attention poly has been getting lately in general. Methinks the loudmouths are only going to get louder for a while.

And, London, your post is an *excellent* candidate for a "like" button... LOL.
__________________
Dramatis personae:
Me: Mono. Divorced, two kids, two cats, one house with many projects.
Chops: My partner of ~3 years. Poly. In relationships with me, Xena, and Noa.
Xena: Poly. In relationships with Chops and Noa, and dating others.
Noa: Married, Poly. In relationships with Chops and Xena (individually).

My navel-gazing blog thread: A Mono's Journey Into Poly-Land (or, "Aw hell, there's no road map?!")
My slightly more polished blog (external): From Baltic to Boardwalk
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 01-10-2014, 03:43 PM
Alan7388's Avatar
Alan7388 Alan7388 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 46
Default

> now that it's too late for more relationships of any kind,

Horse patooties. Jeezum Christmas.

People partner and marry at every age. My mom remarried twice, at 65 and 72, and had more suitors after she was widowed both times. She is frankly pretty ordinary-looking and -sounding.

In my local poly networks (Boston area), the gray-hairs are abundant and some are as active in the mating department as college kids. Most have "anchor relationships" they've developed (the term many here prefer over "primary"), but there's very often new romance gossip to go around at the monthly discussion groups.

Ur Doing Something Rong.

--Alan M.
__________________
----------------------------------------
Keep up with Polyamory in the News!
http://polyinthemedia.blogspot.com/

----------------------------------------
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 01-10-2014, 06:39 PM
opalescent opalescent is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: US
Posts: 1,277
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shipwrecked View Post
Well, it's never easy to admit one is wrong, but although I still stand by the concerns I raised in my original post, and still suspect some of them could be better fodder for real-life poly discussion groups than the typical communication/scheduling/jealousy mix tape, I no longer think it's reasonable to add all of those concerns together and conclude that "finding a new relationship is effectively impossible for someone in Seattle at age 43 with a poly history."

FWIW it was reading dozens of pages in the "Poly Vignettes: Sharing Success & Happiness" thread that made me rethink this.

Additionally, after giving it a lot of thought I have to likewise admit there really isn't any specific reason for me to prefer monogamy over co-primary closed polyamory, assuming everybody is in it for the long term and either everybody lives together or nobody lives together.

Finally, in answer to a few questions above, nothing is really wrong with my life other than the fact that I'm partnerless and the fact that I'm overweight. Anyway, I guess I'll put more effort into addressing the latter and see if that changes anything about the former. Of course I could be barking up the wrong tree there, but at least it's a tree I'd still get some benefit out of barking up.
@Alan7388,

The OP did reconsider some of his ideas and overall conclusions. Of course, that was not quoted by the fundies!
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 01-12-2014, 09:14 PM
Tonberry Tonberry is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,374
Default

The first two points seem to me to be more the case in monogamy than in polyamory. The third one I'll give you, if your partners are pieces of shit, they can use other partners as an excuse. Of course, you're still responsible for your own communicating with everyone, so spotting such lies shouldn't be too difficult.

Afterwards, you lost me. Quite honestly, your post sounds less like it's talking about how difficult it is to age in polyamory, and more about how, if when you're young you only ever have casual relationships and never committed, long-term ones, when you're old you won't have a current partners, and new partners will be harder to find (especially if you're still only interested in casual stuff).

But that problem is definitely not specific to polyamory. It happens to mono people all the time. They age, and more people are taken. With polyamory, we age, and more people are polysaturated. That's normal, if you stick to your age group. However with time you should have more options. When you're in your 20s, you're likely to date people in their 20s and 30s, but when you're in your 30s, you get people in their 20s, 30s and 40s, for instance. And that's if you only go with a 10 year difference. If you go for more, the more you age, the more available partners you have, because they become adults.

So you can imagine being in your 40s with someone in their 20s, for instance, who you could not have met while in your 20s because they hadn't been born.

Anyways. Your issues are for the most part not specific to polyamory, and those specific to polyamory have nothing to do with aging. Therefore, I'm cannot accept your thesis.

I would actually say that the fact lots of young people experiment means that you're more likely to find someone to date if they're a bit older, because those who call themselves polyamorous are more likely to actually be so. And the problem isn't how many people you can date, but how many people are actually compatible with you. The less incompatible people around, the less time you waste.
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 02-10-2014, 04:14 AM
Shipwrecked Shipwrecked is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 11
Default

A few comments...

1. I still consider each of my original points as individually valid: what I reconsidered was instead whether I could legitimately add them all together and conclude that spending the rest of my life alone was truly unavoidable. So, not whether they lower your odds, but rather whether they lower your odds all the way to zero.

2. I just can't believe any real harm has been done to the poly community by my original post having been quoted in a religiously conservative publication, if for no other reason than that any conceivable form of polyamory would have already been flatly forbidden to that publication's readership based on their religion.

But this quoting does raise an interesting question: IS today's poly community excessively vulnerable to unethical journalists with an axe to grind?

I spent a lot of time thinking about this, and I think the poly community's greatest vulnerability today is to a completely secular journalist persuasively painting it as regressive rather than progressive, as follows:

1. Visit a major city's largest poly gatherings. Report the fact that arrangements with multiple females and one male outnumber arrangements with multiple males and one female, or else only quote participants in the former while ignoring the latter. Report the fact that among arrangements with multiple females and one male, more often than not the male is either wealthy or else possessed of a (possibly disguised under a veneer of New Age jargon) bully's personality. For bonus points find a group of attendees hailing from the BDSM community comprising one dominant male and multiple collared females, and quote the male's opinion on whether such arrangements resonate with women's true "biological nature." In short, play into the worst stereotypes of what women might expect to find any situation where powerful men are no longer limited to just one sex partner, all of our utopian swimming-with-the-dolphins 1960's psychobabble be dammed.

2. Quote major poly organizations and poly leaders who still actively endorse the Radical Honesty books and workshops. Then, start with below-the-belt innuendo and guilt by association: note that these workshops still involve filming participants naked, and quote from that Moth storyteller who has publicly claimed the entire schedule of her workshop was rearranged so as to help coerce her into participating in said filming. Continue by drawing uncomfortable parallels between the Radical Honesty principles and the crude men's "pickup artist" literature, both of which encourage saying hurtful things as well as asking essentially every woman you meet to sleep with you, though in fairness only the latter explicitly points out that the lowered self-esteem caused by your insults raises the odds of your sexual invitation being accepted, and only the former explicitly attempts to make you feel PROUD of said manipulation on ideological grounds.

Anyway, the second of those two lines of attack would make it seem as if the poly community's underlying theory is fundamentally regressive, while the first of those two lines of attack would make it seem as if such regression has been the actual result.
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 02-10-2014, 04:49 AM
JaneQSmythe JaneQSmythe is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Pennsyl-tucky
Posts: 1,073
Default

__________________
Me: poly bi female, in an "open-but-not-looking" Vee-plus with -
MrS: hetero polyflexible male, live-in husband (together 21+ yrs)
Dude: hetero poly male, live-in boyfriend (together 3+ yrs) and MrS's best friend
Lotus: poly bi female, "it's complicated" relationships with Dude/JaneQ/MrS
TT: poly bi male, married to Lotus, FB with JaneQ
VV and MsJ: bi-women with male primaries, LTR LDR FWBs to JaneQ


My poly blogs on this site:
The Journey of JaneQSmythe
The Notebook of JaneQSmythe
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 07:28 AM.