|
This topic doesn't appear that often. Now, I'm asking a question about it.
|
View this Thread in Original format
| ali92 |
| What is/are your opinion(s) on Polyamoury (spelt "Polyamory" in the US)? Polyamoury, in it's literal form, means "loving more than one". If you want detailed info (including the basics) on it go here . I think it's a pretty cool alternative lifestyle if you ask me. |
|
|
| jåcë |
| uhhh damn alternatives.. |
|
|
| Arbiter |
| I think it's great that people are thinking outside the box of the dated theistic moralism that has dominated people's views on relationships for thousands of years. |
|
|
| astroboy |
| It seems theoretically sound because it is so broadly defined and draws on liberal principles of rights and choices. But, in reality, I would be surprised if a "polyamorous" relationship worked in the long term for a significant number of people in modern, western society. Furthermore I would not be surprised if the guy who wrote that FAQ (I'm pretty sure it would have been a guy) is fat and has a disturbingly large beard, and has only had long term relationships with women whose physical appearance is only marginally different. |
|
|
| ali92 |
| quote: | Originally posted by astroboy
It seems theoretically sound because it is so broadly defined and draws on liberal principles of rights and choices. But, in reality, I would be surprised if a "polyamorous" relationship worked in the long term for a significant number of people in modern, western society. Furthermore I would not be surprised if the guy who wrote that FAQ (I'm pretty sure it would have been a guy) is fat and has a disturbingly large beard, and has only had long term relationships with women whose physical appearance is only marginally different. |
The person who created the alt.polyamory newsgroup is a lady but, the FAQ? Is that name at the top a male or female name? |
|
|
| ali92 |
| quote: | Originally posted by jåcë
uhhh damn alternatives.. |
What does this mean? Is this your opinion? |
|
|
| ali92 |
| Now, who on here would actually do this kind of relationship? If you're doing it, why? If u don't want to answer these, you don't have to, if u don't feel comfortable answering here. |
|
|
| astroboy |
| quote: | Originally posted by ali92
The person who created the alt.polyamory newsgroup is a lady but, the FAQ? Is that name at the top a male or female name? |
well dawg mah cats. |
|
|
| ali92 |
| quote: | Originally posted by astroboy
well dawg mah cats. |
What is this supposed to mean? |
|
|
| davinox |
im in a relationship like that.
I have a girl, but am constantly having sex with my pet goat. |
|
|
| astroboy |
| quote: | Originally posted by ali92
What is this supposed to mean? |
"dog my cats" - colloquial expression of surprise... similar in meaning to "I'll be damned". I think I got it from Huck Finn (I just realised it may have been "cat my dogs"... hmm.. whatever). :rolleyes:
As for the "polyamory" thing, I'm still sticking to my original opinion:
In reality, I would be surprised if a "polyamorous" relationship worked in the long term for a significant number of people in modern, western society.
WHat I have trouble with is the fact that the coiners of the phrase saw a need to differentiate between a polygamous relationship and a 'polyamorous' one. Certainly polygamy techinically refers to marriage, but it is a term that has been applied to multiple-partner relationships for some time. Etymologically the new word differentiates itself by the latin root "amo" (I love). Thus if (as structuralists treach us) to some extent polyamory can be defined as "that which is different to polygamy", this implies that the latter term either does not refer to love or that it is more narrowly defined. That is: either polyamory involves loving relatioships, while polygamy doesn't; or polyamory takes a looser approach to defining love, involving (for example) a vague fondness for someone, or a purely sexual love of that person, while polygamy involves more traditional, demanding characteristics of love.
If I consider the first case, I find it difficult to imagine that it is possible to "love" two partners to the extent that I would define love. In this case, in my opinion polygamy (as defined by diferance to polyamory) is workable, while polyamory is not. An polygamous relationship, that is openly purely sexual is clearly workable, but one based on the sterner stuff of love seems impracticable to me.
In the second case polyamory becomes a movement of definitional revolution. In this case I would need to see an argument as to why the definition of love needs to be changed.
While some may claim that it is easy to relegate such alternative lifestyles to the category of horny hippies searching for a way to satisfy their desires, and legitimate it with the "alternative lifestyle" discourse - based on my experience I can find no other category into which this movement seems to fit more comfortably.
Of course there is a third alternative: that this is simply polygamy under a new name that avoids all the negative stigma associated with the term in Western/Christian society. In that case the discussion is the old one of monogamy v polygamy And that's an age-old debate which I have no interest in pursuing. :) |
|
|
|
|
