Al99
Well-known member
Vinsanity wrote:
I think this is a very valid point - and similar to the thought that I have been having - that in an effort to "reduce the chaos" (presumably resulting from the current straight forward dictionary definition) by formulating a new and improved definition of polyamory that includes additional ethical/cultural elements, one might actually conclude that even more chaos is being created with the idea that we can simply come up with a new definition that reflect individual (or group) values. After all, another group of experienced poly folks might decide on a competing definition - as we have already seen some differences of opinions on some of the suggested criteria.
Vinsanity wrote:
Ravenscroft pointed out the Wikipedia definiton:
However, in a statement designed to further elaborate on the nature and practice of poly - as an augmentation of the basic definition - I think these are two excellent points to consider. 1) Perhaps the true test of poly is how we handle our partner having multiple partners and 2) Poly is not just the practice of having multiple partners - but also the desire and acceptance (whether one is actively engaged with multiple partners or not). Al
I think the definition of poly is very straightforward. I don't think that "bad poly' is not poly. There is always room for improvement. I could come on here and try to dictate to others what I think poly is, but who am I to say if you are doing it right or not? The more one tries to narrow it down, the more they are defining poly as the way they do it.
I think this is a very valid point - and similar to the thought that I have been having - that in an effort to "reduce the chaos" (presumably resulting from the current straight forward dictionary definition) by formulating a new and improved definition of polyamory that includes additional ethical/cultural elements, one might actually conclude that even more chaos is being created with the idea that we can simply come up with a new definition that reflect individual (or group) values. After all, another group of experienced poly folks might decide on a competing definition - as we have already seen some differences of opinions on some of the suggested criteria.
Vinsanity wrote:
If you see my response to the thread you referenced, you will see that I asked what I consider one of the most important questions in determining if you are poly or not. How do you handle the thought of your partner having relationships with others? That is pretty key to the whole poly thing. Anyone can want sex or love with someone other than their partner, but not everyone can handle their partner doing the same.
Ravenscroft pointed out the Wikipedia definiton:
The wikipedia definition runs as follows:
Polyamory is the practice, desire, or acceptance of having more than one loving, intimate relationship at a time with the full knowledge and free consent of everyone involved.
However, in a statement designed to further elaborate on the nature and practice of poly - as an augmentation of the basic definition - I think these are two excellent points to consider. 1) Perhaps the true test of poly is how we handle our partner having multiple partners and 2) Poly is not just the practice of having multiple partners - but also the desire and acceptance (whether one is actively engaged with multiple partners or not). Al