Polyamory.com Forum  

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

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 01-26-2012, 05:59 PM
AutumnalTone AutumnalTone is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Kansas City Metro
Posts: 2,186
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott View Post
Ok, I see there's certainly a lot of feedback concerning this Poly Map. Because of this, I decided to email the producer of the chart, telling him about this thread; maybe he'll make some changes to it based upon what's been said here.
I wouldn't hold my breath waiting on him to acknowledge this site.
__________________
When speaking of various forms of non-monogamy...it ain't poly if you're just fucking around.

While polyamory, open relationships, and swinging are all distinctly different approaches to non-monogamy, they are not mutually exlusive. Folks can, and some do, engage in more than one of them at a time--and it's all good.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 01-26-2012, 06:06 PM
km34 km34 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 624
Default

I think the second chart is much clearer. However if the purpose of the first one that in the OP is humor, then the mildly confusing/crazy set up makes sense.

I also think the Franklin chart would be much less offensive to some if it didn't have the odd statements in quotations. THAT part is what made me dislike it. The statements themselves seemed judgmental whereas the second chart included a definition instead of a statement that could come from someone that falls in the category.

@Scott - Why do you think commercial sex should be a part of the charts? Not trying to pick on you, but I feel like it would generally fall under one of the other categories (i.e. hiring a prostitute = promiscuity OR cheating, hiring a pro-dom/me = open relationship or cheating, etc). I'm curious how it could form it's own sub-group.

This whole chart thing has made me agree with those that think labels suck!
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 01-26-2012, 09:30 PM
Scott's Avatar
Scott Scott is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: near Toronto, Canada -.-
Posts: 240
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SourGirl View Post
In my opinion, The whole thing should at least have the default of being in a 'non-monogamy' balloon. When we were swinging, if I said to a swinger I was in an open-relationship,.. I would be told ' Ohh, you want feelings, or some kind of relationship involved ?'
I say to poly people, 'open relationship' and I hear ' Ohhh, you just want to fuck ?'
I think we can all agree that friends with benefits, or having feelings and sexual times with people we care for, but maybe don't engage in a forward-moving relationship with, is not some small niche ? It`s a rather large chunk of dating.

So, some of the definitions are a little broader, and could actually be funnier, if there was some more well-rounded humour.

Why does any of this matter on a supposedly 'funny' chart ?

Because people use his labelling and opinion like its some type of poly-bible to go by. Newbies and even people that know better, tend to stick to his word.

I tried to deny this for a long time, but dating and conversing online, has proven otherwise. If only I made some kind of cash off of every Franklin link someone has sent me, trying to 'correct' me.

When you suggest to those people that it`s just an opinion, they seem very confused. 'THIS IS HOW POLY IS DONE DAMMIT !'

So my little jaded-self just figures if he is going to have all this in-depth, 'This is how we do it' stuff, that people recommend, then some accountability in both the humour and practical would be nice.
Makes sense. I still think we should edit his chart. As the old saying goes, if you want something done right, you have to do it yourself. Ofcourse, by we I'm hoping someone other then me because I'm lazy ;-).
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 01-26-2012, 09:39 PM
Scott's Avatar
Scott Scott is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: near Toronto, Canada -.-
Posts: 240
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dingedheart View Post
Wow SG,

I think you beating around the bush so speak ...why not just answer Scott directly.

Scott will eventually learn the truth. Its just a matter of looking back at some your old postings.

The truth is she pissed that the box ( pun intended) that she fits in (again pun intended) is not represented. Let just say it starts with F and rhymes with misting.

Also, I know she's probably too embarrassed to tell you but she is a huge sucker for song lyrics which is why she didn't respond....actually it all kind of embarrassing ....but we love her so what ya going to do.

See SG don't you better now?...I know do

I might have to come out of retirement for this.
Oh, I see. I think you're saying that she may have liked those song lyrics that I put up in a response to her, which is cool. And as to um.. the F thing, I think I get you.. I admit that I've never done something like that to a woman, but I'm willing to learn if a partner would want it. I miss having a girlfriend, laugh :-).
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 01-26-2012, 09:46 PM
Scott's Avatar
Scott Scott is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: near Toronto, Canada -.-
Posts: 240
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SourGirl View Post
True. Though I`m rather fond of that '3-6-9 ...the goose drank wine,..' song.
Which version of it :-)?

Quote:
Originally Posted by SourGirl View Post
I`ll feel even better when it`s my turn to share. Pssst,..you did say you wanted Scottie to beam you up, or something like that. Wink, wink, nudge, nudge.
Laugh :-)
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 01-26-2012, 09:48 PM
Scott's Avatar
Scott Scott is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: near Toronto, Canada -.-
Posts: 240
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AutumnalTone View Post
I wouldn't hold my breath waiting on him to acknowledge this site.
Ok... I take it he hasn't been so responsive to you or someone else in the past?
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 01-26-2012, 09:57 PM
Scott's Avatar
Scott Scott is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: near Toronto, Canada -.-
Posts: 240
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by km34 View Post
I think the second chart is much clearer. However if the purpose of the first one that in the OP is humor, then the mildly confusing/crazy set up makes sense.

I also think the Franklin chart would be much less offensive to some if it didn't have the odd statements in quotations. THAT part is what made me dislike it. The statements themselves seemed judgmental whereas the second chart included a definition instead of a statement that could come from someone that falls in the category.

@Scott - Why do you think commercial sex should be a part of the charts? Not trying to pick on you, but I feel like it would generally fall under one of the other categories (i.e. hiring a prostitute = promiscuity OR cheating, hiring a pro-dom/me = open relationship or cheating, etc). I'm curious how it could form it's own sub-group.

This whole chart thing has made me agree with those that think labels suck!
This is one of those hot button topics, to be sure. Hiring a sex worker doesn't mean that you have to be cheating on anyone, although I have heard from someone who has been in the business that a lot of people do hire them for that purpose. I certainly don't think that cheating is a good thing, but it's certainly a form of non monogamy. I have spoken to people who are now polyamorous, but their first step was actually cheating. Sometimes, it's just too difficult to go from monogamy straight to ethical non monogamy, so a transition is required. I myself never needed such a transition, but I'm only 36 and I knew about polyamory since I was in my early 20s; since I hadn't even yet had a girlfriend at the time, when I finally found a girl who I wanted to be my girlfriend, I told her my mindset pretty much from the get go.

Ok, now on to sex workers; many of them are clearly in the non monogamy field. I found an article from a semi retired sex worker. Here's the portion that I found most interesting:

*********************
When people say prostitution is the world's oldest profession, they mean that since the beginning of time women have not given their love away for free. Men are the opposite. Not only are they inclined to give their love freely, they are prepared to do or give anything to obtain it. This is the principal characteristic of sexual reproduction, which we share with other animals.

Girls learn at an early age that many men, young and old, are attracted to her. This thrills and frightens her. Her biological task, however, is to be fertilised by one man who is not only as healthy and as possible, but is willing to help her raise and protect children he made with her.

As it turns out, young, strong, prosperous men with a high social status have always been the most wanted on the marriage market. Their qualities are, as it were, entrance tickets to vaginas. This makes marriage the most popular and acceptable form of prostitution.

In the wider market of sexual desire and the search for gratification, marriage may be the top attraction, but there is a wide variety of sexual liaisons beneath that pinnacle of respectability. Girls recognise themselves as sexually attractive and experience satisfaction from looking at their own image in the mirror. Fashion, the make-up industry and the soft pornography of advertising exert a strong attraction.

Some girls start having sex at a younger age than others, but all discover that they obtain favours in exchange for the sexual satisfaction they provide. They may be looking for Mr Right and marriage and a a family of their own, but in the meantime they also want to have fun. They have affairs and are helped by their partners to get a nice job, a fine apartment, a better living-standard. Usually this occurs so naturally that the idea of 'prostitution' doesn't even arise, especially when there is only one man and he is truly in love and she likes him. Such 'mistresses' or 'lady friends' are usually kept in the background, but they may also become influential advisers and hold a high position in society.

If the number of contacts increases, and the price per meeting is set more explicitly it becomes more recognisable as prostitution, but here, too, there are ranks to be distinguished. The higher class of professional lovers are called 'geisha', 'hostess', or 'escort'. Essential questions are, of course: does the woman decide with whom she has sex and in what way? Does she have self-confidence and is she educated? Does she have enough knowledge about sex to make smart decisions and does she have the freedom to decide for herself what she wants? Recently, conservative religious feminism has begun to condemn prostitution as a crime against women. To support this claim, every sexual act for payment is considered 'rape'. The 'escorts' claim that they act out of free will, is dismissed as self-deception.

There is, as always, a scale of distinctions between the higher and lower ranks of prostitution. At the bottom of the scale are the victims of sex-trafficking who are sold like slaves, are nothing but objects and don't have anything to say about their lives. They see themselves as failures, as opposites of the successfully married middle class wives and mothers, a status to which they aspire.

But both extremes are somewhat fictional, and figure mainly in moralist discourse about prostitution. In reality, there exist all kinds of gradations of 'sex in exchange for something' in the sexual market place...
*********************
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 01-26-2012, 10:52 PM
km34 km34 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 624
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott View Post
This is one of those hot button topics, to be sure. Hiring a sex worker doesn't mean that you have to be cheating on anyone, although I have heard from someone who has been in the business that a lot of people do hire them for that purpose. I certainly don't think that cheating is a good thing, but it's certainly a form of non monogamy. I have spoken to people who are now polyamorous, but their first step was actually cheating. Sometimes, it's just too difficult to go from monogamy straight to ethical non monogamy, so a transition is required. I myself never needed such a transition, but I'm only 36 and I knew about polyamory since I was in my early 20s; since I hadn't even yet had a girlfriend at the time, when I finally found a girl who I wanted to be my girlfriend, I told her my mindset pretty much from the get go.
I agree that hiring someone for sexual purposes doesn't have to be cheating, but in almost every situation it easily COULD be (hence me putting OR in there). I also agree that to some, cheating is simply a step between monogamy and ethical non-monogamy. I'm glad it never came to that from me, but had I not fallen in love with someone as open-minded as Keith at a very early age (we started dating when I was 15), I probably would have cheated.

I've always been an avid believer that the general style of dating in America is just acceptable prostitution. In general the man is bringing the girl chocolates/flowers, buying dinner, paying for the tickets to the movie, driving, and basically taking all other fiscal responsibility for the time together and then the girl deep down believes she owes him something because he did all this (and most girls at some point or another do feel this way), so she kisses him goodnight. Or has sex with him. Or anything in between. It happens all the time. I'm still not seeing how actual, acknowledged commercial sex should be included in the charts, though.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 01-26-2012, 11:09 PM
Scott's Avatar
Scott Scott is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: near Toronto, Canada -.-
Posts: 240
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by km34 View Post
I agree that hiring someone for sexual purposes doesn't have to be cheating, but in almost every situation it easily COULD be (hence me putting OR in there).
Yeah, a sex worker generally isn't going to ask if the person is cheating on someone I think.

Quote:
Originally Posted by km34 View Post
I also agree that to some, cheating is simply a step between monogamy and ethical non-monogamy. I'm glad it never came to that from me, but had I not fallen in love with someone as open-minded as Keith at a very early age (we started dating when I was 15), I probably would have cheated.
Yeah, finding out about poly early on is the best way to prevent cheating I think, laugh :-).

Quote:
Originally Posted by km34 View Post
I've always been an avid believer that the general style of dating in America is just acceptable prostitution. In general the man is bringing the girl chocolates/flowers, buying dinner, paying for the tickets to the movie, driving, and basically taking all other fiscal responsibility for the time together and then the girl deep down believes she owes him something because he did all this (and most girls at some point or another do feel this way), so she kisses him goodnight. Or has sex with him. Or anything in between. It happens all the time.
True. In all honesty, I don't think there's anything wrong with it per se; I think that a lot of people, perhaps mainly women, would like some financial support from prospective partners. I think that this may come from the fact that women get pregnant and men don't; so women will look for men who would make good fathers; financial support early on would certainly look attractive from this perspective I'd think. I'm not saying that this has to be a conscious thing, nor am I saying that all women look for is good potential fathers, but I definitely think it can be a fairly important factor.

Quote:
Originally Posted by km34 View Post
I'm still not seeing how actual, acknowledged commercial sex should be included in the charts, though.
It's a form of non monogamy. For that reason alone, I think it should be there.

Last edited by Scott; 01-26-2012 at 11:13 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 01-26-2012, 11:14 PM
km34 km34 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 624
Default

Ok, I understand it being included in non-monogomy in general. My argument is that it would fall under other categories instead of having it's own category, I suppose.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
dynamics, map, relationship map, sex, sex workers

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 08:25 AM.