Search results

Sure, it's just academic. I personally have no interest in getting married to anyone at all. Been there, done that, have the t-shirt.

Maybe it's like those guys who think they can turn lesbians straight. "If she just met a real man..."

I'm looking into starting up a dating site, but it will have a different orientation from the standard poly sites. It will be based on the philosophy of the Dispersed Polyamorous Group concept, which I described in another thread. After talking to the people here, I have found that this...

Yep, that's basically the impetus for the thread. No matter what you think and feel now, or how strongly you think and feel it, it may not be what you think and feel in the future. So everyone should at least accept the possibility.

Also, the signed document was just one of the options. Not having an extra-marital relationship unless the partner also has one would be a lot safer in court, even with a middle-aged conservative judge. He would probably dump his puritan condemnation on both parties, so neither would have an...

It's just being a realist. Divorce courts are full of people who never, ever thought that they would wind up in divorce court. Really, wouldn't that be the majority of the cases?

Also, I found the following in wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divorce_%28United_States%29 In addition to the highlighted part, note that "does not require a party to claim fault" is not the same as "a party is not allowed to claim fault". It appears to me that a party can claim...

Okay. What about the other states?

If you are in a traditional marriage and also have relationships on the side, including sex, I assume that legally this would be adultery. Now obviously it is not a moral issue if the partner approves. And adultery itself is not illegal, so no crime is being committed. However...if the...

By the way, I will be adding more content to the blog based on the discussions here. For instance, pointing out that it works better for people entering polyamory for the first time rather those already practicing it. And also emphasize that it is just a way rather than the way, and that all...

Yeah, that pretty much agrees with what I'm saying. I am type B, most everyone else here seems to be type A. The most likely reason for the rarity of the B types is because society considers it "wrong", so it never occurs to most people. It occurs to the type A people because they have a need...

It's not really intended for existing poly people, but for those who want to start from scratch, converting from existing mono relationships. Also the actual topology is totally dynamic. The makeup of the DPGs are depends entirely on who connects with who. Each can be small or huge. Two...

Certainly it is just one way of doing it. When I said "I really intended it for everyone", I simply meant that the idea be available to everyone. This was in direct response to your assumption that I had developed the concept just for myself and any possible partners that I find for myself, and...

I'll address that post later, when I have more time. For right now: It appears that a lot of this discussion (with everyone) has to do with conflicting philosophies. I'm getting the impression that a lot of people here (maybe all) find that poly is a way to achieve something you already want...

I do tend to be regimented. Comes from being a software engineer, I guess. :D But again, people can disregard any part of the gag they wish. Is there a point to poly without it? What would be the reason for forming a relationship with someone who is a clone of your current partner? Annoying...

Perhaps some kind of geometric pattern that shows your actual configuration, circles/squares connected with lines. Obviously you wouldn't be able to display actual male or female symbols without giving it away. I guess that would have to be a brooch or something, don't know what the guys would...

In other places I say "equal attention". That is probably better for what I am trying to say, because it eliminates the scheduling aspect you are talking about. And it highlights that I mean romantic activities rather than the administrative stuff of the household. Even romantically, it...

Not to harp on it or nothin', but my opinion is: Yes, you should not refuse to have sex with someone who is known to be infected. However, if you do, from that point on you should have sex only with that person and others who are known to be infected. If protection from disease ever becomes...

It's not surprising that people who read those novels wound up here. I don't remember Stranger as well, but he made the setup in Mistress sound really desirable. There have been societies described in SF novels that sounded so wonderful that it hurt I couldn't live there. It's set up the way...

I looked at that post again and I don't really see that it is arguing against monogamy so much as pointing out that it is not a requirement. Now you have a point about the original title: "Monogamy: Residue From Centuries Past and Best Forgotten", so I edited it to drop the "and Best Forgotten".