IMO,
Poly isn't like an award or medal, you don't earn it, it's just something that defines your state of having (or desire to have) multiple partners. One can do poly badly and still be poly. Of course, cheating is usually excluded from poly but that is because a cheater doesn't get consent from his partner/s to get involved with the other partner/s. The definition of poly includes knowledge and consent. If either of those is missing then you do not have poly.
Re:
There's such a thing as poly/mono couples. The poly and mono labels refer to each person as an individual and may or may not refer to multiple people.
Re:
That's true. And not all polyamorists are succeeding at the harder part, though it would often be better if they could succeed at it.
Re (from Len51):
I don't know, I haven't been keeping score, but I am going to guess that long-lasting, problem-free open relationships are as common as long-lasting, problem-free closed relationships. (Assuming that longevity and perfection define success in a relationship.)
Re (from LizziE):
I'm not sure whether it's genetic wiring, to any extent. Maybe, maybe not. I do think a person can be of a mind to be monogamous or polyamorous, whether due to their upbringing or just due to things they have figured out and decided on their own.
As for sexuality (hetero, bi, or gay), I again don't know how much of it is genetic wiring -- and if someone identifies as gay (or bi), I don't concern myself with the why. It's their right to identify however they want, for whatever reason/s they want. And it's not my job to try to "change" them. Which is why I fully support SSM.
Of course, according to Sam Harris, none of us have any real free will and thus, we're all wired (to be whatever we are) by a combination of genes and circumstance. But that's a whole other kettle of fish!
- someone that only has the desire to be romantically involved with one individual and expects the same from their partner = mono,
- someone that is okay with their partner having other lovers but they don't want other lovers = mono (poly-friendly),
- someone that wants or has other lovers and is okay with their lovers doing the same = poly,
- someone that wants or has other lovers but needs or expects their partner/s or lover/s to be monogamous to them = poly (with issues),
- someone that wants to have (or is open to having) other lovers but currently has less than two partner/s = poly (by orientation).
Poly isn't like an award or medal, you don't earn it, it's just something that defines your state of having (or desire to have) multiple partners. One can do poly badly and still be poly. Of course, cheating is usually excluded from poly but that is because a cheater doesn't get consent from his partner/s to get involved with the other partner/s. The definition of poly includes knowledge and consent. If either of those is missing then you do not have poly.
Re:
There's such a thing as poly/mono couples. The poly and mono labels refer to each person as an individual and may or may not refer to multiple people.
Re:
That's true. And not all polyamorists are succeeding at the harder part, though it would often be better if they could succeed at it.
Re (from Len51):
I don't know, I haven't been keeping score, but I am going to guess that long-lasting, problem-free open relationships are as common as long-lasting, problem-free closed relationships. (Assuming that longevity and perfection define success in a relationship.)
Re (from LizziE):
I'm not sure whether it's genetic wiring, to any extent. Maybe, maybe not. I do think a person can be of a mind to be monogamous or polyamorous, whether due to their upbringing or just due to things they have figured out and decided on their own.
As for sexuality (hetero, bi, or gay), I again don't know how much of it is genetic wiring -- and if someone identifies as gay (or bi), I don't concern myself with the why. It's their right to identify however they want, for whatever reason/s they want. And it's not my job to try to "change" them. Which is why I fully support SSM.
Of course, according to Sam Harris, none of us have any real free will and thus, we're all wired (to be whatever we are) by a combination of genes and circumstance. But that's a whole other kettle of fish!