Ravenscroft
Banned
Somewhere in my books is a published study of the relational patterns of homosexual males, back in like 1978. Though rather Dark Ages, it was well done & thorough. It began by doing something overlooked in many studies: clearly defining their key term. Working from memory (accurate, if not precise), they described a "homosexual" for their purposes as
I was looking something up on Wikipedia in the Polyamory article, & just now realized that a hundred words in it claims
FIRST QUESTION -- doesn't 500,000 seem kinda overinflated?
________________
The problem might be with getting everyone to use ONE definition of "polyamory."
Apparently fearful of offending anyone, the WP article reaches for weaselly vagueness in the first few words:
SECOND QUESTION -- given that nobody seems to know, or even be ALLOWED to know for fear of hurting someone's feelings, how the hell is it possible to claim ANY number of adherents?
THIRD QUESTION -- any guesses as to how "500,000 relationships" is the same as "half a million families"? The WP article & its source seem to be saying "it ain't polyamory unless its under one roof!"
FOURTH QUESTION -- define "polyamorous relationship" in 15 words or less. Then have a swing at "polyamorous family."
(FWIW, using this criterion, they found that 8.4% of the men they surveyed from the general population qualified as "homosexual.")a male adult who, in the past three years, has primarily had sexual contact with other male adults
I was looking something up on Wikipedia in the Polyamory article, & just now realized that a hundred words in it claims
This is based on a Newsweek article, which claimsAs of July 2009, it was estimated that more than 500,000 polyamorous relationships existed in the United States.
Problem is, that number isn't blamed on ANY of "the few who do."Researchers are just beginning to study the phenomenon, but the few who do estimate that openly polyamorous families in the United States number more than half a million, with thriving contingents in nearly every major city.
FIRST QUESTION -- doesn't 500,000 seem kinda overinflated?
________________
The problem might be with getting everyone to use ONE definition of "polyamory."
Apparently fearful of offending anyone, the WP article reaches for weaselly vagueness in the first few words:
And it only gets more vague:Polyamory is typically the practice of, or the desire for, intimate relationships ...
That damnable word appears exactly three times in a rather lengthy article, ALL in the opening sentences. Here's the third:For example, although polyamory is typically defined as a relationship practice or approach to relationships, some believe that it should also be considered an orientation or identity.
Hmm... I only now realize that, where another article might start off with History, this one decides to run with Terminology. And it veers quickly away from simple etymology & conjugation.People who identify as polyamorous typically reject the view that sexual and relational exclusivity are necessary...
And none of those claims cites a source.No single definition of "polyamory" has universal acceptance. ... Most definitions of polyamory center on the concepts provided by Ravenheart's definition. Areas of difference arise regarding the degree of commitment, such as in the practice of casual sexual activities, and whether it represents a viewpoint or a relational status quo (whether a person without current partners can be considered "polyamorous").
SECOND QUESTION -- given that nobody seems to know, or even be ALLOWED to know for fear of hurting someone's feelings, how the hell is it possible to claim ANY number of adherents?
THIRD QUESTION -- any guesses as to how "500,000 relationships" is the same as "half a million families"? The WP article & its source seem to be saying "it ain't polyamory unless its under one roof!"
FOURTH QUESTION -- define "polyamorous relationship" in 15 words or less. Then have a swing at "polyamorous family."
Last edited: