Some Things Not To Do

[GroundedSpirit]

Oh Dear

Oh Dear.
When we see this kind of stuff it just simply makes us sad. Very sad.
For us it's a Deja-vu experience that takes us back to the first time some of us learned this hard lesson about humanity. For any of you who may have been there - or close - you'll understand. For those too young this may or may not click.
We were involved with what eventually got labeled as the "Hippie" ......movement/group/culture/etc from almost the beginning. Prior to it really having it's "label" attached and hitting the mainstream big time. It would be a long and very sad, emotional story that we'd never attempt here. And yes, there were a lot of parallels to what we seen in the foundings of (modern) polyamory.
But what happened ?
The whole culture, because of it's desire to be open and embracing, soon became infiltrated by a majority of people who only wanted to make a mad grab at what some of the positive aspects were without shouldering any of the effort & responsibility that needed to come with it. And in the end - look what happened. The whole culture was eventually discredited & destroyed. From inside. Lots of tears from some - then & now.
And at least for myself, I have found no way to avoid this for any exposed culture. With the possible exception of maintaining a high level of secrecy. This, as far as I can determine, has been the only method that's had any success in allowing any membership of a group to maintain the positive aspects.
We've been witness to this time & again for so many cultures around the world. And at least to us, it seems it's already happened to the "polyamourous" culture too. So for the brave ones who choose to continue their involvement it probably will involve dropping any labels and just living their "truth" quietly. Those of a similar philosophy will always be able to be identified by each other through their thoughts & actions.

GSs

 

[Ceoli]

The funny thing is you rarely see monogamists arguing about what the word means. It has a definitive meaning. I wish we had such a catchy understood phrase.

I think it's just that the assumed meanings around monogamy are just more accepted by the general culture than the assumed meanings around polyamory.

Saying you're monogamous gives no more information about the nature of your relationships than saying you're polyamorous. Monogamous people have relationships one at a time, polyamorous people have more than one relationship at a time. Any definitions that go beyond that are based upon general assumptions about the cultures that surround each, not the actual relationships. (Things like "monogamous people are more traditional and polyamorous people are more progressive, etc.) Some of those assumptions are quite reasonable to make, but that doesn't change the fact that they go beyond the info offered by the definition. There are a wide variety of monogamous relationships just as there are a wide variety of polyamorous relationships. We run into trouble when we start assuming the word means more than it actually means.


The trouble is that we often confuse definitions with labels and vice versa. Labels exist for the purpose of categorizing things and people. Definitions are merely the information about the meaning of a term or practice or identity.

In other words, definitions tell you what it is and labels tell you where it belongs.

 

[wench]

I found this interesting in the article: "I'm tired of "poly" people who lie, betray or otherwise use and abuse their partners, and then think that nothing more than the words "I'm sorry" should resolve everything."
Interesting because it's not just a 'poly' issue, it happens in all relationships. In a completely mono relationship, I had to explain to my husband that losing his temper, being an asshole to me, saying sorry, then asking if I wanted to cuddle didn't work - I couldn't go straight from his tantrum to cuddling, especially the more often it happened. Negativity is a huge turn off, both sexually and emotionally for me.

 

[AutumnalTone]

how come "swinging" is not an umbrella term? What umbrella does it fit under?

"Swinging" fits under the umbrella of "non-monogamy."

I don't use "non-monogamous" to describe myself because most folks hear that and interpret is as "swinger": "Oh...you're a swinger."

Um, no.

I use "polyamorous" because it denotes a specific approach to non-monogamy. I use "open" because it also denotes a specific approach to non-monogamy. "Swinging" also denotes a specific approach to non-monogamy--and one that I don't do.

So, I don't use the umbrella term of "non-monogamy" despite it including what I do, because it also includes what I don't do--and most folks equate the umbrella term with the specific behavior that I don't do. I'd prefer to give an accurate description of what I do and have them ask for clarification than give a description that leads to false assumptions.

 

[AutumnalTone]

Interesting because it's not just a 'poly' issue, it happens in all relationships.

Exactly. One of the things I don't hear expressed nearly often enough to suit me is that relationship issues of every sort apply to mono and poly relationships alike. It's all about human interaction.