Interesting article on polyamory

[Bramblethorn]

Polyamory is usually defined as *ethical* non-monogamy, which excludes a lot of historical polygamy, harems etc, because of the lack of freedom of many of the people involved.

Some swingers would exclude themselves from polyamory because they insist emotions are reserved for their spouse/partner alone. Most seem to accept that they are friendly at least with sexual partners, and fucking a friend on a regular basis could be called a relationship in a different social circle.

This, and I think also one of those social dynamics where people feel the need to break into tribes and get really loud about the difference between My Tribe and Other Tribe even when, perhaps especially when, the differences between those two groups might not be very significant to outsiders.

(See also: goth vs. emo, bisexual vs. pansexual, Judean People's Front vs. People's Front of Judea, or the two rival Socialist Parties in my neck of the woods.)

 

[AchtungNight]

Don’t forget about the elves of the Green Deep Forest and those of the Deep Green Forest!

Seriously, I honestly think one sexual partner would be enough for me and more would be an ongoing challenge. Not sure I could handle it. We’d probably have to work on it together. Same if there were just two of us but would it be easier or harder with more people? Could go either way.

 

[MillieDynamite]

With three, you get jealousy. With more than three, you get more jealousy. And that's one problem, not the litany you'd have.

Don’t forget about the elves of the Green Deep Forest and those of the Deep Green Forest!

Seriously, I honestly think one sexual partner would be enough for me and more would be an ongoing challenge. Not sure I could handle it. We’d probably have to work on it together. Same if there were just two of us but would it be easier or harder with more people? Could go either way.

 

[Britva415]

Polyamory is the practice of more than two people being in a loving/intimate/sexual relationship with one another

Not necessarily. You have described one way to be polyamorous, and what's even more common than that is just to have multiple loving partners, who don't necessarily have any relationship at all with each other. Or maybe they do, since they're both partners with the same person (the "hinge"), but their relationship doesn't have to be sexual, romantic or loving. It doesn't even have to be friendly. This is still polyamory, and chances are, they too have other lovers who the hinge isn't involved with.

 

[Britva415]

You can be sexually monogamous while still loving and developing nonsexual relationships with many people.

I'm not going to call this "wrong," but it sure isn't what very many people, monogamous, polyamorous or otherwise, mean by "polyamory."

 

[Britva415]

Polygamy is the blanket term for polygyny (one husband, multiple wives), polyandry (One wife, multiple husbands), and serial monogamy (remarriage due to death or divorce of a spouse).

Who in the world calls that last one polygamy?

I'm not saying they don't, just that I for one would be very surprised by that.

 

[Britva415]

By "Fucking" I'm referrring to the insertion of a penis into an orifice. The choice and number of orifices is irrelevent, it's simply a question of the unitary nature of the penis.
Of course you can BE fucked by up to seven people, if you include nostril and earhole fucking too.

Niceguy's girlfriend: "Just letting you know, I fucked the pool guy"

Niceguy: "No, no ya didn't"

 

[NuclearFairy]

Who in the world calls that last one polygamy?

I'm not saying they don't, just that I for one would be very surprised by that.

That one falls under genetic polygamy in my notes. So, I'm guessing biologists.

 

[Britva415]

That one falls under genetic polygamy in my notes. So, I'm guessing biologists.

Aha, thanks for the context.

Seems very much along the lines of the PhD botanist scolding the chef for not including zucchini in the "fruit salad."

 

[NaughteeDragon]

thank you for the clarification on Bigamy vs Polyandry.
I would agree with your assertions.

 

[Statius]

This is an interesting point. If you say "marriage is only permitted between a man and a woman", as opposed to "marriage is permitted between two adults", the implication is that men and women are different in the eyes of the law or societal rules.

They are, by religious conservative law. Where the documents (the Constitution in the US) is sadly and falsely said to be biblically based. In the US women have always been 2nd class, usually in fact, and certainly in principle.