What do you consider to be poly? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Polyamorous Lifestyles



Message


MrThorns -> What do you consider to be poly? (7/9/2004 12:16:54 PM)

This is a topic that I have discussed with my slave on quite a few occasions. I am curious to hear what other people consider to be poly. Wether that means polyerotic, polyamourous, poly-pickalatinsuffixthatfitsinthisspacehere....

I have lived in a poly 24/7 M/s relationship. I play with others outide of my relationship with my slave. Am I poly? I believe that I am. Others may say that I simply like to play with others. At what point do you feel that an outside relationship has evolved into polyamory?

I look forward to the replies...

~Thorns




perverseangelic -> RE: What do you consider to be poly? (7/9/2004 1:28:07 PM)

My personal opinion is that polyamoury invovles serious relationships with more than one person at a time. My partner and I play with other people, but we are not polyamorous, in our opinion. For me, the defining factor is romantic love. I am only 'in love' with one person, though I may be sexual with several.

I define myself as polysexual and monamorous.




Leonidas -> RE: What do you consider to be poly? (7/9/2004 1:28:43 PM)

Polyamorous (though it isn't really a word as far as I know) is used to mean that you are capable of love/sexual relations with more than one partner at a time (in other words, you aren't monogamous). You don't fix attention on a single partner to the exclusion of others. Polygamy (multiple partners of either sex) Polygyny (man has more than one woman) and Polyandry (woman has more than one man) connote committed relations were more than two people are involved. So, it depends on which "poly" you mean. If you and your sub enjoy relations with others outside your committed relationship, you would qualify as "polyamorous". For your relationship to be polygamous you would have to have a third (or more) person in the relationship.

When you see someone say that they are in a "poly' situation, or a "poly family" they are generally talking about the polygamous situation. When you see someone say that they are polyamorous, I would take it to mean that they are either open to a polygamous situation, or simply signaling that they are not necessarily looking for monogamy in a relationship.

I'm not sure if these distinctions make any real difference to you, but there you go.

Take care of yourself.

Leonidas




TallDarkAndWitty -> RE: What do you consider to be poly? (7/9/2004 1:29:40 PM)

For me, poly is much more about the "amorous" than most, I think. My idea of a polyamorous relationship is one in which I am part of a strong couple that surrounds itself with loving, supportive, and compatible people. The relationships with those outside the couple may, or may not, be sexual. The important thing is that they are a support system, a source of kinky fun, and something that adds to the relationship.

Does it work? Not sure, haven't found the right combination of elments...though I might be close. I'll keep you posted.

Yours,
Taggard




iamdosh -> RE: What do you consider to be poly? (7/9/2004 3:05:13 PM)

Poly is simply many, but if you are talking polyamory or one of the many forms of it, then by definition, no. The bases of polyamory type relationships is love. If your just having outside sexual contoact with others then that would be considered to me, more of an open relationship or swinging.

Polyamory n : is the nonpossessive, honest, responsible and ethical philosophy and practice of loving multiple people simultaneously. Polyamory emphasizes consciously choosing how many partners one wishes to be involved with rather than accepting social norms which dictate loving only one person at a time. Polyamory is an umbrella term which integrates traditional multipartner relationship terms with more evolved egalitarian terms. Polyamory embraces sexual equality and all sexual orientations towards an expanded circle of spousal intimacy and love. Polyamory is from the root words Poly meaning many and Amour meaning love hence "many loves" or Polyamory

dosh




Leonidas -> RE: What do you consider to be poly? (7/9/2004 3:13:00 PM)

Out of curiosity, imadosh, where did you get that definition? Polyamory is not a word in english as far as I know.




LadyBeckett -> RE: What do you consider to be poly? (7/9/2004 3:23:04 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: iamdosh

Poly is simply many, but if you are talking polyamory or one of the many forms of it, then by definition, no. The bases of polyamory type relationships is love. If your just having outside sexual contoact with others then that would be considered to me, more of an open relationship or swinging.

Polyamory n : is the nonpossessive, honest, responsible and ethical philosophy and practice of loving multiple people simultaneously. Polyamory emphasizes consciously choosing how many partners one wishes to be involved with rather than accepting social norms which dictate loving only one person at a time. Polyamory is an umbrella term which integrates traditional multipartner relationship terms with more evolved egalitarian terms. Polyamory embraces sexual equality and all sexual orientations towards an expanded circle of spousal intimacy and love. Polyamory is from the root words Poly meaning many and Amour meaning love hence "many loves" or Polyamory

dosh



Very nicely presented, dosh! [;)] I would simply add two things. One, that the basis of Polyamory is indeed Loving "more", and Communication communication communication!!! The other is the following links:

http://www.polyamory.org
http://www.polyamorysociety.org




iwillserveu -> RE: What do you consider to be poly? (7/9/2004 3:58:12 PM)

It means you have to have this discussion to find out what your significant other mean by "poly".

No emoticon, because I'm serious.

Now the joke. "Poly" is the name of a parrot.[:)]




MasterMalice -> RE: What do you consider to be poly? (7/9/2004 7:44:38 PM)

Adding Partners to a Relationship


Multiple relationships are very common in the BDSM community. We look around us and see a lot of leather families that seem not only to be functioning, but, in fact, thriving. Many of us enjoy variety and would like to create our own version of the leather family.


In talking to people who are trying to develop healthy multiple relationships, I've found that a common thread is the number of false starts. A lot of this comes from pre-conceived notions about how relationships work and how additional relationships will fit in with an established BDSM relationship. This is particularly true in BDSM relationships with clearly defined Dominant and submissive roles where the partners do not switch with each other.


Polyamory isn't easy. It involves a lot of hard work. It involves hard work and commitment from ALL parties in the relationship. If everyone isn't behind the process, it's doomed to fail in the long run. People get angry, sad, hurt and emotional. If you're not willing to deal with emotions, polyamory isn't a structure that is likely to work for you. And, bear in mind that the first year is the hardest........


As with anything, it's not without its rewards. Many poly people are hooked on the increased levels of intimacy they find in their relationships and, having done the hard work, are now reaping the benefits of multiple exciting and fulfilling relationships.


If you've decided that poly is your need, you should know a few things that might make the path easier initially. By examining how the process has worked (and not worked) in my own and other polyamorous families, I've come up with a few suggestions for helping the process along.


Define what you want




No, this isn't about whether you want tall, short, blonde, brunette or whatever. This is about what you and the existing people in the relationship want the group dynamic to look like -- about structure and hierarchy. Will you be a group marriage? Will you be a couple adding a third partner as a secondary-type of relationship? What will be the hierarchy within the group - will all members be peers or will some be subordinate to others? How will living/sleeping/ private time arrangements be addressed?




Be honest with your existing group




Adding members to an existing couple or group tends to work best if it's a group decision. Although the primary Dominant in the group may be tempted to order the submissive(s) to accept the decision, from a practical standpoint this is a good way for the new partner to be poorly received. The end result is frequently infighting and destructive jealousy.


Be honest with your potential addition to the group




Anyone joining your group has the right to know what the current structure is and where he/she would fit in. If you do not intend that this ever be more than a secondary relationship, the potential partner deserves to know that - equally so if you hope that eventually he/she will move in and you will all live communally. Obviously, things often change over time, but you have a responsibility at the beginning to share the vision of the group with anyone who may consider joining you.


Allow all members of the group to have input in adding new relationships




People can feel threatened by change. Many people feel less threatened if they feel they have some level of control in the whole process. People in relationships do this in a variety of ways - some people have "veto power", if they don't like a potential new member. Some people have negotiated levels of involvement where they can feel involved enough to feel safe, but aren't necessarily planning on forming a close bond with the new member. Some may use a tactic of a less overt blocking of new relationships that make them nervous or where they simply don't care for the new person. In Dominant/submissive relationships, sometimes the dynamic is such that additions can be decided unilaterally - but when the rest of the members of the group have no input, passive resistance on the part of those out of the loop can result. Getting input and participation around adding new members helps make the existing members feel less threatened.


Encourage group members to pursue independent friendships and relationships




Frequently, a secondary relationship initiated by a member of the group as an independent relationship will evolve into inclusion in the greater group. Although it may go against the grain of what Dominant/submissive relationships are "supposed to be about," a situation where the Dominant can have as many submissives as he/she likes, but where the submissives are totally reliant on the Dominant for their emotional and sexual needs, often results in the submissives not getting their needs met. In the long run, this can lead to resentment and jealousy. It is more practical to create a situation where everyone gets what they need. Additionally, sometimes a member of the group will bring fun ideas explored in an outside relationship home for the rest of the group to enjoy.


Talk about problems




Jealousy in particular is an emotion that does not occur in a void. Jealousy is a manifestation of other underlying feelings. Most of the time when a partner is jealous, what's behind it is a fear of abandonment or of no longer being loved. Personality conflicts are also an issue - dealing with annoyance at how someone brushes his or her teeth up front is a good way to prevent that annoyance from growing into annoyance at how they brush their teeth and how they wash their hair and how they flush the toilet and and and...


Make sure that existing partners feel included




New relationships are exciting. The temptation of the person with the new relationship is to focus heavily on that relationship. The result can be a temporary short changing of the relationships he/she already has. Existing partners should be kept informed if a member of the group is starting to explore a new relationship. The person doing the exploring needs to be conscious of the feelings of the people already in the relationship. The temptation to take the existing members "for granted" can be strong in light of the heady emotions that frequently accompany new relationships. Making sure to emphasize to existing members of the group that they are still cared for, loved and wanted will reduce a lot of the conflicts that can occur with a new relationship.


Communicate your needs




One of the common fears of people in the existing relationship is that their needs won't get met by the other members of the group. However, in many cases, the other members of the group, not being omniscient, aren't really aware of what those needs are. Stating and acknowledging needs clearly and honestly is crucial. Sometimes the submissive's desire to please the Dominant can conflict with expressing the need for emotional support from the Dominant. Eventually the submissive will react to their needs not being met, with the reaction being in the form of an emotional crisis, instead of a meaningful and well thought out discussion beforehand.


Take your time




Be patient and allow the relationship to evolve on its own. Don't push members of your group to be sexual with new members if they don't feel so inclined. Allow components of the relationship to progress naturally. Don't try to force intimacy - let it grow on its own.


Be flexible




Keep in mind that the structure and ideals that the group may have envisioned may not work in real life. Someone that was originally brought in as partner to one member of the group may fall in love with another. Someone who appeared initially to be a suitable addition may turn out not to be. Someone who was an active member of the relationship may decide that the structure is not what they need at this point in their lives. Allow the group relationship to take the course that is natural for it, even if it's not the course that was envisioned initially. However, make sure that all members are active partners in sustaining and moving the relationship.


Have fun




If you get to a point where you spend a large amount of time managing emotional issues within the relationship, you aren't leaving any time for fun. Although relationships aren't always easy, they're not meant to be a mindless lurching from drama to drama. If you're working too hard at it, there's something wrong and it's time to sit back and figure out why the relationship isn't fun anymore.





Multiple relationships aren't for everyone. However, many people in long term multiple relationships will tell you that even though they're a lot more work than traditional monogamy, they find the relationships they have now more fulfilling, and, in fact, cannot envision going back to a traditional monogamous relationship. Adding new members is half the challenge - but if undertaken thoughtfully and carefully, the basic math can work out to everyone's benefit.

Until next time.. Be Safe & Play Hard
For more info on my views, please visit my webpage - http://www.mastermalice.com
.
.

[image]local://upfiles/32240/CC0501036AAB424B9958BA9958540DD8.jpg[/image]




MrThorns -> RE: What do you consider to be poly? (7/11/2004 4:32:31 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Leonidas

Out of curiosity, imadosh, where did you get that definition? Polyamory is not a word in english as far as I know.




Main Entry: polyamorous
Function: adjective
Definition: pertaining to partipation in multiple and simultaneous loving or sexual relationships



Source: Webster's New Millennium™ Dictionary of English, © 2003 Lexico Publishing Group, LLC

~Thorns




LadyBeckett -> RE: What do you consider to be poly? (7/11/2004 4:37:50 PM)

Well shoot, you beat me to the punch, Oh thorned one. [;)] I found it also, even though I knew it was a word, lol. I have a Webster's also. Gotta love Websters!!!




MrThorns -> RE: What do you consider to be poly? (7/11/2004 4:37:51 PM)

Some great info there...thank you Malice. I like the part about having fun. If you're not having fun...you must be doing something wrong.


~Thorns




anthrosub -> RE: What do you consider to be poly? (7/11/2004 4:56:49 PM)

i once had a long discussion with the male of an "open lifestyle" couple. They both were very interested in polyamoury relationships and had a lot of literature, books, and videos from groups (mostly in Germany) that practice the lifestyle. From what i saw, it looked a lot like a commune. But he did say something to me that made a lot of sense regarding one on one relationships.

He said a relationship between two people is not simply a polar dynamic but actually a triad. There's the entity of each member (the female and male, or same sex if it's gay) and the third entity is the relationship itself, which each member needs to respect just as much as they respect their partner. In my opinion, this makes a lot of sense because the relationship has a "life" that's bigger than the sum of its parts.

anthrosub




Sundew02 -> RE: What do you consider to be poly? (7/11/2004 7:58:48 PM)

Way too much information. To me polyanything, means more than two. In my household which contains two Dommes, the number of males slave/sub is the variable. To whatever degree there is love is not the issue. As long as there is respect/caring and all accept that there is no "one and only" life is good. Sundew




kiki blue -> RE: What do you consider to be poly? (7/13/2004 4:31:55 AM)

To me, poly is being emotionally and/or physically involved with more than one person on a regular basis (to differentiate from slutting around[;)]).

Polyfidelity is something I'm open to experiencing in my next relationship.




MrThorns -> RE: What do you consider to be poly? (7/13/2004 8:35:24 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: kiki blue

To me, poly is being emotionally and/or physically involved with more than one person on a regular basis (to differentiate from slutting around[;)]).

Polyfidelity is something I'm open to experiencing in my next relationship.


Polyfidelity...I like that.

Would that make my committed poly relationships, "Polyfidelic"?
(Easy, Leonidas... I know.)

Thanks for all the great posts...

~Thorns




Voltare -> RE: What do you consider to be poly? (7/13/2004 9:48:20 AM)

Ever since I knew I liked girls, I always figured two would be better then one.

Unfortunately, as an adult I've learned two women usually mean twice the expense, twice the work, twice the time on the phone, and quite simply twice the obligations. While I enjoy most of that stuff, depending on the woman/women it can be too much.

I think poly works when everyone wants it to. Unfortunately, it's like the idea of cyber love - it's more pipe dream then reality. I strongly advise folks to discuss the issue anyway, if only to confirm their rules and expectations of fidelity (or lack thereof) as the traditional rules of engagement don't always apply in BDSM, D/s, M/s, or S&M oriented relationships.

I've written about this in the past, so I won't rehash it. Anyone curious for the thread, feel free to email/pm me

Stephan




kiki blue -> RE: What do you consider to be poly? (7/13/2004 3:24:05 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrThorns
Would that make my committed poly relationships, "Polyfidelic"?


If you're only emotionally and/or physically involved with those same people, who are aware and/or interact with each other, then I'd say yes.




wizcitrix -> RE: What do you consider to be poly? (7/14/2004 5:32:11 AM)

I actually had no idea what the word Polyamorous meant. Never heard of the word before. Anyways I found several definitions for it. It seems to be whats known as an "open word", which is a word whose definition changes to suit the individual using it. One of the definitions I found seems to suit my lifestyle and that of most people I know who have alternative lifestyles. That definition is as follows:

Means "many loves." Briefly, a polyamorous person is one who feels it is natural to romantically love more than just one person at a time. A polyamorous person may have more than one person that s/he considers to be a "spouse," for example. Polyamory is about love, without constraint by the dictates of society, defined only by the parameters that we, as individuals, impose upon it.

Now the question becomes what is my idea of their definition of love. I think they are referring to the love one that is often referred to as "true love". That being the case I do not see a Dom/sub master/slave relationship as being on the same level of love, unless you specifically bring it there, another topic altogether.

The reason I believe it is meant to be this way is for logical reasons. Many may argue there is no difference in the type of love involved in a D/s M/s from that of a vanilla relationship. The difference as I see it is one of loyalty. If you are a slave and your master says "Get rid of the b/f he is interfering with your training" do you get rid of the boyfriend of the master? Most would get rid of the master if "true love" is involved with the b/f. Reverse that same scene. Its the b/f saying get rid of the master. I believe most in "true love" with the b/f would say okay and get a different master.




MistressDREAD -> RE: What do you consider to be poly? (7/19/2004 8:32:10 PM)

RE: What do you consider to be poly?

Married to One Mate for 27 years
and Married to the second Mate 10
years later for 16 years at the same
time with the first Mate. All three of Us
Owned slaves which We also have n
had intimate long term relations with.
I am a Widow now from both Men.
Voltare just because Your narrow
minded self cannot handle being Poly
doesent make it a pipe dream. It just
makes You only capable of handling
one relationship at a time comfortably.
I noticed that You only listed things that
You would provide with out giving any
credit nor respect to what Your mate
contributes to Your relationship, Or maybe
You are the only one that gives All with
no one else giving nothing??Kind of tells
Me what kind of woman You levitate to. Or
is it that you do not pick woman whom have
monitary value or do not work or only have
time to talk on the phone instead of commiting
to real life living or You have double obligation
because You keep them apart which makes
you have double the work instead of them being
together and you doing for both at the same time.
All of the Married Mates contributed equally
to Our Relationship in the way that Each One
was capable of doing as well as Our posessions.
We all got out equally what We put in for the most
part. If We dident Im sure it would not of lasted as
many years as it has and does even with many of
the original LifeMates now gone.

[image]local://upfiles/9526/0A4036731DC74367A79DA1E2F8CFD5DA.gif[/image]




Page: [1] 2 3   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Collarchat.com is a member of the Free Speech Coalition
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.0390625