It's a relationship style preference for me, more than a sexual preference. I choose to define commitment, fidelity, and love in ways that are not exclusive in the ways that monogamy and monogamous marriage are. Also, those relationships do not depend on my sexual involvements as a sexual preference implies. I seek commitment and security in my relationships, which is difficult to get if you just have a series of casual dating relationships that happen to overlap in time. This is why I bother with the difficulties of having a family of choice; my polyamory is about way more than the people I'm fucking.
Conceptually I quite like your lifestyle view... :)
But I think that there's an inherent sexual aspect to the term "polyamory." The whole "many-loves" translation is a nicely literal idea, but sex is strongly implied.
I mean, no matter *how* monogamous they are, is going to say that one should only love one person. It is the cultural norm to have many loves. One loves one's parents, friends, children...that's normal. It's the *kind* of "love" that one is claiming many of that makes "polyamory" a significant word and lifestyle choice.
Or, if it's not sex, than what would you say sets apart the "loves" referred to in the term from other loves that a more mainstream lifestyle might include?
I guess the term I think of is "lifestyle choice," though I like the above commenter's phrase "relationship style choice." The key word does seem to be choice, though - I don't think it's an inborn state of being, the way sexual preference is. You choose what form(s) your romantic relationships take - or if you choose not to have any, I guess. And from what I know of it, it involves a LOT of talking and rules and boundaries and communication, and it seems to me that every time you engage in those activities too, you're consciously making the choice again.
As with many things, I practice a live-and-let-live approach. Polyamory isn't my personal choice, but as long as it's happening between consenting adults, I don't see how it's any of my biznazz one way or the other.
Since I'm in this lifestyle because I WANT to be and not because I NEED to be or feel compelled to be, I'd say that it is something more like a philosophical (or perhaps spiritual) belief.
I don't think it's better at all. I think a person can be in a perfectly happy and healthy lifestyle that's monogamous. I've never thought this way of life was superior.
But it IS another viable option. Like vegetarianism when a person's reasons are that they simply don't enjoy eating meat.
Do personal philosophies always have to dictate that one person is right while another person is wrong? Of course, perhaps I'm viewing philosophy as a system of principles for guidance in practical affairs. Guidance being the key word here, not rules
( ... )
One: It's a choice. If that is the case, I go back to my other question: can you choose to want or not want this lifestyle, or can you only choose whether you live it?
Two: It's a philosphy. If we view a philosophy as "a system of principles for guidance in practical affairs", then we have to parse that, right? Guidance based on what? Guidance about which way of dealing with practical affairs is...more effective?...easier?...less hurtful to others?...more satisfying?...what is your philosophy guiding you towards.
In essense, I think that a simple choice based on desire/preference and the cost/benefit of acting on that desire/preference can be seen quite separately from the notion of a philosophical method of behavioral choice, where there is an implication that one course of action is superior to another on some way...
Comments 55
Reply
But I think that there's an inherent sexual aspect to the term "polyamory." The whole "many-loves" translation is a nicely literal idea, but sex is strongly implied.
I mean, no matter *how* monogamous they are, is going to say that one should only love one person. It is the cultural norm to have many loves. One loves one's parents, friends, children...that's normal. It's the *kind* of "love" that one is claiming many of that makes "polyamory" a significant word and lifestyle choice.
Or, if it's not sex, than what would you say sets apart the "loves" referred to in the term from other loves that a more mainstream lifestyle might include?
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Also, if you wanted, I'd love for you to glance at my response to langs_place above...it bears on what you say here.
Reply
And dog-fucking. That gets its own one.
Reply
Reply
As with many things, I practice a live-and-let-live approach. Polyamory isn't my personal choice, but as long as it's happening between consenting adults, I don't see how it's any of my biznazz one way or the other.
Reply
Can one choose what one prefers?
Obviously, with either one's sex/gender preference or one's mono/poly preference, one can choose whether or not to act on it.
But can one choose which, on either axis, one prefers?
And is that, do you think, important?
Reply
Reply
Does that mean that you think that it's the "right" thing to do? A thing that's morally superior, like "don't kill people" or "don't steal stuff?"
Or healthier? Such as "don't drink caffeine" or "don't desire stuff?"
Reply
But it IS another viable option. Like vegetarianism when a person's reasons are that they simply don't enjoy eating meat.
Do personal philosophies always have to dictate that one person is right while another person is wrong? Of course, perhaps I'm viewing philosophy as a system of principles for guidance in practical affairs. Guidance being the key word here, not rules ( ... )
Reply
You've got two different ideas here I think...
One: It's a choice. If that is the case, I go back to my other question: can you choose to want or not want this lifestyle, or can you only choose whether you live it?
Two: It's a philosphy. If we view a philosophy as "a system of principles for guidance in practical affairs", then we have to parse that, right? Guidance based on what? Guidance about which way of dealing with practical affairs is...more effective?...easier?...less hurtful to others?...more satisfying?...what is your philosophy guiding you towards.
In essense, I think that a simple choice based on desire/preference and the cost/benefit of acting on that desire/preference can be seen quite separately from the notion of a philosophical method of behavioral choice, where there is an implication that one course of action is superior to another on some way...
Reply
Leave a comment