Polygamy Immoral?

[Trey of Diamonds]

What is more important, what we meant or how we were perceived? While what we mean is of course important, I would say that if no one understands what you meant then it is completely lost and the perception of what you meant is all that is left.

 

[DallasApple]

What is more important, what we meant or how we were perceived? While what we mean is of course important, I would say that if no one understands what you meant then it is completely lost and the perception of what you meant is all that is left.

I couldnt agree more.And if we are fortunate to be "face to face" or even alive to say how we percieve each other(with the written word especially)..we shoud say "thats what not what I meant" if it isnt and clarigy.But if we are continually being percieved that way regardless of our meaning maybe you need to check that?Not saying its easy..I have to do it all the time..:yes:

I knew one guy that would argue to the death..that its not "your fault" how someone else "percieves you"..that its their responsibility.

No ..both the speaker AND the listener are responsible.

Love

Dallas

 

[challupa]

I couldnt agree more.And if we are fortunate to be "face to face" or even alive to say how we percieve each other(with the written word especially)..we shoud say "thats what not what I meant" if it isnt and clarigy.But if we are continually being percieved that way regardless of our meaning maybe you need to check that?Not saying its easy..I have to do it all the time..:yes:

I knew one guy that would argue to the death..that its not "your fault" how someone else "percieves you"..that its their responsibility.

No ..both the speaker AND the listener are responsible.

Love

Dallas

Yes it is important to communicate in a way that gets what you mean across to the other person. That is very hard on these forums like you pointed out Dallas. We will all see things differently that's for sure.

 

[Smoke]

The thing is as I have said twice..now three times..Im not talking about it as an argument "against" poly families.Only that it would be a special concern that would need to be acknowledged and addressed within the family itself in regards to children.The fact that it puts a child at higher risk to ridicule and descrimination is NOT a critisizm of the family itself.Not by me anyway.Its a sad fact of the matter that cant be ignored or swept under the rug.Its a valid concern.But Im beginning to regret I brought it up as a possible "negative" aspect or concern regarding this topic.But again..I am not taking up an argument "against" people who want to live in poly family arrangments.

Oh, I know. I think I know you better than that by now. What I meant was, people used to say that about interracial marriages, but I don't think it's a big issue for most people anymore. Even people who disapprove of interracial marriages (and I still know quite a few of them) don't generally take it out on the kids. I think if more people just went ahead and lived their lives, in poly households if they like, it might turn out to be a similarly insignificant thing.

 

[blackout]

I"m just gunna put out a thought here.

Perhaps there are many more poly people out there
than anyone presently realizes...
(including those poly people themselves)
as so many people can not even IMAGINE the reality
of a comitted life and family beyond the monogomy model.
After all "it's just not what people do".
They haven't personally seen it, it's not a legal marriage option,
the notion would be shunned by family and friends alike,
and most people have never thought beyond traditional polygamy
to the flexible and equal unions of polyamory.

Yet how many people just cannot commit longterm to just one relationship?
And what kind of stigmas are put on these people?
And how many triad lovers put down their pre marriage polyamory
because they want a family... and well... duh... obviously families... marriages...
are mongomous. It's just how it is. right?
So they chalk their polyamory up to youth... and "grow up".
Even many couples who were poly BEFORE marriage
change their model to conform with society...
but then later on.... guess what?!
Then there is a whole process of re-allowing
and embracing in their marriage
what was once a valid part of their relationship to begin with.

If the stigmas were gone,
and people were "allowed" by society
to express their love and form their families
in personalized variations of polyamorous unions...
I somehow believe many homes with children
would NOT be broken.
Perhaps families would simply ADD to their love
instead of tearing everything assunder.
Monogamy is an all or nothing model after all.

I wonder how much polyamory we would see
if it were seen as just another family option
without stigma.

We are already a society of serial polygamy.
If we ALLOWED polyamory without stigma...
my guess is, most of you would be quite suprised.

 

[Smoke]

I wonder how much polyamory we would see
if it were seen as just another family option
without stigma.

How many of us stay with the same person all our lives? How many married people have affairs? If more people thought polyamory was an option, relationships might be more stable. You'd have more incomes and more hands doing the work in the household, and more people taking care of everybody's emotional needs and sexual desires. You might not be as inclined to say, "Well, I'm not getting what I want out of this relationship, so I'm leaving" -- unless what you wanted was monogamy. I think that would be the main problem for most people: jealousy and a tendency to pair off within the relationship.