Well, while I don't really get the poly lifestyle (trying to stay
emotionally connected to one man is enough, thanks), I definitely get
the distinction between poly and swinger.
And, yah, that guy sounds like a jerk.
On 7/8/05, S. Isaac Dealey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So... I'm sorry if some of you find this beyond the pale for the list,
> but you know, the HOF community lately is my only social outlet (as
> sad as that sounds), because my social groups in south Florida eroded
> while I was away last year.
>
> Many of you know that Tiff and I are bi/polyamorous -- or at least we
> consider ourselves to be, although in the past 5 years we've not found
> anyone we've been able to develop a good long-term poly relationship
> with. Tiff is subscribed to a number of poly mailing lists and
> yesterday someone posted an introduction on one of those lists saying
> they were poly and providing a link to their site/profile/whatever...
> So Tiff checked it out and it's all about sex/swinging -- the term
> polyamory (or any variation) isn't mentioned anywhere, just sex, sex
> and some more sex. So rather than lambast them (which happens to
> swingers who wander on to the wrong poly lists), Tiff sent a reply
> saying simply that it was a poly list and that as such they weren't
> very likely to receive the kind of response ("hey, ya wanna hook up?")
> they were likely interested in from that list. Apparently someone else
> on the list (not the moderator) took offense and lambasted her for
> pointing out the distinction between people who typically identify as
> poly ("relationships -- 'multiple _loves_' -- sex is good with people
> you love") and people who typically identify as swingers ("sex --
> probably only sex -- in many cases, 'love' with more than one person
> is scary and avoided like the plague").
>
> Excerpt from his response:
>
> ---------------------------
>
> My impression of a poly gathering so far is that bunch of unfuckables
> are coming together to prove their worth. Cuz if they know they are
> sexy, why stop when chemistry is right? Do we want to limit ourselves
> by definitions? Or do we want our love to be unlimited? Who can
> distinguish the purpose of sex from the purpose of relating? How can
> one relate to another without the ultimate closeness of genital
> contact? My brain hurts from these questions and too much tequilla...
> Cudos to all of you who know me in bed and yet did not form a
> relationship.. Next life, maybe..
>
> ---------------------------
>
> I dunno... it just seems to me like any reasonable person with a
> diverse set of emotions (like, I think most people have) should be
> able to tell the difference between someone who wants to _know_ you
> (your loves, your hates, your quirks, the "art" of you) and someone
> who just wants to get in your pants because they're addicted to the
> endorphine release of orgasm.
>
> For instance -- the "art" of Jim Davis (if you pay attention, there's
> a very definate style to all of his emails, a certain way he talks,
> and the way he uses the ^ character in emoticons) is very different
> from the "art" of mtangry (this is self-explanatory isn't it?) or Tony
> Weed... err... I mean Weeg. :) My moods vary (I hope most people's do)
> and although I'm not sexually attracted to _any_ of the
> afforementioned men (no offense guys, you're just not my type. :) I
> enjoy "hanging out" and talking about things (I hope most people do)
> and that experience would be different with each of them so I'd like
> to think it's natural that as my moods change, I would want to spend
> that time talking with different people. I wouldn't go pal-around with
> Jim when I'm mtAngry, because Jim doesn't seem like the sort of person
> who'd enjoy that mood. And I'm not likely to hang out with Tony much
> at all because, well, I don't know how to inhale. :P
>
> No wonder so many self-identified "poly people" have that knee-jerk
> response to swingers... <sigh>
>
> FUCK-WIT!
>
> /end rant...
>
> yeah, I'm in one of those mtAngry moods...
>
>
> s. isaac dealey 954.522.6080
> new epoch : isn't it time for a change?
>
> add features without fixtures with
> the onTap open source framework
>
> http://www.fusiontap.com
> http://coldfusion.sys-con.com/author/4806Dealey.htm
>
>
>
>
>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Find out how CFTicket can increase your company's customer support
efficiency by 100%
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=49
Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:163764
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
