Comments on: Common Myths About Polyamory http://www.daylightatheism.org/2009/12/common-myths-about-polyamory.html NIGHTTIME IS FOR DREAMING. DAYLIGHT IS FOR ACTION. Mon, 23 Jan 2012 12:09:52 -0800 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9 hourly 1 By: joanna http://www.daylightatheism.org/2009/12/common-myths-about-polyamory.html#comment-52972 joanna Wed, 23 Dec 2009 04:58:00 +0000 http://www.daylightatheism.org/?p=1223#comment-52972 off thread a bit, but I've been thinking about this one for a couple of days. I doubt the reason most people look down on polyamory is because they're scared of losing their spouse, but probably more that they don't take it seriously and think it's kooky (or perverse). Kind of like bisexuality, polyamory seems to have a acquired a certain trendiness amongst the extra-different college age types that enjoy thinking of themselves as victims of society. They don't really elicit a lot of sympathy from me (maybe because I sorta used to be one..) So I'd say that a lot of people see polyamory, if they're aware of it at all, as perverse, kooky, or attention-baiting before they see it as a threat. The first step seems to be increasing awareness that polyamory is an option that mature, responsible adults are taking for themselves. And that's exactly what this post does, so thanks! off thread a bit, but I've been thinking about this one for a couple of days. I doubt the reason most people look down on polyamory is because they're scared of losing their spouse, but probably more that they don't take it seriously and think it's kooky (or perverse). Kind of like bisexuality, polyamory seems to have a acquired a certain trendiness amongst the extra-different college age types that enjoy thinking of themselves as victims of society. They don't really elicit a lot of sympathy from me (maybe because I sorta used to be one..)
So I'd say that a lot of people see polyamory, if they're aware of it at all, as perverse, kooky, or attention-baiting before they see it as a threat. The first step seems to be increasing awareness that polyamory is an option that mature, responsible adults are taking for themselves. And that's exactly what this post does, so thanks!

]]> By: D-train http://www.daylightatheism.org/2009/12/common-myths-about-polyamory.html#comment-52892 D-train Tue, 22 Dec 2009 06:19:57 +0000 http://www.daylightatheism.org/?p=1223#comment-52892 Me and my girlfriend have been in a poly relationship for about a year now. I'm not sure if it's a Canada/America thing or just the people I tend to know, but it's been essentially a walk in the park (from a discrimination point, the relationship is a little more complex). The biggest part is reminding myself that when I say "I love you." The period is just as important as any of the constituent words. Me and my girlfriend have been in a poly relationship for about a year now. I'm not sure if it's a Canada/America thing or just the people I tend to know, but it's been essentially a walk in the park (from a discrimination point, the relationship is a little more complex). The biggest part is reminding myself that when I say "I love you." The period is just as important as any of the constituent words.

]]> By: Caiphen http://www.daylightatheism.org/2009/12/common-myths-about-polyamory.html#comment-52889 Caiphen Tue, 22 Dec 2009 00:06:55 +0000 http://www.daylightatheism.org/?p=1223#comment-52889 Sometimes, however difficult it may be, you have to think like an idiot to convince an idiot. Keddaw, that has to be the comment of the week. It's quite hilarious actually. Sometimes, however difficult it may be, you have to think like an idiot to convince an idiot.

Keddaw, that has to be the comment of the week. It's quite hilarious actually.

]]> By: keddaw http://www.daylightatheism.org/2009/12/common-myths-about-polyamory.html#comment-52866 keddaw Mon, 21 Dec 2009 10:31:59 +0000 http://www.daylightatheism.org/?p=1223#comment-52866 JulietEcho <blockquote>Well, essentially he's being a sexist asshole, so maybe it was better that you didn't verbalize that. To characterize women as simply leeches who'll bite wherever the most money's at is disgusting and without merit.</blockquote>Agreed 100%. However, this line of argument does not wash with the person in question. It's like going back to the 1800's and trying to explain to someone why white and black people are the same. Saying that they're a racist idiot is entirely correct but in no way changes their mind. in this case you have to realise that they're probably thinking that the only fair way for society to operate is one person each otherwise you get people hoarding and some people with no-one. This will lead to inequality which leads to social breakdown. Wrong, but that's what they think. Sometimes, however difficult it may be, you have to think like an idiot to convince an idiot. JulietEcho

Well, essentially he's being a sexist asshole, so maybe it was better that you didn't verbalize that. To characterize women as simply leeches who'll bite wherever the most money's at is disgusting and without merit.

Agreed 100%. However, this line of argument does not wash with the person in question. It's like going back to the 1800's and trying to explain to someone why white and black people are the same. Saying that they're a racist idiot is entirely correct but in no way changes their mind.

in this case you have to realise that they're probably thinking that the only fair way for society to operate is one person each otherwise you get people hoarding and some people with no-one. This will lead to inequality which leads to social breakdown. Wrong, but that's what they think.

Sometimes, however difficult it may be, you have to think like an idiot to convince an idiot.

]]> By: Caiphen http://www.daylightatheism.org/2009/12/common-myths-about-polyamory.html#comment-52863 Caiphen Mon, 21 Dec 2009 02:31:57 +0000 http://www.daylightatheism.org/?p=1223#comment-52863 "To characterize women as simply leeches who'll bite wherever the most money's at is disgusting and without merit." My wife married me when I had nothing. Now I'm not rich but well off and it's largely because of her. It's not that she provided swarms of money, just her love and support. David, you hit the nail right on the head. Largely because of her I still believe in 1 person for 1 person, but that's just a matter of opinion. Polyamory has worked in other cultures so I'm opened minded about it. It just isn't for me. "To characterize women as simply leeches who'll bite wherever the most money's at is disgusting and without merit."

My wife married me when I had nothing. Now I'm not rich but well off and it's largely because of her. It's not that she provided swarms of money, just her love and support. David, you hit the nail right on the head.

Largely because of her I still believe in 1 person for 1 person, but that's just a matter of opinion. Polyamory has worked in other cultures so I'm opened minded about it. It just isn't for me.

]]> By: Leum http://www.daylightatheism.org/2009/12/common-myths-about-polyamory.html#comment-52858 Leum Sun, 20 Dec 2009 19:22:03 +0000 http://www.daylightatheism.org/?p=1223#comment-52858 People marry for all sorts of reasons. Frankly, if the only reason someone's willing to marry me as that all the rich guys are taken, that doesn't strike me as a marriage I'd want to enter. People marry for all sorts of reasons. Frankly, if the only reason someone's willing to marry me as that all the rich guys are taken, that doesn't strike me as a marriage I'd want to enter.

]]> By: Chris Swanson http://www.daylightatheism.org/2009/12/common-myths-about-polyamory.html#comment-52856 Chris Swanson Sun, 20 Dec 2009 17:12:05 +0000 http://www.daylightatheism.org/?p=1223#comment-52856 Some women are golddiggers, but so are some men. I think most people marry because they think they're in love. Some women are golddiggers, but so are some men. I think most people marry because they think they're in love.

]]> By: David http://www.daylightatheism.org/2009/12/common-myths-about-polyamory.html#comment-52855 David Sun, 20 Dec 2009 11:25:40 +0000 http://www.daylightatheism.org/?p=1223#comment-52855 "To characterize women as simply leeches who'll bite wherever the most money's at is disgusting and without merit." That is pretty judgmental of women who do marry for money. It is not as though it is uncommon of women to search for a rich man. Maybe it is not realistic that ALL women are like that, or even a majority, but there is the money aspect of male-female relations and there ALWAYS has been. To imply that because many women marry for security and money they are leeches is really just as bad as the implication that ALL women are money hungry golddiggers. "To characterize women as simply leeches who'll bite wherever the most money's at is disgusting and without merit."

That is pretty judgmental of women who do marry for money. It is not as though it is uncommon of women to search for a rich man.

Maybe it is not realistic that ALL women are like that, or even a majority, but there is the money aspect of male-female relations and there ALWAYS has been. To imply that because many women marry for security and money they are leeches is really just as bad as the implication that ALL women are money hungry golddiggers.

]]> By: JulietEcho http://www.daylightatheism.org/2009/12/common-myths-about-polyamory.html#comment-52849 JulietEcho Sat, 19 Dec 2009 23:04:21 +0000 http://www.daylightatheism.org/?p=1223#comment-52849 <blockquote>One of my conservative co-workers, also gay, has said he's against these sorts of relationships because it means all the rich men out there would have several wives and the poor men would end up with none. It was an argument so beyond stupid I wasn't even sure how to refute it, so I didn't bother to try. I just gave him A Look. I wish I'd come up with something better.</blockquote>Well, essentially he's being a sexist asshole, so maybe it was better that you didn't verbalize that. To characterize women as simply leeches who'll bite wherever the most money's at is disgusting and without merit.

One of my conservative co-workers, also gay, has said he's against these sorts of relationships because it means all the rich men out there would have several wives and the poor men would end up with none. It was an argument so beyond stupid I wasn't even sure how to refute it, so I didn't bother to try. I just gave him A Look. I wish I'd come up with something better.

Well, essentially he's being a sexist asshole, so maybe it was better that you didn't verbalize that. To characterize women as simply leeches who'll bite wherever the most money's at is disgusting and without merit.

]]> By: Chris Swanson http://www.daylightatheism.org/2009/12/common-myths-about-polyamory.html#comment-52846 Chris Swanson Sat, 19 Dec 2009 21:59:06 +0000 http://www.daylightatheism.org/?p=1223#comment-52846 One of my conservative co-workers, also gay, has said he's against these sorts of relationships because it means all the rich men out there would have several wives and the poor men would end up with none. It was an argument so beyond stupid I wasn't even sure how to refute it, so I didn't bother to try. I just gave him A Look. I wish I'd come up with something better. One of my conservative co-workers, also gay, has said he's against these sorts of relationships because it means all the rich men out there would have several wives and the poor men would end up with none. It was an argument so beyond stupid I wasn't even sure how to refute it, so I didn't bother to try. I just gave him A Look. I wish I'd come up with something better.

]]> By: Vene http://www.daylightatheism.org/2009/12/common-myths-about-polyamory.html#comment-52844 Vene Sat, 19 Dec 2009 19:48:39 +0000 http://www.daylightatheism.org/?p=1223#comment-52844 From comment #20 "To justify polyamory on personal level, you need merely be fair and honest. But to justify it on a social level, you need to address these traditional concerns." That's actually very easy to do. And it's very, very simple, equality of the sexes, places that practice traditional polygamy have it where a man has multiple lives, this is not modern polyamory. In modern polyamory, sure you can have a man with multiple female lovers, but you can also have a woman with multiple male lovers, there's also the possibility of love triangles or squares instead of everybody diverging on one individual. Basically, poly isn't the problem in those societies, it's sexism, if we take care of the sexism, those problems disappear as well. Although what you said holds a certain amount of sexism by assuming that it is typically a man with multiple wives. What you said also doesn't really apply to homosexuals and only somewhat applies to bisexuals. From comment #20
"To justify polyamory on personal level, you need merely be fair and honest. But to justify it on a social level, you need to address these traditional concerns."

That's actually very easy to do. And it's very, very simple, equality of the sexes, places that practice traditional polygamy have it where a man has multiple lives, this is not modern polyamory. In modern polyamory, sure you can have a man with multiple female lovers, but you can also have a woman with multiple male lovers, there's also the possibility of love triangles or squares instead of everybody diverging on one individual. Basically, poly isn't the problem in those societies, it's sexism, if we take care of the sexism, those problems disappear as well. Although what you said holds a certain amount of sexism by assuming that it is typically a man with multiple wives. What you said also doesn't really apply to homosexuals and only somewhat applies to bisexuals.

]]> By: Incy http://www.daylightatheism.org/2009/12/common-myths-about-polyamory.html#comment-52841 Incy Sat, 19 Dec 2009 16:11:14 +0000 http://www.daylightatheism.org/?p=1223#comment-52841 Hi! I am one part of a foursome (two couples). We just passed our one year mark of being together. I simply wanted to thank you for taking the time to write the article. Keep it up! Hi! I am one part of a foursome (two couples). We just passed our one year mark of being together. I simply wanted to thank you for taking the time to write the article. Keep it up!

]]>