marc.wilson at gmx.co.uk
Mon Jun 25 01:22:00 BST 2018
On Sun, 24 Jun 2018 11:10:23 -0600, "Margaret Devere"
<margaret at devere.net> wrote:
>Asking for clarification:
Heh - good luck with that. :)
>Does "poly" imply being in simultaneous committed relationships? Are those
>other people also in committed relationships with each other?
For some. Not for others.
There are *at least* as many ways to do poly as there are people
involved. Polyfolk as a group tend to be a little chary of "One True
Way" poly enthusiasts.
>It's clearly not just sleeping around. (I'm not trying to be negative here;
>I just don't have a term for uncommitted sex with different people.)
>(This is probably a silly question: Every group of people can set up the
>relationships to suit themselves.)
Well, you've kind-of answered it yourself.
You've more or less hit the nail on the head: there are many ways to be
poly, the trick is to ensure everyone involved knows which rules are in
Some require total disclosure and in-advance consent. There are some
couples who have what's popularly known as the "Darryl Hannah" clause
(from the POV of the person who coined it, Darry Hannah was the perfect
crush object) - normally, advance agreement is needed, but...
There are some triads and larger polygons where everyone is romantically
involved with everyone else, but they are relatively rare (Google "poly
unicorn hunters" to see why), others are in a V (or other structure),
and the people at the ends of the V are just "metamours". Sometimes
they're friends, sometimes they've not even met! Some networks can only
be mapped satisfactorily by invoking wormholes, I suspect.
There's also the DADT crowd, but some polyfolk regard them with a little
suspicion - it's hard to distinguish DADT from plain cheating.
The true measure of a man is how he treats someone who can do him absolutely no good. - Samuel Johnson
More information about the Lois-Bujold