Advertisement
I've taken another hack at the previous relationship chart I created:
polyamory.tribe.net/photos/f...3c95915d9
...and updated it to (hopefully) make it read a smidge easier:
polyamory.tribe.net/photos/5...f838f886f
As always, I welcome your critiques and questions.
polyamory.tribe.net/photos/f...3c95915d9
...and updated it to (hopefully) make it read a smidge easier:
polyamory.tribe.net/photos/5...f838f886f
As always, I welcome your critiques and questions.
posted by:
|
SF Bay Area
|
Advertisement
Advertisement
-
Re: Relationship Chart v.2
Wed, October 28, 2009 - 12:57 PMI'd separate deuterogamy and serial monogamy further from monogamy. To me, at least...monogamy implies one partner in one lifetime. So, what we really have are not (primarily anyway) monogamous couples...but serial monogamous / deuterogamous couples in our society. Even the term "monogamy" is therefore seen as a sham, and only something done by birds and fish, and a handful of lower mammals. -
-
Re: Relationship Chart v.2
Wed, October 28, 2009 - 1:18 PMI've given that some thought previously, and you still essentially have monogamous relationships. Deuterogamy and Serial Monogamy are still monogamy, as in only one partner at a time. The three (and it may seem redundant to have monogamy listed under Monogamy, but follow the understanding of only one partner) work well under the Monogamy category.
Take the larger entity of Monogamy (as opposed to the sub-label) as a title that is opposite of non-monogamy, if that helps. -
-
Re: Relationship Chart v.2
Wed, October 28, 2009 - 1:42 PMYeah, I can get all that, and....
At the same time, I think it would help society greatly to tell ourselves the truth about ourselves...that we're NOT monogamous...we are at best serial-monogamous or deuterogamous as a species...and usually not even that. More than half of people who label themselves "monogamous" cheat on their partners...which makes them...non-monogamous. Hell, they're not even serial monogamous or deuterogamous...they're just plain some variety of poly, but without being open and honest about it.
I think it helps to re-re-define "monogamy" back to the original zoological meaning it held in days long-since past: one partner per lifetime. Shed some light on truth, rather than burying it under the nebulous and inauthentic "one partner at a time" definition. -
-
Re: Relationship Chart v.2
Wed, October 28, 2009 - 2:31 PMWhat you present is something beyond a scope of a chart and is more about social relations and their issues/problems. I understand what you are saying, but this is a chart based solely around defined romantic relationships.
-
Re: Relationship Chart v.2
Sat, November 7, 2009 - 2:48 AM*LOL*
While I totally agree with your sentiments ... I have to disagree with changing the chart. The chart is about the concept of relationships. There is no room for the odd-shaped bubbles that would encompass the differences between what people define themselves as in public and how they act in private. That would add several dimensions. There are plenty of poly (in public) folks who aren't really poly inside, cheating bigamists, etc.
Perhaps whenever you see the word "monogamy" you can just do a mental auto-replace with "happily-oblivious, self-deceiving relationship used for successfully raising progeny". *chuckle* That is mostly how I handle it. And, oh, more recent research on birds long thought to be monogamous is that they are proper in public but sneaky in private, just like most humans ... always trying to get YES, MORE, BETTER babies NOW!
cherrio!
-
-
-
