Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Do tell me how long will these partnership fare and what's the separation rate. You're not the only one with experience in it. I don't base my experience on TV shows, because what I told you is NOT something I could see on TV.... TV shows rather focus on monogamy in homosexual couples, not some complex relationship that includes elements of polyamory or even open relationship.
Here's what they show on TV: homosexuals having children with their partner and one of them opts for fertility treatment (gays include surrogate). Life moves on with two parents raising the child together. Here's the reality - I'm sure that lots of homosexuals will opt for having and/or raising a child alone rather than with a partner. Another reality - a large portion will tend to raise it with the other parent as well, unless that other parent is a complete idiot.
These things are non-existent on TV, because the agenda that biology doesn't matter is so prevalent. Step-parents are always OK to raise someone else's child and not want to undergo fertility treatment by themselves as well. That's Hollywood's scenario, of course.
I've explained on economical, social and emotional reasons why homosexuals do it in a previous post (and it doesn't have to include another homosexual, not at all), it takes a bit of a pause for post and comments spawn in the mean time.
Once again - homosexuals cannot have biological children with their partner. I personally don't have many homosexual friends like you do, I know only a few on occasional basis and none of them were part of classical Hollywood scenario where they meet together, fall in love, then they decide to have mutual child. It seems like Hollywood happens on a very narrow scenario which is common only among a very small number of homosexuals, since most of them will either break up with their partner (be it homosexual or heterosexual), many of them will maintain contact with that parent unless he/she was an idiot and that parent will keep on playing a role in child's life. I do suspect that many homosexuals, especially these "closeted" ones and ones who aren't pursuing for a relationship will stay and live with their other person in something that resembles a combination of polyamory in some way, with certain rules in their relationships.
So what exactly are you basing your opinions on since you don't know many homosexuals?
Most of the homosexuals that I know are in relationships - with other homosexuals of the same gender that they are in love with. Off the top of my head, the ones that have children - my cousin and his ex-husband adopted 3 boys. They were together for about 20 years and finally separated but live down the street from each other so the boys can go back and forth easily. I know of 3 lesbian couples (again, off the top of my head - there might be more) that are married to their partner and have children that are biologically one of theirs. The other parent is not a "step" parent. They are both the parents - just as parents who adopt children are not "step" parents but simply parents. I know of a gay male couple that has twins with another lesbian couple. They are raising the children together but in two households. I know of another gay male couple that have adopted twins.
All the people I know - straight, gay, bi, transgender - are in romantic relationships with people that they are in love with. Some of them choose to have children, some do not. I don't know anyone in a situation like you are describing and I find it hard to believe that it is common at all.
Look, I'm not a sales person but were I a sales person trying to sell swinging to the general public I too would call it polyamory. Committed relationship with multiple people in my opinion is any oxymoron. That's like signing a non-disclosure contract where one of the terms of the contract is that everything can be disclosed to everyone. That defeats the contact, it's no longer a non-disclosure contract. None of this logic would fly in the business world.
Even logistically just common sense, how does the commitment work. "We are in a committed relationship. At the same time I'm in a committed relationship with ten other people." How is that a commitment? Is ten too many? How about five? At what point logistically does it remain commitment? Is it commitment then if it's in a relationship with two people or do these people call themselves bi-committed to distinguish themselves from the polyamorous couples who are tri-committed who distinguish themselves from the quad-committed people. I mean at some point the commitment gets lost and you are just messing with language.
Now, were I directly talking to someone who is, "polyamorous," and they told me logically, "I'm not a swinger because it's just more practical to keep sexual relations between a select few people who I can trust are not having unprotected sex outside of ourselves and risk communicable disease." I would buy that. It's just a practical concern of safe sex. I get it. In that case there is no relationship or concern for relationship or presentation as if there is anything so enlightened as a relationship. It's just safer swinging. I get it. I wouldn't participate in it but I get it.
The moment I call B.S. is when the polyamorous guy or girl tries to distance themselves from the Swinger based on some moral high ground i.e. "they are just having random sex we are doing something deeper." No, you are just having less random sex there is nothing deep, moral or spiritual or even psychologically healthy about what you are doing.
Bold part: I think it's not. Polyamory is just a bit more "looser" definition on the sex life but it doesn't even have to be. I'd say it's more emphasis on the emotional part than on sex part - which is why this whole primary/secondary sex relationship exist or primary/secondary hierarchy in emotional relationships where one partner is primary and other ones may be an occasional fling. I've watched documentary on the whole deal some months ago when someone posted some very useful materials. You may check it out on youtube as well, just search for polyamory over there. It's quite different than what YOU may imagine. Some people kept claiming that none of them had threesomes... which clearly says they aren't really what you MIGHT think (personally, I always thought of polyamory as wild sex, orgies and stuff... cannot be further from the truth).
The whole deal that it's sexually liberating is a joke though - it's all about more complex structure and more potential for jealousy and breakups due to unequal treatment, since polyamorous communities aren't really into indiscriminate sex or into equal-rank relationships. Most guys who get expelled are guys though - generally because they can't figure out this part and generally because of Hollywood depictions where polyamory equals orgies, casual sex and stream of people being brought in continuously.
My point is very clear - polyamory is NOT less drama than monogamy and the whole deal is giving me vibes that it brings more of things that people want to avoid - DRAMA. Only way it makes less of a drama is if they have a casual sex buddy on the side and no serious relationship involvement... it takes no extra effort and they engage sex when the other partner isn't willing, or for a change. Then again, open relationship and casual sex with novelty is definitely better for sexual fulfillment.
Any scenario which includes maintaining serious emotional/friendship relationship with another sexu buddy is definitely a way to add up potential drama in your life. If you watched some of their responses, poly folks tend to claim that it doesn't and that it in fact reduces drama, primarily because their stance is more lax on sexual exclusivity from most mainstream monogamous folks... but I'm sure that they'd have much easier life and much easier relationships if they paired off with someone who thinks the same like they do and simply chose casual sex only.
Well, I'm not an expert on swinging either. I wouldn't be part of that kind of relationship. This polyamory thing just seems more toxic than swinging in my opinion. So, I was wrong swinging isn't polyamory...polyamory is worse...I write that because it seems like you are playing the moral high ground to swingers when I think the swinger has the moral high ground in this instance. Of course normally monogamous people hold the trump card but lets forget about a monogamous relationship.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NilaJones
People make all sorts of poly arrangements, depending on what they want.
Some people are in a group relationship -- for example, 3 or 4 people who consider themselves all 'married', and who have a lawyer draw up documents setting how they will divide child care and expenses if they break up, or inheritance when someone dies, etc.
Well, those legal documents are null and void; polygamy is against the law it's a basic rule of contracts that no court can honor a contract that breaks the law. The state determines fatherhood and motherhood by biology strictly and apportions child support and assets accordingly. Otherwise, I could go out and knock a married woman up and her husband would have to pay the tab strictly because he is married to her i.e. biology trumps the marriage contract.
Now, how is this better and less toxic then swinging or monogamy? At least the swinger can say no children or assets are involved. Again, I'm playing the naive debater here, "those enlightened polyamorous people are all about the relationship and not sex like those dirty swingers."
Quote:
Some people have one main relationship and other 'side' ones -- usually long term, and with people who have their own 'primary' relationships.
That sounds like swinging to me.
[quote]
Some people have that and also have casual, fanatically safe, connections.
[quote]
Yah, I'm pretty sure that is swinging.
Quote:
Some people have one spouse each of two genders.
Don't get what you mean here.
Quote:
Some people feel strongly that it is wrong to prioritise one relationship over another, and they have two or three partners that they are equally committed to, but who are not dating each other.
I kind of covered in a previous post how that is not really possible. I mean, I'm an egalitarian guy and to me this seems like the least noxious but a previous post showed how logistically it doesn't work this way.
So what exactly are you basing your opinions on since you don't know many homosexuals?
Most of the homosexuals that I know are in relationships - with other homosexuals of the same gender that they are in love with. Off the top of my head, the ones that have children - my cousin and his ex-husband adopted 3 boys. They were together for about 20 years and finally separated but live down the street from each other so the boys can go back and forth easily. I know of 3 lesbian couples (again, off the top of my head - there might be more) that are married to their partner and have children that are biologically one of theirs. The other parent is not a "step" parent. They are both the parents - just as parents who adopt children are not "step" parents but simply parents. I know of a gay male couple that has twins with another lesbian couple. They are raising the children together but in two households. I know of another gay male couple that have adopted twins.
All the people I know - straight, gay, bi, transgender - are in romantic relationships with people that they are in love with. Some of them choose to have children, some do not. I don't know anyone in a situation like you are describing and I find it hard to believe that it is common at all.
I'm basing it on a few homosexual people that I do know. I know them in a more casual manner, they're not exactly "my best friends". They aren't strangers to me either.
None of them came out of a common Hollywood scenario as seen in the movies where homosexual couple meets together, falls in love and then opts to have treatment for one of them to have a mutual child.
Like I said, more common outcome is that they already had children with previous partner whom they keep in contact with unless this person is a destructive idiot, or they even live together (as in case of my cousin, who has a lesbian "ex" wife who is still his wife). I'm also not very sure how many lesbians opt to have other partner undergo insemination only to raise someone else's child, without opting to have their own afterwards. In fact, only two lesbians that I know... one of them raises her child alone and opted for artificial insemination, other one raises her child alone after having it in a marriage with a straight guy. We seem to have different experiences.
I claim that there are far too many people excluded from the Hollywood scenario which you seem to repeat to me. I'd be ready to put my money on what I'm saying that plenty of them do opt for artificial insemination/surrogacy on their own without a partner and plenty of them do live "family life" with the person they don't have sex with, while raising children. It seems novelty to you only and yet you seem to have so much experience with homosexual folks.... I think I'll have to put it on hold not to make it off-topic any more. My opinion is that plenty of homosexuals do opt for some polyamorous relationships where they keep the connection with the other biological parent while maintaining the relationship, some of them while living together, while others do opt to be single. This doesn't mean that they keep having sex with the other parent, polyamory is NOT just about sex and I'd say that "it's not primary about sex either". I have no practical experience with polyamory and I can't know exactly what people think.
Once again, our experiences seem to differ drastically. I know Elton John hired a surrogate to raise children with his partner. They are complete strangers to me as well. I can tell you about real-life experience with my cousin. The guy lives next to his current wife and they'd probably live together if his girlfriend would be okay by both of them to live there... which wasn't the case. Thus he moved out with her and lives nearby with her. I'm not arguing that she didn't have romantic relationships, I'm arguing that Hollywood scenario isn't so likely and it seems like 100% of the movies depict it.
I'm basing it on a few homosexual people that I do know. I know them in a more casual manner, they're not exactly "my best friends". They aren't strangers to me either.
None of them came out of a common Hollywood scenario as seen in the movies where homosexual couple meets together, falls in love and then opts to have treatment for one of them to have a mutual child.
Like I said, more common outcome is that they already had children with previous partner whom they keep in contact with unless this person is a destructive idiot, or they even live together (as in case of my cousin, who has a lesbian "ex" wife who is still his wife). I'm also not very sure how many lesbians opt to have other partner undergo insemination only to raise someone else's child, without opting to have their own afterwards. In fact, only two lesbians that I know... one of them raises her child alone and opted for artificial insemination, other one raises her child alone after having it in a marriage with a straight guy. We seem to have different experiences.
I base my argument that there are far too many people excluded from the Hollywood scenario which you seem to repeat to me. I'd be ready to put my money on what I'm saying that plenty of them do opt for artificial insemination/surrogacy on their own without a partner and plenty of them do live "family life" with the person they don't have sex with, while raising children. It seems novelty to you only and yet you seem to have so much experience with homosexual folks.... I think I'll have to put it on hold not to make it off-topic any more. My opinion is that plenty of homosexuals do opt for some polyamorous relationships where they keep the connection with the other biological parent while maintaining the relationship, some of them while living together, while others do opt to be single. This doesn't mean that they keep having sex with the other parent, polyamory is NOT just about sex and I'd say that "it's not primary about sex either". I have no practical experience with polyamory and I can't know exactly what people think.
Once again, our experiences seem to differ drastically. I know Elton John hired a surrogate to raise children with his partner. They are complete strangers to me as well. I can tell you about real-life experience with my cousin. The guy lives next to his current wife and they'd probably live together if his girlfriend would be okay by both of them to live there... which wasn't the case. Thus he moved out with her and lives nearby with her. I'm not arguing that she didn't have romantic relationships, I'm arguing that Hollywood scenario isn't so likely and it seems like 100% of the movies depict it.
It's hard for me to take you seriously when you know very few homosexuals but seem to have come up with a lot of ideas that seem very unfounded to me.
I approve of consensual non-monogamy. I know a number of couples in open or polyamorous relationships and marriages. My first marriage was open/poly toward the end (I casually dated here and there and maintained a relationship later on). Would I elect to go that route again? No, it isn't for me, and my husband is not interested.
That's a jerk response and you know it. You can do better than that.
No, it's not. It's the response of someone who knows a lot of homosexuals. I do know of homosexual men that were married to women and had children - but most of them come from previous generations and they were in the closet because they were afraid to be who they really are. I don't know of anyone who purposely created a family with someone they were not in love with - with both parties agreeing to this non-love arrangement because they wanted to have children together. People falling in love and coupling up is not some Hollywood thing - it's what most people do. Not everyone lives happily ever after but I'd say that the majority of people - gay, straight, transgender, bi, etc. - live their lives this way. You have admitted to knowing few homosexuals yet you believe that many of them create families with opposite gender homosexuals. It's bizarre to me - and whether you think this a "jerk" response or not - it's the only response I have to your posts.
I don't think poly is 'better' than swinging, because I don't think there is anything wrong with casual sex. I just don't happen to know anything about swinging. I have my casual sex in other (non-poly, non-swinging) contexts.
You seem to have some very strong feelings about how other people handle their love lives. I don't much relate to that, either.
No, it's not. It's the response of someone who knows a lot of homosexuals. I do know of homosexual men that were married to women and had children - but most of them come from previous generations and they were in the closet because they were afraid to be who they really are. I don't know of anyone who purposely created a family with someone they were not in love with - with both parties agreeing to this non-love arrangement because they wanted to have children together. People falling in love and coupling up is not some Hollywood thing - it's what most people do. Not everyone lives happily ever after but I'd say that the majority of people - gay, straight, transgender, bi, etc. - live their lives this way. You have admitted to knowing few homosexuals yet you believe that many of them create families with opposite gender homosexuals. It's bizarre to me - and whether you think this a "jerk" response or not - it's the only response I have to your posts.
My "few" are enough for me. I could send you names, linkedin profile names as well and numerous data about them that you can't know unless you know them in-person, info on projects that I worked with them. They aren't really "in closet", people who know them are very familiar with the fact that they are gay and they found that out by knowing them in person - it's just that they don't have the need to join gay parade to proclaim about it. I'm not here to compete you about who knows more homosexuals and I'm not interested in googling celebrities and reading their wikipedia biographies or something, these people are complete strangers to me.
A bit of the information goes to PM instead, one of them was my former boss.
The bold part.... just to tell you - just like there are different kinds of love among non-homosexual people, there are different kinds of love among homosexuals. I'm arguing that there are PLENTY of homosexuals that do practice polyamory of some sort - generally an emotional relationship with the other parent and each of them living with their partner(s). No matter what TV tells you, love and sex are often non-dependent. You can love your parent, sibling, cousin, best friend - without having sex with them. You can love them much more than the person you have sex with. Especially if the relationship with them is a permanent bond such as a child.
You need to differ sexual relationship from love relationship, these things are NOT inclusive and there are plenty of polyamorous couples who maintain different settings - polyamory is not about threesomes or casual sex with different people or something like that. Like I said, I know a few homosexual, none of them had a "Hollywood family" scenario - that is a scenario where they meet another homosexual, fall in love, then one of them undergoes medically-helped procedures (sperm donor/surrogate) to get a child that they'll mutually raise. None. I argue that plenty of them will rather have a child while with another person (often a heterosexual) or they'll opt for the medical procedures as single persons.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
