Re: [UUPoly-L] Polyamory vs. Swinging

["Laura Stewart" <lonelocust@gmail.com>]

Hmm, interesting point.  I think you'd have to at least make a
triangle-shaped continuum, not just a two-sided continuum.  While one
side of a linear continuum could clearly be "strict monogamy", what
would end up on the other side would be unclear.

-Laura

On 12/1/06, Doug Walters <dougwalt1@comcast.net> wrote:
> I see the list venturing into the poly and swing distinctions.  I'm this and
> not that.  Well I'm that somewhat and does that mean I can't be some of this
> also.  I think of trying to distinguish between polyamory and swinging is
> similiar to the discussion a few years ago about being straight or gay.  You
> were one or the other.  Bi-sexuals were just people that wouldn't make up
> their minds.
>
> Then Alfred Kinsey, a famous sex researcher, created a scale for
> understanding sexual orientation during his groundbreaking research in the
> 1940s. He put heterosexuality on one side of the scale and homosexuality on
> the other, leaving plenty of room in the middle for the ambiguities of life.
> And yes it is not a perfect representation of sexual orientation in that it
> is too simple.
>
> However it helps me to think of relationship orientation as being on a
> continuem.  Monogomist on one end and non-monogomist on the other end.
> Along the scale you sprinkle titles.  Single partner marriage, poly
> fidelity, open relationship, cheating, swinging, and so on.  I'm not sure
> how to actually construct such a representation.  Has anyone done that or
> seen a paper on the subject?
>
> Thank you,
>
> Doug W
> Portland, OR
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> The UUPoly-L mailing list has public archives.
> Please keep that in mind when deciding how much to reveal about yourself.
> UUPoly-L mailing list
> UUPoly-L@uupa.org
> http://www.uupa.org/mailman/listinfo/uupoly-l