Re: [UUPoly-L] Too many circles, lines, triangles.....

[John Ullman <jsu627@earthlink.net>]

I'm so glad to see you jumping into the discussion. Thanks!

Your posts have made me think it is useful to make the following distinctions:

1. The practice of poly, swinging, etc. This would be the formal 
definitions, i. e. the Morning Glory Zell definition of poly which is 
roughly multiple, concurrent, consensual, sexual, loving, relationships.

2. Practioners of poly, etc. I think it is both vastly oversimplified 
and promotes poor critical thinking to talk about polys and swingers 
as if they were both homogenous groups and mutually exclusive. Any 
accurate description of people who consider themselves poly and or 
swinger would, as your post suggests, have to look at the diversity 
of motivation, personal style, rules, found among the group members 
and the plain fact that the same person could do both practices.

3. The culture associated with or imagined with the practice. Some of 
us associate various cultural trappings with "polys", and I think 
this needs to be looked at objectively. It may be true that people 
who are science fiction fans, pagans, liberals, UU's, etc are often 
found in the poly community, but all these cultural attributes are 
not definitive of or necessary to the practice of polyamory. It is 
formally possible that someone could practice polyamory, ie have poly 
relationships and also be an adulterer, rapist, or even a Republican.

John U