Re: [UUPoly-L] Google Knol Article for Polyamory

[John Ullman <jsu627@earthlink.net>]

I've heard all what you wrote below, too, and it just seems 
unnecessary and illogical to me. A relationship is what it is, and 
insisting on an inaccurate label doesn't change that. I have a friend 
who I no longer have sex with. I don't love her less, but I don't 
call her one of my poly partners anymore. The same with another 
partner's partners who I don't have sex with. They are part of my 
poly community, and they are practicing polyamory, but I don't see 
the need to quibble over whether to call them a polyamorous partner. 
Why bother? Polyamory stands for a general concept, and discussing 
the details of what goes on with a real group of real people doing 
real poly takes a lot more words to describe.

John U

Anita Wagner wrote:           (On 08:04 AM 8/4/2008)
> I get where you are coming from on this, John.  From what I've 
> seen/read, the relatively few people who insist that their 
> non-sexual relationship is a poly relationship are generally 
> thinking of (and perhaps confused by) the fact that they have 
> romantic, emotionally intimate feelings for more than one person at 
> a time, but do not have sex with one or more of their partners for 
> whatever reason.   I've heard this from people who due to physical 
> infirmity can't have sex but would if they could.  I'd be hard 
> pressed to tell them their relationship isn't poly.
> And, of course, there are exceptions to everything.
> A bit more prevalent are those who consider their close, emotionally 
> intimate relationships with the partner(s) of their SO to be poly 
> relationships, even though they don't have sex.  It gets even 
> murkier when partners in a V relationship live together and the two 
> points of the V aren't bisexual but share hearth and home, budget, 
> income, childrearing, etc.
> I'm not arguing with you at all, just sharing some observations.