Comments on: Join the Dust of the World http://www.polyamorousmisanthrope.com/2008/01/28/join-the-dust-of-the-world/ Wielding the Stick of Grandmotherly Kindness Thu, 28 Aug 2008 04:00:48 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.1 By: Goddess of Java http://www.polyamorousmisanthrope.com/2008/01/28/join-the-dust-of-the-world/#comment-3315 Goddess of Java Tue, 29 Jan 2008 02:26:25 +0000 http://www.polyamorousmisanthrope.com/2008/01/28/join-the-dust-of-the-world/#comment-3315 Well, Olga, I think you're going to have different things obsess you at different times. There was a time when my mind was on my relationships and I think it was valid. Right now it's on my career, and I think that's valid, too. But in my "goals for the year" for myself, I try to balance health goals, business goals and relationship goals -- with the relationship one being focused on making sure the people I'm close to know I appreciate them. But the balance is important. Well, Olga, I think you’re going to have different things obsess you at different times. There was a time when my mind was on my relationships and I think it was valid.

Right now it’s on my career, and I think that’s valid, too.

But in my “goals for the year” for myself, I try to balance health goals, business goals and relationship goals — with the relationship one being focused on making sure the people I’m close to know I appreciate them.

But the balance is important.

]]> By: Olga http://www.polyamorousmisanthrope.com/2008/01/28/join-the-dust-of-the-world/#comment-3310 Olga Mon, 28 Jan 2008 19:56:43 +0000 http://www.polyamorousmisanthrope.com/2008/01/28/join-the-dust-of-the-world/#comment-3310 You're making a great point. I think poly has a way of taking over one's brain, given both the joys and the complications. One of my best friends (not poly, so she has an external perspective on this) noted yesterday that I talk about it with more excitement than about my work. (Maybe that's healthy... maybe not :)) So there's a certain amount of deliberate work required to keep things in perspective. You’re making a great point. I think poly has a way of taking over one’s brain, given both the joys and the complications. One of my best friends (not poly, so she has an external perspective on this) noted yesterday that I talk about it with more excitement than about my work. (Maybe that’s healthy… maybe not :)) So there’s a certain amount of deliberate work required to keep things in perspective.

]]> By: Alan http://www.polyamorousmisanthrope.com/2008/01/28/join-the-dust-of-the-world/#comment-3309 Alan Mon, 28 Jan 2008 15:53:38 +0000 http://www.polyamorousmisanthrope.com/2008/01/28/join-the-dust-of-the-world/#comment-3309 We have friends who got this "Uh-oh" look at us when we told them about my rekindled interest in polyamory. Not because they were weirded out by the concept... but because a friend of theirs had gone overboard into it, became way evangelistic, and said *everyone* should become poly (starting with her friends) or there was something wrong with them. Not a good example. I had some reassuring to do, that I'm not a One True Wayer and that they get very little respect in the community. My own guess is that, in maybe the 24th century when the world has become as poly-friendly as a Heinlein story and people are as secure and together as Lazarus Long and company (assuming we haven't blown ourselves up before then), 80 or 90 percent of people will still be choosing monogamy at any given time -- if only because it's simpler. I decided this from looking at the poly world today. There are a lot more open couples and vees than full-up triads; more triads than quads; more quads than quints. The trend: the more complex the relationship form, the less common it is. Extrapolate this graph in the other direction, and it points to couples being naturally the most abundant. Although, when you extend the graph to larger numbers I think the curve starts going the other way. Large networks -- squiggles or tribes -- seem especially stable and comfortable overall and seem to be getting more common around here (pretty urban), even if there's a fair amount of changeableness within them. We have friends who got this “Uh-oh” look at us when we told them about my rekindled interest in polyamory. Not because they were weirded out by the concept… but because a friend of theirs had gone overboard into it, became way evangelistic, and said *everyone* should become poly (starting with her friends) or there was something wrong with them. Not a good example. I had some reassuring to do, that I’m not a One True Wayer and that they get very little respect in the community.

My own guess is that, in maybe the 24th century when the world has become as poly-friendly as a Heinlein story and people are as secure and together as Lazarus Long and company (assuming we haven’t blown ourselves up before then), 80 or 90 percent of people will still be choosing monogamy at any given time — if only because it’s simpler.

I decided this from looking at the poly world today. There are a lot more open couples and vees than full-up triads; more triads than quads; more quads than quints. The trend: the more complex the relationship form, the less common it is. Extrapolate this graph in the other direction, and it points to couples being naturally the most abundant.

Although, when you extend the graph to larger numbers I think the curve starts going the other way. Large networks — squiggles or tribes — seem especially stable and comfortable overall and seem to be getting more common around here (pretty urban), even if there’s a fair amount of changeableness within them.

]]> By: Sarah http://www.polyamorousmisanthrope.com/2008/01/28/join-the-dust-of-the-world/#comment-3308 Sarah Mon, 28 Jan 2008 14:01:04 +0000 http://www.polyamorousmisanthrope.com/2008/01/28/join-the-dust-of-the-world/#comment-3308 1. Yes : The poly community I involve myself with is primarily online, though I do know more than my fair share of poly folk in my state of residence I find more true comradery in the area online as it's not nearly so limited as my immediate community is. 2. Yes: Absolutely. Many in fact. Most of the people I talk to and associate with on a daily level are my friends who have similar lives due to the nature of our spouses jobs (military). I would say that my closest friends are monogamists 3. Yes: Indeed, I work for free at a consignment shop for zip pay - what we sell benefits local charities and events, and I lead several other local community activities through the Spouses association here on base. 1. Yes :
The poly community I involve myself with is primarily online, though I do know more than my fair share of poly folk in my state of residence I find more true comradery in the area online as it’s not nearly so limited as my immediate community is.

2. Yes: Absolutely. Many in fact. Most of the people I talk to and associate with on a daily level are my friends who have similar lives due to the nature of our spouses jobs (military). I would say that my closest friends are monogamists

3. Yes: Indeed, I work for free at a consignment shop for zip pay - what we sell benefits local charities and events, and I lead several other local community activities through the Spouses association here on base.

]]> By: soapwench http://www.polyamorousmisanthrope.com/2008/01/28/join-the-dust-of-the-world/#comment-3307 soapwench Mon, 28 Jan 2008 13:54:17 +0000 http://www.polyamorousmisanthrope.com/2008/01/28/join-the-dust-of-the-world/#comment-3307 It's ironically cool to read this, because one of the first things I realized, in dating a polyamorous man, was that just as he had to balance all the women in his life, I had to balance this new "tribe" with my created family; that I had to not neglect those that I love and have history with for a fun, new discovery. It’s ironically cool to read this, because one of the first things I realized, in dating a polyamorous man, was that just as he had to balance all the women in his life, I had to balance this new “tribe” with my created family; that I had to not neglect those that I love and have history with for a fun, new discovery.

]]>