I never had a name for it, other than "a big heart" until recently. Well, there was "sneaking around".
Somewhere along my way I decided honesty was better than hiding. And lucked into a mate who is okay with my being who I am. Prior discussion necessary, at least for me.
I have no concept of superiority of monogamy vs. polyamoury at all. Just some people look at me funny in the grocery store when I mutter something I shouldn't.
I've never loved only one person at a time, (English lacking everything I need to describe "love". I Love my Mom and broccoli.) or ever completely understood the language around it. Love is as it comes to one from someone else, and then unfolds into whatever shape the two or three, or however many choose or can stand to weave between themselves come to.
And as Love goes it doesn't always mean an exchange of bodily fluids. I've had romances trashed by other romances that involved no orgasms whatsoever. I was younger, then, but it happens. We still have no better way of conferring other than words, generally, and I have no answer to what comes next.
It doesn't involve responsibility for one's happiness, it just is. One is happy or not. What one needs of others is a negotiation.
I'm calling into question "What is Love?".
It is all we do. It is care and thought for other living things and people. It is_feeling_. Distinguishing between polyamourous and monogamous is so silly, I can't believe I still flinch at my nature. Male? Female? Positively null. Love is Love, damnit, and comes in a different flavour for each different person one feels it for.
Once you start categorizing it, instead of describing it for an individual, it starts losing its nature. Or maybe love isn't meant to be described at all.
Are we arguing? I thought I was agreeing with you.
Monogomy has never made sense to me, and feels restrictive in much the same was as censorship does. Why should anyone have the right to restrict my contact with other people?
On the other hand, if someone wants to voluntarily restrict their actions, that's their business. I wouldn't push alcohol on a teetotaler.
I'm sorry, my bad. An argument to me is a statement. It leads to discussion and an enlarging of one's concept. Disagreements lead to heated arguments.
We all censor ourselves to some degree, if only to keep ourselves from getting arrested when we don't want to. (Do not throw water balloons into cars with loud thumpy stereos. Just enjoy the thought. Take that hand off that faucet.)
So, no, there's no disagreement. I certainly have naught to say about others' conduct.
Love is still Love and happens as it will. The more I think about it, the worse I can define it. I want to hibernate now.
Certainly if mono-amory feels like restriction to you, or like something that is being imposed on you from outside, it is a pretty good sign you shouldn't be doing it. Maybe not ever, maybe not at a particular time of your life or with a particular partner.
(no subject)
Somewhere along my way I decided honesty was better than hiding. And lucked into a mate who is okay with my being who I am. Prior discussion necessary, at least for me.
I have no concept of superiority of monogamy vs. polyamoury at all. Just some people look at me funny in the grocery store when I mutter something I shouldn't.
I've never loved only one person at a time, (English lacking everything I need to describe "love". I Love my Mom and broccoli.) or ever completely understood the language around it. Love is as it comes to one from someone else, and then unfolds into whatever shape the two or three, or however many choose or can stand to weave between themselves come to.
And as Love goes it doesn't always mean an exchange of bodily fluids. I've had romances trashed by other romances that involved no orgasms whatsoever. I was younger, then, but it happens. We still have no better way of conferring other than words, generally, and I have no answer to what comes next.
It doesn't involve responsibility for one's happiness, it just is. One is happy or not. What one needs of others is a negotiation.
I'm calling into question "What is Love?".
It is all we do. It is care and thought for other living things and people. It is_feeling_. Distinguishing between polyamourous and monogamous is so silly, I can't believe I still flinch at my nature. Male? Female? Positively null. Love is Love, damnit, and comes in a different flavour for each different person one feels it for.
Once you start categorizing it, instead of describing it for an individual, it starts losing its nature. Or maybe love isn't meant to be described at all.
Sorry for the rant.
(no subject)
No matter the medium, I don't easily suffer censorship.
~r
all the fuss
Re: all the fuss
Monogomy has never made sense to me, and feels restrictive in much the same was as censorship does. Why should anyone have the right to restrict my contact with other people?
On the other hand, if someone wants to voluntarily restrict their actions, that's their business. I wouldn't push alcohol on a teetotaler.
~r
all the fuss
We all censor ourselves to some degree, if only to keep ourselves from getting arrested when we don't want to. (Do not throw water balloons into cars with loud thumpy stereos. Just enjoy the thought. Take that hand off that faucet.)
So, no, there's no disagreement. I certainly have naught to say about others' conduct.
Love is still Love and happens as it will. The more I think about it, the worse I can define it. I want to hibernate now.
Re: all the fuss