?

Log in

No account? Create an account
Poly visibility - Synchronicity swirls and other foolishness

> Recent Entries
> Archive
> Friends
> Profile
> my rpg writing site

January 5th, 2010


Previous Entry Share Next Entry
05:45 pm - Poly visibility
Yet another article about polyamory. Almost all of the examples are het, but the article does mention that close connection with the bi community. In any case, we're definitely becoming more visible.

(7 comments | Leave a comment)

Comments:


[User Picture]
From:chiashurb
Date:January 6th, 2010 02:44 am (UTC)
(Link)
And it's in my city!!!
[User Picture]
From:athenian_abroad
Date:January 6th, 2010 04:49 am (UTC)
(Link)
Yep, I thought this was an unusually non-terrible article for a mainstream outlet. I was particularly struck by the sub-head, which reads, "It’s called polyamory, and with hundreds practicing the lifestyle in and around Boston, is liberal Massachusetts ready to accept it?" I think this is progress compared with the more common, "Can it possibly work?" focus -- the Globe article proceeds from the inarguable fact that people are actually living this way and draws attention instead to the issue of the attitudes of the mainstream towards this state of affairs. (No, that's not a pun. Really.)
[User Picture]
From:heron61
Date:January 6th, 2010 05:12 am (UTC)
(Link)
*nods* between that and the Newsweek article a few months back, it looks like we're starting to hit major media visibility. My guess is that we'll see poly characters on TV within a year, likely either badly done, or (if we're really unlucky) as crime victims of murderous jealousy/ploy gone wrong, but my guess is that they'll be there. After that, it will be the standard media creep towards acceptance/normalcy.
[User Picture]
From:tlttlotd
Date:January 7th, 2010 11:46 am (UTC)
(Link)
We've been seeing the former for about two years now - Big Love on HBO. It's been done a few times as the latter on basic cable in '00-'02.
[User Picture]
From:heron61
Date:January 7th, 2010 12:03 pm (UTC)
(Link)
Big Love isn't quite the same thing. It seems (to me at least) to be more Mormon plygamy freakshow than polyamory freakshow.
[User Picture]
From:bodlon
Date:January 6th, 2010 06:47 pm (UTC)
(Link)
Nice! A bit basic, but it's nice to see something that in-depth and sympathetic floating around.
[User Picture]
From:kitten_goddess
Date:January 7th, 2010 01:32 am (UTC)
(Link)
I like the definition of polyamory the article gave: everything that is not monogamy or lying about being monogamous is polyamory. That succinct definition allows for deviation from the ideal sometimes presented, which goes something like this:

1. Everything is carefully scheduled and the primary relationship always comes first at all times.

2. Everyone in the group has meetings regularly and talks about their boundaries in a rational and adult manner, no matter how long the meetings take. These can go on for hours.

3. If one person in a relationship is monogamous, the other person must be monogamous too to avoid violating the boundaries of the relationship.

4. Polyamory must N-E-V-E-R be primarily about sex. Otherwise, it is not really polyamory.

> Go to Top
LiveJournal.com