Polyphilosophical ponderings

[kiya]

Some people, in response to the . . . entertaining argument over on polyamory, have made comments about what beingpolyness means to them.

I was thinking of doing the same thing, but I'm not actually sure I can make the question meaningful enough for me to do so.


Why am I poly? What does it mean?

Well, I can say, and sometimes do, that I've got objections to arbitrarily closing myself off to a particular type of relationship for arbitrary reasons. But this started giving me mental problems when I used it as an identification, because my sexual/relationship orientation contains several arbitrary components. So how do I reconcile having arbitrary relationship cut-offs with having a moral objection to having arbitrary relationship cut-offs? Heh. (I wound up fixing my sense of morality, as it was clearly by that evidence broken. I still have an objection to arbitrarily closing myself off to particular types of relationship for arbitrary reasons, but I no longer think that my orientation not working to allow for the existence of said relationship is arbitrary.)

Is that why I'm poly? Not particularly. I've always been of that opinion.

I could pull out my explanation of my actual orientation and point to that and say 'that's why', never mind that I was poly for a while before I managed to conceptualise that orientation in words. And I'm reluctant to do this, because I have in the past encountered people who didn't believe in some of the aspects of the orientation, or people who didn't believe other aspects were worthy of respect, and generally I don't want to open up to dealing with that sort of shit.

And it's not a why I'm poly either.

Nor is it a part of my religious beliefs, my political urges, or my social engineering conceptualizations. I have no evolution here.

These days the best answer to 'Why am I poly?' seems to be something along the lines of, "Well, I found myself interested in and involved with two people at the same time and said, 'Whoops, I guess I was wrong.'"

"Why" is about as meaningful a question to ask me right now as the question of why I have brown eyes.

What does it mean?

Same sort of thing that it means to have brown eyes.

There's no secret meaning here. No man behind the curtain.

Darkhawk's just this bird, y'know?

Comments

[elisem.livejournal.com]

I seeble thee, in a big t-shirt.

[jenett]

If it helps any, the way I look at the arbitrary limiting is that I have no objections to arbitrary limits, but I'd much rather be the one in control of them, rather than having someone else say "You can only have one of those."

"I don't want more partne rs, I don't really have enough time and energy for the current ones" isn't an arbitrary limit for me. It's looking at reality and going "Ok, not enough time for all the stuff I want to do, and all the things I'd like to have involved."

"I can't have more partners. I already have one, and I'm only allowed one." is arbitrary.

Or, ooh, here's an other option. Difference between "Don't want" and "Can't". Don't wants can be arbitrary,, but they're a different sort of arbitrary. "Don't want to try and make that work, don't want to try that anyway, don't want.. well, whatever." But all of which are different from someone else outside the situation saying "You can't do that."

However, I am bleary, and have had not enough sleep, so I do not know if I'm making sense.¡

[kiya]

Hrum. Thing is, I've got some can't-stuff in my head too.

I'm not sure why it feels different to me to be wired-monogamous and wired-duogamous; I'm pretty sure it's an irrational glitch, but I've got baggage of some sort that seems to be of the impression that one can be not-arbitrary, and N-up-to-limits-of-reasonable-time-energy-and-interest is not-arbitrary, but some specific number N is intrinsically arbitrary.

I'm not sure that made sense.