new page on my web site

[memevector]

Back in September I invited people to answer some polyamory identity questions, and some of you did. So I thought you might like to read the article which those responses helped me to write.

I've just got around to putting it up, here. It'll be in the "bi-education pack" from now on as well, superseding the previous thing on a similar theme.

Thanks again kboyd, purplerabbits, nitoda, mistdog, alexa_robinson and (after I'd written the article, so possibly saying good things I haven't incorporated - sorry) adjectivemarcus. And thanks also to K who by well-aimed criticisms of the old one provoked me into writing it.

Please feel free to comment on and/or argue about the current version :-)

Comments

[valkyriekaren.livejournal.com]

that's an interesting and well-written article - it debunks a lot of myths about non-mongamous relationships and bisexuality. Thank you for putting it together.

A wee nit pick

[purplerabbits.livejournal.com]

'Tis a good article. the only bit I'd take issue with is:-
"Where three people are each faithful to the other two, that could be called a polyfidelitous triangle."

I don't like the use of 'faithful' in this context and would prefer something like 'have an exclusive relationship with'. Use of the word faithful implies that other ways of doing things are unfaithful, whereas I regard faithfulness as being about keeping promises.

A wee, but well aimed, nit pick

[memevector.livejournal.com]

I totally agree! Thanks!

Don't know how that got past. I don't think it's a sentence I would have written nowadays (as opposed to cut & pasted) - it was one of the bits salvaged from my 1996 polyamory article which has now been superseded.

I will have a think about alternatives.

Yay for the eagle eye of purplerabbits :-)

heh...

[kingginger.livejournal.com]

Thats a pretty cool and useful read...

Already referred a few people to go look at it "for educational purposes"

Easier for them for me to read than for me to recount... again ... and again... and again...

Cheers