Delicious LiveJournal Links for 8-9-2010

[andrewducker]

• Why Parents Hate Parenting
  (tags: parenting psychology children happiness narcissism)
• Miracle spray-on glass reduces bacteria by 25-50%
  (tags: glass nanotech technology health)
• Elgin Park - amazing models of small town America
  (tags: photography architecture models cars photos)
• Some awesome Sucker Punch illustrations
  (tags: movies ZackSnyder illustration)
• Polyamory gains strange traction in the mainstream: except we're calling it monogamy
  (tags: relationships polyamory monogamy)
• Coke is claiming that no sensible person would believe their advertising
  Americans now get nearly 25 percent of their calories from liquids. The quickest, most reliable way to lose weight is to cut down on liquid calories by reducing or eliminating beverages that have added sugar.
  (tags: coke health food)
• The Graphing Calculator Story - very few computing stories could be described as Epic, but this one definitely is.
  (tags: apple history programming mac graphing calculator)
• Emotional Rejection correlated with increases in inflammation response linked to asthma, arthritis, etc.
  (tags: emotion asthma rejection)
• Mr Runner - a frustratingly old-school hard platformer
  (tags: games)
• All new homes to run on green power by 2016
  (tags: environment power uk electricity)

Comments

[marrog.livejournal.com]

The type of polygamy described by that article is extra-pair bonding, and when it occurs in songbirds, we still call those songbirds monogamous.

I'm just saying.

I would certainly draw a distinction between 'polyamory' and 'open relationships' - and I'd be okay* with an open relationship being described as monogamous or polyamorous. I can see reasons for using either distinction. When I talk about what I personally 'get' or could ever see myself having been a part of, I tend to draw a distinction between 'open (monogamous) relationship' and 'polyamory'.

I know that that would mean that a lot of people who call themselves 'polyamorous' I would call 'open-monogamous' or whatever, but then everyone draws their lines in different places and that's okay as long as there's mutual respect, right?

I think that where a relationship has a 'primary' partner to whom some unique level of faithfulness is shown and with whom all other relationships are on some level negociated, for example where there's a power of veto or a line that can't be crossed with secondary partners, then there's a pretty solid argument for calling that relationship 'monogamous' if you want to.


*'Okay' lexically rather than morally I mean - morally people can do whatver they want and call it whatever they want.

[innerbrat]

Yeah, I think my thinking is along the same lines.

I differentiate between 'relationships' and 'sex'* in which the former defines your familial state (with or without children - a committed, long term partnership of two or more adults is still a 'family'), and the other is no one's business but your own.

To me, monogamy is a state of being in a committed life partnership with one person. Whether sex happens outside (or even within) that relationship is no ones business except the people having (or not having) the sex.

*Academically at least. I am not comfortable with sex outside my own, monogamous relationship. I consider this a function of my own issues with sex and relationships.