To request mumsnet to add a 'polyamorous families' section under parenting?

[whycantwegoonasthree]

There's every other kind of family type, pretty much, and polyamorous families have some unique joys and challenges that it would be nice to share and discuss.

Or maybe we're the last frontier and even MN aren't ready to go there.

Yet.

Thanks, OP, for answering my question.

I guess I'm just very uncomfortable with a system that requires a language of its own in this way, not for convenience but seemingly to convey a sense of mystery or secrecy?

That's just the impression I get. It seems very much like playing a complicated game.

Whatever floats your boat, though.

MotherKat you are a good example of someone who's genuinely poly.

I don't see why you couldn't talk about it here.

Stop being so reasonable, Hamster.

phequer but she could do, if she wanted to. She has the ability to do that. She is not monogamous.

So could anyone though. That doesn't make us all polyamorous.

My fuckbuddies were friends of mine so we had a 'relationship' outside of sex. They knew each other and were happy with the arrangement. We didnt have any sort of shared finances, but there are marriages without shared finances?

Twinkelstein if she's happy in her current relationship/s (sorry to speak for you OP) and identifies as polyamorous then she's polyamorous! How is this not obvious?

What bimandbam said.

Oh i see, its about identifying again...!!

MotherKat anyone who's spent any time on MN knows AIBU is never a safe space to discuss anything! A dedicated thread or forum on poly parenting would be trolled a good deal less than AIBU, and those who were interested could find it on a quick search.

Worra yes, hypothetically, everyone could have polyamorous relationships if they so chose. This is definitely true.

And you shoukdn't assume:

• that either I or OSO want a 24/7 cohabiting relationship with this person or indeed anyone else
• that OSO don't have a relationship because we're not sexual with each that isn't different to an ordinary friendship
• that any of us are people likely or willing to be taken advantage of
• that sex is the primary motivating factor in any of this

Yes but simply identifying as something, doesn't make you that something.

I could identify as a Lebanese mountain goat but that wouldn't make me one.

The OP is the other woman. She is not polyamorous.

Hi MotherKat another poly married woman here. I agree with you and will PM you too as I'd love to find somewhere online that is a safe space for poly folks, it's not happening here. Which is a shame. Our city has an active poly meet up group and plenty of poly folks around but it seems to be impossible to discuss sensibly here.

I could identify as a Lebanese mountain goat but that wouldn't make me one.

I guess today you can make anything into a 'thing' and then fight for rights about.

As for 'fluid bonded' wtf is that the new trendy one going around.

Yes my DP would be fine with me having another DP, and has been in the past. We would talk about the nature of the relationship and how it would work for the three of us, the expectations we have for it, and, perhaps any limitations that might be placed on it - although we don't like to do that, because relationships change.

But right now, I'm a bit too busy and a bit too tired for another relationship and quite happy as I am so don't feel I need one or that I've met anyone I want to have a relationship with (probably because I'm not looking).

So people whose sexuality and romantic lifestyles do not fit in to your definition of what's normal and acceptable are met with hostility and are the butt of your jokes?

Sounds a lot like how gay people were treated until very recently, and in fact still are by people we call bigots.

Shame on this thread. Fucking shame on you.

OP, please leave them all to it. Tolerance will not be found in AIBU. Start a thread in site stuff and you'll get support from me there.

I don't think "fluid bonded" is in common parlance. It's just a normal thing for people in normal committed relationships, it doesn't need a name usually.

I'm sorry. I am ignorant about this. Perhaps if you had a safe place to discuss it you wouldn't need other people to approve of it, because you would have each other.

I have been unkind and I hope I haven't been taken too seriously, not enough to cause harm anyway - some of what I said I meant, but other things were unnecessary.

If you're happy with your set up I don't see a problem. In relation to introducing children I would introduce it gradually, see how they like him and build it up. What I would do it protect your finances for your children's sake. I would say that however many people he or you are with. The pooling of finances would make me worry unless a financial advisor had cast an eye over it.

It's got nothing to do with tolerance. If people want to be in a genuine poly relationship then that's up to them. But this doesn't sound like that. It sounds like a man with a family and an OW. It's completely different.

I dont think anyone has been intentionally unkind here
We're just a bit...baffled that your relationship is what would be considered PA. Its not what we are all picturing in our heads, and yes, that is our own issue but we cant work through it without discussing it? Iyswim?

I would describe myself as polyamorous even though I don't currently have any other relationships - I may do in the future and have done in the past, although they were very much secondary, and not all sexual in the traditional sense.

Are the posters of the opinion that the OP cannot be poly because she is not engaged in multiple relationships right now also of the opinion that a bisexual person "becomes" gay or straight if they are in a monogamous relationship with one person?