usable001
Awkward Penn
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2021
- Posts
- 478
One of my favorite lines from Men in Black:not-having-a-sense-of-humor is a peeve, too.
**"You're joking."
"No ma'am, we in the FBI do not have a sense of humor that we are aware of."
It was in the middle of the "Bi but..." forum discussion. Somewhere around the time I talked about Fiddler on the Roof.Specifically with regard to your story, what is an example of a sentence you would like to put this hypothetical word into?
There was an era when what was going on inside your head didn't matter—or at least wasn't discussed. Everything was about what you did and less about why you did it. If you did something unacceptable to your family or peers, it was because you failed to "control yourself." The words monogamy and polygamy are both from that era. They are things you did.
Polyamory is a much newer word. It is a word related to how you think.
Heterosexuality and homosexuality (and pedophilia, for that matter) are words that have changed definitions. In the "did era," if a man was having sex with a woman, he was heterosexual. If he had sex with a man, he was homosexual, but wouldn't be considered homosexual before then because he hadn't acted on his thoughts and feelings. People would say, based on his actions, that he had "turned gay." That is, of course, no longer true, not because people are acting differently, but because the way the words are used changed.
So I, someone raised during the transition, am trying to explain how the words and world have changed to someone raised in the "did era" while in a virtual room full of people firmly raised in the "think era" who are confused about why the discussion has to happen at all. I needed to be as precise as possible with my language without being confusing (and still flubbed it several times).
It was at that time that I realized I was missing a word in my toolbox and started this thread.
I did. I started talking about the song "Do You Love Me?" from Fiddler on the Roof... using an example first presented in 1964 to try and explain to both sides that a shift occurred in the first place....maybe what's called for is to consider writing the passage differently so that you use more words to convey what you mean, while still letting the "non-polyamorous" concept hold the same place and serve the same purpose in the story.
Last edited:
