this post was submitted on 03 May 2025
688 points (98.0% liked)

Lemmy Shitpost

31297 readers
3368 users here now

Welcome to Lemmy Shitpost. Here you can shitpost to your hearts content.

Anything and everything goes. Memes, Jokes, Vents and Banter. Though we still have to comply with lemmy.world instance rules. So behave!


Rules:

1. Be Respectful


Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.

Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.

...


2. No Illegal Content


Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.

That means:

-No promoting violence/threats against any individuals

-No CSA content or Revenge Porn

-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)

...


3. No Spam


Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.

-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.

-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.

-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers

-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.

...


4. No Porn/ExplicitContent


-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.

-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.

...


5. No Enciting Harassment,Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts


-Do not Brigade other Communities

-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.

-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.

-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.

...


6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.


-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.

-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.

...

If you see content that is a breach of the rules, please flag and report the comment and a moderator will take action where they can.


Also check out:

Partnered Communities:

1.Memes

2.Lemmy Review

3.Mildly Infuriating

4.Lemmy Be Wholesome

5.No Stupid Questions

6.You Should Know

7.Comedy Heaven

8.Credible Defense

9.Ten Forward

10.LinuxMemes (Linux themed memes)


Reach out to

All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules. Striker

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] nebula42@lemmy.zip 149 points 1 day ago (5 children)

in case anybody who doesn't know, poly doesn't mean everyone is dating each other. Someone in a poly relationship can date someone who has no interest in dating their other partners. ofc a good rule of thumb is that everyone in this metaphorical web should be able to sit down and have dinner with each other without being mean or violent with each other.

[–] DomeGuy@lemmy.world 62 points 1 day ago (3 children)

While this is certainly a valid form of romance, it's more accurately described as "non-exclusive simultaneous relationships" than a single "polyamorous relationship".

Some people really do live in multi-partner committed households, but those seem most often to be dominated by a single person, such as fringe Mormon polygamy. And the most common form of "polyamory' is probably "affair-tolerant monogamy."

It's a big complicated world, and variations of how humans with form intimate relationships fills all possibilities when there is no enforced legal prohibition. (And,.sometimes, even then.)

[–] SoleInvictus@lemmy.blahaj.zone 28 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

I engaged in the "affair-tolerant monogamy" variant when I was younger. I discovered there's a positive curvilinear relationship between amount of drama and number of romantic partners. I am sometimes barely able to handle my own incidental drama, so it didn't last more than a few years.

Having been divorced from one monogamous relationship

That graph sounds plainly exponential rather than needing its own coordinate system.

[–] vapeloki@lemmy.world 24 points 1 day ago (1 children)

As a poly person: no, it is not a "affiar-tolerant monogamy". That is an open relationship.

Polyamorous partnerships are far more committed. Also, sex is not always a part of it.

Of course there is the concept of a primary partner, but there are lot of poly folks that thislike this idea.

But what all of those relationships have in common: there is no case where only one partner is poly. All is about communication and consent.

And to the core topic: There is this thing like a polycule. A network of people with somehow connected relationships. Breakups in those structures are often consensual and no big fuzz. But if it gets dirty, at least in my experience, the offending member of the polycoule gets shown the door. And most of the times, those are the new ones. People that think the could convince their partner to get monogamous because they are the only one that is needed.

Sorry for the long post, you hit a nerve there ;)

[–] DomeGuy@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago

No apologies necessary*. I certainly wasn't trying to offend, just be accurate in model setting.

A more accurate umbrella term for "affair tolerant monogamy" would probably be "non-monogamous", with the dividing line between that and "polyamory" being exactly what you said : all persons in the relationship cluster knowing the stances of all other participants.

Accurate and non-offensive terminology can be hard.

It does circle us back to OP, though. The answer to "what happens when one couple breaks up in a polucule" is a loud and emphatic that depends on what type of polucule you're in.

(*: no apologies needed from you. To the extent that I caused you any distress I sincerely apologize. Causing pain was not at all my intent.)

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ThatGuy46475@lemmy.world 33 points 1 day ago (2 children)

So it’s like de-federating

[–] VitoRobles@lemmy.today 19 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Explain relationship between people using the Fediverse. Please and thank you.

[–] spacesatan@leminal.space 12 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Fuck, I'll never be able unlink federated social media and polyamory in my head now.

[–] Excrubulent@slrpnk.net 12 points 1 day ago* (last edited 10 hours ago)

Fundamentally they both come from anarchist ways of thinking. If there is no higher order or rule, and nobody has any veto power over anyone else, then the only thing left is to manage each relationship on an equal footing.

Poly for me is about the basic idea that nobody gets veto power over anybody else's relationship, which means exclusivity simply doesn't happen. It's just like if you had a friend that said you weren't allowed to have other friends. That would be weird, and there's no real reason why romantic relationships should be any different.

[–] JasonDJ@lemmy.zip 9 points 1 day ago

La Vie Bohème!

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] WhiteRabbit_33@lemmy.world 92 points 1 day ago (52 children)

There are a lot of different types of poly relationship structures and different names for them. The base unit of relationship is a standard couple where 2 people are together. Add another person in and they can either be in a relationship with only one of those people and form a "hinge" aka "V" or be in a relationship with both of those people and form a "triad" aka "throuple". As many people as those involved consent to can be added this way.

Most of the time it's one person who is in a relationship with multiple people who are each in relationships with multiple people. This forms a "polycule". Where you have the people you're in relationships with aka your "paramours" and they have the people they're in relationships with aka your "metamours". This group of relationships can take many forms and can be drawn out into a cool diagram like a molecule, hence the name polycule.

The people you're in a relationship with can break up with you like in any other relationship and vice versa. It's more complicated when you add in housing situations if you're all living together, multiple people are all dating each other, or if two people are married.

Using one of my breakups as an example:
I've been in a triad where one person broke up with the other. I was then put in the middle of their breakup drama. I set a boundary of not wanting to deal with their drama/shit talking of the other. One of them kept breaking that boundary, so I broke up with that person while still being in a relationship with the other. Luckily I was living with the person I stayed with or that would've been way more complicated.

[–] CommissarVulpin@lemmy.world 59 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

Man I can’t even form a diatomic bond and y’all mfs getting polysaccharides and shit

[–] jecxjo@midwest.social 16 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

I dated a free radical once. Nothing but broken bonds left in her wake.

[–] frozenpopsicle@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 16 hours ago

I thought myself noble, a gas at social gatherings. But, always ended up alone. As if I had a shell that kept people out.

load more comments (51 replies)
[–] Anomalocaris@lemm.ee 63 points 1 day ago (1 children)

gets voted out

slowly takes out an immunity totem i found in a charity shop.

[–] match@pawb.social 41 points 1 day ago (1 children)

the immunity totem is the part of the lease where it says your name and not everyone else's

[–] Anomalocaris@lemm.ee 14 points 1 day ago (3 children)

it must really suck if sudently 2 boyfriend, 3 girlfriends, and 3 non binary partners decide to risk homelessness rather than stay with you.

[–] Hugin@lemmy.world 9 points 1 day ago

I've seen some bad poly breakups. Once where the three all had a falling out. They jointly ownend the house they lived in together. Three were a few months where they all would just stay in their room as much as possible.

One of them finally managed to get a loan to buy my friend out of her share. Now she refuses to be dependent on a partner for housing.

[–] qarbone@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago

If all of them cannot pool together and find another place, then shit's bad enough that you might not notice. As you now will be paying rent on whatever house y'all were sharing.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] straightjorkin@lemmy.world 44 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Imagine getting broken up with by 2 people, both with non-binary haircuts. I'd probably jump into a river and become a trout

[–] SoleInvictus@lemmy.blahaj.zone 18 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

I dove into the desert and became a sand trout.

[–] hakase@lemm.ee 15 points 1 day ago

The Golden Path!

[–] BreadOven@lemmy.world 13 points 1 day ago

B E C O M E T R O U T

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] termaxima@programming.dev 33 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

It is pretty rare for my partners to date each other, so most breakups are usually “normal“. Even when they do, one breakup only concerns the two people involved, unless something really bad prompted it, which has never happened to me directly.

[–] zzx@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Yeah honestly it's pretty normal. Imagine two friends were dating and now they're not. It's not like you all aren't friends anymore

[–] qarbone@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It's because the (western?) default image of a break-up is a messy one. You don't just "remain friends". You fully cut ties and try not to even think of them until 4am.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] bjoern_tantau@swg-empire.de 22 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I wish Caprica wasn't cancelled. I liked their portrayal of a poly group.

[–] SirSamuel@lemmy.world 9 points 1 day ago (3 children)

I can't remember if the show did it, but in The Expanse books poly relationships were part of Belter life, especially on smaller ships

It did: they gave Drummer Michio Pa's story in the last couple seasons.

[–] panic@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 1 day ago (2 children)

On Earth too! One of the main characters (Jim Holden) was raised by a poly family with 8 parents on a ranch in Montana.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] lugal@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Is it worth watching? I liked Battle Star Galactica very much but wasn't convinced enough to watch Caprica

[–] bjoern_tantau@swg-empire.de 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I'd say no. I liked it well enough. But it's frustrating with all the unresolved plotlines.

But it's been a really long time since I've watched it, so maybe there's some awesome stuff I forgot.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] baltakatei@sopuli.xyz 19 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Is there a poly equivalent of something like the Magna Carta?

[–] felixwhynot@lemmy.world 10 points 1 day ago

I have heard of something called the “poly bill of rights” IIRC

[–] straightjorkin@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago

Lemmy needs an out of context community

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] HelixDab2@lemm.ee 5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (5 children)

They mostly don't. Poly people think they do, but you see far, far more relationship volatility in polyerotic relationships than you do in monogamous.

Edit: I see that I'm getting downvoted by the people that are in non-monogamous relationships. Fact is that when you talk to sex-positive sex and relationship counselors, they will almost universally say that functional polyerotic relationships are the equivalent of post-doctoral work, while most people have relationship abilities equivalent to a barely-literate middle school level. It's not that multiamorous relationships are bad or wrong, or that the people that engage in them are wretched examples of humans (...although there are certainly more than a few of those) or anything like that, but to be functional that type of relationship requires a far greater level of self-awareness and honesty than most people are capable of. Hence the reason that they tend to be so volatile; more moving parts, more chances to fuck up.

In my personal experience I have found that most multiamorous relationships are more casual and less emotionally intimate (e.g., more shallow) than monogamous relationships. The people I have personally observed, including my own partners, have had less time to spend with any single person, and were more likely to jettison relationships rather than putting in the hard work to fix problems.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›