Thought for the evening

[chanaleh]

Have said before, will say again: There are people in this world that make me earnestly wish for some kind of polyamory draft board. Or at least, y'know, a nominating committee. (Recruitment division? Task force? ;-)

In other news, had lovely Shavuot dinner at Ely & Sara Beth's tonight. Chag sameach, everyone.

Comments

[cos]

I seem to be part of the recruitment committee. If you find the nominating committee, hook me up with them, will you?

[chanaleh.livejournal.com]

Some would argue that I've functioned at times as a recruiting agent myself! However, convincing someone who is naturally monogamous but single to go out with me while I'm involved with someone else, is another story completely from suggesting to someone who is Very Taken that *they* should open their relationship :-)

Hence the nominating board, to send out notices: "Dear happily committed person, We have received such-and-such petition naming you as a desired respondent. Please consider with your primary partner the enclosed arguments in favor of consensual non-monogamy, and return the form below within 30 days..."

[infinitehotel.livejournal.com]

If there was a draft board, does that mean we could also have courts marital?

"You're a disgrace to the uniform! Dishonorable discharge!" :)

Beware of Slippery Freuds

[infinitehotel.livejournal.com]

Um, I meant "courts martial" of course.

Re: Beware of Slippery Freuds

[xiphias.livejournal.com]

Are you certain about that? Your first phrasing seemed more accurate.

Although I shudder to think about precisely what a "dishonorable discharge" would be in that context.

dishonorable discharge

[hammercock.livejournal.com]

Ewwwwwwwwwwwwwww.

[ceo]

Was that typo intentional? :-)

[drbitch.livejournal.com]

"Dishonorable discharge" in this context is also problematic.

[halleyscomet.livejournal.com]

"Dishonorable discharge" in this context is also problematic.

I think you may be a bit premature in that assessment.

[navrins]

Well, you can always nominate and let people decline, right?

There's something sort of... I don't know, oddly appropriate, about needing a second, though.

[dpolicar]

and, presumably, a third.

[dragonfriek.livejournal.com]

If you guys get one, then the monogamous people get one too. :P
I can think of a couple of people I'd like to try to turn back to the dark side...

[chanaleh.livejournal.com]

That's fair, of course!

[laurens10.livejournal.com]

Ooo! Can there be its opposite too -- a polyamory rejection committee?

"I apologize, but your results for this test, sir, indicate that you do not meet the requirements we look for in our new, potential recruits?"

[cos]

... and then, years later, they can re-test?

*withholds further comment* :)

[laurens10.livejournal.com]

Absolutely!

[rjpb.livejournal.com]

Nah, though I think there should be a "Mono Eye for the Poly Guy" show to help those who need such. :)

Old Top-40 Song seems appropriate

[feste-sylvain.livejournal.com]

Take it for a ten-day trial
And if you don't like what you see
You can bring it back after a while
And get your money-back guarantee

Re: Old Top-40 Song seems appropriate

[greenlily.livejournal.com]

I'd add this one:

"Wanted, young man, single* and free.
Experience in love preferred
But will accept a young trainee..."

where "single" = available by his own definition :)

[navrins]

Out of curiosity, do we get to find out what you're *actually* thinking, or just the witty comment it generated? :-)

[chanaleh.livejournal.com]

What, like explain who it is that inspires this sentiment, and the circumstances? I don't think that's either prudent or necessary. (Certainly not in this public entry, anyway!)

[halleyscomet.livejournal.com]

But inquiring minds want to know!

[bethr.livejournal.com]

However, as we all know, "identifying as" and "being" non-monogamous are two very different things:

* People who very publicly proclaim their poly-ness, and yet when confronted with it in real life they can't handle it; and

* People who had never even considered it as something they might do, fall into the situation, and find it works for them. And they still don't publicly identify as anything.

so people in the first category you wouldn't even need to draft, they'd be like "Pick me! Pick me!", and then you might find they sucked. And people in the second category might not even heed the draft board summons, thinking that the draft board had the wrong person.

[OK. must stop now. Before I start ranting. Beth's Polyamory Rants tend to make people very angry at her, and she's not in a provocative mood right now.]

[chanaleh.livejournal.com]

The purpose of the draft board notice would not be an attempt to alter the respondent(s)' self-identification; it would be an attempt to get them involved with the specific petitioner as a secondary partner. ;-)

However, I very much hear ya.

[halleyscomet.livejournal.com]

I dunno. I'd think a Hallmark card and some flowers could work nicely.

Perhaps a note with a limerick?

Then again, if their partner is the jealous type you could find yourself in a difficult situation.

Being in a monogamous relationship, I'd say the odds are good this mystery person would be flattered by the offer, even if they turn it down.

At that point, you get stuck in the back of their mind, and if their current relationship ever sours and you're still friends with them, they might decide to take you up on the idea.

You never know until you ask.

[cos]

People who very publicly proclaim their poly-ness, and yet when confronted with it in real life they can't handle it

laurens10's suggestion ought to handle them.

[pressburger.livejournal.com]

Polyamory draft board. Hmn. You could start an LJ group. I might even join.