This is prettymuch exactly my view. Viewing another human being as property is unethical. One should communicate with ones partners to come to a relationship structure where all parties feel free and secure. And where all parties involved remain their own distinct individuals, rather than being reduced to being just part of a larger group.
I hate generic pet names!! Ones that are created in a relationship are much better, and mean much more. One I use is I call my wife "Love Bunny" or saying good bye I say "love you bunny." It was actually a slip of the tongue early in our marriage but she liked it so. . .
I agree for the most part, I don't think anything of it if someone calls their lover Hon or some such offhandedly (I've probably even done it), but yes for the most part I believe that pet names should be unique to the individual. I think every lover should have a special name that embodies how they make you feel (actually I tend to give all my platonic friends nicknames too).
In fact I had one relationship where our pet names for eachother became so prevalent that it sounded weird when one of us would use another's real name.
This was the same relationship where my pet name for one of my lovers was "Piggy", which we found hilarious, because everyone thought I was calling her fat, when really it was a quote from Invader Zim, "I loveded you Piggy" (We where doing a marathon the night we first hooked up).
Ha. I thought "sweet patootie" was your term of endearment for that lucky person. Would I be correct to think of your "pet names" as things best said in private? (hmm. I suppose that's a judgment call. If anyone ever called me so much as a patootie in public, I might feel unhappy about it).
Many of my relationships haven't even had one of those. In one non-romantic relationship, I invent new pet names as a matter of routine. The manifest chastity of the relationship keeps me from feeling embarrassed.
Not sure where to ask this, so thought I would start here. Did anyone listen to the Minx on Polyamoryweekly this week and hear the guy that was saying that true Christians can be sex positive? I love listening to The Minx, but this guy seemed to have little understanding of his own tradition. I would be interested in others' views who listened.
For me being polyamorous is about being genuine with the people I care about--as opposed to saying "I'm married now so I can't really hang around with this friend b/c that might get weird", etc. It also means having whatever kind of relationship feels right for us, instead of putting it into little categories.
I don't have as many detailed or theoretical discussions as some people. I just happen to have a few different relationships and it's one detail of my life. I don't need to talk about it; I just live it! I also don't like to act like polyamory is superior to monogamy (although the idea of "emotional infidelity" does rather make me puke). Maybe polyamorous people are reacting to the monogamous dismissing us as sex addicts, unable to commit, etc--but in reality there are pluses and minuses to both relationship types and some people really do prefer to be in a one-person relationship. Some have described this preference for mono or poly as similar to sexual orientation
I also don't like to act like polyamory is superior to monogamy (although the idea of "emotional infidelity" does rather make me puke).
Oh, hurrah! I really love it when someone who has just discovered the idea of ethical non-monogamy tosses out statements like "I've been poly all my life!". As if they were toddling around thinking of their perfect triad when they were in footy pajamas. Or, that whole poly evangelist thing... I find it tiresome.
I agree with you... there are plusses and minuses to all sorts of relationships.