You are viewing tacit

Previous Entry | Next Entry

Still more on the Map of Non-Monogamy

dragonpoly
The Map of Non-Monogamy I've posted on my journal already keeps generating a ton of email, and I've realized that there is still another category of non-monogamous sexual behavior missing from it.

So, here it is yet again, in what is hopefully the final revision (ha!). The Map has gotten quite a lot more complicated, and I've added a number of new examples and clarified some of the old ones. I've also added borders around the various overlapping sections to make them easier to see. Oh, and polyamory intersects with swinging now--it was supposed to from the beginning, and I'm not quite sure why it didn't.

I'm still getting quite a bit of email about the Map, so for the record: Yes, you can re-post or re-blog it provided you give credit and a return link. A couple of folks have emailed asking for permission to translate it into different languages. Same thing; feel free to do so provided you give credit and a return link.

If you translate it or blog about it and you'd like me to link to your translation or article, let me know! I'm also planning, eventually, to add a Sexual Informatics section to the Xeromag.com Web site, which will have this and all the other sexual informatics charts and maps I've done, probably in a more interactive format.

As before, click on the picture to see a much, much larger version.

Comments

( 50 comments — Leave a comment )
Page 1 of 2
<<[1] [2] >>
suzmonster
Sep. 2nd, 2010 02:01 pm (UTC)
Is it weird that now I want to make a 2D chart to mark off the intersection of categories? Looks good, though.
tacit
Sep. 19th, 2010 08:47 am (UTC)
Weird? Maybe. I'm not qualified to say. Hot? Definitely!
merovingian
Sep. 2nd, 2010 09:12 pm (UTC)
It just so happens that "Unicorn Polyamory" is the name of the heroine of my new lurid pulp-fictional novella.

Not really, I just made that up.
pingback_bot
Sep. 8th, 2010 11:53 pm (UTC)
Franklin’s Map of Non-Monogamy
User lovingmorethan referenced to your post from Franklin’s Map of Non-Monogamy saying: [...] Check out this [...]
pingback_bot
Sep. 10th, 2010 09:42 pm (UTC)
Non-Monogamy Map
User feministfucktoy referenced to your post from Non-Monogamy Map saying: [...] , and I totally did) is the Map of Non-Monogamy [...]
(Anonymous)
Sep. 13th, 2010 07:16 pm (UTC)
Up on Savage Love blog
skittenwench
Sep. 21st, 2010 12:17 am (UTC)
ok- I have a challenge for you- How would you fit mine & Bu's relationship on your chart?
He's an asexual, bi-poly geek. I was monogamous before him but I started dating him & as friend of hids at the same time.
Now? we have livedtogether for 8 years & I 'm mostly the only one who goes outside four relstionship with his encopuragement.
I am willing to do casual sex but only if I feel like I know the person.... once, likew 3 or 4 yesrs ago? I got to watvch him have goodbye sex with an old boyfriend (we have an arrabngement that I get to watch when he's with a man)
so..... how would you categporize this? by the way- he gets to meet any & everyopne I ever play with bdsm wise....
orogeny2000
Sep. 23rd, 2010 10:28 pm (UTC)
thanks, this made my afternoon
charlyssa54
Sep. 30th, 2010 02:11 pm (UTC)
Brand *spanking* new!
Just started reading your blog, and I thank you very much it has caused me to get no work done today. :D I love this map, but when I first saw it I screamed at the wonderful chaos of it, then spent the next 30 minutes dissecting it. So thank you, so very much Sir.
mordicai
Oct. 20th, 2010 03:19 pm (UTC)
Bravo, this is a lot of fun.
tixen
Oct. 20th, 2010 03:20 pm (UTC)
This is a totally awesome representation of how these titles interact. Thank you for making this!
eustacecscrubb
Oct. 20th, 2010 06:47 pm (UTC)
I really want to read this but the Comic Sans is making me twitchy...
(Anonymous)
Oct. 24th, 2010 08:45 am (UTC)
Maybe it's used to convey stupidity, but it annoys me as well.
nasu_dengaku
Oct. 21st, 2010 12:25 am (UTC)
Looks like you're the toast of World Statistics Day:

http://www.datapointed.net/2010/10/data-blogs-gone-wild/

(Anonymous)
Oct. 21st, 2010 10:33 pm (UTC)
Not A Map of "Human Sexuality"
You left out almost all forms of sexual orientation. This is a map of Human Sexual "Relational Structures," many of which could be applied to non-heterosexuals. However, your verbal examples decry any attention to non-heteros (except for the bi/gay husband who secretly goes to bathhouses, and the bi/gay women in relationships with men, which is merely another male hetero delight). So, it's a great chart. It's just not what you say it is. It's more limited than your title and description suggest. So, why not just re-title and re-describe it?
tacit
Oct. 21st, 2010 10:46 pm (UTC)
Re: Not A Map of "Human Sexuality"
I don't describe this chart as a map of human sexuality; only as a map of forms of non-monogamy. I did do a map of human sexuality some time ago, but it's an entirely different thing.
Re: Not A Map of "Human Sexuality" - alan7388 - Oct. 27th, 2010 03:56 pm (UTC) - Expand
Re: Not A Map of "Human Sexuality" - innocencest - Oct. 22nd, 2010 03:33 pm (UTC) - Expand
pingback_bot
Oct. 24th, 2010 09:51 am (UTC)
map of non-monogamy
User oroszlan referenced to your post from map of non-monogamy saying: [...] //tacit.livejournal.com/333842.html [...]
pingback_bot
Oct. 25th, 2010 03:47 am (UTC)
map of nonmonogamy
User shagungu referenced to your post from map of nonmonogamy saying: [...] tacit.livejournal.com/333842.html [...]
(Anonymous)
Oct. 25th, 2010 07:53 pm (UTC)
You left out circle jerks
You left out circle jerks
kryschampagne
Oct. 26th, 2010 09:44 am (UTC)
From having talked to sex workers, and being one myself, 'my boyfriend digs that I'm an escort' could probably do with being expanded a bit.

I'm in the 'my boyfriend (husband, actually) digs that I'm an escort' catagory, and we also both have casual partners and are into threesomes (and potentially moresomes if the opportunity arises), we're in theory open to pretty much any forms of sex with other partners of any sex and/or gendedr as long as there's no other romantic involvements.

That's not actually the way most escorts work - for many it's 'my boyfriend accepts that we need the money/I like this job/I won't change who I am for him - but unless money is involved we're monogamous'. Maybe some of these guys think that dating an escort is awesome, but not all of them.

There's also a fairly large number who, having discovered how awesome it is to get paid for sex, absolutely never give it away for free. No boyfriends, no girlfriends, no casual partners - just clients. Who kick themselves for 'giving it away' for so long. A little bitter, not that I'm judgemental :P

Oh, and escorts who'll date and have casual partners while working, but don't want to settle down with anyone until they retire or get a different job because they wouldn't want to marry 'the kind of man' who would be willing to marry an escort. No, I don't get it either, but there's a LOT of them.

Awesome map though, just thought I'd infodump some stuff you might not have thought about. Sources = my life, a couple of real life friends who are in the sex industry, and escort forums online.
(Anonymous)
Oct. 27th, 2010 09:58 pm (UTC)
ditto this comment
I'm in a very similar situation as kryschampagne. My husband digs that I'm an escort and we both enjoy sex with casual partners as well as moresomes. There are no emotional ties with other partners although it's not a condition of our OM. Just the way things have worked out.

That said, I was surprised when talking to other escorts who shared the same viewpoints as in the post by kryschampagne. Just thought I'd chime in because it's rare to find someone else in my situation.

Re: ditto this comment - (Anonymous) - Oct. 29th, 2010 11:19 pm (UTC) - Expand
syredronning
Oct. 26th, 2010 05:20 pm (UTC)
Awesome map. We'd probably land quite in the middle :)
alan7388
Oct. 27th, 2010 03:53 pm (UTC)
> I'm also planning, eventually, to add a
> Sexual Informatics section to the
> Xeromag.com Web site


Dammit Franklin, I still say you've not just one book in you but several.

For your first one, have you given any thought to reconsidering that publisher who had an interest in a book on your own personal life story?

I say this because there are now some good basic polyamory guidebooks out there, so that base doesn't need as much covering as it did when we first talked about it in 2006. But making yourself more widely known as an interesting public figure, as a book would do -- with the attendant book tour, radio, TV, reviews -- would open up wider new audiences for your second book. I'll extend my 2006 offer to any book subject that you want.

I'm reminded (ahem) of H. P. Lovecraft, who spent years writing tens of thousands of brilliant letters to circles of friends, but never got around to producing a book in his lifetime.

Alan M.
Polyamory in the News


(Anonymous)
Oct. 27th, 2010 06:52 pm (UTC)
Final? :-)

Why is there zero overlap between religious/social polygamy and polyfidelity? Where would you put Kerista? They invented the word polyfidelity, and they were a religious/social group. Some people would say they were kind of culty. And are there NO, say, Mormon polygamists who aren't too weird to get into the polyfidelity club? What about Muslims for whom polygamy is permitted, but not required and not a definitive part of their social structure?

Does closed-group swinging deserve so much area? How common is it, really?

Where's celibacy?

Is sex totally definitive of monogamy and non-monogamy? Aren't a lot of those open relationships basically monogamous? Same thing for many forms of cheating, for that matter?

If those get in on the basis of sex, can something get in on a basis OTHER than sex?

What about a relationship where three people are basically married for social purposes, live together, share property, maybe even raise kids... but only two of them ever have sex? Does that also get in, and if so where? Or is it too rare or nameless to consider? Does it matter if two of them are officially married, but they're not the pair who actually have sex? What if none of them ever have sex, but they're still partnered?

What about cheating on the terms of your polyamorous relationship?

lord_colin
Oct. 27th, 2010 10:05 pm (UTC)
Where does "My primary and I can't WAIT to meet IRL, so all her secondaries can stop having her call my name during sex. Also, my secondaries all want to meet her, too. Plus of course, some of my secondaries are hoping to get her in the sack themselves" fit?


It seems SIMILAR to "This is my wife, her boyfriend, my boyfriend, and our girlfriend. her husband will be joining us later" except for the internet/phonesex part. One of my secondaries is ALSO entirely electronic thus far, as is at least one of hers.


Also some Poly/Mono relationships are teledildonic-only.
Don' get me wrong, this thing is FREAKING AMAZING. I was just asking.
(Anonymous)
Nov. 10th, 2010 01:43 pm (UTC)
For fuck's sake, don't use Comic Sans. This graph would be so great without it.
(Anonymous)
Nov. 12th, 2010 10:27 pm (UTC)
We just gave you a shout for this on NakedCity LA
Franklin -- another excellent visual. Here's a link to the post: http://www.nakedcity.com/la/2010/11/its_not_so_complicated_if_you_map_it_out.php

Sincerely,
AV Flox
editor of NakedCity LA, a Village Voice Media property
(Anonymous)
Nov. 24th, 2010 04:55 am (UTC)
100 Mile Rule
I am a bit confused about the 100 Mile Rule. I don't think it can exist outside of either 'open relationship' or 'cheating.' The statement "We're monogamous, except when he's on the road" should fall within open relationships rather than outside of it, because it is inherently an open relationship conditional on physical separation. But the 100 mile rule could also be extended to poly/mono if the rule is one-sided, or possibly even to polyamorous relationships, especially if separation is for long periods or recurrent in the same place.
Page 1 of 2
<<[1] [2] >>
( 50 comments — Leave a comment )
Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by Lilia Ahner