Polyamorous or just not sure?

[alpha_Straye]

...
Oz is right: having one child after another doesn't mean you love the second or third one any less and it doesn't mean that love is taken from the first either. However, time gets divided, so do resources. Eventually there will come a point where the kids cannot be taken care of or loved because there just isn't time or money or whatever in the day to do so. At that point you can feel all the damn love you want for the kids, but are they feeling it from you??

Thats a very interesting analogy. Do families with many children have children who feel unloved and uncared for? i wouldnt know from experience but from hearsay ive usually been given the impression that large families often feel very loved.. even if their time one on one with one person in the family is less than only child families. From what little ive seen, the older children help take care of the younger children and they all go play together etc. i think it becomes a family about the all of them rather than a family all about getting one parents affection as if that were the only source. Whereas an only child is often off alone and lonely and therefore truely needs their parents time and attention alot more.

So to follow the analogy along, from the point of veiw of an only child, thinking they will get only less, dividing what little they get into ever smaller piles, a large family sounds like a bum deal. And yet ive seen many people from large families look quietly pitying at someone when they discover they were an only child.

hmm... well, food for thought. *smile*

[DowntownAmber]

Thats a very interesting analogy. Do families with many children have children who feel unloved and uncared for? i wouldnt know from experience but from hearsay ive usually been given the impression that large families often feel very loved.. even if their time one on one with one person in the family is less than only child families. From what little ive seen, the older children help take care of the younger children and they all go play together etc. i think it becomes a family about the all of them rather than a family all about getting one parents affection as if that were the only source. Whereas an only child is often off alone and lonely and therefore truely needs their parents time and attention alot more.

So to follow the analogy along, from the point of veiw of an only child, thinking they will get only less, dividing what little they get into ever smaller piles, a large family sounds like a bum deal. And yet ive seen many people from large families look quietly pitying at someone when they discover they were an only child.

hmm... well, food for thought. *smile*

The point is not that a small family can provide more love than a large (or that a monagamous relationship provides more focus and attention than a poly), simply that we all need to find a size and number that is manageable to us and fair to the others involved. For some folks, one child is too much because the parent has a career and other concerns etc. and their priorities are other than the care of that single entity. Hell, for some people a friggin' parakeet is too much to cope with! Same situation with romantic relationships - there are certainly enough examples of singularly paired couples that break up because one or the other insn't invested deeply enough. In the case of large families or poly relationships, it's the same deal - if you can deal with the situation without anyone feeling slighted, super. However, if your kids are going hungry and haven't seen you for days; or your third significant other hasn't managed to get you in bed all month because Number Two blows you first and then you fall asleep, well, there might be an issue... :rollseyes:

The number is not the point, the point is that we simply need to realize how much we all can comfortably bite off and chew.