Is it true that a D type can have a slave and a sub and Not be considered Poly?
Yes. You can have a slave and a sub and not be considered poly. The term 'Polyamoury' is an umbrella term that has been bastardized to mean that a person is non monogamous.
Because of this retro fitting of terms people in many types of dynamics claim that they are Poly when there are terms that denote there living style such as, Open Relationship, Swinger, Bi Sexual, Bigamist, Plural D/s etc... I feel the reason for this is do to the negative stigma associated with some of these terms. So, we all become lumped in together. (Which is a different post all together.)
The argument is that Poly means "more than one" and amour means love. So people say, "Why wouldn't these terms apply?" The answer is that the term Polyamoury is traditionally used in reference to 'Polyandry' and 'Polygyny' which are types of marriages that includes more than two partners.
So, if the Dominant has a loving committed dynamic were the sub and slave are regarded as life partners (Which is as close to marriage as we can get in alternative lifestyles.) and are building a family together then yes, he would be considered Poly by the traditional terminology. But, if the Dominant is working toward building a dynamic were the sub and slave are not regarded as life partners and just chattel then I wouldn't consider the Dominant Poly (amorous) because Poly denotes marriage (Love) or a life long commitment.
[Note: People often say that bigamy should technically be considered poly because it includes marriage but bigamy "is the act of entering into a marriage with one person while still legally married to another (Cheating) and neither of the spouses are aware of the other. Poly cannot exist if the people that are in the dynamic are not aware of the relationship or in the case of some dynamics do not agree with the multi-sided dynamic they are in.]
Many Dominants consider themselves Poly because they own multiple subs / slaves but I contend that they are in possession of multiple D/s dynamics which makes that plural D/s. I feel that more Dominant should use plural D/s because so many are not working toward love or life partner status. They just want to own multiple properties or play partners and there is nothing wrong with that.
Because of this retro fitting of terms people in many types of dynamics claim that they are Poly when there are terms that denote there living style such as, Open Relationship, Swinger, Bi Sexual, Bigamist, Plural D/s etc... I feel the reason for this is do to the negative stigma associated with some of these terms. So, we all become lumped in together. (Which is a different post all together.)
The argument is that Poly means "more than one" and amour means love. So people say, "Why wouldn't these terms apply?" The answer is that the term Polyamoury is traditionally used in reference to 'Polyandry' and 'Polygyny' which are types of marriages that includes more than two partners.
So, if the Dominant has a loving committed dynamic were the sub and slave are regarded as life partners (Which is as close to marriage as we can get in alternative lifestyles.) and are building a family together then yes, he would be considered Poly by the traditional terminology. But, if the Dominant is working toward building a dynamic were the sub and slave are not regarded as life partners and just chattel then I wouldn't consider the Dominant Poly (amorous) because Poly denotes marriage (Love) or a life long commitment.
[Note: People often say that bigamy should technically be considered poly because it includes marriage but bigamy "is the act of entering into a marriage with one person while still legally married to another (Cheating) and neither of the spouses are aware of the other. Poly cannot exist if the people that are in the dynamic are not aware of the relationship or in the case of some dynamics do not agree with the multi-sided dynamic they are in.]
Many Dominants consider themselves Poly because they own multiple subs / slaves but I contend that they are in possession of multiple D/s dynamics which makes that plural D/s. I feel that more Dominant should use plural D/s because so many are not working toward love or life partner status. They just want to own multiple properties or play partners and there is nothing wrong with that.