Polyamory!

[Comrade Kane]

Polygamy is a sexual specialization in adultery, there is always a niche for the irresponsible to thrive when the majority remain responsible.

 

[_a_A_C_c_]

while there may be some poly relationship that subjugate women and are based on outdated ideals, it is hyperbole to say that all polygamous relationships are loveless affairs where both partners are just looking for new people to fuck. it is also absurd to say that people in non-monogamous relationships can't feel a close bond with another person.

 

[Comrade Kane]

while there may be some poly relationship that subjugate women and are based on outdated ideals, it is hyperbole to say that all polygamous relationships are loveless affairs where both partners are just looking for new people to fuck. it is also absurd to say that people in non-monogamous relationships can't feel a close bond with another person.

I agree. However I was merely responding in kind to the original poster so he could see how his comment seemed to me.

 

[lola]

Good on you for being happy with who you are but you should've stopped before telling other people their types of relationships are bad and wrong.

I agree with you here, I have friends who are clearly happy in monogamous relationships, so who am I to tell them how to love? But I also know I’m different from them. In a sense I think it’s not dissimilar to having a different sexual orientation from the societal “norm”. Which is why I’m confused how you can say this and then write:

Monogamy has evolved to be the dominant and most natural relationship form... Poly is traditionally most often about subjugation of multiple women to men.

Polygamy is a sexual specialization in adultery, there is always a niche for the irresponsible to thrive when the majority remain responsible.

Firstly, there are plenty of studies demonstrating we are not necessarily a monogamous species. Sex at Dawn is the latest paperback publication (but there are hundreds of studies) taking an evolutionary perspective looking at historical and biological evidence that sperm competition historically took place inside the woman (e.g. women had sex with multiple partners) and that children were in fact brought up collectively in small communities in hunter gatherer societies. It is argued that only the move to agriculture – which wasn’t so long ago – led to the view of women as “property” and the creation of the jealously guarded “nuclear” family unit. There is a great deal of evidence to support this (and if you think about it, it makes much more sense that children were brought up in communities, as the smaller unit of man+woman would be less likely to survive) so I do suggest you get your facts straight.

Secondly, polyamory is distinct from polygamy and in fact more closely related to feminism and secular ideas than polygamous harems. For example, "Polyday" in the UK is organised by members of the feminist network. From a feminist website, http://www.thefword.org.uk/blog/2011/04/feminism_and_re_1:

"It is the self-constructed nature of these [non-monogamous] relationships which I believe gives them the potential to be empowering. Because partners tend to create their own guidelines for how they want their relationships to work, there are fewer cracks through which insidious power-dynamics may creep. Making the implicit explicit, especially in terms of consent, can only be a good thing. This is especially true for women given the historical dominance of men in heterosexual relationships, and the perpetuation of this in contemporary society. Really, it is not the non-monogamous format of the relationships that engender this difference, but the necessity for clear communication when several partners are involved. There may, however, be an issue that monogamy is such a pre-formed social institution that there is a greater risk of unspoken rules. As Red Chidgey quotes Tristan Taormino in a previous F-Word post:Nonmonogamous folks are constantly engaged in their relationships: they negotiate and establish boundaries, respect them, test them and, yes, even violate them. But the limits are not assumed or set by society; they are consciously chosen.”

it's ONLY modern society which allows you to be poly for otherwise you'd have a herd of children to all different women without supporting them all and most of them would starve to death and thus your poly genes would not be passed on as much as that of a monogamous man who looks after his kids.

I agree that in more modern history, e.g. between the move from hunger-gatherer tribes to the invention of effective contraceptives in the 60s there was a high price to pay for non-monogamy and consequently it was perhaps less popular. But to go as far as saying it isn’t physiologically natural to our species is something many scientists will disagree with. Another interesting publication is Mating in Captivity, which explores the way that animals in captivity (and many couples in mono relationships) stop having sex. Asserting control over your partner’s sexuality is a real libido killer for many people. Top this with the nearly 50% divorce rate in the Western world, and the huge amount of infidelity in supposedly monogamous relationships, and there is considerable evidence to suggest that the way we currently “do” heterosexual monogamous simply isn’t working for a hell of a lot of people.

Can we look at you (again, highly judgemental) assertions – and again, can I point the double standards in asking for others not to make assumptions and judgements about your lifestyle choices while doing to same to us:

Without monogamy you will never feel the special closeness of such a bond and for that I pity you, but then poly is about fresh meat, not love.

I am fully willing to accept that this is how it feels to you. But this isn’t some universal truth since everyone is different in the way they express love. I feel closer to my SO than I did with my ex-husband, who I also loved with all my heart, in my monogamous marriage. This is because my SO understands me and allows me to express this side of my sexuality, respects me for who I am, gives me my freedom and loves me without wanting to change me or put me in a box I don’t quite fit into. This makes me love him more and makes our bond feels more intimate and special, because we can share this as well. He is the first person I call if I had a good or bad day, waking up next to him is always special and even after two years we always sleep spooned and rarely argue. We never finish a conversation without saying “I love you” and always look after each other, be it if one of us is ill, strapped for money or simply needing support.

Who are you to lecture anyone about the quality of their connection with another human being? I don’t tell you how you feel. Just because our way of loving and connecting with other people is in a minority doesn’t mean it’s wrong.

 

[StAy HiGh]

If you can have multiple relationships and feel loved and at peace with it (and the same is reciprocated) then go for it! If you feel truly happy with many partners then more power too you.. I almost envy you in fact for being able to love with more than one person.

However, in today's modern society poly is the minority.. If poly was adapted as a cultural norm the world as we know it would be very different. Monog sets a foundation for the family structure. I read an interested article on this :

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/01/120124093142.htm

 

[Comrade Kane]

I agree with you here, I have friends who are clearly happy in monogamous relationships, so who am I to tell them how to love? But I also know I’m different from them. In a sense I think it’s not dissimilar to having a different sexual orientation from the societal “norm”. Which is why I’m confused how you can say this and then write:





Firstly, there are plenty of studies demonstrating we are not necessarily a monogamous species. Sex at Dawn is the latest paperback publication (but there are hundreds of studies) taking an evolutionary perspective looking at historical and biological evidence that sperm competition historically took place inside the woman (e.g. women had sex with multiple partners) and that children were in fact brought up collectively in small communities in hunter gatherer societies. It is argued that only the move to agriculture – which wasn’t so long ago – led to the view of women as “property” and the creation of the jealously guarded “nuclear” family unit. There is a great deal of evidence to support this (and if you think about it, it makes much more sense that children were brought up in communities, as the smaller unit of man+woman would be less likely to survive) so I do suggest you get your facts straight.

Secondly, polyamory is distinct from polygamy and in fact more closely related to feminism and secular ideas than polygamous harems. For example, "Polyday" in the UK is organised by members of the feminist network. From a feminist website, http://www.thefword.org.uk/blog/2011/04/feminism_and_re_1:

"It is the self-constructed nature of these [non-monogamous] relationships which I believe gives them the potential to be empowering. Because partners tend to create their own guidelines for how they want their relationships to work, there are fewer cracks through which insidious power-dynamics may creep. Making the implicit explicit, especially in terms of consent, can only be a good thing. This is especially true for women given the historical dominance of men in heterosexual relationships, and the perpetuation of this in contemporary society. Really, it is not the non-monogamous format of the relationships that engender this difference, but the necessity for clear communication when several partners are involved. There may, however, be an issue that monogamy is such a pre-formed social institution that there is a greater risk of unspoken rules. As Red Chidgey quotes Tristan Taormino in a previous F-Word post:Nonmonogamous folks are constantly engaged in their relationships: they negotiate and establish boundaries, respect them, test them and, yes, even violate them. But the limits are not assumed or set by society; they are consciously chosen.”



I agree that in more modern history, e.g. between the move from hunger-gatherer tribes to the invention of effective contraceptives in the 60s there was a high price to pay for non-monogamy and consequently it was perhaps less popular. But to go as far as saying it isn’t physiologically natural to our species is something many scientists will disagree with. Another interesting publication is Mating in Captivity, which explores the way that animals in captivity (and many couples in mono relationships) stop having sex. Asserting control over your partner’s sexuality is a real libido killer for many people. Top this with the nearly 50% divorce rate in the Western world, and the huge amount of infidelity in supposedly monogamous relationships, and there is considerable evidence to suggest that the way we currently “do” heterosexual monogamous simply isn’t working for a hell of a lot of people.

Can we look at you (again, highly judgemental) assertions – and again, can I point the double standards in asking for others not to make assumptions and judgements about your lifestyle choices while doing to same to us:



I am fully willing to accept that this is how it feels to you. But this isn’t some universal truth since everyone is different in the way they express love. I feel closer to my SO than I did with my ex-husband, who I also loved with all my heart, in my monogamous marriage. This is because my SO understands me and allows me to express this side of my sexuality, respects me for who I am, gives me my freedom and loves me without wanting to change me or put me in a box I don’t quite fit into. This makes me love him more and makes our bond feels more intimate and special, because we can share this as well. He is the first person I call if I had a good or bad day, waking up next to him is always special and even after two years we always sleep spooned and rarely argue. We never finish a conversation without saying “I love you” and always look after each other, be it if one of us is ill, strapped for money or simply needing support.

Who are you to lecture anyone about the quality of their connection with another human being? I don’t tell you how you feel. Just because our way of loving and connecting with other people is in a minority doesn’t mean it’s wrong.

I agree and where I don't agree it's not important enough to distinguish, however I was responding in kind to reactionary comments from the above homosexual poly when he claimed monogamy is about oppression and whatnot. Its got nothing to do with me what others do and I accept that some humans are indeed poly sexual but I wanted this poster to understand how their comment looked to me a mono sexual (lol).

My comment was reactionary just as their was, reactionary and condemning.

 

[lola]

If you can have multiple relationships and feel loved and at peace with it (and the same is reciprocated) then go for it! If you feel truly happy with many partners then more power too you.. I almost envy you in fact for being able to love with more than one person.

However, in today's modern society poly is the minority.. If poly was adapted as a cultural norm the world as we know it would be very different. Monog sets a foundation for the family structure. I read an interested article on this :

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/01/120124093142.htm

^ Interesting article... I've had a quick look, will read it properly when I get the chance. I think it's worthwhile remembering the major differences between polygamy and polyamory: polygamy is often associated with religion, repression of women in a patriarchal structure and marriage/spousal commitments, whereas polyamory is associated with secular lifestyles, liberal politics including queen/kinky sexual orientations and is open-ended in the type of commitments made to different partners and gender egalitarian (which is why many feminists are pro-poly).

I'd also like to qualify that I'm not strictly "poly" in the sense that I only love one person in the way I'd consider "romantic partner love" (we all love our family, friends, etc. so there are many types of love). He's the only one I feel committed to and the only one I allow myself to be 100% close to. But a major part of who I am as a woman is a very communicative, sexual, adventurous person and I enjoy interacting sexually with other people; I don't love them (I love some as friends) but I like playing with them (I guess I consider sex to be the adults' playground, it can be deep and intimate like it is with my SO but it can also be outrageous, silly, random, filthy or just good fun).

Comrade Kane - fair enough, but I think I would have understood your point of view from the offset if you just outlined what annoyed you about rm-rf's post. This could have generated some useful discussion. By doing exactly what you didn't like him doing you compromised your own argument, and by being so scathing you didn't give him the opportunity to explain if he didn't mean it the way you read it

 

[panic in paradise]

I think it's worthwhile remembering the major differences between polygamy and polyamory: polygamy is often associated with religion, repression of women in a patriarchal structure and marriage/spousal commitments, whereas polyamory is associated with secular lifestyles, liberal politics including queen/kinky sexual orientations and is open-ended in the type of commitments made to different partners and gender egalitarian (which is why many feminists are pro-poly).

do you think all polygamist are polyamorists??

 

[lola]

Hehe, someone actually said on a different website that polygamy is a sub-section of polyamory.

I wouldn't necessarily agree, because for some women polygamous marriages don't involve free choice... Since polyamory means "many loves" (whereas polygamy means "many marriages"*), a woman forced into an arranged marriage as the third wife of a man twice her age in order to be effectively a baby-making machine isn't practising polyamory; she's experiencing repression and exploitation.

*In Dan Savage's words: married people and people in love are distinctly separate groups with some distinctive overlaps

 

[panic in paradise]

Ive seen Love defined as 'an attempt to form a relationship with beauty'; this is highly generalized but polygamy seems more like a males grandiose breeding program.

Guilt, shame, jealousy, nor the ego of a jealous or an overzealous type should dictate a relationship, the simple thought or mention of "polygamory" could ruin a less confident couple, with all the taboo involved.

 

[augustaB]

What about polyandry while we're going on about poly things.

 

[lola]

I like the idea... but then again it's just a female-led version of polygamy, polyamory is equal opportunities

 

[panic in paradise]

heheh

i am curious, everyone has curiosities and as human nature is justifiable, within extents of reason.
you seem perfectly comfortable in your life and lifestyle, lola.

maybe you will humor me though..?


do you personally see any use in, "exorcising" these desires? an example could be...

tom and sally love to do "it", they feel in love, do not abuse drugs and alcohol have tried but never cared much for it, seems they have non addictive type personalities...

sally wants to munch a muff, and be engaged to tom...

sally wants to squeeze her round shapely smooth thighs tight around her friend julies head, as she tries not to pull her hot self away from julies warm moist mouth, tongue and lips ..

tom, on the other hand, has not met julie, sally loves suck his cock and would also want to watch julie do this for her man.

although tom is insecure, feels deeply in love with sally, and is fairly inexperienced with sex.

_________
before i begin to enjoy writing this too much

lola, anyone, what from a hard non biased out side prospective could be done here?


neither of them want to split up, and julie would most likely be open to the adventurism.

again, sally and tom are deeply in love, both quietly considering marriage.
sally though has this desire, but is afraid of hurting tom, by asking him to
involve himself in a, what morally questionable activity, which distorts his ethical
beliefs, wounds his ego thinking he might not be enough for her. or what if they decide to this,
and with his playing along sally leaves him..? or they laugh at him?

whos problem is this in your opinion?

what if sally was you, who ever you are, and you knew that you loved your s/o, in every way. and that the feeling was mutual.


IF their love was strong enough, should sally not be having these feelings?

IF their love was strong enough, couldnt they have the experience, the adventure
and not escalate into more?

IF they decided to not venture out into more sexual escapades together, might one of them leave for a weekend just to go and fuck? lying and leaving their partner guessing and ignorant?

DO YOU feel our examples could go about this as mature adults, be in love, and explore to be rid of, or exorcise these desires to go on w/o concern of wanting to have sex with someone else? watch someone have sex with your lover?
or participate in polyamory sex with your lover and another person having no feelings of jealousy or shame?

couldnt such a scenario, between mature consenting adults, be what is needed before matrimony?

if you could not trust your fiancee to participate because they might go venture off on their own, or feel they would become jealous to the extent that marriage was out of the question.

doesnt this attitude seem a bit unpredictable and immature to be married? that is if they were into the things before being with you?

yes, i have been married before, for 9 years, and certainly did have these thoughts of my wife(us) with another chick. but the thought as often as pleasurable, would lead to feelings of being hurt.there are many ways to work out some sexual indifferences, and to come to a mutual understanding and progress further together a s a couple.

before marriage though, to of had my ego broken down and mended with time i believe would of saved a lot of personal angst and, jealousy of her previous fun, which with anyone will create a lot of tension over time if a remaining issue.


to put it in an analogy -
growing a rose bush in a flower pot, the roots of the rose will eventually split the pot, or destroy itself struggling to absorb and retain nutrients, but a rose planted in a suitable flower bed will grow to its full potential; as long as the attention deserved and needed is given, no extra attention or worry is called for. peace of mind might be had debating between trust of she/he with you, knowing they are fully satisfied, rather then wondering about their motives, friends.acquaintances, and wear abouts.

i could keep going but hopefully you get the what i am proposing.
and that is an offer to help !

NSFW:

not in that way...

NSFW:

or, you gotta pic ?!?

 

[lola]

IF their love was strong enough, should sally not be having these feelings?

It doesn't work like this. No matter how much you love someone, you are turned on by whatever turns you on. It isn't something you can help or re-programme (a good example is gay people; you can't help what turns you on and who you're attracted to). You can choose whether or not to do something about it, though, but you won't feel fulfilled if you go through life never getting to explore your desires.

IF their love was strong enough, couldnt they have the experience, the adventure and not escalate into more?

Sure, this has been my experience at least. I've found that if I get to "act out" on my crushes and sexual desires with other men they never go beyond a bit of fun. But whenever I was in monogamous relationships and had a crush on someone I'd be obsessed thinking what it would be like to sleep with them, and because I wasn't allowed to do it it actually became much more of an issue in my head.

IF they decided to not venture out into more sexual escapades together, might one of them leave for a weekend just to go and fuck? lying and leaving their partner guessing and ignorant?

This is a strange question. If they are open and honest with each other, why would anyone be lying or left guessing and ignorant? Surely anything would only happen after discussion and mutual agreement. If they are the kind of people to lie about these things, they would do it in monogamous relationships too.

DO YOU feel our examples could go about this as mature adults, be in love, and explore to be rid of, or exorcise these desires to go on w/o concern of wanting to have sex with someone else? watch someone have sex with your lover? or participate in polyamory sex with your lover and another person having no feelings of jealousy or shame?

I don't have much guilt or shame about my sexuality, I enjoy threesomes and get turned on by my partner seeing me having sex with someone else, or watching him have sex with someone else. I guess I'm odd, but I really don't see what is there to be ashamed of if no one is getting hurt. Jealously is another issue... while I don't think you can "exorcise" those desires I don't see why you can't explore them with your partner at a point in your life and relationship where you are both ready for this and are able to set, and stick to, boundaries to ensure everyone feels safe.

couldnt such a scenario, between mature consenting adults, be what is needed before matrimony?

if you could not trust your fiancee to participate because they might go venture off on their own, or feel they would become jealous to the extent that marriage was out of the question.

doesnt this attitude seem a bit unpredictable and immature to be married? that is if they were into the things before being with you?

Personally, I think it's a bit odd that so many couples negotiate so much about their relationship before making a commitment (children, careers etc.) but don't discuss monogamy. I understand that for many people it's a given, but considering how many people cheat maybe it shouldn't be. Too many people make monogamous commitments without seriously thinking whether this is what they want/need. Either way, yes I absolutely think that these scenarios should be on the table and open to discussion before getting married, if this is what turns one of the people on. I know of open cuckold relationship where only the woman sleeps around (with husband's permission - since he is turned on by it) then comes home and tells him all about it while fucking his brains out. Everybody wins!

to put it in an analogy -
growing a rose bush in a flower pot, the roots of the rose will eventually split the pot, or destroy itself struggling to absorb and retain nutrients, but a rose planted in a suitable flower bed will grow to its full potential; as long as the attention deserved and needed is given, no extra attention or worry is called for. peace of mind might be had debating between trust of she/he with you, knowing they are fully satisfied, rather then wondering about their motives, friends.acquaintances, and wear abouts.

Yup, that's about the whole point of ethical non-monogamy. People should stay with each other because they want to, not because they've been put in a box. You can't own another person and the most loving thing anyone can do (for me, at least) is give the other person their space and freedom to be who they are.

 

[panic in paradise]

This is a strange question. If they are open and honest with each other, why would anyone be lying or left guessing and ignorant? Surely anything would only happen after discussion and mutual agreement. If they are the kind of people to lie about these things, they would do it in monogamous relationships too.

wow thanks for such a thoughtful response lola! I am going to take more time in responding with more, but for now, to address the 'strange question' :D

I agree with how 'Surely anything would only happen after discussion and mutual agreement. If they are the kind of people to lie about these things, they would do it in monogamous relationships too.'

This becomes a strange hypothesis, and is a bit of a paradox, imo, and I like paradox's.

 

[twentysix]

I think its an ideal... But can rarely be attained, at least as of yet... In any sustainable way.

Problems I have with it. 1. Diseases

I have by the age of 30 learned to respect the idea of no sex before marriage, and monogamy.

If sexually transmitted diseases are eliminated, then my mind might change. Also, healthier ways of contraception than birth control, and less restrictive than condoms and other barriers.


I just don't find this polyamorous lifestyle compatible, but I certainly get it... It's just not real, yet.

 

[Libby]

Am down for this, as long as you arent lying to them all telling them the relationship is monogomous when really you are seeing others what's the problem? If everyone know's what's up then they are able to say yeah I'm into this or if they'd rather have a monogomous relationship they can say hey this isnt for me and maybe find someone more suitable. Everyone's happy.

In my experience issues of jealousy/possessiveness are born of deceit and betrayal or ones own insecurities. The former can be avoided completely and the latter can be overcome if one is big enough to admit how they feel about themselves is not the fault of anyone else but is something they can take responsibility for and develop themselves. And knowing that whether or not someone has something special with someone else, does not affect whatever is shared between that someone and you. It doesn't take away, it only adds to.

 

[lola]

I think its an ideal... But can rarely be attained, at least as of yet... In any sustainable way.

Problems I have with it. 1. Diseases

I have by the age of 30 learned to respect the idea of no sex before marriage, and monogamy.

If sexually transmitted diseases are eliminated, then my mind might change. Also, healthier ways of contraception than birth control, and less restrictive than condoms and other barriers.


I just don't find this polyamorous lifestyle compatible, but I certainly get it... It's just not real, yet.

Well... I use condoms with all my lovers, my SO does too. We got tested before we started having unprotected sex with each other.

I now have a new lover and I'm thinking about going condom-free with him. He's very responsible and would be happy to get tested, but I need to ask my SO about this since this is a very intimate things and I don't want him to feel threatened. If it bothers him I won't do it. It's kinda funny though, I found 2 packs of good quality condoms for the price of 1 the other day and I bought 2 packs for my SO and 2 for me, he was grateful

Re contraceptive, I use the implanon. No hassle for 3 years... and sure, who likes condoms? But I prefer it to not getting to have sex with other people...

 

[Libby]

^^ Yeah same, why the hell wouldn't you be having safe sex? unless you want a baby or something I guess *shudders* lol
*raises hand* I like condoms, who likes getting up and on with the rest of the day while old semen is slowly dripping outta them and bunching up their panties? *shudders* double shudder lol, just cum on my face if you gonna pull the condom off V-hole access dee-nied

 

[Busty St Clare]

No matter how accepting you and your multiple partners are, your children will never understand why you can't commit to just one person.