Polyamory

[sophia jane]

I've been meaning to start this thread for a few days but kept forgetting (thanks to Stella's blog pun for reminding me!).
Thoughts on polyamory? Real life experiences?

I've never given it much thought, mainly because I find it very difficult to love even one person, let alone more than one. That said, I'm increasingly intrigued by the idea of it, and would love to hear from the more knowledgable.

 

[impressive]

http://polyamoryonline.org/smf/index.php

 

[matriarch]

Not for me.
Strictly a one woman woman.

 

[sophia jane]

Not for me.
Strictly a one woman woman.

We know. And I doubt it's for me, either. I'm just curious.

 

[sophia jane]

http://polyamoryonline.org/smf/index.php

Interesting site for sure.
Something that I'm trying to figure out- I get that polyamory is basically like a group relationship, right? But what is it if one person loves multiple people individually?

 

[impressive]

Interesting site for sure.
Something that I'm trying to figure out- I get that polyamory is basically like a group relationship, right? But what is it if one person loves multiple people individually?

Heaven.

 

[Norajane]

You can check out Big Love on HBO - I saw the pilot last weekend.

http://www.hbo.com/biglove/about/index.html

It won't give you answers on polyamory, but they do have interesting group dynamics.

 

[sophia jane]

Heaven.

 

[rgraham666]

Not for me. It's nearly impossible to start and maintain a relationship for a single person. Trying to juggle more than one would be entirely beyond my ability.

 

[AppleBiter]

I'm a one-man woman, myself.

 

[Luna_Wolf72]

I've been meaning to start this thread for a few days but kept forgetting (thanks to Stella's blog pun for reminding me!).
Thoughts on polyamory? Real life experiences?

I've never given it much thought, mainly because I find it very difficult to love even one person, let alone more than one. That said, I'm increasingly intrigued by the idea of it, and would love to hear from the more knowledgable.

I have been involved twice in polyamorous relationships. That being said, thay are not for everyone and (if one does not have open communication) they can be far more trouble than they are worth.

My last relationship, my ex g/f and b/f had far more trouble with the jealousy issue than I did (by nature I am not a jealous person) and it is almost impossible to make a poly relationship work if there is any sort of jealousy on any level.

 

[Liar]

Love is a complicated thing. It's a delicate balance to keep it from becoming assymetric with two participants. With more than two? I know I couldn't manaqge it.

 

[Guest]

I'm a one-man woman, myself.

Same here.

 

[minsue]

Sophie, this thread on the GLBT forum might be of interest to you. Polyamory wasn't intended to be the subject of the thread, but that's where it quickly wandered.

 

[BlackShanglan]

I'm quite capable of intense emotions toward more than one person, but I think that most people have practical limits to the time, energy, and resources they can put into the relationships in their lives. The more people you divide that energy between, the less you can really give each one; with the best will in the world, there are only so many hours in the day. And I do believe that relationships need time and energy and work.

I suppose that theoretically it could work if everyone in the group was committed to the group; then you've got other individuals to supply the energy and time that a single partner might otherwise have offered. Still, there are some things that are hard to supply through smaller amounts of attention from more people; the depths and nuances of personal relationships even between two people can take years to develop, and if they're busy trying to keep up with two or three other people, it seems unlikely to me that they could achieve the same level of intimacy with all of them. I prize that depth of trust and intimacy, so I'm a one-person horse.

Shanglan

 

[rgraham666]

One other problem with polyamory is that it will greatly increase the competition for the 'desirable' people.

Under current rules, people are pretty much stuck with a single partner. Sure, there are people who cheat, and some honest polyamorists, but generally once you are committed to someone, you're 'off the market'.

A polyamorous society means the rich and famous will have people lining up even more. And moving those of us who are not rich and not famous way down the list.

A friend argued with me once that it would work out as women would now be in a position to have more than one partner as well, as if the prospect of being #2 or #10 on a woman's list of choices would make me feel better.

Seriously, polyamory will put those of us who aren't 'really attractive' in an even worse mating situation than we are now.

 

[BlackShanglan]

Seriously, polyamory will put those of us who aren't 'really attractive' in an even worse mating situation than we are now.

Hmmm. You think it's that black? I do take your point that you wouldn't personally care to be one of many lovers for the same person, and indeed it's not a setup that I think would work for me. But given that everyone would have many lovers, I don't think it really decreases the amount of sex being had - just changes how it's supplied.

Who knows? Maybe there would even be an up side. At the moment, when one must generally choose one person with whom to be intimate, one tends to be picky and perhaps even a little shallow about who is chosen. People tend not to want to take risks when they only get one choice, so perhaps more of them go for something that looks "safe" - i.e., traditionally handsome/pretty, financially secure, fits in well at parties, etc. Perhaps the freedom of knowing that they aren't limited to one partner would help more people feel that they could take some risks and move outside of the "norm."

Just a thought.

Shanglan

 

[Guest]

Hmmm. You think it's that black? I do take your point that you wouldn't personally care to be one of many lovers for the same person, and indeed it's not a setup that I think would work for me. But given that everyone would have many lovers, I don't think it really decreases the amount of sex being had - just changes how it's supplied.

Who knows? Maybe there would even be an up side. At the moment, when one must generally choose one person with whom to be intimate, one tends to be picky and perhaps even a little shallow about who is chosen. People tend not to want to take risks when they only get one choice, so perhaps more of them go for something that looks "safe" - i.e., traditionally handsome/pretty, financially secure, fits in well at parties, etc. Perhaps the freedom of knowing that they aren't limited to one partner would help more people feel that they could take some risks and move outside of the "norm."

Just a thought.

Shanglan

There's also the idea that a "standard of beauty" -- advertising and commercial conditioning aside -- is still pretty fluid. What someone finds attractive varies a lot from person to person. I use myself as an example. I have never felt particularly good about how I looked, but I've had sufficient lovers and would-be lovers to contradict the idea what no one would want to have sex with me.

Yes, I've also met with plenty of people who didn't want sex with me. Thus it goes.

There's another thread here where someone mentioned that inner confidence and assurance -- liking one's self -- is equally attractive. Putting out attractive energy is important.

I do not know if polyamory is for me. I've been in a polyamorous relationship and it ended because of another member's insecurity, which fed mine, and caused an implosion. Now I'm older and I've spent a lot of time working on insecurities, and I'm sort of curious about it because there were positive aspects to it, too -- like having multiple people find me desirable and having a better change of someone else's mood matching mine.

 

[BlackShanglan]

There's another thread here where someone mentioned that inner confidence and assurance -- liking one's self -- is equally attractive. Putting out attractive energy is important.

Yes. It's often the case that what turns me off from someone is not his/her inherent nature or appearance, but the attitude that goes with it. "No one wants me" and "everyone wants me" are both unpleasant messages because they both end in "me" - focus on the self and obsession therewith. Extreme self-denigration is just as self-focused and insular as extreme self-worship, and both tell me that the person is primarily focused on the internal landscape, without a great deal of time for others. That gets tiring quickly in a relationship. "Hey, wanna have some fun?" is so much better a message than "I'm miserable. Make me better."

I do not know if polyamory is for me. I've been in a polyamorous relationship and it ended because of another member's insecurity, which fed mine, and caused an implosion. Now I'm older and I've spent a lot of time working on insecurities, and I'm sort of curious about it because there were positive aspects to it, too -- like having multiple people find me desirable and having a better change of someone else's mood matching mine.

I think it's largely my experience, personal and vicarious, that leads me to shy away from the idea of polyamory. I've encountered the idea in various permutations both personally and vicariously, and the blunt truth of it is, I've never seen it work. For starters, I've never seen a set-up where one of the partners wasn't "settling" for that when s/he really wanted exclusivity with another partner, whatever was being said to the other people in the relationship. Moving out from that, I've never run into such a relationship (and I've been in the position to observe a number of them) that didn't involve pressure or deceit somewhere in it. The few cases I've seen of individuals within such relationships who were happy always seemed to involve distance or a lack of emotional or psychological demands; lovers were in different cities or were casually met and left, usually with a more "regular" lover seething or sobbing quietly in the wings.

I confess that what I've seen of people claiming to practice it, correctly or not, has not given me a high opinion of the concept. I do accept that in many cases (perhaps all) the individuals were not adhering to the real philosophy of it - the way it's meant to work. However, after seeing the trail of ruin behind any number of such attempts, one begins to wonder if it's something like communism. That is, it's true that none of the spectacular failures of the system were ever due to it being implemented correctly - but after a while one must begin to ask if there's something wrong with the system itself when no one ever seems able to implement it correctly. There's a certain similarity in the two systems that is more than skin deep; both ask, "wouldn't it be nice if humans thought and behaved this way?" It's true that it would be nice, but what I've seen of both systems suggests to me that most humans do not, in fact, behave that way. Perhaps it's better to adopt a system that acknowledges our own limitations.

Shanglan

 

[Svenskaflicka]

It's a nice idea in theory, but I doubt that it works very well. Most people have issues with insecurity and jealousy, and I think that no matter how many men and women there are in one and the same household, it will always be a woman doing most of the work.

 

[Guest]

Yes. It's often the case that what turns me off from someone is not his/her inherent nature or appearance, but the attitude that goes with it. "No one wants me" and "everyone wants me" are both unpleasant messages because they both end in "me" - focus on the self and obsession therewith. Extreme self-denigration is just as self-focused and insular as extreme self-worship, and both tell me that the person is primarily focused on the internal landscape, without a great deal of time for others. That gets tiring quickly in a relationship. "Hey, wanna have some fun?" is so much better a message than "I'm miserable. Make me better."

OH yes! Amen! (and other appropriate signs of extreme agreement)

I think it's largely my experience, personal and vicarious, that leads me to shy away from the idea of polyamory. I've encountered the idea in various permutations both personally and vicariously, and the blunt truth of it is, I've never seen it work. For starters, I've never seen a set-up where one of the partners wasn't "settling" for that when s/he really wanted exclusivity with another partner, whatever was being said to the other people in the relationship. Moving out from that, I've never run into such a relationship (and I've been in the position to observe a number of them) that didn't involve pressure or deceit somewhere in it...

I confess that what I've seen of people claiming to practice it, correctly or not, has not given me a high opinion of the concept. I do accept that in many cases (perhaps all) the individuals were not adhering to the real philosophy of it - the way it's meant to work. However, after seeing the trail of ruin behind any number of such attempts, one begins to wonder if it's something like communism. That is, it's true that none of the spectacular failures of the system were ever due to it being implemented correctly - but after a while one must begin to ask if there's something wrong with the system itself when no one ever seems able to implement it correctly. There's a certain similarity in the two systems that is more than skin deep; both ask, "wouldn't it be nice if humans thought and behaved this way?" It's true that it would be nice, but what I've seen of both systems suggests to me that most humans do not, in fact, behave that way. Perhaps it's better to adopt a system that acknowledges our own limitations.

Shanglan

You know, I've also been in a position to watch a few, select people practice polyamory and, like you, I was not impressed with their actions. One person in particular acted in such a manner that I cut off the friendship completely. This person used everything you mentioned, and I was proud when the non-poly partner (who had endured a lot over 10 years of marriage) decided enough was enough, ended the highly imbalanced relationship, and moved on to another relationship (the details of this would have you rolling your eyes and pulling your mane, I promise).

Not everyone's experience is the same, of course, and I'm sure, somewhere in the world, there is a Heinlein-esque polyamorous family. But sometimes I suspect it's more of a fantasy, in part because people just aren't perfect and have all those nasty tendencies like selfishness and insecurity.

Still, I reserve the right to write all the poly fantasy that makes me happy and if you're bored, you're welcome to come pretend with me.

 

[BlackShanglan]

Still, I reserve the right to write all the poly fantasy that makes me happy and if you're bored, you're welcome to come pretend with me.

Amen in return. I'm delighted to explore the realms of fantasy in fiction. If we can't imagine how nice it would be if ... (insert own ideas), where would be the pleasure in fiction?

Shanglan

 

[Stella_Omega]

Me and my guy have been together coming up thirty years. thirty! And in that time, we've been mostly polyamorous. More often it's been me, and several times I've gotten so involved with someone that he's asked me to stop- I've never asked him to quite seeing someone. For the most part, the partners we find are the type of people that actually like and respect our other half. We have long-term friendships with three of these folks, who came into our lives as casual sexual partners!
At this time, we are monogamous, which is why you see me flirting so much here online. It's one of those "me" things- I wouldn't kid you. Without the release and the input from multiple encounters, I -honestly- really- feel unfulfilled, unimaginative, dull and listless. Not good for anyone. I don't know if it's an absolute part of me, or the result of a lifetime's habit, but I don't see how it would change.

From the very beginning of my sexual life, I found I averaged three partners at a time- one primary, and a couple of more casual dating types. My primary boyfriends would, sometimes, get pissed off enough to take a hike, but that was their problem, the way I saw it- I never hid my nature from anyone...

 

[Guest]

Me and my guy have been together coming up thirty years. thirty! And in that time, we've been mostly polyamorous. More often it's been me, and several times I've gotten so involved with someone that he's asked me to stop- I've never asked him to quite seeing someone. For the most part, the partners we find are the type of people that actually like and respect our other half. We have long-term friendships with three of these folks, who came into our lives as casual sexual partners!
At this time, we are monogamous, which is why you see me flirting so much here online. It's one of those "me" things- I wouldn't kid you. Without the release and the input from multiple encounters, I -honestly- really- feel unfulfilled, unimaginative, dull and listless. Not good for anyone. I don't know if it's an absolute part of me, or the result of a lifetime's habit, but I don't see how it would change.

From the very beginning of my sexual life, I found I averaged three partners at a time- one primary, and a couple of more casual dating types. My primary boyfriends would, sometimes, get pissed off enough to take a hike, but that was their problem, the way I saw it- I never hid my nature from anyone...

The particular poly couple of which I know the most was HIGHLY one sided. It makes for a great story, though. SHE was allowed to sleep with whom she liked. HE existed to serve her whims and wishes. SHE brought men home and had sex with them while HE was around, but HE was not a participant (nor did he wish to be). HE was a wimp about expressing his dislike of the situation, and SHE was a bully/victim/manipulator.

SHE actually left him for another man for "a year and a day", a sort of experiment to see if SHE wanted to 'change husbands", moving to another state but still expecting HIM to care for her pets and pay her bills. HE wasn't given a choice in this.

When her 'new' lover didn't work out as she liked (since she was also finding other partners while with him) and she wanted to move back home, she was EXTREMELY shocked to discover her husband had started an online 'affair' with another woman. She declared herself to have been betrayed because she had assumed the whole "year and a day" thing -- that they would separate and spend the year apart to see if they really wanted to be together -- applied only to HER.

After a lot of self analyzing (and a lot of long talks with me) HE decided he didn't want that kind of marriage and filed for divorce. It took HIM a lot of effort to even stand up for himself, although eventually the anger came out and he got tough, putting an end to her bully/victom techniques. He is now living with the woman he met online, 2 years into what looks to be a successful and happy relationship. I have no idea where She has gone.

This is the only poly relationship besides the one I was in that I know intimately. I'd LOVE to see something like that work, and I applaud you that it has, but I can see that you have rules you follow and you work on your primary relationship the most.

 

[Stella_Omega]

...but I can see that you have rules you follow and you work on your primary relationship the most.

Having rules that you follow- that has to be a given, in any relationship- or nothing works...
I see a lot of abusive marriages of every sort, you know. Monogamous or non- the details are different, the methods are the same; "My rules for me, not for you"