Polygamy in BDSM

[P. B. Walker]

Howdy all.

I was daydreaming about living with a Domme and a female sub the other day (hehe... best of both worlds huh?) and the thought struck me about polygamy in BDSM. Is it a common occurance? Or is monogamy more common? Are BDSM'ers more apt to allow or jump into a polygamous relationship than plain old vanilla folk? Do you think it's mainly Switches that are polygamous or is it common across Dom/mes, subs, and switches?

Another thought I had about this was the differences in the number of people in any given category being the driving force behind people engaging in polygamy. What I mean by this is that it's pretty common knowledge that there are much fewer Dommes than male subs. So, would this lend itself to Dommes being involved in polygamous relationships? I've noticed that many of the Dommes on this board are polygamous. Whereas the ratio of male Doms to female subs is much closer to 1 to 1 and I think you more often see monogamous relationships between male Doms and female subs. What are your thoughts about this? Any other examples where the ratio lends itself to either polygamy or monogamy?

What about in the gay/lesbian relationships? Is one more likely to be a polygamous relationship? Can we draw any correlations between these relationships and the straight relationships?

If you think I've missed a key point or just want to discuss how you feel about this, please feel free to jump in.

PBW

 

[serijules]

My first (and dare I say only) 'collared' relationship was with a man that had a slave (his wife), 3 subs, and a 'boi'. Most of us were really close to each other at the time of the collaring, so it seemed like such a grand idea at the time, us just being one big 'family'. It was a cyber-relationship, which at that time in my life, was about the only 'experience' I was willing to explore. Looking back on it now, it was all so silly and fake, but the feelings and emotions involved were very real, and the resulting hurt feelings still linger.

It was a disaster. He never had the time to devote to each of us that we needed, and expected us to lean on each other for support, which was fine...but to me at least, my main relationship was still with HIM, and it was very hard to have to fight for attention. I have serious issues with ageplay, so watching him play Daddy to his 'boi' was also very hard for me. It was hard to see my Dominant switching roles like that and suddenly talking babytalk to an adult female acting like a little boy. Not to say that there was anything wrong with either of those roles, it was just personally hard for me to be around and watch that since ageplay is something I define as a 'squick' for me.

I learned pretty quickly after our first time together in person that poly relationships are simply not something I can handle...breeds too much insecurity and resentment. I can handle sharing to a limited degree, but not when I have to fight to have the most basic of my emotional needs addressed by someone who's collar I wear. I can't imagine how much worse it would have been had we all lived together or saw each other more often than we did.

However, I do have a few friends that have R/L poly relationships, pretty complex ones, and while they have their fair share of problems, they seem to have managed to make the relationships work out very well for them, and that is very admirable. So while poly is not for me, I can definatly admire those that pull it off and everyone involved is secure and happy.

 

[NemoAlia]

I was in a poly relationship once... a Dom, a kinky nilla, and me. Good, but difficult. I'm not sure I'll ever grow up enough to manage a poly relationship successfully for any length of time.

Sigh.

Anyway, here are some links to past threads on the subject:

alpha sub begun by Slinky'sWench on 06-10-2002
I need help on this one begun by RainCrow on 06-13-2002
Adding a third into your relationship: for fun or commitment? begun by MissTaken on 03-10-2002
Looking for advice begun by Kirabeth on 06-22-2002
is there a guide line begun by Kirabeth on 06-23-2002

 

[Ebonyfire]

Howdy all.

I was daydreaming about living with a Domme and a female sub the other day (hehe... best of both worlds huh?) and the thought struck me about polygamy in BDSM. Is it a common occurance? Or is monogamy more common? Are BDSM'ers more apt to allow or jump into a polygamous relationship than plain old vanilla folk? Do you think it's mainly Switches that are polygamous or is it common across Dom/mes, subs, and switches?

Another thought I had about this was the differences in the number of people in any given category being the driving force behind people engaging in polygamy. What I mean by this is that it's pretty common knowledge that there are much fewer Dommes than male subs. So, would this lend itself to Dommes being involved in polygamous relationships? I've noticed that many of the Dommes on this board are polygamous. Whereas the ratio of male Doms to female subs is much closer to 1 to 1 and I think you more often see monogamous relationships between male Doms and female subs. What are your thoughts about this? Any other examples where the ratio lends itself to either polygamy or monogamy?

What about in the gay/lesbian relationships? Is one more likely to be a polygamous relationship? Can we draw any correlations between these relationships and the straight relationships?

If you think I've missed a key point or just want to discuss how you feel about this, please feel free to jump in.

PBW

I prefer the term polymory to polygamy.

Eb

 

[Lancecastor]

Re: Re: Polygamy in BDSM

I prefer the term polymory to polygamy.

Eb

I find polgamy much easier to pronounce.

 

[Ebonyfire]

Re: Re: Re: Polygamy in BDSM

I find polgamy much easier to pronounce.

But harder to spell, huh? hehehe!

Eb <who can't spell or type>

 

[zipman]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Polygamy in BDSM

But harder to spell, huh? hehehe!

Eb <who can't spell or type>

LMAO !!!

 

[NemoAlia]

Polyamory is a good way of saying that you're in a relationship with (but not necessarily in a marriage with) more than one person at a time. I, for one, can't claim polygamy, since I've never been married. However, it certainly is much easier to pronounce!

I know there are bunches and bunches of websites out there on the subject: everything from informational sites to day-to-day journals written by people involved in polyamorous relationships. Anyone have some good link suggestions?

Of course, most of these sites are not BDSM-related. However, I'm certainly curious to see how polyamory and BDSM overlap. In my experience, BDSM played a big role in the relationship, even though we weren't all necessarily kinked that way. There weren't any set roles; we just did what worked for us.

 

[Cuckolded_BlK_Male]

I don't believe in total monogamy. I think that it's an unnatural state forced on us ancient Patriarchal religious types. I just think that it's pointless to coerce a promise of physical fidelity out of another person. Whether single, married or merely committed, people are going to do as they please.

Western society aspires to monogamy, but it doesn't live up to that aspiration. I've seen surveys in Redbook and other women's magazines that suggest that a majority of married women will have a extramarital sexual experience at some time during their marriages. Given the fact that these magazines have an older somewhat conservative readership, I'd can only assume that the actual numbers are probably higher. And that says nothing for the men.

In addition to those who are actually polyamorous under the guise of monogamy, there are those who engage in serial monogamy. I think that serial monogamy is worse than simply cheating. Entering into one relationship after another claiming love and commitment over and over, while knowing full well that when it gets boring, or something new comes along, that you're going to bail is the height of hypocrisy. There is neither love nor commitment in such an arraignment. There's just the appearance of them for appearance's sake.

As my member-name implies, I have no interest in non-polyamorous women. I have ended a few burgeoning relationships with women because we didn't see eye-to-eye on this issue.

 

[bunny bondage]

while i agree that the social expectation of monogamy isn't for everyone, i find myself truely desiring it. not only for my dom to only play with me, but i also don't wish to seek attention from other men. so i guess it's more of a personal issue as opposed to something depending on your bdsm preference.

 

[Cuckolded_BlK_Male]

I respect your right to define yourself as you see fit. I just don't think that monogamy is the natural state of human beings. If it was, then we would have no problem mating for life, like Mallards.

 

[artful]

bunny

while i agree that the social expectation of monogamy isn't for everyone, i find myself truely desiring it. not only for my dom to only play with me, but i also don't wish to seek attention from other men. so i guess it's more of a personal issue as opposed to something depending on your bdsm preference.

I NOW can say, I agree with your sentiments. I have no wish to develope, and/or explore, a relationship with anyone outside of my slave, (Dream).

In the past,...I have had MANY relationships going at the same time, with women who I was attracted to for one reason or the other.

Maybe it's an age factor,...maybe a hormone thing, maybe MATURENESS. I don't know, but I do know what my "Inner Truth" is.

 

[H piltdown]

My wife and I have been involved in "alternative lifestyles" for years, and I hate that damned term. It implies that anything else is the norm, when, in fact, we have been unable to create a norm throughout our evolution as a species. We have only managed to create an 'expectation' of what is normal. Furthermore, that 'expectation' tends to be different in different cultures. Sadly, modern western ideals have pretty much polluted most other cultures, introducing materialism, possessiveness and jealousy.

A heterogenous, lifelong, monogamous relationship is the expected norm in most modern cultures, but this is not the natural human condition. Not only does our shared history and experience bear this out, but so does our anatomy. (If you don't know what I am refering to, a simple web search for 'Sperm Wars', human sperm morphology, and sexual selection in anthropoids will answer most questions) Furthermore, monogamy in the the mammal world as a whole is as rare as true monogamy in the human world.

I could go on for pages about the origins of monogamy, but this thread concerns polygamy. Polygamy is a social construct that allows men to take multiple wives. Polyandry allows women to take multiple husbands. Frankly, as a goal or ideal objective, I don't see much merrit in either of these lifestyle choices. They seem a bit too exclusive for me.

At this time, I am involved with a 'polyamorous' relationship, where BDSM is a playfull diversion. My wife, our girl friend, and myself share an open and caring live in relationship. We are all bisexual, and extremely open minded and adventurous. We've had issues with sexual jealousy and possessiveness in the past, but because of our dedication to communication and our shared love, we have easily gone beyond these insignificant considerations. Today, our major source of contention is the lack of quality time we have to spend with one another.

Don't misunderstand me, we still have our ocassional arguments, bad moods, and diverse interests. These things are to be expected in any relationship. The tie that binds us is our mutual respect, and our shared love.

 

[MissTaken]

Ahh I was going to pop in and say that polyamory requires incredible amounts of trust and communication.

Communication, again! It seems to be rant lately.

In any event, we have to know who we are, what we need and not go into a poly relationship with rose colored glasses on.

I fear that poly is something , like 24/7 TPE ,. that people will agree to and later find that they aren't cut out for it.

In terms of some of PBW's conjectures?

I dont' think poly is more prevalent in Dom/mes, subs or switches. It is strictly a personal choice.

 

[serijules]

I don't believe in total monogamy. I think that it's an unnatural state forced on us ancient Patriarchal religious types. I just think that it's pointless to coerce a promise of physical fidelity out of another person. Whether single, married or merely committed, people are going to do as they please.

Woo! I thought I was the only one that feels that way, heh.

I do understand and appreciate and respect monogamy...but I just don't agree with it or really want it for myself. I do think poly is a very shakey ground to live on, and definatly not for everyone, but it's something I personally have always found more fitting with my nature in general.

That being said, in a D/s relationship I find myself desiring only one 'official' relationship, but want the freedom to be able to play with and broaden my horizons on a less committed stance with other people, and the same for my partner. So I'm not really sure how I would define my own desires and beliefs. I can share and be shared, but there are limits.

 

[SexyChele]

I think there are stereotypes that Doms want poly relationships, while subs would prefer giving their attention to just one Dom. Well, come to think of it, if one were truly committed to a dominant, they would have to be monogamous unless/until the dominant released/gave them to another.

Anyway, in my conversations with dominants - and it seems as though in the past few months I've talked to every one in my immediate area, sometimes - they are looking for a one on one relationship, that will go long term. Maybe it is because of what I'm looking for, and that is attracting those of a similar mindset, I'm not sure. But it is what I have found to be true in my quest.

As to stating that monogamy isn't "natural", well, isn't that the same argument that "alternative lifestyles" are somehow "different", and therefore "bad"? Monogamy might not be something that everyone can adhere to, and one who is honest in this regard would be greatly appreciated. However, to say it isn't "normal" is quite a judgemental statement. There are many, many couples who have lived monogamous lifestyles, and have been very happy doing so.

To state that surveys conducted by Redbook, or any other women's magazine, is authoratative to any degree is a bit misleading. Those surveys have already been debunked numerous times. Some have stated that because they surveys are anonymous, some women can feel truthful. However, most have stated that people have a tendency to exagerate, and send in data that is funny or amusing to them. I know. I've done just that. It's all for entertainment, not for reality. On those surveys I can state that I'm married for 15 years (have, in truth, never been married), and that I carry on at least one affair per year. It's like the internet - I can be whatever I make myself to be. Not exactly the world's foremost scientific study about anything, IMO.

 

[Cuckolded_BlK_Male]

As to stating that monogamy isn't "natural", well, isn't that the same argument that "alternative lifestyles" are somehow "different", and therefore "bad"?

No. My comments were based on mammalian biology, not anyone's morality. When I said that monogamy was an unnatural state it meant it in that sense. Monogamy is NOT a biological imperative among mammals, least of all humans. Despite all of the societal and religious coercion to conform to the monogamous standard, people routinely experience outside of their primary relationships. Moreover, serial monogamy (engaging in cyclical temporary "monogamous" relationships) isn't really monogamy at all. It's just time-share polygamy. Any time that the oppressive bounds of monogamy become too much for one to bear, it's a simple matter to switch partners while still giving lip service to the ideals of monogamy.

Let me clarify one thing. I'm not a proponent of "polyamoury" as some sort of ideal lifestyle. I'm not at all involved in the "polyamoury community." I'm merely asserting my belief that true lasting monogamy rarely exists. I think humans have a natural biologically driven need to have experiences outside of the limitations imposed by judeo/christian marriage. As alluded to by H. Piltdown, if humans were meant to live monogamously, then men wouldn't have three types of sperm; one to kill other men's sperm in the female reproductive tract, another to form a block for any other man's sperm coming along after theirs, and finally the swimmers who seek to inseminate the ovum. Also, there is evidence that women can influence which man she will become pregnant by among multiple lovers, in the same time-frame. Why would such adaptations have arisen if monogamy is our natural state?

 

[MissTaken]

I have all I can do to keep one man in my life happy.

Hmm polygamy?

Nope, not for me !

 

[Cuckolded_BlK_Male]

We will just have to agree to disagree. I don't believe in it. And, I don't merely mean that I don't believe in it for myself. I meant that I view the concept of lasting 100% monogamy as being akin to Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny. And the more that I hear emphatic protestations in its defense, the more I doubt it.

 

[SexyChele]

We will just have to agree to disagree. I don't believe in it. And, I don't merely mean that I don't believe in it for myself. I meant that I view the concept of lasting 100% monogamy as being akin to Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny. And the more that I hear emphatic protestations in its defense, the more I doubt it.

With all due respect, I think the only one with an "emphatic protestation" is you. Others are simply stating that, for them, they do not believe a polyamorous relationship would work. They prefer monogamy. How is that "emphatic protestation"?

 

[Cuckolded_BlK_Male]

They prefer monogamy. How is that "emphatic protestation"?

I wasn't referring to specific individuals. So, I'm not going to speak to what any particular person said. Also, I wasn't referencing what people "prefer." I was commenting on how people actually live ... which is altogether different from what they prefer of aspire to.

As I said before, we will agree to disagree, as I seriously doubt if a lengthy exchange will render anything constructive. We are of diametrically opposed opinions, which aren't likely to be swayed.

 

[artful]

Cuckolded

No. My comments were based on mammalian biology, not anyone's morality. When I said that monogamy was an unnatural state it meant it in that sense. Monogamy is NOT a biological imperative among mammals, least of all humans. Despite all of the societal and religious coercion to conform to the monogamous standard, people routinely experience outside of their primary relationships. Moreover, serial monogamy (engaging in cyclical temporary "monogamous" relationships) isn't really monogamy at all. It's just time-share polygamy. Any time that the oppressive bounds of monogamy become too much for one to bear, it's a simple matter to switch partners while still giving lip service to the ideals of monogamy.

Let me clarify one thing. I'm not a proponent of "polyamoury" as some sort of ideal lifestyle. I'm not at all involved in the "polyamoury community." I'm merely asserting my belief that true lasting monogamy rarely exists. I think humans have a natural biologically driven need to have experiences outside of the limitations imposed by judeo/christian marriage. As alluded to by H. Piltdown, if humans were meant to live monogamously, then men wouldn't have three types of sperm; one to kill other men's sperm in the female reproductive tract, another to form a block for any other man's sperm coming along after theirs, and finally the swimmers who seek to inseminate the ovum. Also, there is evidence that women can influence which man she will become pregnant by among multiple lovers, in the same time-frame. Why would such adaptations have arisen if monogamy is our natural state?

I *NOW* prefer monogamy in my life, but I fully support *almost* all your post that I quoted above. I would however point out, I don't believe your assumption of, "true lasting monogamy rarely exists", is a FACTUAL statement.

I DO understand it is YOUR opinion,...but on that ONE point,...I will agree to disagree. Thanks for sharing your insight with us.

 

[MsWorthy]

No. My comments were based on mammalian biology, not anyone's morality. When I said that monogamy was an unnatural state it meant it in that sense. Monogamy is NOT a biological imperative among mammals, least of all humans. Despite all of the societal and religious coercion to conform to the monogamous standard, people routinely experience outside of their primary relationships. Moreover, serial monogamy (engaging in cyclical temporary "monogamous" relationships) isn't really monogamy at all. It's just time-share polygamy. Any time that the oppressive bounds of monogamy become too much for one to bear, it's a simple matter to switch partners while still giving lip service to the ideals of monogamy.

Let me clarify one thing. I'm not a proponent of "polyamoury" as some sort of ideal lifestyle. I'm not at all involved in the "polyamoury community." I'm merely asserting my belief that true lasting monogamy rarely exists. I think humans have a natural biologically driven need to have experiences outside of the limitations imposed by judeo/christian marriage. As alluded to by H. Piltdown, if humans were meant to live monogamously, then men wouldn't have three types of sperm; one to kill other men's sperm in the female reproductive tract, another to form a block for any other man's sperm coming along after theirs, and finally the swimmers who seek to inseminate the ovum. Also, there is evidence that women can influence which man she will become pregnant by among multiple lovers, in the same time-frame. Why would such adaptations have arisen if monogamy is our natural state?

Wow. You are working really hard to show *proof* that humans are not monogamous by nature. Surely there is an agenda in there somewhere, there always is.

I think your argument is erroneously based on the *fact* that people cheat on one another. The problem with this argument is that people do not cheat on one another because they feel confined sexually/procreativealy. People cheat for many reasons, many of them emotional. Far and away, (I think) women, especially, do not cheat because they have a biological imperative to be polyamorous. You are reducing us (humans) to procreatively driven animals, as though that is how we are driven, primarily, in our lifetimes.

I, completely, support your right to be polyamorous (sp?), but I do not agree with your arguments that attempt to *prove* to us all that it is not natural, biologically, to be monogamous.

I have always taken exception to the argument that "humans are just animals, after all, we just have larger brains."

~I have no interest in swaying you or your argument/belief. I only care to offer another perspective. And, I must say that monogamy is certainly a biological imperative for females of the human species (when it comes to procreation), if that is, indeed, the argument.~

*I don't think monogamy has anything to do with morality/religion, as it pertains to preferences.*

 

[Cuckolded_BlK_Male]

The problem with this argument is that people do not cheat on one another because they feel confined sexually/procreativealy. People cheat for many reasons, many of them emotional. Far and away...

In my opinion this, like much of what humans think that they decide to do of their own volition, is just biology playing them for fools. Again, I respect your right to your opinions, but I don't share them. Especially this one:
"I must say that monogamy is certainly a biological imperative for females of the human species."
I will agree that there is a Patriarchally motivated social imperative for western female humans to abide by this. However, biologically speaking, IMHO, nothing could be further from the truth. It's in a woman's reproductive best interest to have genetically diverse offspring.

You are working really hard to show *proof* that humans are not monogamous by nature. Surely there is an agenda in there somewhere, there always is.

Actually I'm not. I merely gave my opinion and some of the many reasons for it. Other than that, I've only been commenting on responses directed to me. My only conscious agenda is not to accept as fact something which flies in the face of all evidence, simply because traditional societal moral attitudes dictate that I should.

 

[Artless Preen]

In the past,...I have had MANY relationships going at the same time, with women who I was attracted to for one reason or the other.

Maybe it's an age factor,...maybe a hormone thing, maybe MATURENESS. I don't know, but I do know what my "Inner Truth" is.

So is it your age or your ineer maturity that's changed since april/may this year and the beautiful stable of Artful's Pride, Dream and Wish trimuvariat?