Polyamory...

kerrick…

you said something about being rigorously ethical about polyamory. i notice the term polyamory comes up in circles around me a fair amount lately and would like to hear further discussion about it. any insights or personal sharing on the subject you may have would be helpful i think.

-d

Re: Polyamory...

Hey, thanks for the question…

Polyamory is one of several different types of nonmonogamy. For me there's a distinction between polyamory and open relationships. To me, “open relationship” means there are certain primary partners who have negotiated with one another permission to have casual sex with others. To me, “polyamory” means that there may be multiple ongoing long-term relationships that may involve sex, love, and other levels of intimacy. “Rigorously ethical” means that my primary goal is always to do the least amount of harm with the greatest amount of honesty and integrity.

Currently, I have one partner, with room in my life for another. The reason I have room for another partner is because there are some things I am looking for in a relationship that are incompatible with the relationship I have now, which I would rather keep as it is. These things are also not compatible with casual hookups (which are not in themselves compatible with my sense of well-being, I know from past experience).

Polyamory is not for everyone, and it's not a “more enlightened” style of having relationships. There is such value in monogamy— every person contains infinite worlds, and getting to know just one person even slightly can take a lifetime. Polyamory can sometimes be a way of avoiding being that intimate. Sometimes, people might be tempted to avoid a problem they have in one relationship by creating another, or by immersing themselves in an existing relationship with another partner. I don't think that's particularly healthy. Instead, partners can support one another through the sometimes rocky periods of coming to understand one another in that depth.

Does that help? Do you have more specific questions?

K

Re: Polyamory...

from a structural aspect i guess i have questions about what one would find with one partner that they would not find with another. not necessarily specific to your situation, but in general.

i understand sex for example as a gay man looking at some of my friends' relationships. it is not uncommon for one to want more sex than another which at times is why they will consider opening up a relationship. sometimes one partner is on meds and that inhibits their sex drive and the other has a hard time with that so seeks sex outside the relationship, but generally that is where they look at an 'open' relationship.

i did have one friend who had a primary relationship and then ongoing secondary relationship, well, his partner had one and he was looking for one. he wanted that from me, but i had no interest in being someone's secondary relationship as it felt like being wife number two eventually and i preferred being single to feeling like someone's second fiddle.

any thoughts on that? reactions? insight?

it would seem on some level polyamory could easily require some second fiddling for someone or someones depending on what all was involved.

-d

Re: Polyamory...

“from a structural aspect i guess i have questions about what one would find with one partner that they would not find with another. not necessarily specific to your situation, but in general.”

Well, different people have different dynamics. For example, I might have a partner who is steady and a grounding influence, but also feel the need for something more spontaneous and energizing. I could change the dynamic with my existing partner, but that might be destabilizing for us and maybe one or both of us would not like the results. Or I can spend time with partner blue when I need stability and with partner green when I need dynamism.

“primary” and “secondary” relationships make sense for some poly people, and others prefer their partners equal or just don't use models like that. Sometimes it's just more complex. I might spend time with two partners equally, but put more value on the opinions of one, and bend over backwards to do things for another. But yeah, obviously a lot of communication about needs and feelings has to happen to avoid people feeling competitive.

For me, the real issue is whether all partners are getting their needs met and if there's room to negotiate when they aren't. Sometimes not wanting to be secondary is about needing something that one isn't getting, like maybe more time or more intimacy or more support. Sometimes, though, it's about competitiveness and insecurity. These things also have their place, but in poly relationships they can be real obstacles.

Re: Polyamory...

kerrick…

that was helpful. i guess much like friendships where one meets one need or set of needs, and another another. that makes sense.

appreciate your thoughts there.

-d

Re: Polyamory...

kerrick – i think that's a great overview of polyamory! 

Re: Polyamory...

Kerrick,
Thank you for a concise yet thorough synopsis of what “poly” means to you.  I have been rather judgmental of polyamory, in part because I've encountered both the “we're more enlightened/evolved than you jealous possessive types” subtext  as well as the “I'm having my cake and eating it too; what's wrong with that??” subtext from others who have attempted to explain its benefits to me, a naturally dyadic personality.  Your explanation is the first that leaves me with the belief that it could even be possible to be “rigorously ethical” and polyamorous at the same time, so thank you for enabling me to understand it better.

Stark