Why are you poly?

[HughMungus]

No, I don't mean polygamous; I mean the other poly. Just curious what people get out of this because I met three different women at our regional this past weekend who are poly and it made me wonder what the appeal is.

[hunter S]

HM, Sorry if I'm ignerant but what is "Poly"? I'll google it, but notsure that will help.

[Kinetic IV]

I'm trying to figure this one out too. HM, would you care to enlighten us with an explanation?

[HughMungus]

HM, Sorry if I'm ignerant but what is "Poly"? I'll google it, but notsure that will help.

Polyamory.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyamory

[hunter S]

HM, sorry I googled & found it:) wow, lot of groups in one small name!

[AntiM]

I have several poly friends, best explanation I can think of is that some hearts are big enough to love more than one person. Just another option, although I do think there's a few people who confuse sexual freedom with loving more than one partner.

Polyparadise hosts informative talks, I've been and found it quite interesting.

Fomr the 2005 theme camp listings:

...
Join us for 'Poly High Tea'
4:30-6:00p Daily. First, it's a Tea Party. We will be serving Tea and Cookies... for tea and cookies.
All you Polyamorous, poly-curious, and poly-friendly folks out there on the playa are invited to join us for a discussion about the practical issues of loving more than one in an open, responsible multi-person relationship. There are many workable forms of Polyamorous relationship - polyamory is polymorphic! There is much wisdom in the poly community which can be helpful to people trying to make *any* relationship work, monogamous or Polyamorous. There will be a facilitated discussion in which you can get your questions addressed and some of the knowledge in our community can be shared.
Hometown: Phoenix, AZ
URL: http://polyparadise.azcompuguy.com
Contact: scotto (at) burningman (dot) com

[Ron]

Why are you monogamous? The answer is basically the same. When I look inside myself I don't see a value in monogamy. Back in the day, before I'd ever heard the word, "poly," I considered myself just non-monogamous. To my ears a closed relationship said, "I love you so much you'd better not have any (sexual) fun unless I'm the sole cause and only other person with you." Wow, some love, eh?

Now I'm not saying that's what monogamy is, mind you. Just saying what it's always been to *me*, see the difference?

As such, I lost my virginity in a triad while a young teenager and haven't looked back since. At 37 years old my wife and I have been together since I was 14 (she and I started out in my second, her first, triad) and she was 18 and we've only even tried monogamy once. It was my sole experiment with the relationship style and it is not for me. Why? Because for me to act monogamous makes me feel like my inner self and outer behavior are not in alinement. I'm not a good me, when I'm monogamous. Just like lots of monogamous fold aren't good versions of themselves when they act non-monogamously.

But what do I know, I think the "choice," model is largely broken. :)

Ron

[Apollonaris Zeus]

Does Poly what a cracker!


AIIZ

[PlayaPetal]

poly-
pref.
More than one; many; much: polyatomic.
More than usual; excessive; abnormal: polydipsia.
Polymer; polymeric: polyethylene.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[Greek polu-, from polus, much, many. See pel-1 in Indo-European Roots.]

So what was your question again? oh ya... I am MANY things... so I guess I am poly.

[helitack]

......heli comes up for air and what does he see? Argument boy. Methinks I will duck back to a better place........






















































































































A poll: Does Hugh have too much time on his hands? Or is he simply a chain puller?

[Rob the Wop]

I'm simply wondering if he will pull the same crap as the last thread:

He asks question.
People give honest answer.
He says that it isn't good enough, they need to prove why their way is better than his (monogamy).
They try to answer in a way he might comprehend.
He ignores answer, says their first answer wasn't good enough, and that they are really monogamous- they just refuse to admit it.
They say he's off his fricking bean.
He smugly says that he won.

What simple minds do for entertainment is beyond me at times.

[Kinetic IV]

<soapbox>
People are fundamentally good.
People deserve chances at learning from past mistakes.

So with that mindset I looked at the thread and thought it was legit. As for what Hugh's done in the past in another thread....maybe that's his thread for being mischievious or to draw out different points of view on the topic in question. This thread could turn out to be different. In any event until he exhibits that behavior again...the thread remains innocent and I'm treating it like any other thread.
</soapbox>

[Rob the Wop]

<soapbox>
People are fundamentally good.
People deserve chances at learning from past mistakes.
</soapbox>

In order for people to learn from a mistake, they have to know it was a mistake. If a mistake is never acknowledged, the behavior cannot be improved upon.

[HughMungus]

I'm simply wondering if he will pull the same crap as the last thread:

He asks question.
People give honest answer.
He says that it isn't good enough, they need to prove why their way is better than his (monogamy).
They try to answer in a way he might comprehend.
He ignores answer, says their first answer wasn't good enough, and that they are really monogamous- they just refuse to admit it.
They say he's off his fricking bean.
He smugly says that he won.

What simple minds do for entertainment is beyond me at times.

You're still trying to "win" that argument?

Ron, I can see polygamy as in non-monogamy. What I don't understand is polyamory. Specifically, how do the partners forming the legs of a V-shaped triad handle sometimes not being able to express the love they feel at any moment of any day as someone in a monogamous relationship can. If you say that they CAN express the love they feel at any moment they want to, how do they handle never having any "alone time"?

[HughMungus]

<soapbox>
People are fundamentally good.
People deserve chances at learning from past mistakes.
</soapbox>

In order for people to learn from a mistake, they have to know it was a mistake. If a mistake is never acknowledged, the behavior cannot be improved upon.

In your world, it can be however you want.

[Ron]

....

Ron, I can see polygamy as in non-monogamy. What I don't understand is polyamory.

What do you see as the difference between the two?

.... Specifically, how do the partners forming the legs of a V-shaped triad handle sometimes not being able to express the love they feel at any moment of any day as someone in a monogamous relationship can. If you say that they CAN express the love they feel at any moment they want to, how do they handle never having any "alone time"?

Huh? I'm sorry I'm not tracking your question. Getting alone time, and expressing one's feelings, are things folk have to deal with all the time and I don't see how being monogamous or no has an effect on it. Wanna try the question again, I'm not tracking it.

Ron

[ibdave]

Huh? I'm sorry I'm not tracking your question. Getting alone time, and expressing one's feelings, are things folk have to deal with all the time and I don't see how being monogamous or no has an effect on it. Wanna try the question again, I'm not tracking it.

Ron

Ron, The Lines forms behind me..

[Kinetic IV]

I'm curious how one guy can take care of the emotional needs of two other women in such a way as to keep the evil jealousy monster at bay? Monogamous relationships are not exactly easy to maintain as is....adding another person into the mix looks like a recipe for excess volatility and a relationship meltdown over time.

[HughMungus]

....

Ron, I can see polygamy as in non-monogamy. What I don't understand is polyamory.

What do you see as the difference between the two?

.... Specifically, how do the partners forming the legs of a V-shaped triad handle sometimes not being able to express the love they feel at any moment of any day as someone in a monogamous relationship can. If you say that they CAN express the love they feel at any moment they want to, how do they handle never having any "alone time"?

Huh? I'm sorry I'm not tracking your question. Getting alone time, and expressing one's feelings, are things folk have to deal with all the time and I don't see how being monogamous or no has an effect on it. Wanna try the question again, I'm not tracking it.

Ron

What I'm talking about is people who are in more than one loving relationship at once (with consent), not just multiple consensual sexual relationships (I'm not qualifying yours, just clarifying that I'm talking about romantic/emotional vs. sexual).

Here's an example of what I diagrammed earlier. Le'ts say me and another guy are in love with a woman and we're both married to her. She loves us equally. It seems that with polyamory, you have to give up the guaranteed alone time OR you have to give up the guaranteed access.

Let's say we have an agreement where sometimes she spends exclusive time with him and sometimes she spends exlusive time with me and sometimes it's not exclusive for either of us and we all get to hang out together. What I'm wondering is if that is the case, and she and he are away somewhere and I'm not supposed to be interrupting, then there is one situation that would really suck for me. In a monogamous relationship, there isn't that kind of limit. I can, theoretically, express my love for my partner no matter the time of day or where she is. But in a polyamorous triad like that, I couldn't do that because I have to respct their alone time (as agreed).

Alternatively, let's say that to prevent something like that from happening, exclusivity is not allowed at all. Well, then you might never get ANY "alone time" with the other person. I don't mean alone time for having sex or cuddling. I mean what if you want some alone time just to talk, one one one, etc. Again, with monogamy, I know that any time that she is available for someone else would be time for me -- and that I wouldn't have to wonder if I'm going to be able to get some alone time or not.

Basically, I don't understand how people, especially the legs of a triad, handle either exclusion or lack of one-on-one time with the pivot. With monogamy you get both.

[theCryptofishist]

From what I've heard, polygamy doesn't seem to work well. At least as it is practiced in traditional sociaties. Although it is then practiced by rich men, it still seems to short wives of resources. (as evidenced by a lower number or children raised to adulthood per woman. The man does better than just having one wife.) Of course, polygamy is not polyamoury. I think there have always been a small number of people who function best in either a one major partner and a lot of people on the side arrangement or some sort of small group marraige and they've pretty much done it stealth (like a lot of transgender in history, or western history) and succeeded or failed without many noticing. I'm curious as to the assumption that it's one man, two women and that the man is responcible for the emotional well-being of both the women rather than each being responcible for his/her own emotional well-being. And then if both the women are bi and they were the original couple. I have read a rather nice essay in one of name won't pop into my brain--famous gay and leather prawnographer who wrote Mr. Benson, john somebody, but anyway in one of his collections there's a nice little essay about a gay male diad that becomes a triad.
I think a one man/two woman thing works better if at least two of the partners are working--so you don't run into the resource issue.
I would also caution that the poly explosion is very new and there aren't much data on longevity as yet. We could cross-reference with swingers, who have traits in common with the polyamourous. I dont' know the whole story but I get the feeling that there are people who managed to make that work for them long term, but that it took a tendency towards that on behalf of both partners and it took communication.

My guess is that for people to whom poly is important, they make it work.

[Ron]

I'm curious how one guy can take care of the emotional needs of two other women in such a way as to keep the evil jealousy monster at bay? Monogamous relationships are not exactly easy to maintain as is....adding another person into the mix looks like a recipe for excess volatility and a relationship meltdown over time.

Well see now, there's a fair chunk of poly folk who don't buy the idea that one person can ever fully meet another person's "needs." We don't have one friend, one child, one parent or so on and expect that one person to meet all of our needs in that one relationship context, do we? No one says, "I'm having a second child because the first just isn't meeting my needs," eh? :)

For myself, when I'm acting honestly within and without, when I'm making the right decisions for me and mine, then maintaining my healthy relationships is easier, not harder. And so, for me, maintaining non-monogamous sexual relationships is much easier than maintaining monogamous sexual relationships. It's a rule of thumb that has proven useful for me. The right choices make life easier and better, reducing stress and drama. True here as elsewhere, in my experience.

Ron, ignoring the gender assumptions...

[dr.placebo]

OK, I'll bite. I'm in a monogamous relationship, but I've been in "open" relationships in the past.

The whole notion that you need "guaranteed" exclusive time with your lover, or one of your lovers, is a bit suspect. I'm apart from my spouse due to work or some other reason fairly often. I enjoy my time with her, but if she is having lunch with someone (M or F) while I'm at work it is simply not an issue.

Further, I don't get exclusive "access" to my spouse. She has a lot of irons in the fire. So I have to share her with a lot of people and activities. I even support her having retreat time away from all contact. The only exclusivity we have is our particular emotional and sexual bond.

What you are actually asking about is handling jealousy. When she is with him (especially being sexual) and not with you there is emotional distress for you. OK, then you need monogamy as a shield against that feeling. And there will be be many partners who agree with you on that need.

But not everyone feels that level of jealousy. Some people can actually be happy for their partner receiving love from another. It's not that common, given our cultural imperatives, but I know a few successful poly/open relationships.

The key to a good poly relationship is actually the same as for a non-poly relationship. You need to be open and honest about your intentions, you need to have agreement about the substantial issues, and you need to honor your agreements.

[regynalonglank]

and it is good, whenever possible, to refrain from lying on the application. if having other people involved in your relationship will turn you into a hideous, weeping, jealous monster with insecure lashing out and pouting then telling someone you want to be with that you are "cool with that" would be a bad idea. just for example :P

[Ron]

........
What I'm talking about is people who are in more than one loving relationship at once (with consent), not just multiple consensual sexual relationships

So you're saying poly is the former? So do folk have to have sex to be poly?

Sorry to bring up an old chestnut, but it's a hobby horse of mine. :)

Seems to me that the distinction you're making isn't really relevant to the question but it is one I see all the time in the sex community.

............
Here's an example of what I diagrammed earlier. Le'ts say me and another guy are in love with a woman and we're both married to her. She loves us equally. It seems that with polyamory, you have to give up the guaranteed alone time OR you have to give up the guaranteed access.

Actually being poly just says that everyone is open to the wife having a relationship with both of you at the same time. That's it. You may or may not have to give up either of the two. Maybe one guy lives distantly and the relationship is all virtual, just by way of a universe of examples.

........

Let's say we have an agreement where sometimes she spends exclusive time with him and sometimes she spends exlusive time with me and sometimes it's not exclusive for either of us and we all get to hang out together. What I'm wondering is if that is the case, and she and he are away somewhere and I'm not supposed to be interrupting, then there is one situation that would really suck for me.

And lots of others. No one likes to be alone, at times, but finding yourself unable to contact your partner during one of those moments isn't something that's either unique to, or inevitable within, poly. Your example runs far ahead of the relationship style and into the field of individual relationship tactics and behaviors, seems to me. Those behaviors, in turn, are as unique as the folk in the given relationship. Just like mono people have to deal with negotiating mutual behavior so too do poly folk. And when those discussion happen from a place of mutual positive regard and respect they can generally produce workable solutions for all.

........ In a monogamous relationship, there isn't that kind of limit. I can, theoretically, express my love for my partner no matter the time of day or where she is.

Not at all. I know countless monogamous folk who have regular "boys/girls" nights out for one or the other partner. It's considered bad form for the non-partying member of the relationship to contact the other during these times, often. Folk deal with it, it's not that big of a deal, seems to me. Every try to call your girl friend while she's off at at "bitch and stitch," with the ladies? ;)

...........
Basically, I don't understand how people, especially the legs of a triad, handle either exclusion or lack of one-on-one time with the pivot. With monogamy you get both.

Everyone spends some time together, and some time apart, regardless of their relationship style. Mono or poly both gotta talk and discover the mix of time to themselves and time together that works for them and it seems to me that if one can do so in a monogamous context the same skills apply to a non-monogamous one. The only difference between the two is the possibility that during some of that time apart one (or more) of the partners may be having sex. Um, well, maybe I should say that the only difference between the two is that in an open, honest, non-monogamous context one (or more) of the absent partners may be having sex that is approved of in the rules of the relationship. :)

Ron

[AntiM]

I see my husband three, maybe four days a month, sometimes a little more often when his runs bring him through town. You'd think we'd be the perfect candidates for poly relationships, but no, monogamy works for us, we're both insanely jealous beasts and we know it.

That said, I think if three (or more) people can be happy for each other giving and receiving love from more than one person, "alone time" would become less and less of an issue. You know you love your other, you don't need to run to them to prove it or feel it or validate it; the love is there and you express it when and where you can. I can see why that wouldn't work for everyone as I know it wouldn't work for me, but I wouldn't disbelieve it could happen for other folks.

[joel the ornery]

my eyes glazed over after the 5th or 6th post.

[AntiM]

better than drugs, eh?

[theCryptofishist]

I can, theoretically, express my love for my partner no matter the time of day or where she is.

Just remember that if you got too cuddly on the street my husband and I would have called you breeders.

[Rob the Wop]

and it is good, whenever possible, to refrain from lying on the application. if having other people involved in your relationship will turn you into a hideous, weeping, jealous monster with insecure lashing out and pouting then telling someone you want to be with that you are "cool with that" would be a bad idea. just for example

Sorry, didn't hear a word you were saying- I was staring at your tits. Wanna fuck?

Wait a second...

If you profess a virtual desire to boink someone else while staring at their naughty bits, yet have said this to more than one person on the Eplaya- does that make you E-poly?

[theCryptofishist]

my eyes glazed over after the 5th or 6th post.

Thinking of pottery, uhuh!