Polyamory

[Steezie]

One thing I managed to discover about myself over the last few years is that I am actually polyamorous. This was a bit of a shocking discovery since before that I'd always considered myself extremely monogamous.

After going through that, I can honestly say I have at least a taste of what it feels like to have to tell the people around you that you are gay because the reactions of different people ran the gamut between fascinated and angry.

I'm curious as to why this is.

I understand that a lot of it is religious and I had several friends say to me "Religiously, I don't agree with it, but you are my friend and I accept you." Much of our social fabric is woven out of Christian cloth and Christianity typically frowns on a relationship with multiple partners so, again, that much I understand.

However beyond that it seems strange to me how quickly attitudes change. Many of the reactions I observed to this news were negative even though I am not currently and have no plans to be in a polyamorous relationship.

I guess it falls along the same lines as the phrase "Im no different now than I was before you knew" and that honestly confuses me.

What are your thoughts?

 

[lawtonfogle]

"Would this be an appropriate time to introduce the polygamy* is Biblical debate?"



*one male, one+ women only form


Even if you told me this in real life, that would be my response.

 

[Steezie]

"Would this be an appropriate time to introduce the polygamy* is Biblical debate?"



*one male, one+ women only form


Even if you told me this in real life, that would be my response.

This is one problem I find A LOT, people confuse polyamory with polygamy.

The two are not interchangeable terms, they are not synonyms.

Polygamy is a marraige between one man and multiple women.

Polyamory is a relationship with (or being ok with being involved in) multiple people.

I know that may seem like a trivial difference but its a very important one to recognize.

 

[Sitswithamouse]

Polyamory is in no way the same as polygamy.
Polygamy involves marriage to several female partners.
Polyamory is a consensual relationship between males and females to have multipal partners and not neccesarily in a marrital situation.
It is what could be termed as an open relationship between partners of either sex.

How do I perceive or feel about it?

I don't feel comfortable myself to partake of such a relationship, I am very monogamous,(and I am seperated at present) but if two or more people are consenting and there is no hurt then I see nothing wrong in this arrangement.

This is not confined to sex, it is also meaning that one or more persons can be in love with more than the established (one) partner at any given time.
It happens.
Remember the song ..Torn between two lovers by Mary Macgregor??
Or am I just getting too old ??:0)

 

[Jade Margery]

One thing I managed to discover about myself over the last few years is that I am actually polyamorous. This was a bit of a shocking discovery since before that I'd always considered myself extremely monogamous.

Think you could talk to mah boyfriend? I could totally do polyamorous, with gals and guys, but he's all monogamous and such, srsly. Personally, I find it an unfair double standard that he'd consider doing things with another girl but not another guy. I'm more adventurous, I think I could handle friendly-to-intimate relationships with a couple folks, but now I shan't have a chance. Ah well. (He's worth it though)

I recall hearing about a study done on sets of monogamous and polyamorous marriages (will try to find reference if desired, it was a while ago though). Polyamorous = relationship where extra relationships with other people were allowed. Anyway, the researchers followed these couples for several years, and were surprised to find that the rates of divorce, the levels of happiness and dissatisfaction, were about the same accross the board. The polyamorous marriages lasted as long on average as the monogamous ones. I thought this was very interesting.

 

[Steezie]

Think you could talk to mah boyfriend? I could totally do polyamorous, with gals and guys, but he's all monogamous and such, srsly. Personally, I find it an unfair double standard that he'd consider doing things with another girl but not another guy. I'm more adventurous, I think I could handle friendly-to-intimate relationships with a couple folks, but now I shan't have a chance. Ah well. (He's worth it though)

I'm no therapist, but I think its unfair to ask him to be something or to be ok with something that he doesnt normally do. If he isnt poly, he's not poly. Also, polyamorous doesnt necessarily mean you are gay or bi. I'm straight and poly.

 

[Jade Margery]

I was just kiddin' dude.

 

[Joachim]

My honest position.

People have the right to be in polyamorous relationships and the state shouldn't come down upon them, but honestly, I would not allow a child to be adopted into such a situation and I support keeping bigamy laws as they are

 

[chingchang]

My honest position.

People have the right to be in polyamorous relationships and the state shouldn't come down upon them, but honestly, I would not allow a child to be adopted into such a situation and I support keeping bigamy laws as they are

I generally agree. The only time polyamorous relationships become an issue (for me) is when children are in the mix. Somebody has to be responsible/accountable for raising the child and the child needs to know for sure who to look to for guidance/love. Maybe in an ideal world where love and selflessness ruled it wouldn't matter...but that isn't the current reality.

Hugs All,
CC

 

[lawtonfogle]

This is one problem I find A LOT, people confuse polyamory with polygamy.

The two are not interchangeable terms, they are not synonyms.

Polygamy is a marraige between one man and multiple women.

Polyamory is a relationship with (or being ok with being involved in) multiple people.

I know that may seem like a trivial difference but its a very important one to recognize.

One is an attraction (be it in general or specific), one is the actual marital relationship, at least, that is if my understanding is correct.

 

[Verv]

Polygamy was a necessity in many societies at many times due tot he fact that you would see a tribe go to war and only half the men come home and in order to maintain the numbers and strength one would have to take the other wives to make more children and not have them live out their days with no men.

That is why it was a common Jewish tradition in the old days for a brother to in addition marry the wife of a dead brother afterwards.

Other forms of polygamy were about sexual greed. E.g., the Kings and Emperors of some places have multiple wives.

Polyamory is just a method to rationalize irresponsible sexual activity with the bare presence of "rules."

I'd also like to put it on the record that I do not believe in romantic love that is eternal, and I feel that romantic love by many measures is false.

I do not believe in the form of 'amory' that is even in 'polyamory.' Nor do I even agree with the 'poly' part. You could say that my views on love and marriage are the exact, 100% opposite of polyamory.

I believe in monogamous, extended family system as opposed to the monogamous, nuclear family system as well.

 

[Kharak]

Polygamy was a necessity in many societies at many times due tot he fact that you would see a tribe go to war and only half the men come home and in order to maintain the numbers and strength one would have to take the other wives to make more children and not have them live out their days with no men.

Is there any evidence for this statement at all? Considering that prostitution still existed in the most ancient of times, your statement seems even more absurd in that light.

It's like the summary on the back of one of those silly romance novels: But set in the Stone Age. I can see the leopard skin wearing wives and their burly husband now.

 

[Steezie]

Is there any evidence for this statement at all? Considering that prostitution still existed in the most ancient of times, your statement seems even more absurd in that light.

jm's statement was very true. Multiple wives were often allowed because property laws for centuries often dictated that property passed to the oldest MALE in the family and thus there was a big drive to have sons and heirs.

Prostitution was common but you didnt father children with prostitutes.

 

[Veyrlian]

jm's statement was very true. Multiple wives were often allowed because property laws for centuries often dictated that property passed to the oldest MALE in the family and thus there was a big drive to have sons and heirs.

Prostitution was common but you didnt father children with prostitutes.

But you did father children with concubines. In fact, many times you took concubines for that purpose, if the wife was infertile or too old.

 

[lawtonfogle]

But you did father children with concubines. In fact, many times you took concubines for that purpose, if the wife was infertile or too old.

You are confusing a concubine and a prostitute. The former is like a person prostitute. The issue with standard prostitution is that there was not guarantee who the father was. But if she only prostituted with you, there was not questions.

 

[Steezie]

But you did father children with concubines. In fact, many times you took concubines for that purpose, if the wife was infertile or too old.

Concubines were fairly rare unless you were in the upper echelons of society and even then it was still pretty rare in most places. Concubines were not members of the household nor was there (generally speaking) love between the man and the concubine.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

One thing I managed to discover about myself over the last few years is that I am actually polyamorous. This was a bit of a shocking discovery since before that I'd always considered myself extremely monogamous.

After going through that, I can honestly say I have at least a taste of what it feels like to have to tell the people around you that you are gay because the reactions of different people ran the gamut between fascinated and angry.

I'm curious as to why this is.

I understand that a lot of it is religious and I had several friends say to me "Religiously, I don't agree with it, but you are my friend and I accept you." Much of our social fabric is woven out of Christian cloth and Christianity typically frowns on a relationship with multiple partners so, again, that much I understand.

However beyond that it seems strange to me how quickly attitudes change. Many of the reactions I observed to this news were negative even though I am not currently and have no plans to be in a polyamorous relationship.

I guess it falls along the same lines as the phrase "Im no different now than I was before you knew" and that honestly confuses me.

What are your thoughts?

I don't think I am myself, but a good friend of mine self identifies as polyamorous... and He struggles with it because he is in a monogomous relationship, with someone who would be very hurt if he were to "stray". I believe he could love both his long term partner and another equally, under the right circumstances, but unless the partner is fully informed and consenting, I think its going to cause a lot of pain. Thats the problem with it. As with everything, if everyone involved gives their full, informed consent, I don't have a problem with any behaviour, however polyamorous, or polygamous, or even adulterous relationships tend NOT to be conducted with the full and informed consent of all involved.

 

[Kharak]

jm's statement was very true. Multiple wives were often allowed because property laws for centuries often dictated that property passed to the oldest MALE in the family and thus there was a big drive to have sons and heirs.

Er . . . No?

Polygamy was not something a common man (or wife) engaged in based on historical accounts (even among the traditional Moslem societies), and he was arguing it was a reproductive-survival mechanism. You just argued against his claim: That it was for property instead. I wasn't arguing that it didn't have practical implications, I was simply stating he had no evidence that it was ever for survival in a stereotypical paelolithic society where the men just dropped like flies. Considering that women would often die in childbirth too, it is unlikely such a lopsided population could exist based on our biology. Well that, and divorce laws would ensure that a polygamist male probably would end up a pauper is some of the Latin cultures.

Unless, like certain reptiles, we can control the sex of the unborn through temperature manipulation.

That would actually be pretty awesome.

 

[Verv]

Is there any evidence for this statement at all? Considering that prostitution still existed in the most ancient of times, your statement seems even more absurd in that light.

It's like the summary on the back of one of those silly romance novels: But set in the Stone Age. I can see the leopard skin wearing wives and their burly husband now.

what part of the statement do you want evidence for?

I do not even understand why you doubt it as it is common sense.

 

[sidhe]

I actually find the whole notion that love and possession are in some way connected to be pretty...how to put this...much totally insane.

Seriously.

I love my partner. I don't own her. She can do what she wants, so long as I know about it. To state that I have some kind of inherent and exclusive right to her automatically based on the simple fact that we're in a relationship is a statement of insecurity.

A monogamous relationship should be based on mutual consent to monogamy, a polyamorous relationship should be based on mutual consent to polyamory, and neither should ever be accepted as standard simply due to the dictates of the culture.