Polyamory

[Eudaimonist]

Between the 5th century BC and the 17th century AD there was a long line of Chinese philosophers who held a very rich dialog on what is the proper way for human beings to behave...

They were Confucianists, Taoists, Buddhists, Neo-Confucianists, Neo-Taoists, etc. They often called this school of thought 'Seong-ri-hak.'

Seong for 'disposition' or 'nature', 'ri' for 'reason' or 'logic,' and 'hak' for knowledge.

The aim was to undrstand what is the nature of humans and what is the most proper and best way for us to behave, and what characteristics are good to cultivate and what others should be removed.

... And you aren't going to find anyone saying 'indulging in all of the sex you want with multiple partners on a flexible and loose schedule is proper.'

Interesting, but what were their reasons for rejecting polyamory?


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[moonkitty]

I mean, I was 18 years old. A young kid. I was dating several guys at once and I really liked it. But, it gets old after a while. When I began seriously dating, it was too tempting for me to not have other men in my life.

I think its more natural for me to be involved in several people's lives than just one. But, I find that path more destructive and ultimately dissatisfying.

I was and still am like this. Not just in a sexual way, but just being close friends with many of my female friends and their children and hubbys. And I have to admit as well the poly ideal has occurred to me more than once. I have had a few male friends that I was attracted to, and enjoyed their company and would have enjoyed a bit of sex with them without being in love with them more than friendship. I didn't go that route, 1 because I would not ever want to hurt my husband. In many ways he loves more like a woman does, unlike most men he does not enjoy causal sex, he has no sexual interest in someone he is not in love with. So he doesn't understand how people can have sex and not be in love. 2. Even if my hubby was ok with it, the other guy I'm sure would start acting all possessive after a while. While I think it would be fun to have a poly lifestyle, I have a feeling it would just be more hassle in the end.

 

[Eudaimonist]

You see children be exclusive in who they let play with their toys and who they choose to be friends, and when you get older and have crushes on the opposite sex there is the simple fantasy of being with that one person and being able to share your life with them in a special union...

... And we are accused of muddying the waters by asking people if they find it acceptable for their loved ones to engage in this behavior. This is because the emotions and the body are acutely aware of how utterly bizarre and bestial said proposal is

Hold on. I personally share your emotional reaction to polyamory. It seems inconceivable that this is a romantic option that should be taken seriously as something potentially good. I even have to explain polyamorists to myself by suggesting that their brains are wired differently.

But my emotional reaction to polyamory just isn't enough to prove that it is wrong for everyone, any more than the emotional reactions of polyamorists are enough to prove that we all should be polyamorists as well.

yet how easy it is to rationalize it to the person whose sexual appetite dictates their thoughts...

You are making an awfully big assumption here -- and that is that polyamory is all about sex. It doesn't have to be.

But again: How would you want your daughter in a relationship with two men?

I wouldn't like it on a gut level, but I would respect her right to self-determination. I would hope that she would be self-examining enough to detect if there was something wrong about this for her.

If you ever needed more proof of the decline of Western civilization, this is it.

I'd need far more proof than emotions and body-sense.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Eudaimonist]

unlike most men he does not enjoy causal sex, he has no sexual interest in someone he is not in love with. So he doesn't understand how people can have sex and not be in love.

I'm pretty much the same way. I wouldn't necessarily say that I had to be "in love", but I would have to know, like, and trust my partner at least reasonably well.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[moonkitty]

Blink your eyes twice and she's 15. You'd be surprised how fast it will go.

Somehow, without this "new" information I have navigated 37 years of monogamous fidelity and raised a son and daughter (now 25 yrs old +) without regrets.

Might reread your own posts before calling others condescending, just saying.

I haven't looked over this book every carefully, but my teen age daughter (13) has asked about different types of relationships. we have had very frank and open conversations about the pros and cons of marriage, dating, open relationships and such. We have discussed the the biology of sex in different species, like how baboons tend to use sex as a social bond. (She is very interested in animal behavior, and wants to go into zoology and animal research).

Would I want my 13 year old daughter hiking parts of the Appalachian Trail by herself? No way. Would I want her to hike the Appalachian Trail as a mature, responsible adult? sure.

Same with a polyamous lifestyle. As a teenager, no, because she is not mature enough to be handling a sexual relationship with anyone. As a mature adult if that is where her heart is, and she is mature about it, then I wouldn't have a problem with it.

 

[drstevej]

I haven't looked over this book every carefully, but my teen age daughter (13) has asked about different types of relationships. we have had very frank and open conversations about the pros and cons of marriage, dating, open relationships and such. We have discussed the the biology of sex in different species, like how baboons tend to use sex as a social bond. (She is very interested in animal behavior, and wants to go into zoology and animal research).

Would I want my 13 year old daughter hiking parts of the Appalachian Trail by herself? No way. Would I want her to hike the Appalachian Trail as a mature, responsible adult? sure.

Same with a polyamous lifestyle. As a teenager, no, because she is not mature enough to be handling a sexual relationship with anyone. As a mature adult if that is where her heart is, and she is mature about it, then I wouldn't have a problem with it.

I actually hiked the Appalachian trail as a 13 year old, albeit not alone.

Studying sexuality in the animal kingdom is a valid study. I have lots of vet professor and biology professor friends here at LSU but none of them feel compelled to pattern their own sexuality after their findings in the animal kingdom.

As a Christian, I believe humans are uniquely created in the image of God and given dominion over the animal kingdom. With this dominion comes the need to study them and to care for them.

However, in the area of sex and marriage God never told us to study the animals for clues. Instead, He established marriage between a man and a wife and He made it clear that adultery is sin (offensive to Him). Jesus affirms these tennets.

You make this an issue of maturity. Maybe you need to define maturity. I think you and I are both aware of people who are viewed as mature in many areas of life yet make bad choices regarding selecting their "love interests."

As a pastor who has performed about 200 marriages, I insist that not only do couples embrace the biblical concept of marriage but that they also demonstrate the maturity needed to enter responsibly into the covenant of marriage. I require 6 hours of counseling, which I do at no charge, including the TJTA temperament profile. I refuse to do weddings when these criteria, in my opinion, are not met or are questionable.

Of the weddings I have done 85-90% are still together. A year ago I spent a weekend with 20 couples that I married over 25 years ago. I don't know how many of them could describe the sex habits of a chimpanzee or a sea horse but they still loved one another and were not into threesome or spouse loaning to any Polly. None of them have ever been on the Jerry Springer show.

Would you want your grand kids to be raised in a polyamorous context, especially a polyamorous context where new partners were added and old subtracted as your daughter and her partners decided? Can you say that is what is in their best interest?

 

[moonkitty]

I actually hiked the Appalachian trail as a 13 year old, albeit not alone.

Studying sexuality in the animal kingdom is a valid study. I have lots of vet professor and biology professor friends here at LSU but none of them feel compelled to pattern their own sexuality after their findings in the animal kingdom.

As a Christian, I believe humans are uniquely created in the image of God and given dominion over the animal kingdom. With this dominion comes the need to study them and to care for them.

However, in the area of sex and marriage God never told us to study the animals for clues. Instead, He established marriage between a man and a wife and He made it clear that adultery is sin (offensive to Him). Jesus affirms these tennets.

You make this an issue of maturity. Maybe you need to define maturity. I think you and I are both aware of people who are viewed as mature in many areas of life yet make bad choices regarding selecting their "love interests."

As a pastor who has performed about 200 marriages, I insist that not only do couples embrace the biblical concept of marriage but that they also demonstrate the maturity needed to enter responsibly into the covenant of marriage. I require 6 hours of counseling, which I do at no charge, including the TJTA temperament profile. I refuse to do weddings when these criteria, in my opinion, are not met or are questionable.

Of the weddings I have done 85-90% are still together. A year ago I spent a weekend with 20 couples that I married over 25 years ago. I don't know how many of them could describe the sex habits of a chimpanzee or a sea horse but they still loved one another and were not into threesome or spouse loaning to any Polly. None of them have ever been on the Jerry Springer show.

Would you want your grand kids to be raised in a polyamorous context, especially a polyamorous context where new partners were added and old subtracted as your daughter and her partners decided? Can you say that is what is in their best interest?

Well first of all I'm not christian and have not raised my children to be christian. I have always allowed them to explore, learn and choose their own religious path. I was raised hard-core southern Baptist and it has pretty much turned me off from most religion. I have worked very hard to over come my knee-jerk reaction to religion so that I did not negatively influence my children in regards to religion.

I have raised my children to know there is no question off limits, I may not know the answer, but I will do my best.

So I do not really care if the bible says not to study the animal kingdom when it comes to sex. In conversations about human sexuality and human sexuality/realationships vs. animal sexuality I always try to include not just basic biology but also social constructs, like religion. My children know that the dominate culture is a christian culture that teaches mongomy and that going against that trend can have serious problems. They have to decide if the risks are worth it. The most recent example is a close friend of ours is going through a divorce, mainly because the husband wanted a swinger lifestyle and his wife did not. The daughter of this couple confided in my daughter that her dad is a "swinger" and my daughter did not know what that meant so she asked me. So we got into the discussion of such things, but on a level that she can understand. We dicussed how in other cultures and religion and it was acceptable to have multiple wives, but all parties have to be in agreement. That in this situation that he had made a promise not to have other lovers, and he broke that promise and hurt his wife and children.

We also have had friends in the past who have polyamorous lifestyle (with children) but because everyone went into the relationship knowing what to expect and were ok with it, then noone was hurt.

My daughter is just starting to take an interest in boys and is starting to have the little boyfriend/girlfriend relationships. Not really dating so much as having play-dates; i.e. they go to the movies but me and the other parent are there as well. As another poster has said, I do not want my daughter making commitments to these little boyfriends because she really does not understand, as of yet, the serious nature of a true commitment. I want her to view these little play-dates as getting to know a friend not a love interest. At 13 she is too young to be in such a serious relationship. Now as she gets older, and matures--I mean maturity as in knowing how to make good decisions in all areas of her life--then I will be more willing for her to make commitments, or not.

As for her raising grandchildren in such a lifestyle, like I said as long as I feel she is mature enough, then I would not have a problem with it. But I really wont have a say in it. Just like my mom does not like me not raising my children to not be southern baptist. She was FURIOUS that I took my children to a science museum that taught that the world is much older than 6,000 years and that I encouraged her in her love of dinosaurs. (My parents tried to teach us that dino bones where planted by the devil to trip up good christians).

 

[moonkitty]

Hey Mling,

Short answer, so long as everyone involved gives their fully informed adult consent? I say more power to you, and much happiness may it bring.

ETA: There's a book you may be interested in called "Sex at Dawn" Sex at Dawn about just how much of human monogomay and alternatives are biological, and just how much is socially conditioned. Well worth a read. I'm happy to lend you a copy if you promise to return it.

Now that I have had a chance to look it over, that does sound like an interesting read. Of course with most books I read it before I allow my children to read it. Just like I encourage my children to read the classics, I'm not going to let my daughter delve into War and Peace without adult guidance. But this is something I think she will enjoy when she is a bit older. Right now I don't think is is something that she can handle as of yet.

 

[rsduncan]

Well moonkitty, I have decided the risks are not worth it and I offer the problems we face in our society as evidence. I don't want to end up like some fifteen million people in the US do each year. I see this new foray into the sexual avant-garde as only exacerbating the problems we now face and creating new ones for us to deal with.

But I am considered a cantankerous, superstitious idiot by the representives of the logical, intellectual elite here, so what do I know???

 

[Everlasting33]

I was and still am like this. Not just in a sexual way, but just being close friends with many of my female friends and their children and hubbys. And I have to admit as well the poly ideal has occurred to me more than once. I have had a few male friends that I was attracted to, and enjoyed their company and would have enjoyed a bit of sex with them without being in love with them more than friendship. I didn't go that route, 1 because I would not ever want to hurt my husband. In many ways he loves more like a woman does, unlike most men he does not enjoy causal sex, he has no sexual interest in someone he is not in love with. So he doesn't understand how people can have sex and not be in love. 2. Even if my hubby was ok with it, the other guy I'm sure would start acting all possessive after a while. While I think it would be fun to have a poly lifestyle, I have a feeling it would just be more hassle in the end.

I also share in your sentiments above. I was nodding my head in agreement while reading it Since I was a young girl, I have always had a best friend that was of the opposite sex. It's easier and way more fun to talk to guys. And, yet I think it would create too much drama and hassle, like you said.

My sister admitted to me that she has also entertained these thoughts and it leads me to believe many people find it appealing. But, they don't say anything because its looked down upon. But, admitting it should not induce shame.

 

[40 Rabbits]

Possibly so, but marriage-for-love and romantic love are relatively recent developments as well. At one time, marriage was just a political or business arrangement, or just some needed thing the tribe needed to do to survive.

Perhaps it is the individualism that arose in the West that led to such developments, but they do seem to be natural. In other words, these were social developments regarding the social acceptance of natural aspects of our psychology. In ancient Greece, for instance, infatuation was viewed as a kind of temporary insanity. Today, it is not uncommon to view having such feelings at least once in one's life as a requirement for a full life.

So, it's not like we (or most people) can't develop a romantic attachment to someone, and feel hurt or jealous if there is cheating on that relationship. I don't think that a "we are all naturally polygamous" argument really works in full. In a polygamous society, I expect at least some people -- the natural monogamists -- to have been at least vaguely dissatisfied.


eudaimonia,

Mark

I don't believe romantic love is a recent development. I believe it is an integral part of what we are. I think romantic love is a significant part of polyamorous and polygamist relationships. That, in no way, disputes the fact that arranged loveless marriages haven't and do not happen.

I am one of the natural monogamists that you mentioned. I have never been interested in casual sex, which has placed me at odds with many of my male friends since I was in my teens. It has also placed me at odds with female acquaintances who wanted to have sex and I said "no". Even when I've been single, I will not have sex with someone I am not in love with enough to have a committed relationship with.

I am a Native American and I endorse traditional beliefs. Polygamy and monogamy are both equally valid concepts for us. Polyamory seems to be a more modern phenomenon in the sense of relationships without responsibility and commitment. It is, however, a part of our culture today. I think that is because women have become more independent and do not have to be part of a marriage relationship to survive any more.

 

[Gracchus]

I don't really care what other people do in the area of sex. It is not my business... Except, that every deviation from strict monogamy inevitably promotes the spread of STD's, and that can have a serious negative impact on families and society in general.

 

[Mling]

I don't know how many of them could describe the sex habits of a chimpanzee or a sea horse but they still loved one another and were not into threesome or spouse loaning to any Polly. None of them have ever been on the Jerry Springer show.

Would you want your grand kids to be raised in a polyamorous context, especially a polyamorous context where new partners were added and old subtracted as your daughter and her partners decided? Can you say that is what is in their best interest?

I asked before if you could offer some details about what you are imagining poly is like (also, curious why you spell it like the parrot name, but that's somewhat beside the point). Is this that little bit of insight?

Do you realize that there are a million and a half ways to do poly, and that, when you get into long-standing relationships, they usually look nothing like what you've described above?

(Another aside--the word "loaning," what's up with that? People aren't property. That's the whole point of this.)

I do know one poly family that is raising a child. They're the one I described earlier, with two women who are married to each other and both their boyfriends, all living together. The baby is now 6 months old, and they mentioned once that nobody's had sex since he was born. Aside from baby stuff, the most exciting thing that's happened among them lately was one of the mothers being diagnosed with Lyme disease, (there's no indication it was contracted from an outdoor orgy.)

The bit about new partners being added and subtracted as "your daughter and her partners decided" confuses me a bit. Who else would decide?

My take--raising kids in a poly family is just like raising kids in any family. Keep a critical mass worth of their life consistent. Not everything has to be, but enough that any changes will be experienced as variety in a stable universe, rather than yet integral change in a constantly shifting universe.

In practice--anybody involved in raising the kids needs to be committed for the long-haul. If there's anybody else involved with them, they shouldn't have much to do with the kids. You know...the same way you might have a couple, and their grandparents, and some aunts and uncles and maybe some family friends all playing some kind of role in raising a child; but the kid probably never even meets coworkers or less dear friends and acquaintances, and if she does, they briefly come and go without much relationship. Children being raised by more than two caretakers isn't a new thing, after all. It was the norm for most of human history. People do have a sense for how to do it.

Also--new parents are new parents. It's unlikely they're going to be doing much random hooking-up when they're not getting any sleep and are up to their ears in diapers.

Would the kid be confused if his parents occasionally have friends over who they're a little affectionate with, (assuming that the parents are having other relationships openly in front of them, which not all poly parents would)? Probably not. Kids aren't born knowing social norms. They know when they're being hurt or neglected, but the don't intrinsically know what monogamy is or that it's common. If they're certain about the stability of the people they consider family, and of their role in the family, and that there is enough love going around for them to get their fair share of it, then what would bother them about this?

When I was little, I sometimes found it odd that other kids were biologically related to all of their siblings, and had kept the same birth-order place for their entire life. "You're the oldest? That's cool. I was the oldest until I was nine, but now I have an older sister. How long have you been the oldest? Oh, two sisters at the moment--my parents are chatting about maybe adopting a boy named Josh, but nothing official yet." (That never happened, which made me sad.)

Kids know when they're being taken care of--they don't know that the pastor down the street disapproves that they have more people taking care of them then he thinks there should be. Unless, of course, he decides to butt in and start telling the kids how much he disapproves of their parents.

 

[corvus_corax]

Would you like your daughter to be polyamorous as a teenager?

My daughter is 20 years old and JUST got married.
And she not only loves her husband, but adores him and vice versa.

However, if she wanted polyamoury and it made her happy?
Then absolutely!
No doubt about it


Would I like her to? YES, absolutely, IF it makes her happy.
Other people's "rules" be damned.

And if it's "self-ism" to want her happy, so be it.

 

[drstevej]

My daughter is 20 years old and JUST got married.
And she not only loves her husband, but adores him and vice versa.

However, if she wanted polyamoury and it made her happy?
Then absolutely!
No doubt about it


Would I like her to? YES, absolutely, IF it makes her happy.
Other people's "rules" be damned.

And if it's "self-ism" to want her happy, so be it.

If marrying her brother made her happy would you give that a

 

[corvus_corax]

If marrying her brother made her happy would you give that a

Incest is not the topic.
Of course, you know that, Mr Slippery Slope.
Stick to the topic and dont smile at me as you gleefully slide down the slippery slope of your own mindset.

Next thing I know, you'll be bringing up OTHER forbidden subjects for CF.

Edited to add- And what the HECK is this whole thing with "would you want your daughter to do it?" Did I miss the post where you added "Would you want your son to do this?" Why do debates like this nearly always come down the the hypothetical daughter?
O wait, I know why

 

[Mling]

Incest is not the topic.
Of course, you know that, Mr Slippery Slope.
Stick to the topic and dont smile at me as you gleefully slide down the slippery slope of your own mindset.

Next thing I know, you'll be bringing up OTHER forbidden subjects for CF.

Edited to add- And what the HECK is this whole thing with "would you want your daughter to do it?" Did I miss the post where you added "Would you want your son to do this?" Why do debates like this nearly always come down the the hypothetical daughter?
O wait, I know why

Well besides that, it seems to work on the assumption that people know, deep down in their hearts, that what they're doing is icky and wrong, so of course they'll have a knee jerk reaction against their children doing it.

Assumptions like that come up a lot around here. Like, "atheists don't want to be saved,"--that one's popping up in another thread-- is based on the assumption that atheists believe god, heaven, hell and salvation all exist. I'm always a little confused when people who, when they run out of actual points, collapse into "Oh, you secretly know I'm right! Of course I'm right! How could I not be! Just admit it." If I believed somebody was right, I wouldn't argue that they were wrong.

Likewise, if I believed something was wrong, I wouldn't do it. Well, I might, but I wouldn't argue that it was good. I do recognize the wrongness of my candy habit, but I don't deliberately build my live around the promotion of candy, and I don't argue that it's a good thing.

 

[Mling]

I don't believe romantic love is a recent development. I believe it is an integral part of what we are. I think romantic love is a significant part of polyamorous and polygamist relationships. That, in no way, disputes the fact that arranged loveless marriages haven't and do not happen.

Yeah, I have trouble with the argument that people didn't have the luxury of marrying for love, until very recent times. Why would we fall so deeply in love with non-related adults, if there had been no opportunity to have such an experience before now?

In certain classes of certain cultures in certain times, marriage has been based on practical matters...but I have to notice that those matters generally do with the transfer of power, influence, land and wealth. Those things are generally only relevant to the rich and powerful, or to social climbers. But not all poor people are social climbers. My guess is that, among the people nobody bothered to write about, marriage for love has been more common than we think. Maybe even the norm?

After all, if nobody in your village has much contact with powerful people, and the land you're on isn't all that desirable by powerful people, and your life consists mostly of just taking care of yourself and your family and chilling with your friends...why wouldn't marriage for love be the norm?

[/quote]I am one of the natural monogamists that you mentioned. I have never been interested in casual sex, which has placed me at odds with many of my male friends since I was in my teens. It has also placed me at odds with female acquaintances who wanted to have sex and I said "no". Even when I've been single, I will not have sex with someone I am not in love with enough to have a committed relationship with.

I am a Native American and I endorse traditional beliefs. Polygamy and monogamy are both equally valid concepts for us. Polyamory seems to be a more modern phenomenon in the sense of r ielationships without responsibility and commitment. [/quote]

Just a quick point--commitment might be present or lacking depending on the tastes of the people involved. But to manage it well, responsibility has to be present. It doesn't work if you can't trust your partners to be honest about their needs and to respect the rules you create together.

It is, however, a part of our culture today. I think that is because women have become more independent and do not have to be part of a marriage relationship to survive any more.

Probably. There's a lot of interesting baggage behind all those social structures making life all but impossible for single women. In a culture where a woman has to marry, or else she'll be condemned to a life of poverty, isn't marriage sort of...empty? I mean, the misogyny is obvious, but the misandry is a lot more interesting to me. Do men really find any kind of fulfillment in knowing that their "beloved" may well be thinking, "Oh well...I guess he's better than starving on the street." Did men who embraced those cultures (and do men who wax nostalgic about them today) really think that that's all they had to offer a partner? Being only the second worst thing that could happen to them?

One of the great things that came out of women's lib, that isn't really recognized, is how much more a relationship means when it isn't required. When people are able to build their life any way they want, and they choose to share it with you because they think you are worth it--that situation seems much, much better than merely being preferable to dying a slow, undignified death.

 

[Eudaimonist]

I don't believe romantic love is a recent development. I believe it is an integral part of what we are.

I agree with you, but my point is that the social acceptance of romantic love is a recent development, at least in the culture arising out of the Hellenistic world.

I think romantic love is a significant part of polyamorous and polygamist relationships.

This is difficult for me to imagine, since for me romantic love can only be for one other person at a time (thus allowing for serial monogamy), and I mean for psychological reasons, not ethical ones. This is why I have to imagine differences in brain wiring.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Mling]

This is why I have to imagine differences in brain wiring.


eudaimonia,

Mark

There are a fair number of people who think "monogamous" and "polyamorous" are inherent traits wired into the person, like you're saying. some people identify as one or the other, the way they identify as "gay" or "straight." (Which, interestingly, makes it possible to be a monogamous person in a poly relationship )

I'm not completely convinced, myself, but some people are pretty hardcore about the idea.