Polyamory, Revisited
Irma read my post from January 21, 2007 on Love and Sex, and took issue with some of my comments about polyamory. You can read her post in response here. What follows is my response to her latest post:
Wow, that post was put up over a year ago! I had to go re-read it to remember what I said. I had shut it down to neighborhood only comments because I was getting some strange ones. As seems only fair, I will post a link to this post in the comments of my post.
I wrote my post to come to terms with things I was feeling at the time about the nature of relationships. I chose to link to the relationships tag in your blog to give an example of someone who writes well in favor of the polyamorous lifestyle. I'm sorry if you took offense to me linking to your blog.
You said: ...in my opinion, you emphasise the sexual aspect too much. Polyamory isn't about sexual partners per se...
You can decide what polyamory means to you, but in the general meaning of the word, it is understood that there is likely to be a sexual aspect to the relationships. Otherwise, why not just call it friendship? Obviously, we're talking about multiple sexual partners.
The point of my post is that while there are outspoken proponents for both polyamory and sex without intimacy, for most people this isn't really an option. Most people cannot and will not adjust to being comfortable with knowing that your partner has other partners. If you are able to do that and choose to do so, that's fine.
Frankly, I find it a little silly to promote polyamory as something that more people should do. If it's the right lifestyle fit for them, they're probably already doing it. If not, no amount of cajoling from the pro-poly crowd is going to make them comfortable with it. Both emotional/relationship bonding and jealousy are based in our basic biological make-up, and the strength of those biological forces will vary person by person. Why not let each person find their own way?
The one aspect of what you preach that I truly do appreciate is the honesty and openness of the relationships. I find nothing immoral or unnethical about polyamory, as long as everyone in the network relationship(s) knows that that is what's going on. It's just not for me. Nor, I suspect, is it the right choice for many. I have a much worse problem with "friends with benefits" or people who have repeated one-night-stands, not only because of the implications for STDs, but because perhaps not everyone involved knows that that is all it means to the other person. Honesty is the key, then everyone can choose what works best for them.
I also think that children change the equation. I would imagine that children brought up in a polyamorous household may be better off than children brought up in single parent homes, but only if it is a truely stable environment, with the same players taking part in the raising of the children. Serial monogamy has created a large group of children from homes with one parent, who also works, and therefore leaves very little familial support for the children. It's certainly something that should be discussed and considered before children are brought into the relationship.
Comments
Of course in my younger days I had one night stands. Not the worried of STD's back then. Although I did get crabs once and that was awful. lol
Amazingly even if that relationship ended I still didn't want to see that person with someone else.
Not amazing at all. Jealousy lasts a lot longer than affection, in many cases. It's funny, in a way, when there's no way in hell you would want a person back, but you don't want to see them with someone else, either. :-/
As for the rest of your comment... that's a lot of information! lol
Bonding and jealousy are definitely in there for me. On top of that? Guilt. I can't really get away from feeling guilty. Even thinking about another guy while going solo can cause me to feel guilty. It's weird.
I had an online relationship with someone who believed in polyamory, and I told him I don't think I could put up with that. Now, he's in a relationship with someone (in his area, instead of long distance), and even though they both agreed to have an open relationship (at first), his girl won't allow him to find someone else now. She gets too jealous. She's also very emotionally unstable. And the meds she's on zap any sex drive, so I think he's pretty frustrated on that aspect of their relationship. Sucks for him.
I've always understood that polyamory is really only suited to those mature enough to accept that sex is just that....sex.
I really don't understand how the trivialization of sex became a sign of maturity.
Proponents of polyamory, I think, would say that sex is still meaningful in a polyamorous relationship, distinguishing it from swinging.
The line between the two may seem very grey and blurred to some, however in my experience, it is quite sharply defined and crystal clear.
Which was exactly the point of my original post... that to some people sex is purely physical and there is no emotional bonding involved, and that to others the two are inseperable. I think it is more a matter of individual genetic/chemical makeup.
Still, I don't think it's a matter of "maturity." I take some offense at the idea that because I have to feel affection for people I am intimate with I am somehow less "mature" than someone who sleeps with strangers and never looks back. That seems completely backward to me. It's probably just as offensive to the "players" that I think they are shallow and frivolous, and yet I do.
But, back to the subject, polyamory is for those rare people who do feel affection and want emotional bonding with their sexual relationships, but either don't feel jealousy like most people or are able to sublimate it.
I have a hard time believing or understanding that statement.
It's the idea that children are probably better off with a strong network of familial support. I don't have any research to back that up, but it seems to be a generally accepted concept. A stable, long-term polyamorous arrangement may provide more familial support than a single, working parent can, in some cases.
I wouldn't read too much into it. It's mostly me thinking aloud, and I have nothing to back it up.
BUT...that being said, I think it would be almost impossible to find, in reality, a group of people who were all stable, responsible, mature, have children, and were truly polyamorous with no jealousy/bickering/regrets, etc etc etc. Humans just aren't made up that way.
People ARE jealous.
Then there is the horror of exposing children to situations that would appear to attract sexual predators. It's horrendous enough with the single parents' rotating partners/stepparents who abuse kids from a previous relationship. UGH.
Those are all very good points. I was only basing it on some of the single parents I know, and how I worry about the effect of a stream of one-night-stands and short-term relationships effects the child's socialization. On the other hand, all relationships are complicated, and adding more people to the mix might just make it more complicated and therefore less stable. Since I don't personally know anyone in a polyamorous relationship, let alone with children, it's all random thoughts. :->