10-11-2016, 06:29 PM | #1 |
Marsh Badge
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: ELO Hell
Posts: 1,864
|
Polyamory: Defining Relationships
So, a bunch of us got talking on the discord server about Polyamory and what defines relationships as a whole. Naturally, some of us agreed, and some of us were bewildered at the openness of the people who claimed to be polyamorous. But when questioned as to why polyamory was 'wrong' or 'immoral', none of us could really come up with a definitive answer.
So I'd like to bring this up as a topic. What do you guys think of Polyamory and Polygamy? Should people be more open-minded about it? Is how we define relationships a societal issue? I though this might be a nice change of pace from all the political shouting matches going on in the politics thread. I'd also like to say I am welcome to strong opinions and I don't want people to be ostracised for simply having a stronger, or more controversial opinion about things than most. Go! |
10-11-2016, 06:38 PM | #2 |
Barghest Barghest Barghe-
|
I, myself, am open to polyamorous relationships, but I haven't been in one yet (...this is mostly because I've only ever been in one relationship...). I think that polyamorous relationships are more difficult than monogamous ones, because there is simply more people involved, but I disagree with the idea that they are impossible or that people cannot be content in a polyamorous relationship. I think they are entirely possible, but obviously stress the important parts of any relationship: trust, communication, and devotion.
I think that there really needs to be more positive polyamory rep in media. Relationships are almost always exclusively monogamous, and the ones that aren't typically are bad stereotypes or fall apart. It would be nice to see a strong, positive relationship in...something. Really, anything. Help.
__________________
|
10-11-2016, 06:51 PM | #3 |
Sarasaland represent!
|
I love being poly! I feel I have the capacity to love many people, but it's hard to be more open about it when a lot of opinions about it tend to be "oh, you're cheating" or "oh, someone's always going to be jealous and it'll fail" :< Like all relationships, you need communication and consent from all parties for it to work out!!
I'd loooove to see polyamory/gamy representation in the media, especially queer ones! It makes me feel validated and that I'm not doing something "wrong" just because I feel different from the norm. |
10-11-2016, 06:57 PM | #4 |
プラスチック♡ラブ
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: 蒸気の波の中
Posts: 14,766
|
I really don't see myself ever being polyamorous, more for the fact that I tend to be the kind of person who really doesn't have more than a few close friends at a time and I really don't see myself committing to one person romantically (or sexually for that matter) at a time.
That said, I think there's nothing wrong with polyamory and I have some friends that swing that way. Even then, I feel like while I generally desire a monogamous relationship, I find myself leaning towards being emotionally committed (if that makes any sense) to multiple people in some way. As long as you're honest with your partner(s) and other people in your life and don't do things to deceive them, I see no problem with it. If you're all adults and you can all mutually agree on boundaries, go for it. I think there's a lot of shades of "polyamory" and it often gets confused with being promiscuous or something. You can love more than one person at a time and society doesn't seem to be too against that, generally. Whether or not you can have a long-term life partner relationship with multiple people, however, is another thing. |
10-11-2016, 09:46 PM | #5 |
時の彼方へ
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Lafayette, Indiana
Posts: 20,578
|
There are a lot of problems in monogamous culture that polyamory solves. That stated, I think there are social advantages to monogamy as well -- to say nothing of the meaningfulness that many find in a monogamous relationship. I personally subscribe to a monogamous view of myself.
To me, the most obvious problem that polyamory solves is the love triangle. The darling of many a romance story, love triangles work in Western (and Japanese, and many other cultures') storytelling precisely because we're monogamous. (Or at least most of us are.) It's just sort of assumed, a baseline, really, that only one girl can get the guy or that only one guy can get the girl. But this problem goes away the moment you allow for a society in which both the men and the women are okay with sharing. You don't even have to ask the women to like each other -- so long as two women who love the same man are okay with sharing him, and so long as that man is okay with being shared, you can totally have a happy ending for everyone. Another problem polyamory addresses is the human desire for variety. Too often I find men who profess that they like both short women and tall women, both plump women and skinny women, both big boobs and small boobs, both long hair and short hair, both quiet girls and energetic girls, both smart girls and dumb girls, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera! All different races, all different nationalities, all different careers and backgrounds and hobbies ... And yet 99% of these men either end up forever alone or else, more commonly, in a monogamous relationship. One woman, "the Chosen One," who even in the best of worlds is their No.1 top pick. ("Every attribute she has is my top pick for that category! ") And yet? 30 years of being in a relationship with the same person day in and day out, it's understandable why a man or a woman would want to try something else out for a change. And while many couples try to solve this problem in the bedroom, exploring different fetishes and sex positions, at the end of the day there are some things you just can't change about you or your partner. This discussion reminds me of Mukashi Ecchi, a series of doujins written by Otabe Sakura. It tells the story of a fictional Japanese village in which the people practice what can best be described as "the opposite of monogamy" -- rather than one man being married to one wife, pretty much every woman in the village is accessible to every man and vice versa. But monogamy solves a lot of problems that polyamory suffers from too. When a man has seven or more wives he's impregnated, and this man has twenty or more children by them, how does he split his time between all those sons and daughters? It's a simple answer: he can't. He can't be everywhere at once. Either he spends all of his time with all of his kids gathered around him (in which case he's little more than a storyteller or tour guide) or else he affords some of them intimate one-on-one time at the expense of others of them. Monogamy, if you subscribe to the whole "marriage is about the family unit, about holding society together" philosophy, cleanly addresses this problem: "One dad, one family." Your dad will be in your life all your childhood years. Your mom too will be in your life all those years. They'll both be there for you, fixtures for your young developing mind. You won't have twenty distant uncles, but rather one dedicated dad. Obviously "seven wives and twenty children" can be argued as an exaggerated case, but I dunno ... I kinda think that there's some merit in the idea that monogamy might very well have evolved in early human civilizations precisely because of problems with polyamory like this.
__________________
|
10-11-2016, 10:12 PM | #6 | |
Barghest Barghest Barghe-
|
Quote:
This is not to say polygamous relationships won't have more kids, but I would chalk it up more to cultural changes and other things like birth control. But that's just me, really, and you made good points otherwise.
__________________
|
|
10-11-2016, 10:35 PM | #7 | |
時の彼方へ
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Lafayette, Indiana
Posts: 20,578
|
Quote:
I forgot to mention another historic (and resurgent) benefit to monogamy and other forms of dedicated sexual partnership -- and that's STDs. Or rather, not STDs. People who practice monogamy are categorically less likely to contract and spread STDs. If your partner is clean and you are clean, you both stay clean for life. If your partner is somehow infected (BUT HOW!? ;p), you catch the infection but the buck stops there with you. The only way that STDs can really spread in any given community is if the people catching them then go on to have sex with other members of the community who have yet to catch them. In other words, if a subset of your polyamorists are also shitbags. Which is not a difficult supposition to make. "Humans: what a bunch of bastards!" You can think of this STD problem in relation to Abrahamic marital customs the same way you can think of food-borne illnesses in relation to halal foods. "Why can't Muslims eat pork? Why can't Jews eat bottom-feeding fish?" Parasites, parasites, parasites. "Why can't Jews or Muslims get married to more than one person at a time?" STDs, STDs, STDs? I don't think it's much of a stretch. If the Jewish elders were trying to look out for the people's best medical interests in the one case, it stands to reason that they might have been in the other case as well.
__________________
|
|
10-11-2016, 10:42 PM | #8 |
Double Dragon
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 3,776
|
Much like many other people, I can definitely not see myself as polyamorous. However, I recognize that that kind of relationship can work for people. Maybe it's because I'm selfish, maybe it's because I'm an only child or whatever but when I'm in a relationship with someone I want to be "the one" and I in turn would treat them the same way. I'm definitely not controlling like "no you can't hang out with your friends it's me me me" (I had a girlfriend like that once and it was not fun). So I guess I agree with (I think it was Jeri) in that there are many people that I can love, but there's only one person that I can be in a relationship with. Like I love my friends to death but if there's a person who's going to end up becoming my wife she would be the number one priority. I would just get too jealous/overwhelmed if I had to share.
__________________
|
10-11-2016, 10:48 PM | #9 | |
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 3,540
|
Quote:
*Flies away* |
|
10-12-2016, 12:10 AM | #10 |
我が名は勇者王!
|
I don't find polyamory immoral because I don't think it's real. Versus the real case of polygamy, I don't believe that someone can love two people equally. Love is proportional to the amount of interaction you have with someone, so dividing the attention is going to cut down the affection to below what love is.
For example, consider Facebook. Can you honestly say you are best friends with everyone on your friends list? That you are intimate enough to discuss your inner thoughts and interests without fear of retaliation or embarrassment? And that the feeling is mutual? I would say no, and anyone who thinks they can is mistaken. I have a small circle of best friends. There's a larger circle of more distant friends, and the concentric circles extend onward from there. Even with two best friends, I don't think the level of relationship is comparable to a single significant other.
__________________
あなたの勇気が切り開く未来
ふたりの想いが見つけだす希望 今 信じあえる あきらめない 心かさね 永遠を抱きしめて |
10-12-2016, 12:14 AM | #11 |
Silver LO
|
So, I've really just skimmed a few posts in here at most, I'm not in the headspace to do much reading at the moment, but I'm certain I'm one of the more qualified around here to speak to this topic, as I've been in multiple poly arrangements and am deep in many communities in which it's massively prevalent and often the default or assumed norm.
I do say "arrangements", because not all were relationships, per se. Such as, without getting graphic, once I was in an arrangement with a Dominant. He had arrangements with others, I had play with others as well. It wasn't quite a relationship, but it was definitely poly is nature. As I think I saw someone say before, poly has many different shades and layers. The only real qualification is that it involves or includes more than two parties. Even many open relationships fall under the poly umbrella. I see polyamory as something that's more or less a part of someone (and monogamy as well). I think there's just some people who are, as they say, "wired" for it. I am one of these. This has sometimes cost me pursuit of potential relationships because the other guy was strictly monogamous. We couldn't change each other (and shouldn't try to), and that left us incompatible. It does happen. Of course, when you're poly, some of the first questions you often get asked are things like "don't you get jealous?" and "don't you feel left out?". That does get old. I have to say questions like that can be a bit disappointing, if not surprising. Largely because I feel these questions are looking from the wrong angle. I feel as though such questions are coming from a starting viewpoint of relationship instability. It's "how do you not (negative)" instead of "how do you (positive)". That alone is a subtle thing that can make a conversation start the wrong way. "How does it work?" is generally a better starting question if you're really interested. And if you are sincerely interested in informing yourself, most poly folks will gladly open up about it. One of the most important things to know is that pretty much every poly arrangement is different. Some set rules and boundaries. One open poly family I knew and dated with before basically only had the cardinal rule that they weren't to stay overnight with anyone else. There's closed poly Vs, relationships where one partner can't or doesn't desire to have sex often/at all, so it's open on the other's side so he/she can have a sexual outlet. There's poly relationships where a man and woman are married, but the woman is bisexual and dates a girlfriend non-sexually. If you can imagine it, there's probably a poly arrangement around that's done it. And that says nothing of kinks. Doing my best to keep this PG-13, of course. But some people are into certain things, like leather, pain, and other things I'd probably have to censor myself from saying, but have a partner who isn't. This kind of thing is part of what makes the market for prostitutes and Dominatrices/proDoms so significant, one can pay them to do something one's significant other wouldn't. Now, I am not trying to drag prostitution and its level of ethicalness to this debate, but it is a point worth pointing out. I also know that in many of these cases, the significant other is unaware of these dalliances, which is something I will say is unethical, but there's a surprisingly large number of men and women who not only don't mind their SO doing such things, some watch and/or even get off on it. And as long as it's informed consent on all sides, that's fine. And that sentence is really the main sum of my entire, probably not too well-written post here: As long as it's informed consent on all sides, it's fine. @Doppel "I don't believe that someone can love two people equally." I gotta object here. I sincerely believe you can. You can love them in different ways and still carry equal love for them. And in a sense, that's what polyamory is for some people: multiple people fulfilling multiple needs for each other. And while some definitions of polyamory call for equal love of all involved, that, too, is not a necessity. Bringing up leather again, a man can have a husband for many years, but then collar a submissive boy and be his Sir. The Dominant is not expected to love his submissive as much as his life partner, especially not at first, and especially not in the same ways. That does not mean the relationship is a sham, doesn't exist, or is unhealthy. It certainly doesn't make it wrong. Last edited by Slash; 10-12-2016 at 12:21 AM. |
10-12-2016, 12:39 AM | #12 | |
我が名は勇者王!
|
Quote:
A monogamous relationship has a higher ceiling of satisfaction than a polyamorous one in ideal terms. In practice, it's tough to call because a lot of monogamies don't work out, and polyamory doesn't really exist. But intuitively, if your passion is art, and you devote your entire life to it, it comes off as a little strange that someone else can say they're as passionate toward art as you, but also equally passionate toward music. You would think, "they don't understand the depth of my passion" or "they're not actually as passionate about art as me, because there's only so much love you can give".
__________________
あなたの勇気が切り開く未来
ふたりの想いが見つけだす希望 今 信じあえる あきらめない 心かさね 永遠を抱きしめて |
|
10-12-2016, 01:05 AM | #13 |
Silver LO
|
If you're trying to maths out love and denying the fact that polyamory exists (as there are relationships in existence that fit the definition of polyamory, it definitively exists), then I have to say, it is I who finds the view you state to be the shallow one.
"ceiling of satisfaction"? Seriously? Is that the lens through which you see sharing love? I'd hardly say people only contain a finite amount of love. |
10-12-2016, 01:11 AM | #14 | |
The Scientist
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,211
|
Quote:
As someone who has been in a poly relationship, I can tell you straight up, 100%, that I held the same love for the other two members of said relationship, and that it is absolutely no less than the love that I have or would give to someone that I was in a mono relationship with. This is not a false perception on my part; I am acutely aware of myself, my thoughts, and my honest feelings. I assure you, it is most certainly real. This is coming from a demi person, who just so happens to have been involved with both mono and poly relationships.
__________________
|
|
10-12-2016, 02:00 AM | #15 | |||
我が名は勇者王!
|
Quote:
As I see it, there's no limit to the kind of appreciation you can have for another. It increases infinitely with time interacted, but time interacted itself is limited. You only have one lifetime to divide up among people, so naturally investing in one person is going to give the best ROI. Quote:
Quote:
If someone told me "I love you" after 3 weeks of interaction, they might actually feel something that drives them to express it like that. But I wouldn't believe it to be "love" from my understanding of what love is, I would consider it infatuation.
__________________
あなたの勇気が切り開く未来
ふたりの想いが見つけだす希望 今 信じあえる あきらめない 心かさね 永遠を抱きしめて |
|||
10-12-2016, 02:15 AM | #16 | |
The Scientist
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,211
|
Quote:
Do you have doubts as to what I define as love? For that matter, since you feel so clearly on this, how do you define love? May as well make that explicit.
__________________
Last edited by Altocharizard55; 10-12-2016 at 02:25 AM. |
|
10-12-2016, 02:50 AM | #17 | ||
我が名は勇者王!
|
Quote:
I have a general belief that polyarmory, for the most part, doesn't exist. You claiming to have experienced one of those exceptionally rare cases is going to be met with extreme skepticism by me. It's no different from how many view - and have extreme disdain for - those who claim to have had a spiritual revelation of God. At any rate, claiming to be offended doesn't help your cause. It just makes you look insecure about your experience. If you honestly believe you experienced a polyarmorous relationship, you shouldn't care at all about what I think. Slash tried to convey the experience, which I appreciate even if I ultimately couldn't relate to it at all. For example, I personally have been in love. I've also seen my cat come back from the dead (as a zombie), which I take as proof God exists. These were true experiences that no one will ever take away from me. Quote:
Also, I don't believe you can get over a lost love. Ever. So it is better to have never loved at all.
__________________
あなたの勇気が切り開く未来
ふたりの想いが見つけだす希望 今 信じあえる あきらめない 心かさね 永遠を抱きしめて |
||
10-12-2016, 03:45 AM | #18 | ||
Marsh Badge
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: ELO Hell
Posts: 1,864
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
10-12-2016, 08:17 AM | #19 | |
Fog Badge
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,513
|
Quote:
In the end, it was for the best, though I would never wish what I endured on anyone, and it really helped me understand what a broken heart truly is: a real, physical (as well as mental and emotional) illness. But you can grow past it. You can accept it and move on in your life, just living day to day. Eventually, something might change. Due to a series of incremental changes in my own life, I was eventually able to find someone else. Whereas the previous relationship was riddled with hidden problems including a hidden constant lack of respect for the other party in many ways, this relationship does not suffer the same issues. I was too immature to handle the relationship I previously had, at least in certain areas, I just didn't know it at the time. In the end it's going to be different for everyone. I remember seriously thinking the depression and loneliness would never end. It affected my friendships, my jobs, and my education, to a point that I essentially stunted my own growth very hard, and to this day I'm still trying to catch back up. Struggling to handle all of the things in my life that fell apart because of it was actually the most difficult part. My point is, it's possible to move on, depending on if you are able to do it. Today, I try to look back on it as a growing opportunity, even if the reality was it was the hardest thing I ever had to go through. But I can confirm I am definitely over that, and in a much healthier and more stable relationship. TL;DR - Yes you can. |
|
10-12-2016, 08:28 AM | #20 | |
Problematic Fave
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: VA
Posts: 3,199
|
Quote:
Many people, like me, are perfectly fine with one or two days a week of time spent with a girlfriend or boyfriend. While I have no interest in a relationship right now (sorry Deebs ily anyway </3), my ideal relationship is one that gives me lots of room to be me. I don't pretend to be mono- or polyamorous, since again I'm mostly just trying to fly with a crew of good friends rather than with a partner or partners. But the idea that you HAVE to devote ALL of your time to loving someone is simply inaccurate, even when it comes to monogamous relationships - and perhaps especially when it comes to monogamous relationships. Too often we see people being stifled because of their deep need to have a significant other, either because of their social clock or because they are immature and insecure and latch on to the first person to come along and offer that maturity and security. Speaking of which, I'd like to offer a PSA. Most abusive relationships get very serious very quickly. If someone is suspiciously interested in a committed, long-term relationship with you, or wants to start a serious, long-term relationship with you after only a few dates (we aren't talking "be my boyfriend," we're talking "be my husband"), that is a serious red flag. Get away from that person immediately.
__________________
|
|
10-12-2016, 02:32 PM | #21 |
Ducks gonna duck
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 2,824
|
k
|
10-12-2016, 06:59 PM | #22 |
Night Man
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,371
|
Well trolling aside it's possible to love two different people for different reasons (albeit it's not romantic but don't you love both your parents?). One person you love for their emotional support while one perhaps physically. You can't fault people for wanting it all and not necessarily wanting to wait for a unicorn (S7E3 of '30 Rock' talks about this). The key being as always seems to be communication and setting ground rules really. You gotta do you babeh.
Now I've never been in a poly relationship myself, that's not to say i'm not open to the idea. Though it seems more and more that everywhere I look now-a-days it seems to me like it's becoming more and more the norm. Admittedly my observations may be skewed due to where i live.
__________________
I'm an old school Poke-BALLER. ”Fee, fie, foe, fum the End are Near at thou Bobbum. Time me open Bobbum Van trunk, for ruin Bobbum wif Equipmunk.” Last edited by GrJackass; 10-12-2016 at 07:12 PM. |
10-12-2016, 07:02 PM | #23 | ||
Night Man
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,371
|
Quote:
Quote:
TRUTH
__________________
I'm an old school Poke-BALLER. ”Fee, fie, foe, fum the End are Near at thou Bobbum. Time me open Bobbum Van trunk, for ruin Bobbum wif Equipmunk.” |
||
Lower Navigation | ||||||
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
Thread Tools | |
|
|