The Watchtower of Destruction: The Ferrett's Journal - Strange Ramblings On Polyamory Vaguely Inspired By A Distant Post
[Recent Entries][Archive][Friends][User Info]
|
09:42 am
[Link] |
Strange Ramblings On Polyamory Vaguely Inspired By A Distant Post
“Polyamory doesn’t work,” said my friend. “I’ve just seen too many of those relationships crash and burn. You just can’t make it work.”
The problem with that is, of course, the goal of polyamory. What is it? It’s pretty clear for the other side, but poly’s a little more mutable.
See, as a non-poly guy in a monogamous relationship, I have the luck of not having every sexual interaction I have be the trial for my entire relationship style. When I had, oh, fifty failed relationships before I finally latched onto my lovely wife, I didn’t have to hear about how each of those fifty crash-and-burns were proof that monogamy’s innately substandard. (And thank God, because with fifty failed relationships, I evidently had enough problems floating around.)
Yet monogamy also has a culturally built-in end-goal. See, I got married. That’s what monogamous couples of all stripes are supposed to do – heck, there’s a war being waged so that gay couples can share in my monogamous uniting process. And marriage is designed to be forever, thanks to that whole “‘til death do us part” clause.
So if I make it to the end with Gini, and one of us dies before we get divorced, then I score a win for monogamy! I am now proof that monogamy works, because we clung to it all the way down. And that’s regardless of whether I actually signed on for that victory condition or not!
Isn’t that grand? Especially since we get to ignore the vast majority of people who don't get there, or the multiple failed relationships that generally precede a victorious marriage?
But poly has no clear end goal. I mean, is poly supposed to be eternal? I’ve seen any number of poly relationships end not with a bang, but with a whimper, as two people slowly lose interest in each other and move on without any hard feelings. It’s not a breakup, just two folks evolving in opposite directions.
Is that what poly’s supposed to do? Well, according to the monogamous goal of capital-F Forever, no. But should we judge polyamory by a one-relationship standard? I’d say not.
And more importantly, is every breakup bad? I’d say not. Certainly there are any number of marriages that fail not because the people involved are evil, but because two healthy people continually grow and change in the course of their lives. Sometimes, what you needed at age twenty is not what you need at age forty… And sometimes, two people diverge.
That doesn’t mean that your relationship failed. It means things changed. Ideally, your partner evolves along with you, but sometimes that’s not healthy. Sometimes, you can have a short relationship that doesn’t work out yet is entirely satisfying for what you needed then.
It’s not cool to say that your divorced ex-partner is still a good guy and you still love him – just not enough to stay. In a monogamous society, you’re supposed to find the blame and assign it straight away so you can figure out who broke the monogamy. Because it’s clearly a fault with you guys, not the system.
Which is not to say that poly doesn’t involve high drama from time to time. ‘Course it does! You’re juggling more people, and more people means more opportunities for things to go wrong. When poly relationships crumble, often they do so in an avalanche of hurt feelings as not just one, but several people are pulled into the maelstrom. Poly’s trickier to pull off in a stable way, and I don’t think anyone really debates that.
But I don’t think that every breakup is a sign of unhealthiness…. Just as I don’t think that every end-goal victory for monogamy is the sign of a strong relationship. Certainly we all know two desperate people who’ve latched onto each other and refuse to leave. There are a ton of radically unhealthy dynamics that can cause two people to unhappily superglue themselves at the hip through life, though one suspects they’ll be kicking their heels off in heaven once they’re finally released from that damned contract.
That’s not really a score for monogamy. If anything, it’s a checkmark against it, in my book.
The problem is that I’m loath to say that any relationship style flat-out doesn’t work. I’m not particularly comfortable with BDSM master/slave relationships in my own personal life, but I do know a few people that it seems to work for. And I’ve seen some long-term poly relationships that would terrify the shit out of neurotic, clingy ol’ me, but appear to be just fine for all involved.
People are individuals. I tend to think any blanket statement on any lifestyle statement is just a way of quietly asking others to tell you that what you want is not just okay, but actively good.
You know what doesn’t work? People. People are fucked beyond comprehension. And any time they manage to interact properly for any amount of time that makes them happy is something I have a hard time dismissing globally, y’know?
|
|
| |
![[User Picture]](http://l-userpic.livejournal.com/61912977/810751) | | From: | ![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif) jfargo |
|---|
| Date: | May 15th, 2008 01:47 pm (UTC) |
|---|
| | | (Link) |
|
The problem is that I’m loath to say that any relationship style flat-out doesn’t work.
That, and the whole paragraph after it, are pretty much how I feel on the whole subject. I have friends who are poly, or into that whole master/slave relationship, or enjoy things that I'd rather not even hear about let alone experience, and it works for them.
If it works for them, and they're not hurting anyone more than they want to be hurt, then who am I to say it can't work?
*Chuckle* I've occasionally been asked to get up in front a bunch of folks in the kink/alt. lifestyle community and discuss polyamory and how my household does it since the generally acceptance is that "we do it right."
And every time we try to draft up a class outline we hit the same stumbling block, what makes poly work? The same stuff that makes monogamy work. It may require different proportions than what people consider "standard" monogamy or call more attention to certain aspects, but otherwise, having poly relationships isn't much different than monogamous relationship, you just have less engineering tolerances.
I would guess that what makes your poly relationship work might be death to another poly relationship. What makes yours work is probably specific to the individuals involved.
For example, one of the things that makes my relationship work is that my husband understands that when we argue, I need an apology fast. He can continue to disagree with me. We can have a civilized discussion of our disagreement but if my feelings have been hurt, I need them to be addressed with an apology. If I don't get an apology fast, to derail my train of thought, I will focus on the hurt and anything he says to me while I am in that state will be heard through a filter of hurt feelings.
This works for us and is very specific to us. There are other couples who need time to themselves after an argument to cool down. Finding rules to make a relationship work (any relationship) is impossible because each relationship is different.
The thing I see not working in poly relationships is when a monogamous couple go suddenly into poly. Usually at that point one person really wants it more than the other does and things start to go horribly wrong. Relationships that start out poly don't seem to have the severe drama quotient that the ones that start out monogamous do.
I'm not saying that's the case for all relationships, just the ones I've seen in my experience.
Yeah, I think that's a bad imbalance, and I've seen more of that than I really care to. Monogamous can evolve into poly, but if it's one partner tugging at the reins because OMG NEW FUCKSTICK then you're in trouble.
I think part of the problem is that we really only, unless we ourselves are participating in poly relationships, only hear/think about poly stuff when it goes spectacularly bad. So that is what sticks out in memory. I have a number of poly friends who speak very openly about their relationship successes and that has helped balance out my mental view.
This is very true. I know a fair amount of poly folks who keep it on the DL.
![[User Picture]](http://l-userpic.livejournal.com/52037939/2117656) | | From: | gm_avie |
|---|
| Date: | May 15th, 2008 02:08 pm (UTC) |
|---|
| | yeee! | (Link) |
|
Exactly.
Thank you.
I actually don't like marriage, simply based on the sheer number I've seen fail (including my parents), although I believe that longterm monogamous relationships do work sometimes (with or without a marriage involved). I have no experience with polyamorous relationships, personal or otherwise, so I have no opinion on them.
It’s not cool to say that your divorced ex-partner is still a good guy and you still love him – just not enough to stay.
Er...what? You are aware of the concept of the no-fault divorce, right?
Relationships work on commitment, poly or mono. I think it's worth sorting out the real polyamorous relationships from the "polyamorous" relationships where a doormat agrees to polyamory just so he or she can cling to a complete asshole who wants to sleep around and doesn't care about the doormat's feelings, though. The latter never end well, the former can.
I read that as meaning that most people don't consider that okay, in a general sense, not that Ferrett believed it personally. Hence the sentence directly following it.
People are the key ingredient in any relationship, and they're what determines whether something works or not. Social conditioning, self-awareness, emotional stability and maturity, and myriad other variables of human experience are pivotal for determining whether a relationship is going to fail or survive and those variables are constantly changing.
Ok, that's my experience and I probably shouldn't approach it as writ but I've seen it time and time again.
A lot of it for poly or monogamy is determining what a relationship or relationships in general mean to you, what you want out of a relationship, and all the assumptions about poly/monogamy that one brings into interactions with other people.
Thank you. I'm so tired of the "hey, they broke up! That means their entire relationship style (of which I disapprove or know no details about) is invalid YEY" reaction.
Edited at 2008-05-15 02:12 pm (UTC)
I suspect that a lot of the poly relationships that work long term are the ones that are more discreet and don't go overboard - which means you don't hear about them that much.
I suspect when people are going to swing clubs and engaging in multiple simultaneous long term relationships it's got to be really hard to keep jealousy issues out and to keep perspective.
I hesitate to use the word "poly" to describe my own relationship in public, because I fear that's how people will interpret it.
What it is for us, however, is that my long term partner likes to go hang out with her friends in Rome for several weeks at a time a couple of times a year. Sometimes on those trips she has flings. Sometimes, when we are not in the same city or country for periods of time meet interesting women for interesting times.
But, we don't play around when we are together, we keep our mouths shut around all but a very select group of friends and we don't base our lifestyle around it. Brief romances just happen.
The bottom line is we set clear boundaries, treat each other with respect and stay both physically and emotionally safe.
So, in essence we alternate between periods of monagamy and periods of potential polyamoury.
And, it works just as well, as far as I can tell, as permanent monogamy.
![[User Picture]](http://l-userpic.livejournal.com/28496984/4285319) | | | Trying to understand | (Link) |
|
I always thought that what you describe is called open marriage and that polyamory describes a group of three or more people who are monogamous with the members of the group...
Or is polyamory a spectrum of relationship styles/attachments - with the one at one end and the other at the other end?
The few poly- couples I know embraced it as a desperate attempt to hang on to their marriage in the face of cheating by the other spouse. "You're not cheating, hun; we're polyamorous!" I'm not sure that's the best reason to get into it.
I admit that I'm pretty uncomfortable with polyamory, but that shouldn't deter anyone from pursuing that lifestyle if that is what's best for them. I've long thought that we should do away with marriage as a legal institution and let people pretty much define their own relationships, and that we hold "consenting adult and able to express it clearly" as the only legal requirement.
I feel the same way about marriage, I wrote a whole entry more than a year ago about how institutions that become stale should be abolished, and I believed marriage had already become stale. I will admit that I am heavily influenced by the divorce of my parents (which was more than 6 years ago), but I have seen other people in bad marriages as well. I think some sort of contract (something like prenuptial agreements combined with marriage licenses) would be a good substitute, but without distinctions such as "one man and one woman" involved.
Some polyamorous relationships have the same "end goal" as monogamous ones - that a couple get together, and stay together for the long haul. They just happen to have decided that sexual exclusivity is not a requirement of that condition. For some people, that's a better setup, because they're the sort of people who would eventually cheat if in a long-term exclusive relationship, and then there's be a breakup, or lots of ugly recriminations as they patched things back up. (This sort of polyamory works best when it's decided going in, not after the cheating has happened.) If the reason a person would cheat is for sexual variety, rather than the thrill of the illicit or a desire to hurt one's partner, this can be a pretty stable arrangement.
Of course, that only describes some polyamorous relationships. There are many others, some of which work, and som of which don't so much.
And, of course, some monogamous relationships don't have that end goal.
"And more importantly, is every breakup bad? I’d say not. Certainly there are any number of marriages that fail not because the people involved are evil, but because two healthy people continually grow and change in the course of their lives. Sometimes, what you needed at age twenty is not what you need at age forty… And sometimes, two people diverge."
Here's my problem with your essay. My belief: In a loving relationship the focus should be on what the other person needs. It should most definitely NOT be on what you need. That's just allowing selfishness to grow, and that's never a good idea for a relationship.
It is because this idea stopped in my father's head that my parents divorced. My father began thinking that he ought to have more than he did and stopped thinking about what would be best for my mom.
Interestingly, I both agree and disagree with you. I believe that in a healthy relationship, there should be about a balance of 60/40. 60% what the other person needs, 40% what you need. My reasoning is that you cannot be a whole, healthy person if you don't focus at least partially on what you need. I say this because of my experience with my own parents, my mother spent almost all of the marriage doing what my father wanted, while he didn't sacrifice anything for her or even my brothers and I. And that worked for them for more than 20 years. My mother wasn't unhappy for most of that time, either. She wasn't totally fulfilled, but she was still pretty happy. Not once in that whole time do I think my father gave more than a passing thought to what my mother wanted. Yes, the marriage did end, but only when my father decided suddenly that my mother was holding him back, even though she had supported him for more than twenty years. But it had nothing to do with suddenly not caring about her, he hadn't cared about her for most of the marriage (loved her, yes, but didn't care about her).
I admit that I may have a slight bias because of my intended field as a vocalist, as I will always have to put the health and wellness of my voice over all other considerations (including family and friends) if I want a real career. It's simply a function of what I wish to do. Unfortunately, by your reasoning, if I ever met someone I really loved, they would have the right to make me give up that, simply by needing something more from me. And I believe that's entirely unfair.
I've always been of the opinion that not only are polyamorous relationships not really my thing, but they're hard. All healthy relationships require communication, and that can be hard to do just one on one. Add in one or more extra people, and the difficulty increases exponentially.
From what I've seen of my poly friends, what makes a poly relationship set work is that the people involved are generally adult and honest with each other. Expectations are communicated, and people are respected. This is unsurprisingly the same thing I see in the successful relationships of my monogamous friends - it's just upped a communication notch among the poly.
They're incredibly hard, from what I've seen. You're juggling chainsaws.
![[User Picture]](http://l-userpic.livejournal.com/34037762/2788060) | | From: | ba1126 |
|---|
| Date: | May 15th, 2008 02:46 pm (UTC) |
|---|
| | | (Link) |
|
It's my understanding that monogamy was originally designed to protect society. Before birth control, it ensured that most children would have two parents to raise them. Generally, there would be a female who nurtured and provided comfort to the children and her spouse, and the male provided protection and sustenance. It made it clear who was responsible for caring for which children. It also reduced strife, with less discord over who would mate and later, who would inherit. Birth control and women being able to work and be independent has changed a great deal of the need, but I think a woman who plans to raise children is still better off having a stable monogamous relationship.
I got married because we wanted kids. And while I think having kids is a lot easier in a stable long-term arrangement, I don't think monogamy is a requirement. Although I suspect explaining polygamy to a kid might be a difficult trick.
You hit the nail on the head with the line about every poly relationship being the trial for that entire relationship style.
When my marriage was monogamous, we'd sometimes go through difficult periods, but we'd work through it and come out stronger for it. And we'd get nothing but praise for how committed we are and how healthy our marriage is.
Now that we're poly, if we go through the same kind of difficult period: "How horrible. Why do you do this to yourselves?"
I recently had a relative call my relationship style "sinful." This is the same relative who cheated on his own spouse, got caught, and caused all sorts of angst and drama in his family.
I wonder how he'd take it if I said, "Well, y'know, that's what you get for choosing to be monogamous. *tsk tsk* But hey, if you think it works for you ..."
That relative is probably jealous.
![[User Picture]](http://l-userpic.livejournal.com/69829819/995192) | | | Divorce Rate as argument against monogamy | (Link) |
|
I am neither for nor against monogamy, but poor logic is my biggest pet peeve. Which brings me to the horribly inaccurate divorce rate of 50% that everyone quotes and is often used as an argument against monogamy. That divorce rate was achieved by comparing the number of couples married in a specific year with the number divorced in that same year. Those two numbers have nothing to do with one another. They have no relationship.
To properly determine a divorce rate, you would need to find a year far enough back that all people married in that year are now dead. Then, track which percentage of those marriages lasted until the death of one partner (this brings to my mind the question of whether it is a successful marriage if one partner caused the death of the other) and compare that to the number that ended in divorce. So maybe we can get an accurate divorce rate for 1920s marriages, but we can't get an accurate rate for 2008.
I'm not saying that there aren't reasons to be against monogamy. I'm just saying that if you are against monogamy, you could find a better argument against it ("It just doesn't work for me" is a great argument against monogamy) than the inaccurate 50% divorce rate.
![[User Picture]](http://l-userpic.livejournal.com/31357263/559299) | | From: | hartley |
|---|
| Date: | May 15th, 2008 03:13 pm (UTC) |
|---|
| | Re: Divorce Rate as argument against monogamy | (Link) |
|
Using that logic, I would guess that we would discover the divorce rate for recent marriages is actually a lot worse than 50%.
There are some friends of mine that have a huge poly family, and I am in love with the idea of it.. because it works, and works well. They go through a LOT to make it work, and I think what turns some people off of poly is the sheer amount of work involved, because of all the people involved.
Which is intersting because I'd say a monogomous relationship takes a huge amount of work. And yet as nounsandverbs mentions above, that is considered par for the course. But add another relationship into the mix and it's too much work... Something to think about eh?
I completely understand, especially regarding the parts about people changing. I've had friends like that in the past, and people I've met across the years. You meet, you greet, you make friends, you share special times, and then for whatever reasons you end up having a falling out. But for that short time that you had with said person, whatever problems arose or needs were needing fulfilling then said person was the right person at that time to get that done. Then you just go on with your lives, and you either never see the person again or you maintain a mutual friendship. At least that's the way it's always worked with me.
I think you also need to make sure that your definition of polyamory isn't some strictly defined thing when you talk about it. It seems a number of commenters strictly see polyamory as swinging or a sexual arrangement, and while that can be the case, it can also be about allowing romantic attachments to form without boundary.
I don't have a strictly defined polyamory. In fact, the point here was that there was no archetypical poly to point at.
getting married is hooking two draft mules to a cart. Together they can pull the cart easily, until one of them dies, and then the cart, it becomes as heavy as lead because you are pulling it by yourself.
most mules because they are used to having someone share the load, will immediately get another mule as soon as the other mule leaves, for whatever reason.
I guess you can think about it like a race where the finish line is the death of your spouse.
ps by my analogy, being poly is like having 8 horses pull your cart instead of two mules. If you can keep the damn thing under control, you get to gallop instead of plod along.
"People are fucked beyond comprehension."
I believe open relationships can work as long as there's no jealousy, and the people in the relationship aren't fucked-up.
But too many people fit the quote of yours I copied at the top of this entry.
Relationships are great until people get involved.
I think its more about learning to work with your own jealousy. Jealousy is an emotion like any other and all people are going to feel it at some point (whether romantically or over the neighbor's new car). That being the case, learning to handle your own jealousy, much like learning to handle your own anger, is a useful skill regardless of your romantic involvements.
People are fucked up. Its what separates us from machines (except my oven, which is also fucked up).
You know what doesn’t work? People. People are fucked beyond comprehension. And any time they manage to interact properly for any amount of time that makes them happy is something I have a hard time dismissing globally, y’know?
This - this is so very true. My particular flavor of relationship involves me and a guy. No marriage, but a long-term commitment. We are filing POAs and wills - to safeguard those rights that are granted automatically by marriage. What very few can understand is our decision to not marry. But it's the way we want to do things. It works for us.
We are filing POAs and wills
I must be suffering from serious eye strain. When I first read this I say "We are filling POAs"
Totally different meaning there! :-)
![[User Picture]](http://l-userpic.livejournal.com/69436887/440417) | | From: | jenk |
|---|
| Date: | May 15th, 2008 06:24 pm (UTC) |
|---|
| | "Who Broke The Monogamy?" | (Link) |
|
I love that phrase. That should be a game show!! Or a trivia game!
Edited at 2008-05-15 06:24 pm (UTC)
![[User Picture]](http://l-userpic.livejournal.com/16062838/1412585) | | | Re: "Who Broke The Monogamy?" | (Link) |
|
Professor Plum. In the library. With the lead pipe. |
|
