this post was submitted on
36 points (89% like it)
41 up votes 5 down votes
shortlink:
to anything interesting: news article, blog entry, video, picture...

reddit is a source for what's new and popular online. vote on links that you like or dislike and help decide what's popular, or submit your own!

35
36

What’s the one aspect of poly you wish everyone knew about? (self.polyamory)

submitted ago by chiuxo

(First, let me just get this out of the way quickly – I’m really sorry if this post is a little out of place, or not what r/polyamory is for. Please ignore me/ flame me into oblivion if you think I’m just being inappropriate or lazy, but offending people is absolutely not my intention!)

Now that’s out of the way, let me explain myself… I'm a student making a documentary about polyamory in the UK, and this subreddit has just been a complete inspiration and a great resource. But I want to pick your brains:

Is there a particular aspect of the poly lifestyle/ poly relationships you wish more people new about? Or a false assumption lots of people seem to make, that you wish you could overturn? Is there one thing standing in the way of more people coming out? And would any UK-based Polys like to be a part of my piece, by speaking to me in person? I’d LOVE to hear from anyone at all, really, but especially if you’re in a long term relationship, or have children, or feel you can’t come out for whatever reason.

Just to explain a little more about the project: I'm actually making two pieces side by side. Firstly, I'm doing an MA in Broadcast Journalism and as part of my assessment I have to make a very short (10 minute) social documentary for radio. I want to focus on both the existence of, and the acceptance/ understanding of polyamorous relationships in the UK. At the same time, I am also making a much longer and broader piece more generally themed around changing modern attitudes to fidelity and monogamy, and as well as polyamorous people I also hope to speak to a range of other contributors (for example people who used 'married-cheating' dating websites, swingers, members of various religious organizations, etc). I want to focus on the idea of ethics within non-monogamy, and particularly on the concept of long-term, family oriented non-monogamous groups (with or without children), as I think this is a really interesting angle which is not covered so often in the media. I’ve also set up an interview with a marriage historian, who I’m hoping can talk a little about the social history of monogamy, and the transition between ‘marriage as a socio-economic contract’ to ‘marriage as an expression of romantic love’. This second piece is nothing directly to do with my studies, but I am hoping to pitch it to various radio stations (with the help of my tutors) once it's finished. Sorry to bore you with tedious detail, but I thought it might help to know what kind of piece I’m aiming at.

Aaaaaand a little more about myself? OK, I’m 26, Londoner, f, I’m actually in a monogamous relationship at the moment but polyamory is something I’ve felt an affiliation with ever since I first heard about it – I’ve felt something akin to compersion but had no word for it until recently. Bit of a lightening bolt moment when I first saw it defined. I’ve been working in radio for around three years, but came back to education last year to qualify as a ‘proper’ journalist.

ALL help and opinions very gratefully received!

TL;DR: Is there a particular aspect of the poly lifestyle/ poly relationships you wish more people new about? Or a false assumption lots of people seem to make, that you wish you could overturn? And is there one thing standing in the way of more people coming out?

all 88 comments
sorted by:
best
hot
new
controversial
top
old

[–]cubicarts 38 points39 points ago

The aspect of poly that I wish everyone knew about is that there are virtually as many different styles as there are people.

Every monogamous relationship is the unique product of the interaction between two unique participants. Same goes for each branch of a polyamorous network.

[–]OneWonderfulFish 5 points6 points ago

Relevant. :)

OP, this image might help you get some things straight in your quest to educate people, and will definitely help you remember to include aspects of poly you might forget.

[–]chiuxo[S] 4 points5 points ago

WOW, that diagram is fairly intense! Think I should blow it up to A3 size and stick it over my desk when I work...

[–]chiuxo[S] 6 points7 points ago

Thanks, a few people have said that to me actually! One guy I spoke to said there's no such thing as 'poly relationships' and 'mono relationships', just relationships. No great divide between them, no different considerations from one to the other... He might have been on to something I think...

[–]blackberrydoughnuts 8 points9 points ago

I don't think that's helpful at all. It's true that every relationship is different and they all have a lot in common, but given the social standard of monogamy and the way it creates categories of "single people" and "attached people," poly relationships are very very different. Removing the often unstated and unquestioned assumption of exclusivity changes a lot. If we lived in a society where poly was more common and more accepted, he might be right.

Most people assume "in a relationship" means "taken" or "off the market" and this dictates a lot of their social interactions.

[–]cubicarts 0 points1 point ago

I didn't say poly relationships are the same as monogamous ones, I meant that they are at least as varied and unique, if not more so. When monogamous people ask about my relationships, they frequently take my experience to be much more universal than it is. I have to explain that my/our arrangements are the product of our unique desires and circumstances (i.e. who is out at work, to their family, etc).

Obviously the NEED to make these decisions can be a distinction between poly and mono... no, wait, that's a distinction between anyone who expresses their sexuality (or lack-thereof) in anything other than the hetero-normative monogamous paradigm. Including asexuals, LGBT people, swingers and kinksters. I think in educating people about what poly is, it really is better to focus on what makes us all the same, than what makes us different.

Also, I'm a she.

[–]blackberrydoughnuts 0 points1 point ago

I think you misunderstood my comment. It was a reply to chiuxo's comment about the guy who did say they were the same. I wasn't talking about you.

(Comments are generally a reply to the one above them and that's generally where pronouns refer back to, especially when the gender doesn't match yours :) )

I think in educating people about what poly is, it really is better to focus on what makes us all the same

Depends on the purpose, I think. If people are interested, and we want to tell them honest non-monogamy is an option, the first thing they'll want and need to know is how to handle situations that only come up in non-monogamy. That's really where the difficult part of poly is, and besides there are tons of resources on relationships in general.

But if we're talking about generally informing people that poly people are out there and we're not weird and scary, then yes, we should focus on how we have lives, have boundaries, deal with jealousy, work out conflict, sometimes live together and have kids and families, just like non-poly people do.

[–]InfinitelyThirsting 28 points29 points ago

Is there a particular aspect of the poly lifestyle/ poly relationships you wish more people knew about?

That MMF+ couples and groups exist. A lot of people think it's just men sleeping around, or men and bisexual women. They don't realise that there are also women with multiple male partners, not just a bunch of harems. Hotwives and cuckolds, as well as just MMF triads and more, are fairly common.

Or a false assumption lots of people seem to make, that you wish you could overturn?

Sexual exclusivity doesn't mean love. I don't not love or not like my boyfriend just because I don't care if he has other partners. Commitment is about committing to being with someone, not just about sex. I need love and caring and attention and compatibility, not monogamy, in a partner.

And is there one thing standing in the way of more people coming out?

Societal shame. It's the new gay closet. Even I'm not fully out to my extended family, just to avoid the trouble whilst I can (obviously if I acquire another longterm partner, it would come out). And I get sick of people judging my relationship from the outside in ignorance.

Also, I'm not from the UK, and it wasn't group-style, but my parents had an open marriage (kept very quiet, took a long time to figure out), if you have any questions about what it's like to be a child of poly people.

[–]avapoet 5 points6 points ago

MMF+ couples

There's no such thing as an MMF couple. =o)

Now that I've got that pickiness out of the way - InfinitelyThirsting is correct: we FMM groups exist! I've also come across committed relationships that are MM, FM, FF, MMM, FMM, and FFM. As far as I'm aware, I'm yet to meet an FFF. And then there are the FFMMs, the MFMFMs... I'm not sure how much gender has to do with, well, anything, but there's a huge amount of variety of the scope of these kinds of nonmonogamous relationships.

[–]InfinitelyThirsting 8 points9 points ago

Haha, yes, forgive me. I'm very underslept today.

[–]TimeToStartPosting 4 points5 points ago

"underslept"! Adding to my vocabulary

[–]SMCinPDX 5 points6 points ago

I've known a 4xF triad-with-a-leg, so anecdotally, that completes your set. Yahtzee!

[–]radicaljane 1 point2 points ago

I'm yet to meet an FFF.

I've met a few, and been in one as well.

[–]SMCinPDX 5 points6 points ago

Re: relationship composition by gender, I'd be happy if people would just stop assuming that a group with one man and two or more women is some sort of harem or sex cult. I'm poly, I'm a hetero man, and most of my plural relationships have been with het or bi women in a polyfidelitous dynamic. Much fuss is made about how everyone's interpretation is valid, but whenever my family and I socialized in the "community" there were always people sneering at my "one-penis policy", even though that's just how our mix of attractions and negotiated boundaries settled out. If we caught that kind of shit inside the poly scene, you can imagine how friends and family reacted. I've bathed in so many death glares, I have callouses.

[–]chiuxo[S] 4 points5 points ago

Wow, you've had reactions like that from within the community? Extraordinary, you would have thought it would be fairly judgement-free. Do you think hetero polys get a lot of that?

[–]SMCinPDX 7 points8 points ago

I think there's a strong drive not to be identified with swinging (and I'm on board with that, to the simple extent that I want the difference understood and respected). A result of that is that anything that looks like wife-swapping or harem-collecting is viewed with alarm--so a het couple, each of whom has an outside partner, or two straight couples dating in a bowtie-shaped arrangement, can make some people verrry touchy. The fact that these are exceedingly common combinations, especially for couples who have just started exploring polyamory (and are therefore caught up in the novelty, romance, adventure, and transgressiveness of their new relationships), is a further complication.

In any self-defining niche community or underground, there will always be an ideological purity brigade who thinks it was there first, is more authentic, represents some mythical golden age (at least a decade ago), etc., etc., and in their eyes, I'll always just be a horn dog with a sister-wife fantasy, and my girlfriend(s) are either victims or sellouts. This is more pronounced in some cities than others--I've been a guest in some laid-back, socially diverse extended households, and I've been to munches where you need the correct genderqueer-anarchist bona fides just to get past eye contact and terse small talk.

I should mention that I'm on the West Coast of the U.S., by the way. I have no idea what the poly culture is like on your side of the pond. I also don't want you to think that this constitutes the prevailing tone over here; it's more like that one obnoxious little fly that's always in the ointment.

Anybody else want to sound off, either pro or con?

[–]turkproof 3 points4 points ago

A bowtie arrangement? I've never heard that! I've taken to calling my situation a square.

[–]SMCinPDX 1 point2 points ago

There's probably another name for it, but I feel like "bowtie" gets the point across.

[–]blackberrydoughnuts 2 points3 points ago

Yeah, this is a subject that interests me, and I've noticed some similar things as well.

I think there's a lot of concern with fostering a safe, friendly, egalitarian community environment, which is a good thing. I do think it's possible that having a lot of MFF closed groupings can hurt the community by making it more competitive. In other words, it starts becoming -- or looking -- more like a status competition and less like an egalitarian feminist paradise.

I think a lot of it is based on dislike of polyfidelity in general, for the same reasons a lot of us dislike monogamy: expecting your partners to be exclusive can be unrealistic and it can be a way of avoiding dealing with jealousy. It's so tempting to start thinking of them as "your girls" and wanting to protect them and defend them from other guys, etc. Not saying you're like that, but I think that's the concern.

Did you see this post I made on competition and "harems"? My conclusion is that the poly community has a norm against MFF exclusive groups because a) they're sometimes associated with abusive, controlling situations and naive submissives who don't have good boundaries; and b) because too many of them hurt the community environment by promoting competition and ownership of people. I'd love to know your thoughts on this.

[–]SMCinPDX 1 point2 points ago*

I did see that, and I considered replying, but I didn't really know what to say. The sort of partner-snatching and backbiting you describe isn't anything I've seen in action, and it sounded more like you were reacting to a few horror stories that have been posted in this sub than describing anything you've seen with your own eyes; a little exposure to poly in the real world should quickly disabuse you of those fears. It's been about two weeks--any follow-up?

Polyamory means "loving many". It doesn't necessarily mean free-love with no boundaries (or "take-it-or-leave-me" boundaries). I've been through relationship phases where everybody was free to date and fuck however they wanted to, and in my experience, having a buffer zone of consensual exclusivity (that is perfectly free to be expanded [*in any direction] to include new people, pending discussion and rapport-building) makes for more confident, secure, and intimate long-term relationships.

As for the rest, I have to say that I roll my eyes at the idea of polyamory as an "egalitarian feminist paradise". Polyamory isn't about politics, it's about rejecting the idea that anybody but you can define who and how you love. Other than that, all the conventional rules apply. If you want egalitarian, feminist, utopian treatment, find somebody who'll treat you like that and enjoy each other. If you aren't being treated fairly, tell your partner you expect better, or just dump the bastard. If you're being abused, get help.

[–]blackberrydoughnuts 1 point2 points ago

The sort of partner-snatching and backbiting you describe isn't anything I've seen in action

I'm genuinely happy for you: it's great that you've managed to avoid it. That said, poly people are people like anyone else, and the sort of conflict I describe occurs in all groups of people. I wasn't reacting specifically to that post I linked to in my post, I was indeed talking about experiences I've seen and been through "in the real world."

My follow up from the post is: a) poly people are like any other group, and there does exist some drama and competition; b) it's possible to avoid it by carefully selecting the people you hang out with and working to fight your own jealousy and insecurity; c) MFF closed groups and "harems" are looked down on because they're more likely to be abusive and controlling, as well as harming the community by making it more competitive; and d) there are plenty of MFF closed groups and "harems" that are friendly and happy and consensual, and not abusive and controlling.

I've been through relationship phases where everybody was free to date and fuck however they wanted to, and in my experience, having a buffer zone of consensual exclusivity (that is perfectly free to be expanded [*in any direction] to include new people, pending discussion and rapport-building) makes for more confident, secure, and intimate long-term relationships.

Would you elaborate on this? What do you mean by "a buffer zone of consensual exclusivity that is perfectly free to be expanded"? If it's exclusivity, how can it be perfectly free to be expanded?

Polyamory isn't about politics, it's about rejecting the idea that anybody but you can define who and how you love. Other than that, all the conventional rules apply. If you want egalitarian, feminist, utopian treatment, find somebody who'll treat you like that and enjoy each other.

How is "rejecting the idea that anybody but you can define who and how you love" not about politics? Particularly social politics? And I do think there are poly ideals: that people are treated fairly and respectfully, that people all get along in the community, that people try to fight jealousy and insecurity. Are you saying there aren't any of these ideals that are worked towards?

What do you mean, "all the conventional rules apply"? I'm not really sure I know what the conventional rules are, but do you mean that people fight, get jealous, compete, and so forth, just like anywhere else? They do, but it's also part of the poly ideal to try to get rid of that (at least that's what I thought).

[–]chiuxo[S] 0 points1 point ago

Just want to say thanks to both of you for this debate... REALLY interesting reading, exactly the kind of insights I was hoping to get from this Q. Don't suppose either of you are in the UK are you? Upvotes for all!

[–]SMCinPDX 1 point2 points ago

Two quick replies:

1) I've never met anyone who considered themselves available to be "snatched" from their current partner, and I don't think I'd care to. The whole concept sounds uncomfortably dismissive of respect for people's choices about who to initiate or stay in a relationship with, and why. I had a partner break things off a year ago. She's still in a relationship with someone she'd started dating after she met me. Do you think he "snatched" her, or is she allowed to have had her own reasons for breaking up with me?

2) The version of polyamory you're talking about sounds like one big free-for-all meat market, and that's not my thing. My committed long-term relationships work like anybody else's, I/we just have more than one of them at a time. Sometimes one of my girlfriends has another boyfriend, most of the time I'm dating a couple of women who don't happen to be dating anybody else. On very rare occasion, something gets going between those women, and once or twice, there's been a "proper" triad dynamic. No matter what, an emphasis on nurturing the core relationships is prioritized when somebody considers acting on a new attraction. "Will adding this person to our lives, even through a degree of separation, make everyone's life better somehow" is the chief question. The version of polyfidelity I've always practiced isn't a cloister, it's a firmer set of boundaries and filters that puts the relationship/"household" ahead of any single person in it.

Edit: one more thing. Re:

And I do think there are poly ideals: that people are treated fairly and respectfully, that people all get along in the community, that people try to fight jealousy and insecurity.

Those are, or should be, universal ideals (at least in any civilization I'd want to be a member of). They are not, and should not be, unique to polyamory, and I'd argue that they're necessary, but not sufficient, conditions for living polyamorously in the first place.

[–]blackberrydoughnuts 0 points1 point ago

1) If A actively tries to take B away from B's current relationship, and disrespects B's boundaries, of course it's still B's choice to leave or not, for B's own reasons. That doesn't take anything away from the fact that A is being disrespectful and trying to "snatch" someone.

Or, if C and D are in a dom/sub relationship and D starts dating another dom E, and D and E want E to be an equal status dom to C, but C is uncomfortable with this and makes D choose... well, I could see how both C and E feel like the other is trying to push them out. (I'd love to know your thoughts on that one.)

2) Yes, the idea of poly communities being at least partly "one big free-for-all meat market" is basically what my concern and fear is here. On the other hand, there's nothing wrong with people wanting to meet/date/fuck lots of new people as long as they're respectful about it. So a "meat market" isn't totally bad -- it's just the result of lots of people looking for new partners -- unless people are assholes.

I'm pretty new to poly and am trying to have less of a competitive mentality, but I'm also scared of being naive about social status and competitions and so forth.

I think there's a sliding scale with polyfidelity on one end, to needing your partner's approval, to needing to talk things over with your partner and put the relationship first, and then on the other end of the scale is "I don't want anyone to have control over who I date, and I don't want to date anyone who won't let me date who I want," which is more where I tend to be.

Sounds like you tend to be more on the other end of the scale and I can see how that would reduce problems with partner-snatching, instability, and meat markets. At the same time, that has its own problems, like people using veto power to control the relationship out of jealousy.

I guess I don't really understand putting the relationship ahead of any single person, because if it's not working for you and you want to end it, doing so requires putting yourself first.

As far as poly ideals being universal, in a general sense that's true, but as applied to poly, they're more specific. I brought that up because you brought up "all the conventional rules applying," which seemed to mean that the ideals, poly or universal, were not being lived up to -- I assumed by "conventional rules" you meant that people fight and compete (not live up to the ideals). Did I interpret incorrectly?

[–]SMCinPDX 1 point2 points ago

The "conventional rules" are what I spelled out at the end of that paragraph. Give your heart to people who will treat it well, never apologize for having standards, expect to be respected, and don't put up with abuse.

As for the difference between "relationship-centric" versus "individual-centric" polyamory, maybe you'll understand it better if I put it this way: between my partners and I, learning about a new person comes in the form of "I met this cool guy/girl, I think there might be some 'there' there, how would you feel about that" instead of "I'm dating and fucking somebody new now, thought you might like to know".

It seems like you're carrying some serious baggage about competition, and you want polyamory to be the magic bullet for it. Could I suggest that you talk to somebody about that before you dive any deeper into being actively poly? Whether or not your worries are founded, walking into a new lifestyle with false expectations is setting yourself up to be disappointed and hurt.

[–]ejp1082 1 point2 points ago

I've never run into an anti-swinger attitude. Such an attitude would be weird, given how much overlap there is between the two communities and how blurry the line is in any case.

I think you're right about a "my poly is the only true poly" style purity brigade that exists pretty much everywhere, but I don't think it's the chief source of anti-MFF prejudice.

Certain less-than-good relationship practices and less-than-good personality types lend themselves to certain relationship configurations. If you are a narcissistic, possessive, maybe abusive guy practicing "poly", you're probably going to surround yourself with submissive women you manipulate in various ways, for a closed MFF+ relationship. You're probably not going to enter into an open V or N or something along those lines.

This in turn leads to suspicion of people in a closed MFF+ configuration. The poly community is generally very pro-feminist, so I think many people get concerned when they see a red flag for abuse, and they perceive that configuration as one such red flag.

It is unfair, as all prejudice is. But it does mean that people in that configuration have a higher bar to jump in order to prove they're good poly's than someone in a configuration that doesn't lend itself to that possibility.

Plus I'll note there's a general annoyance with unicorn hunters, which likely produces some antipathy as well. That annoyance doesn't really go away just because the unicorn hunting couple managed to (usually temporarily) snag a unicorn.

[–]blackberrydoughnuts 1 point2 points ago

Plus I'll note there's a general annoyance with unicorn hunters, which likely produces some antipathy as well. That annoyance doesn't really go away just because the unicorn hunting couple managed to (usually temporarily) snag a unicorn.

I definitely think that there is a prejudice against "unicorn hunters" just as there is against closed MFF groups. But my understanding of the (IMHO dumb and offensive) term "unicorn hunter" is that it's a derogatory term applied to couples who want a third as a plaything, not an equal partner. As such, it wouldn't apply to closed MFF groups, and I don't think that describing an MFF group as a couple that "snagged a unicorn" is accurate. They often come from the two Fs dating the M separately, meeting each other, and being into each other as well.

What do you think about my theory that closed MFF groups are looked down on because they hurt the community by encouraging competition?

[–]ejp1082 1 point2 points ago*

it's a derogatory term applied to couples who want a third as a plaything, not an equal partner.

Well yes and no. Unicorn Hunters - the stereotypical ones anyway - are derided mostly because they're hopelessly naive and laughably self unaware. The ones who are just looking for threesomes are probably somewhat less derided actually, as they're self aware and honest. It's the ones who go on about "sister wives" and "completing our family" that are annoying, because they treat the unicorn like a sex toy while thinking they're treating her like a relationship.Every once in a while they do beat the odds and meet a unicorn, who's usually young and inexperienced herself. It doesn't end well, but for the brief period of time they're together they all think they're experts at polyamory.

What do you think about my theory that closed MFF groups are looked down on because they hurt the community by encouraging competition?

Honestly, it's just a complete and total non-issue. Not every poly person is available for dating. The existence of closed groups, whatever the gender mix, doesn't really increase or decrease the size of the dating pool. And in general there's a lot less competition in the poly community simply because there is a lot less zero-sum-ness going around.

[–]blackberrydoughnuts 0 points1 point ago

It's the ones who go on about "sister wives" and "completing our family" that are annoying, because they treat the unicorn like a sex toy while thinking they're treating her like a relationship.

Could you elaborate on this? Do you mean that straight men and couples looking to expand their relationship sometimes don't treat the people they're dating with respect, and that's what makes them "unicorn hunters"? I'm kind of confused about your definitions. Are unicorn hunters:

  • any straight man or couple looking to add another woman to their relationship
  • ones who do it without respecting the other woman's needs or treating her as an equal
  • or something else?

Or to put it another way, how can a man or couple attempt to expand their relationship without being a derided "unicorn hunter"? Not be a closed group? Treat everyone they date as an equal? Date men as well as women? Not expect the other people they date to be a "third" who will serve them and follow their rules and love them equally and be their plaything without considering her own needs?

The existence of closed groups, whatever the gender mix, doesn't really increase or decrease the size of the dating pool. And in general there's a lot less competition in the poly community simply because there is a lot less zero-sum-ness going around.

Ok, let me explain in more detail what I'm thinking, because it's definitely not a non-issue.

Back when women were considered property, there were essentially two types of relationship models: monogamy, and the structure where a wealthy or powerful man would have multiple wives and concubines. The latter created conflict because it left some men without wives, caused competition among men for adding more women, and created resentment towards the wealthy or powerful men who had "harems."

This seems to be a fairly natural system for a human society, and it's spontaneously developed in several more modern situations as well: see the fate of the sailors stranded on the Pitcairn Islands, or the Mormons (back when they were polygamous) kicking out young boys so they wouldn't compete, or other cult-like or isolated situations. (The book "Sex at Dawn" argues that this isn't how humans lived before civilization, and that it's not really "natural." Even so, it's developed and spread since agriculture was invented.)

Monogamy was a step away from this system. It was a cultural innovation that helped the society by reducing competition and enforcing more equality. If men were only allowed one wife, no one could be the target of resentment and competition, and there would be no shortage of women.

Modern polyamory, of course, recognizes that women have agency and allows and encourages women to have multiple partners as well. However, there can still be a tendency towards competition. For instance, consider two separate poly communities. In community A, there are only a few closed poly groups, and they have roughly an equal gender mix. In community B, roughly half the community is in closed poly groupings and they're predominately MFF+. So with 50 men and 50 women, we'd have, say, 16 men and 34 women in closed groupings. Isn't it clear that community B will in general have more competition, drama, and unfriendliness? Doesn't it seem like there will be a lot more trying to break people out of relationships in community B?

[–]ejp1082 0 points1 point ago

Not expect the other people they date to be a "third" who will serve them and follow their rules and love them equally and be their plaything without considering her own needs?

Pretty much that one yeah.

because it's definitely not a non-issue.

In the real world it's definitely a non-issue. The reality doesn't match your theory, so it follows your theory is wrong. I'll try to explain why.

If I recall my anthropology, you do sometimes see the effect you're describing in small, closed, patriarchial polygamous societies - that is, in your situation with only 100 people, and no one leaves and no one new comes in. But the effect just vanishes once you start getting into bigger populations. Even a king only has the resources to support a finite number of wives. In extreme cases the King of Siam had something like 30. But 30 out of a population of a million is nothing.

As it happens, the US population has 4 million more women than men, as men are more likely to die due to violence or accidents. That means 4 million women could opt for a polygamous marriage and there'd still be one woman for every guy.

I'd also point out your characterization of monogamy is wrong. There's intense competition for the most desirable mates, which is played out in a zero sum game. A half dozen guys will pursue the head cheerleader, a half dozen girls will pursue the football team captain, and meanwhile not even the fat girls are willing to date the socially awkward gaming dorks and vice versa. You still get that in the poly world but not nearly as much - the cheerleader can date all six guys and the dork can hook up with the fat girl without giving up on the possibility of also dating someone more desirable.

And finally, in the poly world specifically, people drop out of the dating pool for all sorts of reasons. They're poly saturated and can't handle any more partners. They decide poly wasn't for them and go back to monogamy. They can even die. Entering a closed relationship is a reason, but it's not a particularly outsized reason. I've lost girlfriends to monogamy, I've never lost one to polygamy. Nor have I even heard of such a thing happening. And in any case, new people are constantly entering the dating pool - they decide to open their relationship, they broke up with a partner, they learn about polyamory and want to try it, etc.

[–]blackberrydoughnuts 1 point2 points ago

Extraordinary, you would have thought it would be fairly judgement-free. Do you think hetero polys get a lot of that?

I've noticed some of this as well. Poly people are people just like anyone else, and they can be just as judgmental, dumb, and just as capable of thinking that there's only one right way to live.

[–]chiuxo[S] 0 points1 point ago

Polys are human, eh? WHO KNEW! :)

[–]InfinitelyThirsting 2 points3 points ago

Yeah, that too. I was just thinking about how people immediately go "but then there will be so many lonely men!!". There's nothing wrong with MFF+ at all.

[–]2Coin_Operated_Girl 28 points29 points ago

That synced google calendars are the single best invention since the beginning of time.

I wouldn't ever get to see my partners if we didn't share our calendars, but at any point they can see where I am, and I can see them, it helps us plan everything.

[–]chiuxo[S] 2 points3 points ago

Good one! throws away filofax Seriously, organisation does seem to be a massive factor for a lot of people.

[–]SapientSlut 2 points3 points ago

One of my girlfriend's nicknames is "The Coordinatrix" - juggling five people's schedules is no easy feat!

[–][deleted] ago

[deleted]

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points ago

I use Dropbox and had never realised I could use this to share things with people. This is a genius idea :)

[–][deleted] ago

[deleted]

[–]chiuxo[S] 0 points1 point ago

I don't suppose you're in the UK, and/or might speak in person about this? The organisational angle is an important one for me to cover, and you sound like you've got it totally nailed! PM me if you want more details, or a chat x

[–]wildly_curious_1 0 points1 point ago

Sorry, I'm in California. :-) Shoot me a PM though if you want to ask some questions, and I can elaborate if needs be. :-)

Oddly enough, we haven't found it necessary to use a Google Calendar yet. We may at some point, but so far scheduling hasn't been difficult.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points ago

I just recently shared ours (mine and husband's) with my boyfriend. So helpful!

[–]turkproof 1 point2 points ago

Also, Find My Friends and group messaging on iPhones. Thanks, iOS5!

[–]izjustsayin 16 points17 points ago

That not everyone who participates in polyamory are middle aged, ugly, pagan hippies (no offense intended to any of those categories).

We're all different and became (and remained) poly for different reasons. It seems that the majority of the media coverage on polyamorous people make us all seem like free-love, crystal worshiping, tantric yoga experts....we're not.

[–]cubicarts 7 points8 points ago

yes, no offense intended to the ugly people. ಠ_ಠ

[–]rderekp 10 points11 points ago

None taken.

[–]izjustsayin 0 points1 point ago

Yeah, I knew I'd get a comment on that....

[–]AbsoluteElsewhere 3 points4 points ago

As a younger, semi-attractive pagan hippie, I'm only half-offended.

[–]izjustsayin 2 points3 points ago

As a younger, semi-attractive atheist hippie, I'm only half-offended too... by my own comment. ;-)

[–]awkward_ostrich 12 points13 points ago

Well, so often I hear people say something along the lines of: "How in the world do you deal with the jealousy?! Do you just not get jealous?"

I guess I think it's important for everyone to know that jealousy exists in most relationships. Poly or monogamous, casual or serious, even friendships or romantic relationships, and even over things that have nothing to do with sex/romance/whatever. Heck, I sometimes get "jealous" when I think my SO is paying more attention to Reddit than he is to me. :P Mildly jealous, but jealous nonetheless.

In poly relationships, jealousy often feels a bit like this: "Why do you want to sleep/spend time with ______? Am I not enough for you?," feeling like you are personally lacking in any way. And healthily dealing with jealousy in poly relationships isn't so different from healthily dealing with jealousy in mono relationships. Communication, reassurance, trust, etc.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points ago

And healthily dealing with jealousy in poly relationships isn't so different from healthily dealing with jealousy in mono relationships.

Also, healthily dealing with jealousy isn't so different from healthily dealing with anger, frustration, sadness, confusion, resentment, or any other negative emotion that one might happen to experience. I don't break up with my girlfriend because I sometimes feel frustrated with her. So why would I break up with her because I sometimes feel jealous? There are ways to manage issues that don't involve categorically throwing out entire sections of our lives.

[–]epikura 12 points13 points ago

Or a false assumption lots of people seem to make, that you wish you could overturn?

"being poly is all about sex." "so you're allowed to cheat?" "one day you'll find your true love and then you'll want an exclusive relationship too." "but you have no real/serious relationship" "you can't live like that as soon as you have children."

And is there one thing standing in the way of more people coming out?

see false assumptions... once i mention poly, many people either pity me for "not knowing true love" or pity my partners for having to endure all the pain they surely feel when they are not the one and only.

[–]terrifiedsleeptwitch 0 points1 point ago

"one day you'll find your true love and then you'll want an exclusive relationship too."

"but you have no real/serious relationship"

Just came out about my new open relationship to my roommate-friends. They responded with mostly that line of logic, augmented by some shit about "I tried that with so-and-so and it didn't work. Hence, it does not and cannot ever work."

And logic did not work with them at all, either.

[–]BirthdayLibertine 12 points13 points ago

That it can really strengthen relationships what with the emphasis on communication and honesty.

[–]rasta-bating 10 points11 points ago

Is there a particular aspect of the poly lifestyle/ poly relationships you wish more people new about? Or a false assumption lots of people seem to make, that you wish you could overturn? Is there one thing standing in the way of more people coming out?

I wish more people could understand how fulfilling it is to feel a legitimate connection with multiple people. How amazing it is to enjoy an afternoon with my boyfriend, and come home to my boyfriend.

A false assumption? Well, there are plenty. The worst, imo: is perceiving polyamory as something completely different (and somehow -more- wrong) than dating around. The concept that it's cheating really puts a negative spin on the whole thing, and the idea that jealousy is "healthy" and there must be something "wrong with us" (myself and my primary) if we want to sleep with other people. Also: yes, sti's are incredibly common...but they are not for any reason more prevalent in the poly community than they are in the college dating scene. Even less so; generally because poly people have strong relationships they feel they need to keep safe...thus more care is taken.

The thing standing in the way of more of us coming out, is simply ridicule. We know what makes us happy. If the people in our lives are committed to making us feel as if this way of life is 'unsafe' and 'immature', we just simply don't tell them.

Which is a shame, because I'm certain that ALL of my republican uncles would just adore my new military pilot boyfriend. #polyproblems

[–]polywanna 2 points3 points ago

When I read this I thought you were using the word pilot to describe a "test" boyfriend. :)

[–]dancingsam34 8 points9 points ago

That its possible for a human being to not be a jealous, possessive lunatic when it comes to relationships.

[–]zluruc 2 points3 points ago

And, conversely, that jealousy happens, that it's a normal human reaction and there are reasons behind it (often a need not being met, but sometimes just plain old insecurity). That jealousy is not the sign that you're "doing poly wrong", but that some poly people are perhaps even better equipped to work through it when it does happen than many monogamous people. And how jealousy can be a signal that something needs to be shifted or changed, and how people in a poly dynamic can successfully make that happen.

[–]SapientSlut 1 point2 points ago

And also that not being jealous does not mean you don't "really love them"

[–]ejp1082 8 points9 points ago

That it exists.

[–]SMCinPDX 6 points7 points ago

I can answer the last one.

is there one thing standing in the way of more people coming out?

I think it's just the body of misinformation that's out there because of Big Love, Girls Next Door, the Gingrich news cycle, etc. When we don't tell people, it's frequently because polyamory/polyfidelity means something different to each of us, and we've learned that, as soon as we say anything about being non-monogamous to certain types of people, this shutter of moral-panic-fueled preconceived judgment clangs down behind their eyes before we can explain what that means to our particular case. Anything we say past "we're poly" or "we have an open relationship" is perceived as a tissue of rationalizations for a lifestyle of emotionally bankrupt spree sex and spousal bullying. It's like being an atheist, and having that one side of the family who, no matter how many times you explain God of the Gaps theology or agency-projection, always comes back with, "but why are you mad at Jesus?"

And on that note, thanks for the work you're doing. Projects like yours are going to make this easier.

[–]ZorbaTHut 6 points7 points ago

That polyamorous relationships aren't always fully connected - not everyone involved must be in love with everyone else involved.

I had one relationship that looked somewhat like this. I'm Z, obviously. R was (and is) my best friend. I made out with M but there was never anything romantic there, just "hey, this is fun". I got along with K but we live in very different worlds, and I never even met L, to say nothing of being involved with her. (A didn't like her at all - I probably wouldn't have either.)

Everyone always imagines these relationships that can be described as a pile of letters, just listing what genders people are and assuming everyone is together in some manner, but that's not always the case. Sometimes they're very geometrically complex.

[–]epikura 0 points1 point ago

yep. it even happens that A and B love each other, B loves C, but A and C don't even like each other. though the "happy loving family" is an assumption i havn't heard by monogamous people yet but quite often by new polys. monogamous people seemed to be rather surprised about the possibility to like the "other".

[–]dragonnyxx 5 points6 points ago

That it's FAR more common than most people realize. Being poly is easier to hide than (say) being gay, as well as being even more stigmatized. I'm not saying being an out-of-the-closet gay guy is easy, certainly, but let's face it -- after all of the hard work done by the gay community over the past fifty or sixty years, everyone is familiar with homosexuality, there are plenty of famous gay role models, and there are areas where you can be openly gay and no one bats an eye.

Furthermore, being gay is relatively simple to understand -- you can think to yourself, "ok, I'm not attracted to guys, but I assume you feel the way about guys that I do about girls". Even if people don't approve, it's at least pretty straightforward for them to wrap their brains around. Poly is both more complicated (the endless variety of different relationship types) as well as more foreign (most people can't even imagine ever being ok with their partner sleeping with someone else), and therefore more difficult to talk about.

So given that, small wonder most people don't live their lives as openly poly to everyone they meet. I know lots of poly people -- respected professionals, teachers, and so forth. None of them are especially public about it. Only my closest friends know my situation, and I suspect that's true of a lot of the people on r/poly as well.

[–]jdac 1 point2 points ago

I think it's more accurate to say that gays and polyamorists face differing oppression. While queer people can live openly in many places (not to say their experiences wouldn't differ from mine, ceteris paribus), I as a straight polyamorist can at least marry one of my partners, and that marriage will be recognized and respected essentially world-wide.

In the interests of full disclosure, I live openly as a polyamorist. So this too is something that we can do, in some places.

[–]avapoet 4 points5 points ago

In the UK and making a documentary (even a student documentary) about polyamory? You want to talk to these guys, who can probably give you some soundbite stuff and perhaps put you in contact with folks you can interview.

[–]chiuxo[S] 1 point2 points ago

Thanks, they were my first port of call! I got a nice reply but they are predominantly US-based, the cogs are turning but I'm not sure I'm going to find anyone to speak to...

[–]avapoet 1 point2 points ago

If you're looking to make contact with people to interview, there are various groups, meetups, and mailing lists that you might consider: I'll leave you to Google for them yourself. Please bear in mind that many of these groups will be hostile to researchers and documentary-makers, no matter how good their intentions seem to be, either because folks in them have been burned by bad articles in the past or because they don't feel that it's okay for journalists to invade their space, so an extremely light touch is required (e.g. emailing organisers, explaining your situation as you have above, and asking them to pass on a message and ask for any participants... NOT by joining a group as a "member" and then admitting your motivation).

I don't know what kind of deadlines you're working to, but whatever happens this year from the people who organise PolyDay (which I was at) and OpenCon (which I wasn't) might be worth watching. Also: there's often a large poly presence at BiCon. Again - light touch, don't "push", and never lie about your intentions. Basically the same rules that make poly relationships work, I guess.

Finally: I'm only 60-90 minutes outside of London myself, if there's anything I can do to help. I almost certainly can't be of direct assistance (my partner and her husband are media-shy and are not poly-activist types) but I might be able to point you in the direction of people who are. Drop me a PM with contact details if I can be of any help.

[–]chiuxo[S] 2 points3 points ago

Thanks for the advice, I feel like I'm painfully wary of being intrusive at the moment, but so far everyone I've spoken to has been just lovely. I do take a very soft approach though. And I totally understand the hostility, as a trainee journalist it's - SO - cringey to read a badly skewed or overly salacious piece of work! Will PM you for sure, thanks again!

[–]jdac 5 points6 points ago*

In order: I wish more people knew that polyamory gives you an unprecedented opportunity to explore how the company you keep changes who are, both instantaneously and over time. Fantastic personal growth can be achieved.

A misconception I think is widely held? They polyamory is a gateway to easy sex with abundant partners. Being poly shrinks your dating pool even as it allows you to engage with more people at once. I think this misconception stems from several deep prejudices, and the truth is very damaging to the canard that polyamorists are unscrupulous, wantonly sexual and greedy.

What prevents people from coming out? Prejudice. Being out is taxing, especially if you can't hide your proclivities: people feel entitled to ask you for a 101-level explanation of your life, or poll you on behalf of all non-monogamy. People will assume you are emotionless, unconditionally sexually available, a victim, a potential child molester. These beliefs are self-sealing, conspiracy-like: contradictory accounts are dismissed as biased or fabrated.

[–]chiuxo[S] 0 points1 point ago

"Being out is taxing, especially if you can't hide your proclivities: people feel entitled to ask you for a 101-level explanation of your life, or poll you on behalf of all non-monogamy"

Is this something you get a lot? I read an interesting article (I completely forget where, sorry) by a gay guy, who said that before he came out he felt like he had two choices:

a) firmly in the closet, OR b) out and an activist, spokesman for the whole gay community

Do you think there are people who would be happy to be out and proud, but don't come out simply because they don't want to be seen as 'representing' the whole poly community?

Sorry for al the questions! You piqued my interest. :)

[–]jdac 0 points1 point ago*

I'm somewhat immune by virtue of my circumstances. Since I'm childless, not disposable at my workplace, not in the military, and a host of other reasons, it's relatively safe and easy for me to be out as poly. Basically, I get that kind of thing when I choose to, but not everyone gets that luxury.

I think the prospect of explaining polyamory to people who may be judgmental or hostile figures into the thinking of people who are contemplating coming out. The example of kendra holliday is instructive as to the kinds of adverse effects coming out as poly, or in her case poly and kinky, can have.

Also, people, upon learning that you have unconventional relationships, can develop boundary issues. Case in point: when my primary and I came out to my mother, her first queston was if we were having group sex, which is, bluntly, none of her goddamn business. She also cried, inexplicably. I can see how someone would rather avoid situations like that.

I definitely feel pressure to be an advocate, and I make an effort, at times, to be hard to ignore. Given my relative invulnerability, I kinda enjoy robbing monogamous people of their comfortable myopia.

[–]SapientSlut 3 points4 points ago

That being poly doesn't mean cheating - even "consensual cheating"

[–]raziphel 3 points4 points ago

That it's ridiculously difficult at times, but even the toughest of things can be overcome with love and patience.

[–]MsLogophile 2 points3 points ago

On false assumptions, Iv gotten the "Hurr what are you going to do about STDs? Yeah everyone likes herpies" ಠ_ಠ I dunno man, what do normal people do about STDs? I think Ill do that. Yeah. Ugh.

[–]epikura 1 point2 points ago

but nobody thinks of the sniffles.. meh. i havn't had a sniffelfree month for ages.

[–]MsLogophile 1 point2 points ago

Relevant. I JUST got my fiance and my boyfriend sick with the same sinus thing. I feel terrible about it, haha!

[–]chiuxo[S] 0 points1 point ago

The 'haha!' makes me think you don't feel TOO terrible about it!

[–][deleted] ago

[deleted]

[–]paganwaffle 3 points4 points ago

I've been through that before. Don't worry, this too shall pass. <3

[–]chiuxo[S] 1 point2 points ago

Interesting, thanks. So do you reckon that your (hypothetical) 'perfect relationship' would be poly, but would also involve one particularly close partner? For you, you need a Primary to feel properly complete?

[–]iwasapolygon 2 points3 points ago

I wish people would see the other side of being irrationally jealous of other people being with their partner. Why not be flattered when someone agrees with how attractive your partner is?

[–]gennywitha_G 2 points3 points ago

The part I wish more people knew about is the amount of support that can come from a poly relationship. Not only would you get support from your partners, but also all of the OSOs supporting each other too. It's not exactly something you hear about a lot.

An assumption I'd wish to overturn is that polyamory is not a reason to go out and sleep with everyone just because you can. At its core, polyamory is way to have multiple meaningful relationships, which are beneficial to everyone involved. In addition, each relationship has their own sets of agreements to make sure that all involved are comfortable with the situation.

[–]YeshkepSe 2 points3 points ago

That having two or three or four or more partners supporting you when shit goes bad is unspeakably awesome, and sharing your joys and happy moments with them is even better.

[–]eine_person 2 points3 points ago

Basically I wish that more people would make up their minds to the fact that you can love and really love more than one person. I hate it when people assume that someone with more than one partner simply wasn't consequent enough to break up with his former partner when he fell in love again.

I also totally agree on the problem with the harem-image. But even if there are two (or more) men in a relationship a lot of people tend to think it's all about having sex. Which is simply not true.

And I hate the assumption that a polyamorous relationship can not be a good environment for growing children. I don't like it in general when people forget how acceptant children are and how many things are only seen as false because of social norms, but the view that polyamory would disturb children is a major problem to me.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points ago

That I know what love is. That I know better than they how I feel about my partners and how they feel about me. That my marriage is real. Basically, that strangers don't know my business better than I do.

[–]wascurious 1 point2 points ago

I'm unsure if I'm poly, based on the definition being an umbrella term for all consensual non monotony, or a form of non monogamy based n multiple romantic relationships (while I don't embrace the term, I fit into the swinger branch as our sex partners are friendships and not additional romantic partners).

That said, the biggest lesson lesson for me I wish everyone knew about, was how open honest communication and sexual fulfillment throb sex with others can strengthen a relationship and be so much more rewarding than one defined b sexual exclusivity. Also compersion, how much fun watching and helping your partner be sexually fulfilled can be.

[–]naka_witch 1 point2 points ago

That all poly people are bisexual. We tend to accept it more, and one of my bfs and I are bi, but the other bf is straight. People assume that because we are a MMF, that the men are sleeping together. While I think that would be fun, it doesn't happen.

[–]SapientSlut 2 points3 points ago

sigh both of my boyfriends are hetero - it's such a shame, it would be so hot if they made out!

[–]TraumaPony 1 point2 points ago

That there are far more people in mono relationships who abuse children than people in poly relationships who abuse children.

Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy. © 2012 reddit inc. All rights reserved.

REDDIT and the ALIEN Logo are registered trademarks of reddit inc.

π Rendered by PID 23898 on app-127 running 86c9e1d.