Polyamory
So as to not take over the other thread.
I do have emotional relationships. If something happened and I or my partner wasn't able to have sex, I could work around that. If our emotional/intellectual relationship diminished, it'd be over. For me, the "connection" is the most important thing. Sex is important to me, but it isn't defining - although bad sex will end a budding relationship. I can usually tell by kissing styles. I tend to work on the "connection" with people who I think will be good sex partners, so it goes hand-in-hand. In a relationship, for me, what makes us "us" is the overall bond.
I avoid casual sex. There's a high probability of first-time sex being bad because partners aren't in tune with what the other person likes. I'm likely to be sexually monogamous, because for sex to be good (for me) it takes a few times with the same person and that wanders into emotional monogamy space. However, I don't feel necessarily tied to either casual sex or monogamy.
I dunno why I don't have a problem with open-ish relationships. If people continue this dicussion, it may help me put it in words.
hm. maybe i misunderstood you and kmk. it seemed like you two felt that there was no way to truly be in love with more than one person. or at least it wasn't possible for you two. and if you thought you might be in love with multiple people, you would reevaluate to see which one you "actually" love (which to me sounds like you still think you can only be in love with one).
if i misunderstood your position or hers, i apologize.
but if you are agreeing that you can be in love with multiple people, then why do you disagree with being involved with all people who you are in love with? (not "disagree" as in think it's wrong in general... but simply think it's wrong "for you")
also, can i ask about your position on "emotional cheating"? i'm so curious.
when i think about "cheating" i think of it as something that someone knowingly and intentionally does even when they have the ability to not do it.
which is why i have a hard time understanding "emotional cheating" since we cannot control our emotions. if someone had feelings for someone else, how would they avoid "cheating" in your case? say they still loved you the same, but realized they loved someone else too but had no way of controlling it and didn't realize it was going to happen until it did? in that case i could see where they would choose to limit contact with the person or something to hope that the feelings fade... but from what you're telling me, they unwillingly cheated already and there's no undoing it.
but if you are agreeing that you can be in love with multiple people, then why do you disagree with being involved with all people who you are in love with? (not "disagree" as in think it's wrong in general... but simply think it's wrong "for you")
No, I never said there was no way for it to happen, I was just trying to understand the different reasons for wanting it. As I have said, the only reason I could come up with, was wanting to have multiple things from different people (as Cali explained). I wouldn't be in love with multiple people, because that would be selfish on my part, and it doesn't appeal to me. I love the relationship that my husband and I share, and I love that it is ours alone. I wouldn't become in love with someone else, because I wouldn't allow it to happen. I'm able to control the situations I put myself in. I have absolutely no doubt that it is possible to have feelings for another person, because there are so many individual traits that no one person has. For example, I might develop a "crush" or some shallow feeling for another person, because I like certain things about that person. That doesn't mean I want to risk the complete relationship I have with my husband to have something with the crush. This is not to say that other people can't explore multiple relationships if they all agree on it, but it's not what we want. I have developed a strong, committed relationship with my husband, and that's all I want. I don't place myself in situations that might jeopardize any of it. I have everything I need in my husband, and I don't need anyone else to give me anything, romantically.
also, can i ask about your position on "emotional cheating"? i'm so curious.
when i think about "cheating" i think of it as something that someone knowingly and intentionally does even when they have the ability to not do it.
which is why i have a hard time understanding "emotional cheating" since we cannot control our emotions. if someone had feelings for someone else, how would they avoid "cheating" in your case? say they still loved you the same, but realized they loved someone else too but had no way of controlling it and didn't realize it was going to happen until it did? in that case i could see where they would choose to limit contact with the person or something to hope that the feelings fade... but from what you're telling me, they unwillingly cheated already and there's no undoing it.
This is similar to what I was just discussing. If a crush developed, and didn't disappear, I would remove myself from that person, and let it fade. Now, if I didn't remove myself, and my feelings continued to grow (ie falling in love), then I would be cheating by continuing the relationship. Chemistry/crushes are going to happen for most people, but that doesn't mean we act on them (emotionally or physically). Emotional cheating, to me, is having romantic feelings for another person/being in love with another person/talking about these feelings with that other person, etc. I agree that there is nothing to do about an initial "crush" type feeling for someone, but you can definitely remove yourself from that situation. Say the feelings did not diminish at all, then it would be time to evaluate what to do about the situation. Continuing with strong feelings for another, but staying with the partner would be emotional cheating.
Regarding the "emotional cheating"...
I agree with you, rd, in that all your emotions are valid. You can't deny an emotion, it just happens. I don't think it's cheating if you have fond thoughts of another person. I do think it is immoral to have feelings for another person and then act on them in spite of your current partner. But a passing feeling is nothing to be ashamed of. This isn't 1984--no thoughtcrimes.
The other thing here is, love happens in stages. The general model for this, as studied, is that the first stage is the infatuation stage. It's the "puppy love" or "crush" stage. Deeper love takes bonding time to develop, on the other hand. Sometimes we mistake infatuation for love (we've all probably experienced that). So, I personally think it is irresponsible to divert affection from a deeply loving relationship to an infatuation.
Now, what if the third person is, in fact, deep romantic love? Well, that has to happen with time, and I guess I wouldn't spend enough time with that third person to allow it to develop to that point. Because, like many of you, I do believe it is possible to fall in love with more than one person, if there is enough time for attachment-building. Otherwise I would never have one relationship after another.
And why wouldn't I allow myself to fall in love with a third person? Because I do believe that love is finite. The emotion is infinite, but the actions which build and sustain love are limited. There are only so many hours in the day, and when I love someone, I want to devote all my affections to that one person. I want to spoil him. I don't want to be spending some time in some other bed. That doesn't appeal to me.
Now if the third person were a male friend--someone I had already bonded with--then it might be possible to already be in love with him. So I would have to re-evaluate my priorities and my relationships.
So, my main feelings are:
- Yes, you can fall in love with more than one person
- Deep romantic love requires spending some time together
- While the emotion of love is infinite, acts which communicate and develop love are limited
- I want to spend all my bonding time and energy with my current partner. I want to spoil him.
That's my whole thing. It fits pretty well with a lot of the understandings we've been talking about. Now, I don't know about third partners who are just like sex partners. That's something different. Here I'm talking about more than one LOVE. And I'm using a specific idea of love and what that feels like to me. And I can't really qualify that besides to say that it means that I have given myself entirely to another person while still retaining myself. Limiting myself to one person isn't an inhibition of love, it's an expansion.
thank you, kmk. i think i can agree with a lot of what you said, actually. i do believe deeper love takes bonding time to develop. and of course i agree that there are limited hours in one day, although i don't think that means that the actions to build love are limited (for me, at least). and i can agree that love is infinite, and that emotions just happen. while i don't feel that it's "immoral" to act on your feelings IF your partner agrees and understands (otherwise, yes... i agree, it's cheating if you are dishonest and go against your partner's comfort zone), i know that this is a common feeling and it is what makes you on the monogamous side of this issue.
"And I can't really qualify that besides to say that it means that I have given myself entirely to another person while still retaining myself. Limiting myself to one person isn't an inhibition of love, it's an expansion."
i have a lot of respect for this statement. while i don't agree that limiting MY love is an expansion rather than an inhibition, i can understand your point here. i don't know why, really, but this last part really made sense to me in trying to understand your side.
Thanks! It took me a while to organize my thoughts about the topic. I'm glad that makes sense.
I'm disappointed more people aren't discussing though!
I'd discuss it more, but I don't seem to get it out right. So, whether people get or don't get what I wrote, it's not quite what I meant. Or, occassionally, it's exactly what I meant. *sigh*
hh, i think a lot of people were "getting" and "understanding" you! i sorta felt like no one was getting me!
I think people got what I wrote. And I wrote what I meant. But there's so much to think about with this topic and I miss writing so much that I'm the one not doing a good job of communicating. I don't think there's a right or wrong side, but maybe I don't know where my "x" is on the continuum.
i'd say that you are somewhere in the grey area in between. physically poly, emotionally monogamous. is that a correct analysis?
Mostly. It's the area outside of mostly that I don't know how to word. Or, more accurately, put my finger on.
try! i'm interested in what you have to say.
I'll think on it. Maybe I'll have something by the end of the week. since Wednesday and Thursday are going to be braindead days for me. (I'm getting up at 3a on Wednesday, so I expect to be non-functioning on Thursday.)
How I feel about open physical relationships for me.
How I feel about open physical relationships for my partner.
How I feel about open emotional relationships for me.
How I feel about open emotional relationships for my partner.
Those I can answer. But there are nuiances floating in between them. Like, what about an emotional relationship with someone, other than my partner, but who lived a distance away, so never challenged the loyalty/time issue? That's analogus to casual safe sex. If that's okay, then I have to rethink emotional monogamy in general. It's shuffling around the variables so they all follow one concept that is true to me that's hard.
hmmm... sometimes things don't always make sense. especially in emotions.
I'm not bothered by the self-stated trollishness of the post, it just would have been nice if it was accurate. We can be inspired to debate even without deliberate enticement through misrepresentation. I keep coming back to this thread to say something real, but then it feels pointless since the first post mocks authentic debate.
PLEASE NOTE: if anything offended you, good. i wrote this purposely less considerate than I normally write things to get people to respond, so don't get nasty. it's all in the name of lively conversation. If you're still pissed, get a sense of humor.
You don't even take the time to state what you disagree with, or what is "inaccurate", because, why? Perhaps you could tone down the pretentious vibe, and be a little more friendly.
If you have an issue with my post being "trollish", report it to the administration, they can decide what needs to be decided, and I can take the hint that me and my "offensive" opinions aren't welcome.
i think maybe these are the parts that got to her. i could be wrong.
but admitting that you were trying to be offensive might be what seemed "trollish".
wow, you guys, there's so much stuff here that I haven't read, but I like this thread! To throw in my two cents, I don't have a problem with poly relationships. I know they aren't all the same, and as long as everything is safe and consensual that's all that matters to me!
I have to point out that the folks I know who are not currently monogamous are pretty smart about it - they talk with their partner(s) and lover(s) about their boundaries, which is very healthy and I think more monogamous folks would benefit from doing this more often! I also feel that my poly friends are smart enough to know how to go about things safely. Safety is usually part of an agreement between partners when there are multiple partners involved, at least for the people I know. I'm this is not always the case, but I'm going to respectfully disagree with MM on the point that non-monogamy is unhealthy or unsafe. I also cannot concieve of these people doing anything "for attention" or validation - they genuinely like, love and/or are attracted to the people they're seeing, and that's why they're seeing them.
I also want to mention that I don't have an issue with people whose relationships are based on sex (as long as everyone involved is on the same page). Sometimes physical attraction can be very strong, and people can have a great time together from that, and sometimes it will grow into something else. Other times it will remain a physical attraction alone. Again, as long as everyone knows what's going on, and things are safe and everyone consents, I don't see a problem with this. I've witnessed some relationships start off this way and later end up being more serious, and/or monogamous, which didn't work at all for the people involved. They didn't have much of an emotional or intellectual connection, although their physical attraction was very strong, and it worked out best when they had a casual thing going.
Another thing I want to mention is the meaning people place on the word Love. I think we sort of get the idea drilled into us at a young age that romantic love can only be one way and mean only one thing - intimacy, commitment, etc. In my experience I've learned that this is not the case. Every relationship I've been a part of had some degree of love present, but it was never the same as the last. I think it's important to acknowledge that this happens and it doesn't make some relationships less valid than others. I've had some great relationships and some less than great, but at some point during each one I felt some form of love towards whoever I was involved with. Even though most of them were not recent, I still feel that I have a small amount of love & affection for each one. It doesn't mean I want to get back together with these people (uhh definitely not, heh) but I acknowledge that I felt that way, and it doesn't mean there's less love to go around to the people I might be with in the future.
Anywho. I hope I haven't repeated alot of what other people said. I didn't want to read all the pages. I really like the discussion going here, keep it coming people! :)
lol. That was a strong response. It's a more fulfilling debate when people state their position rather than play devil's advocate in order to try to get people riled.
http://www.chaoticnoise.com/images/uploaded/matt/Frankie_says_relax_t-shirt.jpg
I agree with you about safety, tb.
Clinical monogamy means sex with one partner for the rest of your life. Serial monogamy is where you have sex with one person at a time. Clinical monogamy does reduce exposure to risk. Serial monogamy isn't protective. There are multiple elements that compose safe sex, including physical barriers, testing, and open communication. Those are equally applicable across demographics.
It's also important to note that STDs can be spread through saliva, blood, semen, and vaginal secretions (and hepatitis is found in feces). Non-penetration sexual activities, such as mutual masturbation and oral sex, also carry risk.
If you're not abstinate, you're at risk. If you're at risk, practice safe sex. One partner at a time does not make someone inherently smarter or more diligent about implementing safe sex measures.
tino. yes! i agree with everything that you said. there are many different ways that one can look at polyamory and each of those relationships or groups of relationships will be different than the next, its based on trust, safety and discussion.
has anyone posted this link yet? http://www.polyamory.org/ that helped me out a lot when i was trying to figure out how my monogamous boyfriend fit into my poly lifestyle. meaning. goodbye poly relationships. : (
Pages