Log in

No account? Create an account
entries friends calendar profile ABMann.net Previous Previous Next Next
On Polyamoury - Portrait of a Young Man as The Artist — LiveJournal
On Polyamoury
lady_fox wrote an entry in response to a coworker's question regarduing the necessity (or the "why bother with") of maintaining primary relationships, a relationship of the sort I have with her. As in, if you're sleeping around why bother with living with a single person? Besides the obvious problems I have with this, which I've stated in other entries but can't find links. Suffice to say that polyamoury ISN'T just about sex, people. It is, however, the apparent benefit the entire world (meaning Americans, as I don't know anyone internationally besides questingfalcon and he doesn't count) focuses upon because we're all sex obsessed. I blame puritanism.

Fox stated the following:
"It's impossible to expect ONE person to give you everything you need."

To which a friend of ours replied:
Well... I've never thought a monogamous relationship implied that, mind. Not knocking on polyamory, but that's a very unrealistic/codependent belief.

I liked my response to the comment here and I'm curious about your thoughts.

How is it unrealistic? Different people provide different things in different ways. Part of the underlying assumption of polyamoury is that people are fundamentally "as they should be." So, the process of a relationship becomes discovering, learning how you interact with another person rather than trying to make them be to you what you want exactly.

You know, some times we just can't be something. I mean, if I'm just categorically opposed to talking about religious extremism, very uncomfortable by it for myriad reasons, is it right for a political dynamo to force get me to talk about these things constantly? Monogamous relationships fill this gap with friendships or by adjusting a partner's behaviors. Polyamourous relationships to the same, they just have different expectations.

Sure, there's a worry about codependency as does any relationship, poly or not. I worried more about codependency when I was in monogamous relationships.

Yeah, I think I'm starting to understand the core assumptions we make as people withing relationship context. Food for thought, ne? So chew it up. Let me know what you all think. I'm especially curious of the 5 new people I've picked up in the last week or so. Welcome to my crazy life. :)

PS: access to my love life sex filter is at your discretion. I don't care who is there, I just don't force it on anyone. Comment if you'd like in. I won't poke fun at you (much).

And I need to remake this Sin icon.

Tags: , , , , ,
Current Mood: thoughtful introspective

39 comments or Leave a comment
(Deleted comment)
abmann From: abmann Date: October 18th, 2005 03:07 pm (UTC) (Link)
So, what did you mean? It certainly seems like you were saying that poly relationships can become codependent.
(Deleted comment)
(Deleted comment)
abmann From: abmann Date: October 18th, 2005 03:20 pm (UTC) (Link)
Trading up can only exist of the mind set includes competition. Think about it, if yo're in the realtionships to exist as is nothing becomes better or worse than another. it just is as it is. Trading up implies that someone is different from waht you're looking for, is missing some quality that you desire. (Trying to find it elsewhere isn't necessarily a problem.) The only real problem is expecting the first person to hold this qaulity or build this quality.

So, if you're looking for something a person doesn't have, sure you'll be dissatisfied. The focus (and purpose) of polyamoury demphaszies the appeasement for desire by displacing it over multiple people rather than demanding it from one. Thus, trading up isn't possible because we are getting different needs/wants met different people in different manners.
(Deleted comment)
From: adamgreeney Date: October 18th, 2005 03:19 pm (UTC) (Link)
I come down on the monogamy side. I'm a romantic and i fall in love hard and fast. I feel that i am loyal, and when i feel i'm satisfied, i feel no need to go anywhere else, and i expect the same. I've never had a partner not be satisfied with me sexually, and in the areas that i may not be able to fit into (political, artistically, or any myriad of things) they had friends and i had friends to bridge the gap. A relationship isnt about one person filling every single need, want and dream you have, it's about someone that compliments a major part of you and frees you to explore the parts of you that go outside the relationship.

Friends, work and extracurriculars can fill in the gaps in a relationship and make it healthier. i cant imagine having any more then one sexual relationship at a time. Now, saying that polyamoury is not about sex at all is fine, but without sex it's just having other friends, which we all have, so it ceases to be polyarmoury.

personally, as far as other people are concerned, i couldnt care less. if someone dates numerous people, good for them. if they are asexual, good for them. I admire people who work to find what makes them happy instead of trying to stay within social "norms," i just couldnt do it. . .
abmann From: abmann Date: October 18th, 2005 03:57 pm (UTC) (Link)

Happiness is not a fish that yuo can catch.

Happiness is a grand thing and must be actively cultivated.

Havent yuo ever been curious about what sex is like with a person? It's in interesting concept, within polyamoury, that you can experience a person in such a way. It becomes another way to know someone rather than an ultimate expression of something. Now, adding or stripping emotional connectivity to/from this makes for an entirely different experience.

That said, sex isn't lessened within the bounds of my sort of relationship. I think it becomes a device to better understand peiople as well as enrich a relationship. I could argue, I suppose, that freer sexual relationships makes sex better when shared with people. It's a very diffeent mindset.
thian_un From: thian_un Date: October 18th, 2005 03:19 pm (UTC) (Link)
yes, I added you in the past week. I realized I kept reading you on friends pages and figured you should probably be on my own.

So comment: I ended a relationship with someone who was very possessive of me a little over a month ago. I knew I couldn't be everything to them, but he seemed he still wanted me to be. Ugh, I'm not going to go into more detail here. My point is that, relationships have to allow flexibility within a wider world of relationships beyond the person of your affection. I'm not poly, I'm not sure that I could be, but that flexibility within a monogamus relationship MUST exist. One person CANNOT be everything to someone.
abmann From: abmann Date: October 18th, 2005 03:51 pm (UTC) (Link)
Caroline's comment below addresses this as well. There may be underlying problems to be fixed when we feel like we're missing something.

Communication is the first line of ofense adn defense to all relationship problems. (And I'm not saying polyamoury is a solution afterwards.) Flexibility is certainly required and possessive SOs are never a good thing. The two tend to but heads voraciously.
(Deleted comment)
abmann From: abmann Date: October 18th, 2005 03:48 pm (UTC) (Link)
"But as long as I can have what I want, you can have what you want, and everybody's happy, and all is good. There are plenty of people out there who need to realize this."

Were it only that obvious to some. :)

Pretty icon, btw.
From: que_emocionante Date: October 18th, 2005 03:35 pm (UTC) (Link)
i was going to say that i thought you were misinterpreting that comment, but it seems conan already came to the rescue of his own words. haha.

i am fully monogamous. although i've had some unsatisfying, frustrating, and/or painful relationships in the past, right now i am completely happy and satisfied, moreso than i really thought possible before. and that isn't because i've made a list of what he needs to do and tested him on it. haha. moral of the story is, one person shouldn't have to be everything for you. but if you find yourself feeling like that person isn't enough, i'd wonder if that isn't a sign of a different trouble.

(my feelings about polyamorous/open relationships are available if you want them, but i'm afraid to go into it without being asked because you're in one.)
abmann From: abmann Date: October 18th, 2005 03:46 pm (UTC) (Link)
So, apparently I just can't understand Conan. This isn't news to me. :)

True, if you're upset about not getting something there may, indeed, be underlying issues that should be sorted out. I just don't think it's right to ask that someone change to give yuo what yuo want, necessarily. Sure, uf they want to try that's wonderful but it may not be possible.

I'm curious on your thoughts. You won't offend me. I'm very aware that what I
choose in my life may be controversial, it's still my life. :)
lex_of_green From: lex_of_green Date: October 18th, 2005 05:11 pm (UTC) (Link)
I assume the live life filter and the sex filter are different groups? If so, I'd like access to both.
I am nosy. Nose. Nose.
abmann From: abmann Date: October 18th, 2005 05:13 pm (UTC) (Link)
They are the same. I just switched it up to confuse people. You're in all of my non-single person filters, come to think of it...
ocarina_justin From: ocarina_justin Date: October 18th, 2005 05:41 pm (UTC) (Link)
Quick response - it IS unrealistic to expect one person to give me everything I need. Sharon doesn't. I don't expect her to. It would be horribly UNFAIR to expect her to. Honestly, if you aren't complete in and of yourself, no one else is ever going to make you that way.

That said, I agree with conan, above - this arrangement seems to work fine for you two, so I see no problem with it. I don't think most people are cut out for it, emotionally speaking, and to the extent that you are saying things above that sound PRESCRIPTIVE about your lifestyle, I'd be careful. ;) Different strokes for different folks.
abmann From: abmann Date: October 18th, 2005 05:46 pm (UTC) (Link)
What sounds perscriptive?
(no subject) - (Anonymous) - Expand
questingfalcon From: questingfalcon Date: October 18th, 2005 06:05 pm (UTC) (Link)
abmann From: abmann Date: October 18th, 2005 06:08 pm (UTC) (Link)
returnofglitter From: returnofglitter Date: October 18th, 2005 06:30 pm (UTC) (Link)
:) I like you.

Core assumptions? I make none. Or rather I try not to make any. I have hardly had enough experience to form a thesis, or to have somehow made a long-term decission about my expectations about relationships. I assume that I'll take life as it goes. . . I expect that each relationship that I encounter will be a different one and, that each person will have different boundaries and preferences. I take it as it comes. Whether a poly relationship ever figures into those preferences or expectations, I have no way in knowing ahead of time.

I have absolutely nothing against poly relationships, in fact I've known many people in them. But I am hardly able to make the claim that I would or would never be interested. ::shrug::

To each their own. . .

:-* ~Julia
returnofglitter From: returnofglitter Date: October 18th, 2005 06:39 pm (UTC) (Link)
Oh, about the sex filter? I know I just met you, but I'd be interested. . .
39 comments or Leave a comment