junkyard
Posts: 107
Joined: 3/13/2005
Status: offline
|
I am no longer poly. I have given it a go several times and I find that it tends not to work - routine jealousies and constant renegotiations make any real control over what is happening very nearly impossible. My sense of negotiating is mainly to set some basic ground rules and to evolve from there over time as trust builds between the participants - but with a poly relationship that's not really possible because partners can and do feel free to constantly demand new and different things. What it really boils down to is a single ethic that would go something like this: "I am going to do what I am going to do, and you are going to be okay with that." All other considerations revolve around negotiating around that primary ethic.
After many years, I decided that polyamory rather than offering solutions just tries to replace monogamy with a whole new set of problems - many of which are the same old problems merely exacerbated in new ways. One of the few advantages offered by polyamory over monogamy is that people at least get to try out whatever partners they may choose. But then, many polyamorous relationships don't actually have a completely open end to them or not for all participants, many poly unions are a closed circle in whole or in part. One other point well worth mentioning is that rather than a simple negotiation between only two parties as in a monogamous relationship, one must continually negotiate ideas amongst several parties. Some people cannot agree on what to have for lunch, and polyamory seems to postulate that these same people can and will agree upon even more fundamentally important issues. Can you say "endless compromises"? At one point have you just negotiated yourself out of what you wanted from polyamory in the first place?
Like a prolonged game of musical chairs, the main point to polyamorous unions seems almost to be who is going to get caught out without a chair to sit in.
Points I found interesting from some primary and secondary sources:
--------------------------------------
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyamory
"In contrast to some other forms of negotiated relationship (e.g. the prenuptial agreement) polyamorists commonly view this negotiation as an ongoing process throughout the lifetime of the relationship."
Comment: Basically this is a problem of shifting sands. If you stand in the ocean long enough, you will find the tide has pushed you around a bit - either up or down the beach.
"Those who value monogamy often point to the strength and trust that can be built up within a long standing couple, who only are focused on each other and have no other partners."
Comment: Right, multiplying your problems by each new participant in a poly union doesn't somehow make getting along with others easier - in fact, it makes it harder and harder. With poly you eventually have to wonder if what you are getting out of it is really something of quality or not.
"An intermediate viewpoint is that maintaining a loving relationship requires time and energy, and neither of these are infinite resources; hence, while it may be possible to love several people just as well as one, there is a point beyond which relationships do begin to suffer."
Comment: This would be one of my bigger issues with poly. It's so well stated above, I leave it as is.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jealousy
"Some studies suggest that jealousy may be reduced in multilateral relationships where there is a clear hierarchy of relationships or where expectations are otherwise fixed. (See Smith and Smith, Beyond Monogamy.) Contemporary practitioners of what is now called polyamory (multiple intimate relationships) for the most part treat jealousy as an inevitable problem, best handled by accommodation and communication."
Comment: Have you ever really had to handle someone who is in the grip of a jealous rage? If you have, you will immediately understand that this issue is a powder keg of trouble. Apparently, the number of jealousy driven homicides is very high in the U.S. (which is where I live). See where it says "expectations are otherwise fixed"? Is that poly as you know it, or does your version of it require constant renegotiation? This explains the presence of the following phrase in the next sentence "Contemporary practitioners of what is now called polyamory (multiple intimate relationships) for the most part treat jealousy as an inevitable problem."
The inevitable problem of jealousy would be something I want to avoid almost at all costs.
http://www.maymay.net/blog/archives/2005/03/26/poly-resources-for-newcomers/
(main page)
No comment really, it just looked like a good resource very similar to others I have seen over the years.
http://www.xeromag.com/fvpolymyths.html
"Anybody can feel jealousy, under the right circumstances. Being polyamorous does not make you immune to jealousy at all; poly folk are just as prone to it as those in traditional relationships.
Jealousy is merely a feeling; of and by itself, it's neither good nor bad. Jealousy is almost always a symptom of an underlying insecurity; the most effective way to handle jealousy is often to solve the underlying problem that creates it."
Comment: Bold assertion. I am not convinced that anyone really knows what jealousy actually is. I would suggest that it is some kind of offense/defense response intended to protect people somehow. What's interesting is that people can and will commit murder if they are pushed hard enough on the issue of jealousy. Just a heads up...
I think what I dislike about the above assertion is that it pretends that there can be no positive reason for the existence of jealousy, and I feel certain that such an assertion must be wrong. All emotions have a reason for existing, I would claim that asserting otherwise is merely indicative of a poor understanding of the emotion in question. Put another way: if jealousy were well understood it would be entirely avoidable - but it isn't, so it's not.
http://www.xeromag.com/fvpolyguide.html
"Often, we may be tempted to try to turn multiple relationships into a tallying game--"You slept with her two nights in a row, now you need to sleep with me two nights in a row!" "You took him to dinner three times, but only took me to dinner once!""
Comment: Been there, done that. Time is finite. Quality is also quantity.
"Bringing someone into an existing relationship that has problems is likely to exacerbate those problems. What's more, it's unfair to the person coming in. The greater the problems in the existing relationship, the more unstable the position of the person joining that relationship, and the more likely that person will bear the brunt of those problems."
Comment: How can a relationship undergoing constant renegotiation and revision not have problems? What is a stable poly relationship and what is an unstable one - what's the difference? Isn't any possible criteria an arbitrary one as imposed from outside the union (because, of course, inside the union it is seen to be bliss)? Keep in mind that such a judgment has to be done from outside the situation before one joins in it.
"Love is a funny thing. Sometimes, your partner may love someone you yourself would not really choose to associate with. In times like that, it's helpful to recognize that you are in a relationship with that person, even though your relationship may be indirect. That person is part of your lover's life, and therefore, by extension, part of yours."
Comment: Great! Just what I want - a bunch of assholes hanging around with me that I don't even like.
"Know thyself. This is perhaps the most important single thing you can do in any relationship. Knowing what you want and need in order to be happy is an excellent first step in being happy."
Comment: Most excellent advice, as usual.
"One way people sometimes seek to address the problem of feeling threatened by emotional intimacy is to say "okay, emotional intimacy is not a problem, as long as a new partner becomes involved with both of us and loves both of us. That way, nobody feels left out, and nobody needs to feel jealous. (new paragraph) On paper, it looks great. In the real world, however, it's not usually successful, because it rests on an assumption that isn't true--namely, that it's possible to dictate that two separate relationships can develop at the same rate and to the same degree with two different people."
Comment: Once again, the endless problem of jealousy, petty and otherwise. Relationships are unequal however much poly folk like to proclaim nonsense like: "We are faithful to ALL our lovers." Yeah, the ones you like and value, most probably organized in a loose hierarchy. People have favorites: believe it.
"Polyamory is not a way to evade problems in your romantic life. In fact, problems in one relationship have a very nasty habit of spilling over into your other relationships, if you're not careful. (new paragraph) If you have a relationship that is facing difficulty, that is not the time to be starting new relationships. Doing so is likely to create problems in the new relationship, and exacerbate the problem in your existing relationship. It's unfair to both your existing lover and to any new lover to begin relationships under these conditions."
Comment: Okay, so poly is to love what nuclear fission is to the atom? And I want this arrangement why?
Further, if people really held back from new relationships when they were dealing with issues in an existing relationship then many polyamorous people would find themselves without partners because most poly unions are usually undergoing constant renegotiation. Again I ask: what is considered a stable poly relationship and what is the criteria for making such an assessment?
"Be careful about getting involved with an existing couple who haven't worked out what polyamory is all about."
Comment: Oh really? What about the constant renegotiation? That's a wrench in the works isn't it? I don't think most polyamorous people have "worked out what polyamory is all about" - I think they are mainly flailing about like fish out of water. Try to renegotiate with ongoing suffocation.
http://www.xeromag.com/fvsecondary.html
"Not everyone is well-suited to being a secondary. Secondaries sometimes can not expect their relationship to meet all their needs; their role may be circumscribed by rules designed to protect the safety and security of the primary relationship. (new paragraph) If your true desire/need is to have (and be) a primary partner, but the only relationship your lover can offer is of a secondary nature, then you should probably figure out whether you can be happy in that role either temporarily or permanently."
Comment: Why isn't the advice just to leave the siutation alone? "If your true desire/need is to have (and be) a primary partner" - then you should wait until you can get what you want and leave these psychic vampires to their endless games. It seems pretty clear to me that polyamorous people are always up for a taste; they hate to cut associations that could lead to actually getting some.
|
RE: Sharing slaves - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread