Elphaba

I confess that this is a new term to me that I have seen a few times here at TFP. I did a google search and found a paper by a psychologist who also engages in polyamory.

My questions:
1) Are these accurate descriptions of the types of polymory?;
2) How are they significantly different from my understanding of "open relationships," or "swinging?";
3) Is there some importance, whether cultural or otherwise, in making this new distinction?
4) What other forms of polymory exit?

Link

This author relies upon very dated publications and recent personal communications in order to support the thesis. I find that difficult to accept for the obvious reason that necessary current research and neutrality of position are lacking.

I believe the members of TFP can offer a dialogue that brings clarity to the topic.

Lady Sage

I do believe it is a relationship that is considered "open". This means that while person A and person B are dating seriously/living together/married they can "play" with person C, D and or E.

__________________
If only closed minds came with closed mouths.
Minds are like parachutes, they function best when open.
It`s Easier to Change a Condom Than a Diaper
Yes, the rumors are true... I actually AM a Witch.

ngdawg

A recent documentary on tv followed the lives of 3 people living together. The relationship started with two men but wanting a woman to complete their household(one of the men thought he was strictly homosexual but found the idea intriguing). They actively sought one out and finally one agreed to the arrangement. It was a very successful arrangement for them and the film tried to break it down a bit as to the dynamics of how something like that would work.
When she got pregnant, there truly was no idea nor any concern over which one was the father-they felt equally 'fatherly' about it. All three were successful in their careers and not at all secretive to family or friends.
It seems that some might want to use 'polyamorous' as a synonym for swinging, but they're different. There's a 'casualness' associated with the swinging lifestyle. Perhaps using the word 'polyamorous' helps to eradicate that notion in that instance.
I really think it's harder to be monogamous than poly. It takes a great deal of compromising, restraint and resolve to insist only one other can be the be-all-end-all. On the other hand, the type of arrangement as in the documentary takes even more compromising, along with commitment and understanding to making it work without the petty jealousies humans seem to have.

__________________
Don't blame me. I didn't vote for either of'em.

ratbastid

Regarding the quote from the OP, he's careful to say that those are only a few of the myriad possible configurations or approaches to relationships that might fall under the umbrella of polyamory. When it comes to polyamory, there is no "is" about it. It is literally up to the interpretation of every individual, couple, or group that engages in it.

The basic definition of polyamory is: a belief in the freedom to have multiple romantic relationships with the full knowledge and consent of everyone involved.

As you can see, that might look a lot of different ways to a lot of different people.

The term "open relationship" is so vague as to be useless. "Swinging" implies sex with non-primary partners without emotional intimacy, which isn't what polyamory is. Polyamorists say that poly is about the relationship, not the sex. Swinging is pretty much entirely about the sex.

There tends to be some sneering back and forth between swingers and polyamorists. I find that to be regrettable, as we're all interested in the same sorts of things and the same sorts of freedoms. But poly folks are about love, and sex as an expression of that love. Swingers are about sex, and love or romance among non-primary partners is explicitly taboo. There are many more swingers than polyfolk on TFP, maybe they want to say some more about that?

Well... It's a relatively new term being applied to a lifestyle choice that has been available and in at least somewhat common use for at least a couple thousand years. It's distinct from "open relationship" and "swinging" as I distinguished above. So while the term is new(ish), the distinction has existed for a long, long time.

As many as there are poly-families. I think it's fair to say that there are two general ways to come at it: either you have a primary relationship, and everything else is secondary, or every relationship you have is equal. Inside those two general approaches, there are an infinite number of possible configurations.

Right now I'm not in a relationship with anyone other than my wife, but I'm casually seeing a couple other women, and so is she. I'm in the "I have a primary partner, everything else is secondary" camp. That doesn't mean that secondary is unimportant, just that without my primary partner's knowledge and approval, nothing secondary is ever going to happen.

I know of a woman (who happens to be in the "all my relationships are equal" camp) who is in a relationship with a married man, whose wife has two other lovers. That married man has three grown children, one of whom is married and has another lover. The beauty of polyamory is that you can say what works for you, want you want and don't want, and--while that puts a certain responsibility on you to create relationships that work inside of that--you're free to do and have whatever you want to do and have.

I strongly recommend the Polyamory Weekly podcast if you're curious about Poly. http://www.polyweekly.com. As (I guess!) TFP's honorary poly spokesperson, I'm happy to answer any other questions you might have.

That certainly hasn't been my experience! Being poly has stretched me so much as a person that I hardly recognize myself. It has had me confront my whole bag of tricks that I bring to relationships.

That hasn't always been pretty, but the results have been well worth my effort. I can no longer pull my petty jealousy shit without seeing it coming and having the opportunity to head it off at the pass. I've become a vastly better husband out of being polyamorous. I now know that sometimes my partners need to know that they're cherished and valued, and I'm way past my tendency to neglect that need or play that down.

rr1024

Ok I have to say something here, if you don't mind
Polyamory is nothing more than swinging with a new word, that it. If you believe that swingers want random sex with anyone you would be totally incorrect. If you look at any profile on the net for swingers looking for swingers and actually take the time to read it. You will see a common thread that links most of them together.

"Looking for friends with benefits"
"LTR with couples, males, females"
"Not looking for one night stands"

These people are "Swingers", Polyamory was created to allow the MORE uptight and speritual people to recogncile in their own minds that they are swingers but don't want to mentally deal with "public label".

There are a few and far between profiles that are looking for the one night stand or gangbangs but not very many. My guess is 90% of swingers are looking for friends to explore with. Read profiles you will see exactly what I mean and that this is true.

Swingers are generally accepting of everyone and all sexualities where as the Poly people are not

I haven't whitnessed any "sneering" from swingers but I have seen a lot from the poly people. The swingers I know just think Poly is nothing more than swingers who don't accept who they are and can't deal with it mentally. Since swingers and Poly are the same exact thing.

ratbastid

Dude. Classic defensive swinger.

Swinging and Poly are different in many, many ways. Right now MY expression of polyamory is that I live with two amazing women who I'm completely in love with, and who love me and each other totally. There's really no talk of relationships (at whatever level of seriousness) outside our triad at the moment. No swinger in the world would call that with swinging. And there are plenty of things I hear from swingers that they do or have done no polyamorist in the world would call polyamory.

Nobody's attacking any lifestyle here (well, that may not quite be accurate... let me say: I'm not attacking any lifestyle here). Swinging's fine for swingers. I'm not one, but for those who do that, it's fine. And like most aspects of sexuality and lifestyle, it's ALL grey area and points-on-a-spectrum. I know couples who have friendly sex with one good friend, and they don't consider themselves swingers OR poly.

abaya

EDIT: Ratbastid beat me to it... (I was taking my time writing)

Hrmm, rr1024...methinks you need to get to know Ratbastid a little better before spouting off like that, mate. He, along with Lurkette and StellaLuna, are in one of the most admirable polyamorous relationships I've ever seen. There are a few other poly-configured folk here on TFP who are also bound to chime in on this thread (I am not one of them, but I respect them).

What has been your personal experience, to lead you to the opinions you stated earlier?

__________________
And think not you can direct the course of Love;
for Love, if it finds you worthy, directs your course.
--Khalil Gibran

Racnad

I'm not poly (though sometimes I'd like to be), but since this the internet, I'll spout my opinion anyway.

The poly crowd defines "swinging" as sex as parties with people you barely know, while poly people are all about the relationships.

My impression about swingers though is that many "date" other couples on a regular basis, so there is some sort of relationship that develops. And I'd find it hard to believe that people who call themselves "poly" never on occasion hook up sexually with people they think are hot.

So I bet in reality there is a bit of overlap.

ShaniFaye

I dont think I could disagree more with your post. I have been in both types of situations and you would be hard put to find a less uptight person than me. A poly relationship and a swinging lifestyle are two different things, each with their own advantages/disadvantages.

I think maybe you're talking to the wrong people

__________________
I want the diabetic plan that comes with rollover carbs. I dont like the unused one expiring at midnite!!

ratbastid

Well... My definition of swinging includes that. It also includes casual sex with people who are friends.

Oh, absolutely there is. And there are hard-core people at either end of the spectrum. And there are people who partake in both sorts of activity but blanch at either term.

From what I know of swinging (and I'm open to being corrected about this), intimate romantic relationships between non-coupled people in the lifestyle is WAY taboo. Absolutely friendships develop--I don't equate swinging with anonymous sex, necessarily. But the husband of Swinging Couple A has an (implicit or expressed) understanding that his wife won't be falling in love with the husband of Swinging Couple B no matter how good of friends they become, and if she does, they have a Problem.

To a poly couple, that wouldn't be a problem at all. In fact, the husband of Poly Couple A would probably encourage it and cheer it on.

I think that right there most clearly distinguishes poly and swinging, from my perspective.

As a side note, poly folk are MUCH more accepting of gay and bisexual men than swingers are. Which is to say: they're accepting. A textbook swinging couple (and, again, I'd be delighted to be wrong about this) consists of a straight-as-an-arrow husband and a bisexual wife. Bi or gay guys are VERY much unwelcome in the lifestyle. Whereas there are lots of poly families that include same-sex relationships of both genders.

Oookay. Tell that to a bi man at a swinger's party...

DuneHunter

First of all Ratbastid, you're a lucky person to have such a relationship...

Secondly, you're right on the money. Polyamory and Swinging are not the same in any defined part of it. Swinging may lead to more intimate relationships, but Polyamory is based on them intertwining. Not being "casual" as swinging allows (though not requires). Swinging ultimately breaks down to couples while Polyamory can break down to multiple relationships co-existing and tied together, like in your case.

Just my take.

__________________
When it comes to rut... there's nothing like a hot doe!

Ustwo

Actually in my experience a lot of 'polys' are basically swingers. We could go into the why but no point to it, its just my opinion based on observation.

The biggest problem with poly relationships is that unless its one male with multiple females it will not work long term. Yes this is a blanket statement and obviously there are exceptions to that rule, but I think its one where the exceptions prove the rule.

The key is that poly relationships must, again as a rule, fit the normal human mating patterns. Part of this is why you see so many poly's with 'primaries' that sort of pair bonding is natural. Likewise to a lessor extent multiple females with one male fits the normal mating patters (though mass polygamy itself is not as 'natural' a human situation as you might think and is a rather recent development due to agriculture. By recent I'm talking 6000 years, which is very recent in biologic terms).

There is only one society in the world that has multiple men for one woman and thats in parts of Tibet where conditions are very difficult. Two brothers may marry one woman, but even there it is the goal of the younger brother to get his own wife.

So whenever I see 'poly' involved with couples or multiple males, I feel I'm really looking at swinging, only less 'dirty' in the people involved eyes.

Then there is the poly which are basically open relationships only it sounds better because they have 'feelings' for their partners. They never live together, have kids, have any commitment, or are on equal footing with their 'primary' partner, yet they are poly? Ten years ago it would have been called a fuck buddy, but these days poly is something of a buzz word. Just because you call yourself poly doesn't mean you are.


While those are common themes they are not usually consistent with reality. Few friendships result from swinging, mostly because you just can't 'make' someone your friend. The odds of hooking up with people who you would be friends with under normal circumstances who are also swingers is pretty low.

While I know of swingers who like to say they are poly because its sounds better, especially women, I don't think it has much to do with being uptight or spiritual. For some its just because they are still hard to accept they like casual sex, and for others they would like to BE truly poly, but that doesn't happen often either.

I'd guess the reality is closer to 10% in the long run. Again its not the desire thats false but the reality. It takes more than sex to make a friend, and it takes a lot more time to make a true friend than most swinging will allow.

Completely false I'm afraid. Bisexual males are almost universally shunned in swinging. If anything the only way I see a long term stable poly MFM to work would be if the males were bisexual. Swingers may be more open about gay marriage and the like than non-swingers on average, but I doubt its any more so than poly couples.

Swinging and poly are not the same thing. A lot of people who say they are poly are in fact swingers, that is true, but for those who ARE poly, rare as that is in my opinion it is in fact different. Things do get blurred as I know poly triads (FMF of course) who also swing, but the two can be different. Swinging is basically couples who have decided that you can have a monogamous marriage without a monogamous sex life, and do so together rather than separately (such as an open marriage, something else which is generally unstable as well). Beyond that there is pretty much no difference between a swinger couple and any other couple. Being poly does bring another angle in, often a difficult angle, but different than swinging. For one thing, being poly doesn't mean you are free from sexual jealousies, and I've read a few posts from poly females upset at how jealous their husband (no idea if thats the 'proper' term) was about them. To me thats a man protecting his harem, so not surprising at all. Likewise I'm not sure how 'old fashioned' Mormons viewed/view wife swapping but I rather doubt it was common in their polygamous marriages.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

Infinite_Loser

Humans, by nature, are possesive and selfish. We hate having to share. If at all possible, we want others to give us their undivided attention. Therefore, it's impossible to maintain a relationship involving more than two parties because it's impossible to show the same amount of affection towards each party member equally. In addition to only receiving part of someone's affection, there's the fact that one member will always be favored more than the other.

*Shrugs*

I don't care who gets mad, but any relationship with more than two parties is doomed to failure.

__________________
I believe in equality; Everyone is equally inferior to me.

ngdawg

Would this be the same as 'mostly'?
Fact is, a poly situation has about as much chance as failing as any other.
Secondly, the reasons you state for being monogamous are not instinctive base natures-they are bourne of environmental factors/upbringing/cultural/religious reasons.
Monogamy is a conscious choice one makes-to be faithful to one only. Going by instinct is another matter.
Simply put, we as humans have the capacity to love multiple ways and times and choose to act one way or another.

__________________
Don't blame me. I didn't vote for either of'em.

Midnight

for ME, this is the case. I can not bear the thought of sharing a partner. You may call it greed, you may call it unevolved, you may call it a throwback to an older timeframe with a more strict moral standard BUT.....

BULLSHIT! I myself may not be able to deal with this choice for ME, but I have witnessed more than one polyamorous relationship that was absolutely beautiful to behold. FMF, MFM, and so on, with EVERY piece of that individual machine equally as invested in the relationship as any other, every one of them completely happy with them selves, their chosen "mates" and their lifestyle. I flat out refuse to fault them for being able to find happiness.

Monogamy is a learned response to a society with a rigid "morality" structure. monogamy and swinging are (my opinion) greed based, and polyamorous lifestyle is by far (being an outside observer) the most giving and selfless

That being said. Swingers are : 2 people. 1 serious relationship with each other. "open minded" enough sexually to be able to swap partners with other couples, where a variety to their sex life is the desired result, while it being mutually understood by all parties involved that there is to be no sexual contact without the understood consent and prior knowledge of all parties involved. it is also the same for bringing an "additional" person into the bedroom, but NOT the relationship, for singular or mutual satisfaction of the parties involved in the sexual encounter. Swingers are interested in sexual variety, and are NOT interested in emotional ties to the parties from outside the relationship.

Polyamorous people are most commonly a couple that brings a third person into a pre-existing relationship for not only added sexual interest and variety, but because both parties in the base relationship are equally romantically interested in the individual or individuals brought into it. they feel they are emotionally stable and invested enough in each other that there is no question ever of one "loving the other MORE", but all parties are content, happily share life and love with their partners, and are far more interested in a permanence to the relationship than a swinging group would be. all the people involved in a polyamory relationship care a great deal about their partners, as their partners do them, and are far more inclined to build a more stable relationship emotionally than a swinging relationship, simply because of the solidity of the relationship, as well as the mutual wish of all parties involved that they be there for each other and contribute to each others happiness not only in a sexual manner, but in day to day life and happiness as well.


Find your happiness where you may people. I have my ways, you have yours, that person over there has theirs. Just because my choice id different than yours, dosent mean i dont know whats "really going on" or that I dont have complete respect for those of you that have been able to accept things that i cannot for myself. Kudos to those of you that are open minded enough to go for what you want.

albania

I don't think it's the simple fact of having multiple partners in a relationship that dooms it. I think that they are unlikely to succeed because most of the people who enter them aren't doing so for the right reasons or are not really mature enough to handle them. I have always had some trouble understanding that type of relationship; to me monogamy is very important. So if anyone wouldn't mind answering a few questions:

The difference in my mind between a group dynamic of two people and three people is quite large. How would does one handle the hierarchy? In the same vain, how feasible is it that one could minimize the friction that can be created in such a situation?

What about uneven attraction. You can certainly try to love equally but you can't help when you're more sexually attracted to someone. How would one handle this scenario?

Finally, how does one realize they don't want to be monogamous? Do you just wake up one day and go this isn't for me?

Infinite_Loser

No, this is different :P

You can't pull up any statistic which supports that claim because it's simple not true.

That's completely and totally untrue, otherwise the majority of the world would be polygamous as most religions have openly polygamous relationships (Christianity and Islam, anyone?).

...I'm sorry, and polygamy isn't? I don't see what point you're trying to make.

I answered this earlier but, you can't love two people exactly the same. It's impossible. You will ALWAYS love one person moreso than another one, and this will put a strain on any relationship sooner or later. Period.

__________________
I believe in equality; Everyone is equally inferior to me.

Hyacinthe

I agree with both of you in different ways.

You will NEVER love two people exactly the same, this does not however mean that you love one person more then you love another person. This applies to any relationship in life whether it be to parents, children, pets, friends or partners.

Monogamy is not an instictive thing, many cultures around the world have supported multiple wives or harems. Instinctually you want to spread your genetic material comingled with that of an individual whose genetic code this will provide beneficial aspects to your offspring. This has nothing to do with selecting one singular partner.

It's true the majority of us may not be able to support an ploy relationship. How much of this is because we were brought up to believe in monogamy though? If you had been raised in an environment where everyone around you was in multiple relationships that to you would be the norm, you would not expect to have one partner devoted to you, when you reached marriagable age you would most likely find multiple partners.

I doubt that I could ever accpe being in a polymorous relationship but I respect the decision of those who choose this lifestyle. I personally know peope who are happy living this way and as my friends all I care about is their happiness not whose in bed with who at night.

__________________
"I want to be remembered as the girl who always smiles even when her heart is broken... and the one that could brighten up your day even if she couldnt brighten her own"

"Her emotions were clear waters. You could see the scarring and pockmarks at the bottom of the pool, but it was just a part of her landscape – the consequences of others’ actions in which she claimed no part."

ngdawg

Marriage has a close to (if not by now over)60% failure rate and I don't know of anyone my generation who is happily married. Since polyamourous relationships are not widely studied yet, your views are simply your views and not based on any statistics. If that is a wrong assumption, I'm sure you would cite something to back up your claim.
Actually, a great deal of the world IS polygamous. And various reports have stated that over half of all married men have cheated during their married life at least once.


ALL relationship dynamics are based on choice. That's the point.

Are you speaking from experience? One can love more than one and it would be different because each person is different. You can't even love your own kids the same, it'd be no different than that. Your best bet would be to speak to people who are in poly situations. Until then, you make conjecture with no back-up at all, even anecdotal.
As Hyancinthe pointed out, if you only knew poly as the norm, you would only have that to go by.
You haven't presented one thing that supports your assertion that monogamy is instinctive or that polyamorous is a certainty of failure. Only time monogamy has been a proven fact is with geese.

I think this states it best:
Source

__________________
Don't blame me. I didn't vote for either of'em.

Ustwo

Actually I don't think it would work that way. Pair bonding seems to be part of our nature. Most polygamous cultures base it on wealth, and its a financial decision not a love decision. Obviously its better to be the second wife of a very rich man than a the first wife of a poor man, but most would rather be the first wife of the rich man. So while sexual monogamy seems to be not part of our make up, pairing off is.

Even the ancient despots with harems in the 1000's had a 'wife' who was the one who produced the heirs.

The aberration in western culture is the rather recent concept (500 years or so tops) that once you are married you never have sex with anyone else, but the tradition of marriage is as old as history.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

rr1024

Dude. Classic defensive Polyamory statement.

I totally agree with it's all grey area, it truely its. Basically anyone who can not reconcile what they are doing physically in their own mind they result calling themselves polyamorist.

Now from your description of your relationship above it sounds, ( don't take this wrong or anything, I'm not against this at all ), like Polygamy not Polyamory. However, if the three of you are in bed at the same time then your lucky and have the swinging relationship that most swingers (Polyamory) are looking for.


"No swinger in the world would call that with swinging. And there are plenty of things I hear from swingers that they do or have done no polyamorist in the world would call polyamory."

I disagree, agian look at 90% of the profiles / posts of the people out there looking are looking for bifemales. If more than two people are in bed having sex then it is, like it or not, swinging.
Now maybe you are looking down on swingers with your high brow because you have found the swingers lifestyle you've been looking for and are done with all the "lifestyle dating". This is kind of the way some married couples look down on long time singles, male and female.

Not all couples look down on singles but a lot sure do and it's not a high and might way of looking down it's more subtle.

rr1024

Well my experience comes from being around all sexualities in many different situations. I'm and engineer and I design sex toys so I visit sex toy trade shows, swingers conventions and yes the polyamory conventions, I meet gay, lesbian, swingers, polyamorists, porn stars..you name it....

In talking with people over the years it's very easy to see the "swingers" in the polyamorist. Basically, all the swingers I've met have always wanted the same things at Polyamorists...."friends with benifits and LTR with another couple, women or man."

Again we disagree, we've been swinging for about 20 years now an in the first 4 years we met several long term friends
who we of course still swing with and we go out and do other things with. In fact just last week 8 of us went to an all day wine fest and we didn't do anything after...everyone just went home. Too buzzed I think "laughing"
Actually I think that statement is totally incorrect, maybe you should check craigs list or as I said before actually read some of the swingers profiles. There has always been plenty of bimales and couples who accept them. Traditionally most profiles were writen so as not to scare away the "Str8" couples....most of the time when swingers or polyamorist profile says bifemale and the "male" states Not stated, no sexual stated or other such terms then they generally are accepting bimales or other couples with bimales... Bimales have only been shunned by of course those who are str8....and generally most of those str8's have had bimales in the room with them but they just didn't know it....

It sounds like the post above is referring to Polygamy as Polyamory....
I think some of you spouting the differences in Polyamory and Swingers should take a 1/2hr and if you have show time watch Penn and teller bull shit about Polyamory....very good and in fact I've been to the "Polyamory" retreat featured on that show about 3 months before it aired...

Ustwo

Thats great and it does happen, our best friends are swingers, but its still the biggest complaint among swingers that forming friendships just doesn't happen often.

Try going to a swing club. Just about all of them ban bi-male activities. Its economic, their clientèle as a whole doesn't want to see it, nor do they want to deal with gay prostitutes. If you think male bisexuality is accepted in swinging, you need to meet more swingers. Undoubtedly there are bi-males in swinging, but if you want to have fun, find a swinger web site and complain about the plight of the 'double standard' between bi males and bi females and see where that goes.

Generally I think most 'poly' relationships are B.S. and are all destined to an early failure. That doesn't mean under the right circumstances it couldn't work. The B.S. part is that a majority of people who SAY they are poly are not, which is the point I was driving at before, but I would not say ALL poly relationships are B.S.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

Redlemon

There is a bit of logic to this statement. With two people, there is one bond that is at risk. With three people, three bonds. With four people, six bonds.

__________________
I can't read your signature. Sorry.

ratbastid

As opposed to the rigorous statistical support you provided for your lovely little "doomed to failure" claim?

I'd like to gently remind everyone that for some of us, this isn't an abstract conversation. I welcome and invite your opinion, and I respectfully request you please not refer to my relationship and chosen lifestyle as "doomed to failure".

There's a WHOLE lot stronger language I could use to make this request, and I'm not going to do that.

Carry on.

lurkette

Y'all are entitled to your opinions about poly relationships being "doomed to failure" but I have to join ratbastid in taking issue with it. I'm sure you all have perfectly valid observations of other couples (trios? whatever...) but we're not them and it's kind of hard not to take the sweeping generalizations personally.

Marriage is hard. Relationships are hard. Most of them end, for any number of reasons. When most people can't even manage to keep a dyad intact, it's easy to understand why people would be skeptical of something unconventional. But the things that make a good marriage work are the things that make a poly relationship work: communication, concern for your partners' happiness, responsibility, and willingness to do what it takes to make things work.

All the nonsense about "swingers" vs. "poly" is just semantics as far as I'm concerned. Every couple, regardless of how they define themselves, works out their own boundaries and expectations. Some people are into "alternative" relationships for the sex, some for the novelty of new relationships, some for the relationship aspects, whatever. Far as I'm concerned it's none of my business what people's predilections are as long as everything is consensual and brings more love into the world.

__________________
"If ten million people believe a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing."

- Anatole France

StellaLuna

Doomed?
Yikes. I wish I'd been on TFP before I got into this relationship, then I'd have known it was Doomed To Failure. Thanks!

[/crankybat]

__________________
Screw tradition!

Infinite_Loser

I'm just speaking the truth. Humans are very egocentric and, as a result, are prone to selfish/jealous tendencies. No one-- Regardless of who you are-- Is an exception to this rule. The problem with relationships involving more than two people is that it requires one person to accept the fact that they're going to receive less attention than another party member. While said situation might work in the short-run, it won't work indefinitely as simple human nature will kick in and cause the least favored party to feel as if they have to 'compete' with the other for attention. The best example I can give of this is simple sibling rivalry. Here you have one child who feels threatened by the other child, and as a result acts out in hopes of garnering the attention of his/her parents (Granted, this is a slightly simplified view). Such occurances have been observed to happen time and time again in nearly all human interactions and your situation is no different.

Human interaction is complex, but you're still prone to basic tendencies.

__________________
I believe in equality; Everyone is equally inferior to me.

Jenna

So um, on a sidenote:

How did you get into these poly and swinger relationships (those who have been in them)? I mean, have you always been the type of person who is not easily jealous? Did you have to "train" yourself to deal with these emotions and feelings?

I've always been interested in swinging - not polymory. I'm not interested in another emotionally intimate relationship. But, I know I'm not emotionally ready for it yet. Physically however, I am.

I'm worried this type of thing would ruin my relationship, and I'm not even sure if my partner would want to have physical relations with another person. I'm not sure if this is considered swinging - but we introduced another female into my sex life, just once, and it was clear that I was the one to be touching the woman. So, technically, I wouldn't call it a threesome? Our relationship recovered, and it wasn't very hard on it. But, I'm sure my boyfriend wouldn't be very interested in just loaning me out for sex whenever I wanted.

Anyways, just interested in how this stuff all works itself out.

Ustwo

Well you can take heart that you are in the one type of poly relationship that has the potential for long term stability. Throw another guy in there and I'd call ya doomed

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

ratbastid

When you can make ONE relationship at a time work, I'll pay attention to what you might have to say about relationships. Until then, just know that I consider your presuppositions faulty, and I have ample experience in this area while you have none.

Cervantes

I know I'm late into this discussion but your scenario fails in one very crucial regard that is also, from what I've gathered, of the outmost importance in a poly relationship.
The natural continuation in your scenario is that after some time rebelling the child who feels unloved reconciles with his situation and makes the best of it, in the end he/she finds that he/she isn't less loved but loved equally. (I speak from personal experience here as I have 2 younger siblings and one older brother, I've been on both sides of this fence).

I agree with you that humans are basically egotistical in their nature but given the choice of giving up someone you love dearly or sharing him/her while he/she shares you with others, would sharing and being shared sound like such a bad idea?
I doubt I'd ever function in that kind of relationship but I've never been in one so there is no way for me to know for sure. But given the choices I'd say sharing and being shared is way (double waaaay ) better an option than being alone looking for a new, nonexistent, True Love. (Ok I'm a bit cynical.. so sue me.. )

__________________
- "Philosophy is questions that may never be answered. Religion is answers that may never be questioned.."
- "Religions take everything that your DNA naturally wants to do to survive and pro-create and makes it wrong."
- "There is only one absolute truth and that is that there is only one absolute truth."

Ustwo

I think what you just said is that its better to settle to be a #2 than risk not being a #1.

Few men would go for that sort of thing, or be happy with it at least. Women are, as a group, more open to it, but even then all things being equal most would rather be the #1. Now what I used to think poly meant was there was no #2, everyone was #1 so to speak and I thought that sounded great, but once I got to meet poly's and read what they had to say I got introduced to the whole 'primary' thing which seems very 'un-poly' to me. Under the right circumstance I'd be willing to have another woman live with us and honestly my wife would be to if the circumstances were 'right'. That being said I'd have a 17 year history with my wife, she would always be '#1' regardless by default, we have to much of a past together so while someone new could be loved, she couldn't be 'equal'.

I would have to wonder if we would be doing this hypothetical female a real favor in the long run, preventing her from really finding what we as a couple have together.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

tecoyah

Consider this.....pretty much any relationship is doomed in the context presented in the OP. Ask yourselves how many relationships you have had, then how many are active right now.

4 to 1?

20 to 1?

15 to 0?

The point is, every single relationship we have has a very good chance of failure ( as in not lasting forever), thus making claims about a Poly relationship is a rather Null Point in my opinion.

__________________
Holding onto anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned. - Buddha

Ustwo

I suppose its how you look at it.

While I've had my share of relationships, only one have I called my wife and that hasn't failed.

I assume that level of commitment in a poly relationship as my baseline. If the definition is something far looser and then yes it is doomed to 'fail' because the foundation was never there for it to last.

What I would expect would be the husband/wife level of love only not just between one pair in the couple. That to me would be a true polyarmorus relationship.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

rr1024

This is very true, and it maybe that people "SAY they want an LTR with another couple/man/woman" But their actions don't jive with there desires

Yes but they have bisexual clubs now a days and as far back as the 70's so I wouldn't agree. Everyone has to cater to their clients, you don't see gay men going to lesbian swingers party either but gays and lesbians are still all part of the "GAY" Community. I believe this maybe an important point to this topic. So by your own logic if a gay man is not accepted into a lesbian party then the lesbians are not part of the "GAY" community. I think both gays and lesbians would disagree because both of them are and have reconciled with them selves that they are part of the gay community.

....Much like polyamorists may or may not visit a swingers club but like it or not they "polyamorist are part of the swingers lifestyle. As hard has they try to break the bond between swingers and them selves the fact is if there is more than 2 people having sex in the same bed then they are swingers. Even if the sex is relationship based.

Again another issue is BDSM there are straight, Male bisexual, female bisexual, gay and lesbian BDSM clubs and some are seperated and others are combined.

I kind of agree, I think if their heads are in the right place there is no reason why it couldn't work. However, I think most of the swingers are B.S. too......LOL
I think it may come down to do say what you are going to do and do what you say.

It seems while most state on the profiles they want LTR's they seem to settle for one night flings until they find the "perfect relationship they've built up in their minds" which is never going to happen. If that makes sense?

My intention is not to make anyone upset but just to discuss the different aspect and point of views.

Cervantes

Ok, that came out a bit bad.. What I was trying to say was that (this is my own personal speculation on the subject btw. I have only what the few poly people I have had the pleasure of talking to, to go on in this matter. So please take it with a truckload of salt) if you have a poly relationship you define the relationship and the love for your partners in that context, the primary is simply a word for the person with which you have the most stable relationship.

If egotistical love (maybe a bad term for it), the kind that is most common in our species enters into such a relationship, Infinite Looser's prediction would be the ultimate end of it.

But if I interpret Ratbastid and Lurkette (as well as the other polys I have had the honor of talking to) right it is that the love you form in poly relationships is a bit different from this since it is formed in the poly context. Different, not more or less, higher or lower, better or crappier (err. dang language barrier...) just different from what we commonly hold as Love.

I really hope I didn't step on anyones toes in this, as I said in the beginning, this is just my own speculations but I hope to spark some more input from the polys in here as this is a very interesting subject. If I'm wrong in my speculations I humbly ask that you point it out to me...

__________________
- "Philosophy is questions that may never be answered. Religion is answers that may never be questioned.."
- "Religions take everything that your DNA naturally wants to do to survive and pro-create and makes it wrong."
- "There is only one absolute truth and that is that there is only one absolute truth."

amonkie

As someone who has been a #2 in a poly, the major growth happens in that you learn what Love CAN mean - People in your life can fulfill you in different ways - Imagine that the little things that one person has as weaknesses, you find someone else who can complement those as their strengths, and all the way around .. 3 is now stronger than one, or even 2.

And yet another thought ... while it may not always be the case .. Polyamory can also happen in the absence of sex as a primary or even seconary part of the relationship, whether temporary or not - I've been there. It is this possibility that to me makes polyamory worlds apart from swinging. The relationship(s) comes first.

__________________
Calling from deep in the heart, from where the eyes can't see and the ears can't hear, from where the mountain trails end and only love can go... ~~~ Three Rivers Hare Krishna

yotta

I was in a long term (18 months) poly MFM. The other guy was straight. We didn't have any problems living together. The two of them eventually lost interest in each other, and I'm still good friends with him. She went a bit nuts this year, and ended up breaking up with her.

My boyfriend now is poly and bi, and we're hoping at some point to add a woman or two to round things out (two bi women and two bi men in the relationship seems to be what we both want). Hopefully we'll get there and be happy.

__________________
I am Jack's signature.

tecoyah

Quoted for Truth

__________________
Holding onto anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned. - Buddha