Be The First On Your Block To Post In The The All New "Justify Monogamy" Thread!!!

[filtherton]

I've been in an open relationship for the past six months. I'm finding that it is working well for me, better than any monogamous relationship ever has. In monogamous relationships i always end up feeling trapped. I just don't want to feel like i am obligated to love and/or fuck the same person for the rest of my life. This has started me wondering why i ever thought monogamy was the kind of relationship for me. I'm starting to realize that it isn't. The magic realization was that monogamy isn't necessary for love, companionship or reproduction. If you are responsible about it, there really isn't anything you can achieve through monogamy that you can't also have with polyamory(aside from monogamy itself). One of the other benefits i see in polyamory is that it forces you to constantly reevaluate your relationship with the your lovers.

So, aside from the obligatory evolutionary arguments, i would just like to hear different ideas about whether any of you believe that polyamory or monogamy are inherently right or wrong, or better or worse than one another.

[Coppertop]

I say whatever works for you and yours is what's best.

[Irishsean]

We have to justify points again rather than use the search function and find one of the dozens of threads that have already beaten this dead horse in order to realize that there is no one true way, and to do what makes you and your partner happy?

[adam]

Well, I would amend that to "do what makes you and your partner happy, and gives your kids what they need." I don't have any trouble believing a long-standing polymorous relationship could work for the kids, but I would worry about them if the relationships weren't stable.

[Irishsean]

Originally Posted by adam

Well, I would amend that to "do what makes you and your partner happy, and gives your kids what they need." I don't have any trouble believing a long-standing polymorous relationship could work for the kids, but I would worry about them if the relationships weren't stable.

Agreed, I was just going off the assumption that most people involved in an open relationship don't have kids. None of my friends that are do.

[ratbastid]

Well, as someone in a year-log polyamorous relationship, I've got to say that the notion of it works for me. What you said about the constant reevaluation of your relationships is dead on, too. My primary relationship, my marriage with lurkette, is so much more vital and alive now, out of the examination and soul-searching we've done inside this new context.

lurkette and I are quite clear that a long-term committed relationship with another woman is in our future. The relationship we have now may or may not be that, that's a bit up in the air right now. But there's no chance of us going back to how things were. Or at least, not any time soon.

[shortynickel]

Originally Posted by adam

Well, I would amend that to "do what makes you and your partner happy, and gives your kids what they need." I don't have any trouble believing a long-standing polymorous relationship could work for the kids, but I would worry about them if the relationships weren't stable.

I am up for trying just about anything but i dont see it going over well with my wife...but i do commend those like ratbastid and lurkette that can and do make it work...I AM IN AWE of couple like that.

[gar1976]

Originally Posted by shortynickel

I am up for trying just about anything but i dont see it going over well with my wife...but i do commend those like ratbastid and lurkette that can and do make it work...I AM IN AWE of couple like that.

Depends on what you want out of life, but I'm not in awe of anyone who can get this to work.

/married with 1 1/2 kids
//at this point in life, not awed by much. Except the new star wars film that's coming out.

[Irishsean]

Different doesn't always equal better, sometimes its just different.

[Ustwo]

Having been an swinger from time to time I've always frowned on the idea of an open relationship.

Open relationships to me seem more like 'friends who fuck' without much on the relationship side. This may sound hypocritical comming from someone who was a swinger, but with swinging you tend to be together and know what each other is doing. This can add to sex and your relationship without being a threat to said relationship. Swinging is done for the benifit of both partners, while open relationship seem to be based around solo pleasures.

[little_tippler]

do what works for you...monogamous here, it's a part of me I can't deny

[Pragma]

I don't think anyone here is going to post "justifying" monogamy.

I think we're an open-minded enough population that the general consensus is monogamy, open relationships, polyamorous relationships, whatever - do what you like. If you're happy, and your partner(s) are happy, then that's all that matters.

[filtherton]

Yeah, i should've called the thread something else. A choice of relationship really needs no justification beyond, "Because i want to and i think i can make it work."

Originally Posted by Ustwo

Having been an swinger from time to time I've always frowned on the idea of an open relationship.

Open relationships to me seem more like 'friends who fuck' without much on the relationship side. This may sound hypocritical comming from someone who was a swinger, but with swinging you tend to be together and know what each other is doing. This can add to sex and your relationship without being a threat to said relationship. Swinging is done for the benifit of both partners, while open relationship seem to be based around solo pleasures.

Relationships are defined by the people who participate in them. An open relationship is only about fucking if that's what you choose to make it about. I would argue that an open relationship requires just as much work with just as much potential reward, than a standard monogamous relationship.

For me, i just see monogamy as such a trap. Every monogamous relationship i've been in, no matter how great it was at the outset, eventually devolved into what could be summed up by cheesy, codependent pop songs- "I can't live, if living is without you" type bullshit. I think it is just more favorable for me to get involved with other people without the unspoken assumption that one day we might have kids or get married.

I probably should have made a journal entry instead of a thread. I guess you live and learn.

[monica]

I am in the unique position (for myself, not unique to everyone) of seeing and knowing that open relationships do not work for me, and they hold no interest whatsoever.

While I am having a very hard time believing there is just one person out there that will hold my interest for life, I have become quite clear that I am only interested in being with one person at a time.


(wow, could I say the word interest one more time? heh.)

[irateplatypus]

the point of a monogamous relationship is to devote your life to someone else, not to satisfy internal needs. if you're feeling trapped or confined by a monogamous relationship then i would argue that the relationship, in certain fundamental ways, has ceased to be monogamous.

[shyguy]

Isn't the idea of an "open relationship" inherently selfish? I have a hard time believing that a relationship between two people can be at all for each other when each person is going off to satisfy their own desires. At what point do you actually consider the other person (if there is a main one) or one of the other people (if they are all equal)? Do you even care if you lose one or more? Do you continue to have the same ones?

The idea that ratbastid put forward is not really what I'm talking about. Him(?) having a three way relationship could work with just as much giving but then you are giving to more than one.

I'm not saying that being selfish is wrong. But I believe you must be selfish to be in an "open" relationship comfortably.

[filtherton]

Originally Posted by irateplatypus

the point of a monogamous relationship is to devote your life to someone else, not to satisfy internal needs. if you're feeling trapped or confined by a monogamous relationship then i would argue that the relationship, in certain fundamental ways, has ceased to be monogamous.

I think the conclusion i have come to is that it isn't healthy for me to devote my life to someone else. I guess i think that it is less than ideal to devote my life to anyone who isn't my child. I understand the sentiment of monogamy, but to me it just seems like most people are coerced into monogamy by the idea that they can't be happy unless they are devoting their life to someone else.

I want to be happy with myself, and i want to be with people who are happy with themselves. I don't want to be with someone who needs me and i don't want to need someone. I don't think that is healthy. I want to enjoy the company of people who enjoy my company. Monogamy can have different meanings, often i think it is just another word for codependence. I currently favor polyamory because if it seems nearly impossible to be successfully polyamorous and codependent at the same time because, like i said before, if you want to have an open relationship that works out for everyone involved you have to constantly re-evaluate your feelings and communicate effectively. Such things are great in monogamous relationships, but aren't completely necessary to have a successful monogamous relationship, sometimes such things are even a detriment. My ex thought my overall lack of jealousy was a sign that i didn't really love her. Nevermind that jealousy is manifested insecurity. She thought that since i wasn't getting all bent out of shape about her hanging out with other men, that i was somehow not into her. It was this attitude, that somehow i should be more insecure in our relationship to show my love for her, that eventually led me to stop caring for her in a romantic sense. Her idea of a monogamy involved me becoming a stupid gorilla anytime she made friends with another guy. Now, i know that monogamy on its own is only a concept, i know that it is humanity eventually turns to shit anything that looked good on paper. I just think that, for a lot of people, monogamy means a great many things that are antithetical to respectful, equality based relationships.

Originally Posted by shyguy

Isn't the idea of an "open relationship" inherently selfish? I have a hard time believing that a relationship between two people can be at all for each other when each person is going off to satisfy their own desires. At what point do you actually consider the other person (if there is a main one) or one of the other people (if they are all equal)? Do you even care if you lose one or more? Do you continue to have the same ones?

The idea that ratbastid put forward is not really what I'm talking about. Him(?) having a three way relationship could work with just as much giving but then you are giving to more than one.

I'm not saying that being selfish is wrong. But I believe you must be selfish to be in an "open" relationship comfortably.

Could it not also be argued that monogamous relationships are also inherently selfish? Monogamy is essentially askind someone to foregoe loving or even thinking about another person as a sign of their commitment to you. How selfish is that?

Polyamory is only as selfish as those who engage in it. It isn't any worse than monogamy in terms of selfishness, it just involves different boundaries.

[Bauh4us]

I am too selfish to be in an open relationship. I find that I have given myself to my girl, and she in turn has done the same. If we were open, then I would have to share her with someone else, and quite frankly that is not something that I am willing to do. I don't look at it as being trapped. I can leave the relationship whenever I want. I just found that I would rather be with her and no one else than to be with everyone else and not her.

[Brooke]

Monogomy contains alot of dedication and hard work. Like a craftsman who takes time to polish and perfect his craft in the image he has in mind, so does monogomy create somethign new - where two were, there now is a one stronger whole entity.

It is true - before you leap up in protest - we all exist seperatly in our own skins. But what is skin, but something constantly regenerating to keep our innards in. It is the ability of the human mind to conceive and create, and rather than confining or restricting a person - a monogomous relationship gives you room, space, freedom to grow.

And do you not reevaluate any relationship you are in? Monogomous or otherwise? Reevaluation is not seperate from the issue. In truth, th emore a monogomous relationship is reevaluated - and the decision is remade everyday to commit (because it is not a once vow - it is a vow to make that vow over and over again as shure as the sun will rise) and that commitment makes the union stronger.

From a strong and solid base anything can be had. Do you have money? Do you need it? You work and a strong solid relationship and societies problems will fall to the wayside. Worries about payments, alimony, child support, the fear, the wonder of who is with what and doing what, and the mistrust. The doubts and mistrust are absent from a healthy and well maintained monogomous relationship.

Such a union needs no defense. If you have seen one succeede, even where one hundered have failed, you know its merits. You can see its strength. You know it is good.

[Brooke]

I want to be happy with myself, and i want to be with people who are happy with themselves. I don't want to be with someone who needs me and i don't want to need someone. I don't think that is healthy.

Another note.

I wanted that too once, to need no one. Cause if you can survive on your own you can't be open to hurt.

I am sorry, for you and a bit for the person I was, but the universe doesn't work that way. We all need people. We all need eachother. If you can accept that and yet still still survive on "your own" then you can glimpse the beauty of monogomy and not the restricting claws that you are so fearful of. Take the fear from the concept and there is nothing stopping you from a wonderful, healthy, strong and trusting relationship.

[kipmiller]

I find the path of monotony...i mean monogamy...is more of an exciting challenge that allows us that dont sky dive, bungee jump etc. a chance to have some badge of valour or courage...Oh did i mention that some god fearing people think that polyamory= hell...I guess some like it hot

[filtherton]

Originally Posted by Brooke

Another note.

I wanted that too once, to need no one. Cause if you can survive on your own you can't be open to hurt.

I am sorry, for you and a bit for the person I was, but the universe doesn't work that way. We all need people. We all need eachother. If you can accept that and yet still still survive on "your own" then you can glimpse the beauty of monogomy and not the restricting claws that you are so fearful of. Take the fear from the concept and there is nothing stopping you from a wonderful, healthy, strong and trusting relationship.

Don't cry for me argentina, there is a difference between needing someone to feel emotionally complete and needing people because humans are social creatures. Need is the first step towards coercion. I love the woman i am currently dating, i love the shit out of her. I don't pretend for one second that our relationship will last forever, or that i can't live without her. All i can to is appreciate the time that we share together. That's it. I know i don't need her to be happy, even though her presence makes me happy. I'm not afraid of being hurt, pain and growth are two sides of the same coin. What i'm afraid of is falling victim to an out of touch, disney-esque, idealized image that our society has of love. Right now for me that means completely abandoning my society's oft unquestioned concept of what it means to be in a successful romantic relationship.

The only thing one can't get from a polyamorous relationship that one can get from a monogamous one is monogamy itself.

Originally Posted by Brooke

Such a union needs no defense. If you have seen one succeede, even where one hundered have failed, you know its merits. You can see its strength. You know it is good.

I think the same could be said about polyamory.

[Brooke]

What i'm afraid of is falling victim to an out of touch, disney-esque, idealized image that our society has of love. Right now for me that means completely abandoning my society's oft unquestioned concept of what it means to be in a successful romantic relationship.[QUOTE]

You love her. Truly. Why then would you want to hold anything back? Monogomy is giving all you have to that one person.

So, you are afraid of falling victem to disnyification. I don't beleive it. If you are open, honest, and aware of that person, and you trust them, I honestly see no reason for monogomy to not be involved. Monogomy does not trap you - but you sound very afraid of giving all you got and then having something other than the freedom you have. try if you can to wrap your mind around the concept that anything worth having is worth working hard for.

Don't abandon society completely - work within it while retaining your individual strength. It is a skill few have. (I struggle with it myself)

[filtherton]

Originally Posted by Brooke

You love her. Truly. Why then would you want to hold anything back? Monogomy is giving all you have to that one person.

I'm not holding anything back. I don't know why you think monogamy is necessary for a relationship to achieve its maximum potential.

So, you are afraid of falling victem to disnyification. I don't beleive it. If you are open, honest, and aware of that person, and you trust them, I honestly see no reason for monogomy to not be involved. Monogomy does not trap you - but you sound very afraid of giving all you got and then having something other than the freedom you have. try if you can to wrap your mind around the concept that anything worth having is worth working hard for.

I'm not afraid of monogamy, i am choosing to not be in a monogamous relationship because i don't buy into what the monogamy salespeople are selling. There is no emotional scarring going on here. There is a conscious, noncoerced choice to avoid buying into the idea that someone has to commit their life to me and me alone to prove their love to me. It works for some people, and not for others. It all depends on how realistic you are about what it really means to be in a relationship with another person, as opposed to what our society tells us it means to be in a relationship with another person. I think polyamory is about being a realist. Your perspective is exactly what i am trying to avoid, because you can't seem to fathom how someone could go about being in a relationship that is fundmentally different from the kind you choose to be in and still have a successful relationship. It is condescending for you to imply that my lack of enthusiasm for monagamy is a result of some sort of fear and that if i could only overcome this fear i would see that monogamy really is the one true way.

[Willravel]

I am madly in love with my wife, and she is madly in love with me. Each of us is madly in love with our beautiful daughter and our lives. Becuase manogomy makes us so happy and content, we will continue to be happily married until death parts us.

Neither of us sees manogomy as a necessity in having a good relationsip, but we will be together for the rest of our lives. I would never force manogomy onto someone who doesn't believe in it.

Also my wife wanted a nice big wedding, and I was glad to deliver. It is the one constant in my life, and that is more than worth it to me.

[Mr Cassata]

I am on the "whatever tickles your pickle" side of the issue... If your partners know the situation, and you are completely honest about it (as with any relationship), then I am not one to argue against what you are doing.


Colin

[wilbjammin]

There has been a few things said here, and I think it is time for me to chime in now

I want to be happy with myself, and i want to be with people who are happy with themselves. I don't want to be with someone who needs me and i don't want to need someone. I don't think that is healthy. I want to enjoy the company of people who enjoy my company. Monogamy can have different meanings, often i think it is just another word for codependence. I currently favor polyamory because if it seems nearly impossible to be successfully polyamorous and codependent at the same time because, like i said before, if you want to have an open relationship that works out for everyone involved you have to constantly re-evaluate your feelings and communicate effectively.

Being in a monogamous relationship does change the way that you make decisions. On one hand, you do give up a little in the way of doing things you once would do on your own. But that should be true in any kind of caring relationship. I do see many relationships that fall victim to the codependency problem, particularly because people are so willing forego responsibility for themselves. It is much easier to get through life if you don't have to face challenges, if that is how you want to do it. But that is true with anything and everything.

I could easily say that polyamorous relationships can fall into the same category, by being unwilling to face the challenges that strong one-on-one relationships need. Truly, I think it is more complicated than that, but for all choices there is a sort of "opportunity cost" to use generic economics terms. We're always making sacrifices by choosing one thing over another. I think that I would feel that I was giving up too much by entering an open relationship or polyamorous relationship because I would be spreading myself out, and I can't imagine how I would ever feel like I was doing justice to anyone including myself. I think that life is necessarily different when you are in a committed relationship, because you have to assume responsibility for how your actions affect another person.

I find that the biggest challenge in a committed relationship is to communicate effectively, and to evalute how things are going. Relationships are challenging, that's why they're worthwhile. If a relationship is totally easy with no challenges, then you aren't getting anything of value from it. I'm constantly learning about myself and my partner, and we work together to make decisions and challenge each other. It is a very enjoyable process, but it is not one that skirts responsibility, the engagement of self, or being needy.

Originally Posted by filtherton

I'm not afraid of monogamy, i am choosing to not be in a monogamous relationship because i don't buy into what the monogamy salespeople are selling. There is no emotional scarring going on here. There is a conscious, noncoerced choice to avoid buying into the idea that someone has to commit their life to me and me alone to prove their love to me. It works for some people, and not for others. It all depends on how realistic you are about what it really means to be in a relationship with another person, as opposed to what our society tells us it means to be in a relationship with another person. I think polyamory is about being a realist. Your perspective is exactly what i am trying to avoid, because you can't seem to fathom how someone could go about being in a relationship that is fundmentally different from the kind you choose to be in and still have a successful relationship. It is condescending for you to imply that my lack of enthusiasm for monagamy is a result of some sort of fear and that if i could only overcome this fear i would see that monogamy really is the one true way.

From my experiences in this committed relationship that I'm in, I don't feel like I'm proving anything or that I need things proved to me. I firmly believe that love is something is demonstrated, love without action (like anything without action) is dormant and meaningless.

The only thing one can't get from a polyamorous relationship that one can get from a monogamous one is monogamy itself.

I think this statement is fundamentally abstract. If I left my monogamous relationship, my life would have some radical changes. The chemistry of my relationship would change, I would have to fundamentally change my philosophy of how I approach the relationship that I'm in, I'd have to fundamentally change the way I deal with others. In essense, I would have to become a new person to accomodate a different lifestyle. Would I lose in this situation? I certainly would. Currently, my life is full... I'm busy, I feel as though I don't have enough time to do everything I would like to do in my relationship, and to open that up rather than spending effort to strengthen the relationship I am in I would likely become more fragmented and I think I'd lose out on the intimacy that gives my relationship value.

When it comes down to it, I think there is a simple question that I keep asking and answering similarly, "Do I want more than what I have or seeing getting in this relationship?" I don't, and I don't feel as though I'm a victim of brainwashing or other social pressures to be here.

[filtherton]

Originally Posted by wilbjammin

Being in a monogamous relationship does change the way that you make decisions. On one hand, you do give up a little in the way of doing things you once would do on your own. But that should be true in any kind of caring relationship. I do see many relationships that fall victim to the codependency problem, particularly because people are so willing forego responsibility for themselves. It is much easier to get through life if you don't have to face challenges, if that is how you want to do it. But that is true with anything and everything.

Most interpersonal relationships involve some form of compromise. Polyamory is just a different set of boundaries, with a different set of compromises.

I could easily say that polyamorous relationships can fall into the same category, by being unwilling to face the challenges that strong one-on-one relationships need. Truly, I think it is more complicated than that, but for all choices there is a sort of "opportunity cost" to use generic economics terms. We're always making sacrifices by choosing one thing over another. I think that I would feel that I was giving up too much by entering an open relationship or polyamorous relationship because I would be spreading myself out, and I can't imagine how I would ever feel like I was doing justice to anyone including myself. I think that life is necessarily different when you are in a committed relationship, because you have to assume responsibility for how your actions affect another person.

I see what you're saying, but i personally feel like i can do justice to someone just fine in an open relationship. Being in an open relationship does require responsibility for how your actions affect another person. It isn't about unprotected sex with anything warm. It is about looking at a romantic relationship with a different perspective. Just like any other successful relationship it requires honest communication and respect.

I find that the biggest challenge in a committed relationship is to communicate effectively, and to evalute how things are going. Relationships are challenging, that's why they're worthwhile. If a relationship is totally easy with no challenges, then you aren't getting anything of value from it. I'm constantly learning about myself and my partner, and we work together to make decisions and challenge each other. It is a very enjoyable process, but it is not one that skirts responsibility, the engagement of self, or being needy.

I have the all of the same qualities in my relationship with my primary lady, we challenge eachother, learn from each other, and make some decisions together, i worry about the things she goes through, and she worries about things i go through. We support eachother emotionally, but we also realize that love does not require attachment. It takes just as much work and is just as challenging as any monogamous relationship that i've been in, probably moreso. Like monogamy polyamory is not the shirking of all responsibility, it is just the acknowledgement that exploring sexual and possibly romantic relationships with more than one person can also be rewarding, often for all of the same reasons that you cite your monogamous relationship as rewarding.

From my experiences in this committed relationship that I'm in, I don't feel like I'm proving anything or that I need things proved to me. I firmly believe that love is something is demonstrated, love without action (like anything without action) is dormant and meaningless.

I agree. I don't think love need be demonstrated by monogamy. Despite the fact that many people prefer their love with a side of commitment, they are two seperate things. You love your close friends, right? And it doesn't bother you that they have other friends, i presume. It doesn't cheapen your friendship with them when they hang out with someone else. Are romantic relationships so entirely different? I would die for all of my close friends just as quickly as i would die for any girlfriend i've ever had. I can't speak for anyone else, but the only difference between a good friend and an SO is that conventionally you don't fuck good friends.

I think this statement is fundamentally abstract. If I left my monogamous relationship, my life would have some radical changes. The chemistry of my relationship would change, I would have to fundamentally change my philosophy of how I approach the relationship that I'm in, I'd have to fundamentally change the way I deal with others. In essense, I would have to become a new person to accomodate a different lifestyle. Would I lose in this situation? I certainly would. Currently, my life is full... I'm busy, I feel as though I don't have enough time to do everything I would like to do in my relationship, and to open that up rather than spending effort to strengthen the relationship I am in I would likely become more fragmented and I think I'd lose out on the intimacy that gives my relationship value.

Aside from the inherent abstract nature of language, how is it that abstract? All of the things that are held up as clear and unarguable justifications for mongamy: love, respect, commitment, trust, companionship, growth, etc, can all be achieved in polyamorous relationships. The only difference is that there isn't any monogamy in a polyamorous relationship. It isn't like all of the ingredients for a good relationship are meaningless without monogamy as a catalyst, because they all exist in relationships where monogamy is irrelevant, such as friendships or familial relationships or polyamorous relationships. Of course your life would change if you left your current relationship, that isn't relevant to the issue at hand. The point, which is obscured by my poorly thought out thread title, is that i personally don't think monogamy is all it is cracked up to be. I don't think monogamy needs to be justified beyond the whole, "If it works for you, do it" rationale.

When it comes down to it, I think there is a simple question that I keep asking and answering similarly, "Do I want more than what I have or seeing getting in this relationship?" I don't, and I don't feel as though I'm a victim of brainwashing or other social pressures to be here.

Nope, there's nothing wrong with agreeing with the status quo; it doesn't amount to brainwashing. This raises an interesting question as to whether the idealized concept of what it means to be in a romantic relationship defined by our society is actually ideal, or whether it is just "the way we do things".

[noodles]

why does anyone need to justify monogamy?

why do you feel the need to justify polyamorism?

or can you even call what you're advocating as such? not needing anyone slash providing for only one's child would be more of an antiamouristic (i'm making up words now) point of view, to me.

[Brooke]

i don't buy into what the monogamy salespeople are selling. There is no emotional scarring going on here. ...... It all depends on how realistic you are about what it really means to be in a relationship with another person, as opposed to what our society tells us it means to be in a relationship with another person. I think polyamory is about being a realist. Your perspective is exactly what i am trying to avoid, because you can't seem to fathom how someone could go about being in a relationship that is fundmentally different from the kind you choose to be in and still have a successful relationship. It is condescending for you to imply that my lack of enthusiasm for monagamy is a result of some sort of fear and that if i could only overcome this fear i would see that monogamy really is the one true way.
__________________

Naw, not really. People will do whatever people truly want to do. I truly beleive mine is the most right and fulfilling way, yes. Not because I have been preprogramned to by society though. I too have weighed the pro's and cons and have decided that one is better than the other.

I'm not holding anything back. I don't know why you think monogamy is necessary for a relationship to achieve its maximum potential.

You are not expecting anything either? If she left or slept with someone else the next day you would be okay with that? You must have done well with sharing in Kindergarten.
no, seriously. Boundaries and definitions are what make something special and unique. If your boundaries include other people, than that special and unique can potentially include anyone! Exclusive is not bad. The rich have a privat eclub - okay then, I go start my own. People have a great marraige - and I want the same thing - I go after my own! exclusiveness is exciting, bold, and dangerous. There is more potential for hurt - and at the same end more potential for penultimate trust and expression.

To be honest - how can you trust this person? It is beyond my comprehension - honestly - not understanding, because many of my friends become involved polyamously....but to comprehend how that can halp in growing trust and love. I just have to disagree.

[anti fishstick]

Blah, well most of the time, I am "afraid" to voice my thoughts/opinions but here goes:

Originally Posted by filtherton

What i'm afraid of is falling victim to an out of touch, disney-esque, idealized image that our society has of love. Right now for me that means completely abandoning my society's oft unquestioned concept of what it means to be in a successful romantic relationship.

What Disney-esque image do you speak of? Does that mean a throwback to the 50s perfect, happy "white picket fence" family? Because society is becoming so out of touch with that idea in itself that what you are proposing with polygamy being ideal to you is not uncommon at all, by any means. If you think you are rebelling to unquestioned norms, and more and more people are right there with you, is that really rebelling? We are living in a postmodern world in which the reality around us is constantly changing. The "norms" aren't really norms anymore because even the norms are changing. In fact, I think more and more people are going to find themselves in "open" relationships or swinger relationships or at least seriously think about it/want it as this trend picks up. Our American society is very individualistic and this may be where the polygamous idea is coming from.

Originally Posted by filtherton

Most interpersonal relationships involve some form of compromise. Polyamory is just a different set of boundaries, with a different set of compromises.

I don't understand... he is saying that compromises are true in any caring relationship, so what are you defending here? It seems like you care about your primary partner because there are obviously feelings there. We know there are different sets of compromises for any different models. Also, why do you think that monogamous relationships are inherently codependent? They don't have to be, and a healthy "ideal" monamagous relationship is more along the lines of interdependency, which is a big difference. You have to constantly re-evaluate your feelings and communicate effectively for a healthy, monogamous relationship to work also.

First of all, there is no "perfect" Disney-esque relationship, it does not exist except in our minds. Relationships take work, no matter what model you choose to take (polygamous, monagamous, etc.) Codependent relationships tend to function when one person is unhealthily attached to someone else for the wrong reasons. They define their self-worth based on external sources like the relationship. This puts the person in a position of powerlessness and the other person having all or most of the power in a relationship. The codependent partner has no control because they have given away power over self-esteem. Their self-esteem is *defined* by the relationship.

Interdependency is about mutual partnership and giving another person *some* power with our feelings. The dynamics of codependent vs. interdependent relationships are very different. Interdependent relationships are much more balanced (although not perfect). Of course, when we care about someone, and allow ourselves to be vulnerable in any way to another person, we are giving them some power with our feelings. Interdependency is normal and natural and happens in many monogamous relationships.

The only thing one can't get from a polyamorous relationship that one can get from a monogamous one is monogamy itself.

You keep saying this and I do agree that some people just don't seem to be fit for monogamous relationships, or marriage for that matter. But why are you asking to justify monogamy when it seems like you are just trying to justify polygamy? So far, I haven't heard any good reason why polygamy still supports the same love, respect and committment, trust, growth, etc. that comes from a monogamous relationship because those dynamics would be completely different in a polygamous relationship. Leaving a monogamous relationship and switching to a polygamous one would change everything. Like wilbjammin said, you would have to change your philosophy, and everything you knew about the relationship would have to change to accommodate to other people.

If your claim is really true, then doesn't that mean that codependency could still exist in a polygamous relationship? If your goal is to get away from codependency by trying different relationship models than the society standard/ideal, then I don't think you'll get very far. Codependency is still codependency no matter what relationship you are in. The fight to end codependent relationships is really a fight to end dysfunctional cycles within yourself. It seems to me as if you are trying to gain control, as well as a sense of individualism by entering polygamous relationships. Trying different relationship models could work, but it won't escape any problems that monogamous relationships could have.

[Suave]

Monogamy is better for most people because it's not as complicated as poligamy. With poligamy, I doubt that everyone gets equal time or consideration, and feelings are likely to be hurt. People also like to feel special, and being "the one", versus "one of the many", is about as special as you can get. If you can make it work, more power to ya.

Oh, poligamy also results in higher chance of STD transmission.

[filtherton]

Originally Posted by Brooke

Naw, not really. People will do whatever people truly want to do. I truly beleive mine is the most right and fulfilling way, yes. Not because I have been preprogramned to by society though. I too have weighed the pro's and cons and have decided that one is better than the other.

How about yours is the most right and fulfilling way for you. Beyond that, you have to admit that you have no ability to know what is right and fulfilling for other people.

You are not expecting anything either? If she left or slept with someone else the next day you would be okay with that? You must have done well with sharing in Kindergarten.
no, seriously. Boundaries and definitions are what make something special and unique. If your boundaries include other people, than that special and unique can potentially include anyone! Exclusive is not bad. The rich have a privat eclub - okay then, I go start my own. People have a great marraige - and I want the same thing - I go after my own! exclusiveness is exciting, bold, and dangerous. There is more potential for hurt - and at the same end more potential for penultimate trust and expression.

It's happened, and i felt jealous for maybe a minute. Then, after i reminded myself that she didn't belong to me and that this was part of an open relationship i felt just fine. I dealt with it and moved on. Sharing has nothing to do with it, because i don't own her. She shares herself with whomever she wants to, i don't share her with others. Exclusion is fine, if you want a relationship to make you feel important. I'm comfortable with my relative importance in relation to my world, i don't need a relationship just because i want to feel special. I also don't measure the value of my relationships by the amount of potential they have to hurt me, i measure them by how much potential they have to make my life more fulfilling. Sometimes these two conditions overlap, often they don't.

To be honest - how can you trust this person? It is beyond my comprehension - honestly - not understanding, because many of my friends become involved polyamously....but to comprehend how that can halp in growing trust and love. I just have to disagree.

I trust her because she has never given me a reason not to. By what other measure is trust given?

Originally Posted by anti fishstick

snippage

I'm not going to line-by-line this because i've been doing it too much already in this thread.

I'm not really trying to claim monogamy is useless, i just named the thread poorly. I'm just saying that for me, it is useless. Disneyland was a reference to the idealized image that everyone has in their head about what it means to be in a romantic relationship with someone you love, i think for most people this idea is formed before the critical thinking skills necessary to evaluate it are formed. People then get attached to this idea without necessarily considering the fact that it isn't the only way. Disney-esque relationships are fictional, the problem is that there is a tendency to point to them as the ideal goal without realizing that they aren't really possible. I guess the difference, and this is me speaking only for what i have experienced personally, is that in polyamorous relationships, there isn't generally this fantasy based expectation of what it means to be a participant in the relationship. No boundaries are completely predetermined.

I do concede that there are most likely just as many codependent polyamorous relationships as there are codependent monogamous relationships. It was silly of me to say or imply that polyamory had an advantage in this respect.

I started the thread out with a combative tone because i thought that would be the tone of the responses. I brought an argument knife to a discussion gun fight. That's what i'm used to in the politics board. Upon seeing a different tone in the discussion i tried amend my intial point. I am not seeking a justification for monogamy any more than i need any of you to justify for me the way i choose to live my life. What i really want is an explanation for monogamy. I said some things, than people responded and now i am responding again. Let me reiterate one last time: I know that monogamy works for a lot of people, right now it is something i am avoiding.

What everybody seems to be having a problem with is the idea that a polyamourous relationship can be just as fulfilling for all of the same reasons that a monogamous relationship is fullfilling. Let me see if i can put it into words.

Love, respect and committment, trust, growth, etc. are not rooted in monogamy. That is to say, monogamy is not a necessary ingredient in the cultivation of relationships that thrive on love, respect and committment, trust, growth, etc.. You do not need to be monogamously committed to someone to get these things out of a relationship with that person. You need only look at a good friendship to see that this is true. So why is it so difficult to imagine an open relationship where these things occur?

Look, it boils down this: People are what make relationships what they are, not some symbolic commitment or lack thereof. I think that the type of relationship is far less important than the people involved. The only important difference between monogamy and polyamory is that in one you can fuck more than one person.

What i'd like to hear is what the signifigance is monogamous relationships in agreeing not to have sex with another person. Though i've heard a lot about how that is what makes a relationship worthwhile, what i haven't heard is how.

[waltert]

my preference is monogamy. to me, an open relationship requires me to trust the people who my girlfriend would be shared with as much as I do her....Im not big on that. i dont feel as though I can trust them with her. i mean-where have these people been? what have they been doing, who have they been doing, etc etc....it bugs the hell out of me. its the same reason I'd never do a threesome, I dont trust anyone else enough.

[Zeraph]

*applauds ratbastid and lurkette and anyone else who can make it work.

[adam]

No kidding. Sounds like a lot of effort to me...

[anti fishstick]

Originally Posted by filtherton

I guess the difference, and this is me speaking only for what i have experienced personally, is that in polyamorous relationships, there isn't generally this fantasy based expectation of what it means to be a participant in the relationship. No boundaries are completely predetermined.

No boundaries are completely predetermined because of the experimentory nature of polyamorous relationships. I think the "disneyland ideal" is in the minds of people because the marriage paradigm has been in use for years.

I do concede that there are most likely just as many codependent polyamorous relationships as there are codependent monogamous relationships. It was silly of me to say or imply that polyamory had an advantage in this respect.

My point with that was that you thought it gave polyamorous relationships an advantge over monogamous ones and since we agree that it doesn't really, then what *is* the advantage of polyamorous relationships? If you're trying to avoid monogamous relationships because you think they're mostly codependent, why do you think entering a polyamorous relationship will be different? You seem to be making the argument that you can get all qualities of monogamous relationships except for monogamy itself in polygamous relationships so what is the difference? I understand you can fuck more than one person, that's obvious but how does that fulfill a persons emotional needs other than making it more complicated (and thus harder to attain)? I guess what I don't understand is how polyamorous relationships can be more ideal because it would seem much harder to balance.

Your codependent views on monogamous relationships gives me a little perspective of where you are coming from and why you are trying to avoid it. Are you afraid of attachment? You mention that you and your primary partner understand that love does not require attachment, which is what I think your view of a codependent relationship may have. Perhaps you're cynical of what love is and finding the "right" one for you. Each persons individual experiences on relationships are different from the next person. A lot of people haven't experienced a monogamous relationship worth lasting for more than a couple years. I know what it feels like to be discouraged and cynical and closed to the idea that a meaningful relatonship exists. And I guess that's another question. Could a meaninful relationship exist in polyamorous love or is it just a way to escape from the confinements of "meaningful" monogamous relationships?

Currently, I come from the experience of basically finding who I want to be with for a very long time, if not my lifetime, so it's very different from yours. In my opinion, love requires at least some attachment because you give yourself a little vulnerability towards the other person. Like i've said before, when we care about someone, and allow ourselves to be vulnerable in any way to another person, we are giving them some power with our feelings. And that can be an attachment, connection, or bond with another person.

Look, it boils down this: People are what make relationships what they are, not some symbolic commitment or lack thereof. I think that the type of relationship is far less important than the people involved. The only important difference between monogamy and polyamory is that in one you can fuck more than one person.

What i'd like to hear is what the signifigance is monogamous relationships in agreeing not to have sex with another person. Though i've heard a lot about how that is what makes a relationship worthwhile, what i haven't heard is how.

Fair enough. How does being with one partner make it worthwhile? I think that by dedicating yourself to one partner, you are choosing to commit to them in a way that makes it special to both of you, and no one else. You give eachother the 'gift' of your bodies and love and it can be almost sacred. Having multiple partners would give you more risk of objectifying yourself and/or your primary partner or any of the other parties involved because it would be harder to maintain balance and love them equally. Open relationships seem to be more about the ability to fuck more than one person, like you've said, than it is to maintain love, committment, growth, trust, etc. Although that certainly happens too, the "trap" with open relationships is that it tends to focus much more on the sexual act.

If my partner and I decided to bring in a third person, we would *obviously* love eachother more, and that other person would just be there to treat us. We would be objectifying the third person, or perhaps eachother, and I don't like reducing myself to others. You may feel empowered, and in control, but I think that all gets lost when you become a sexual object. I know I have the abilities to turn other people on or get into the possibilities of open relationships but for me, I wouldn't even consider that unless I was missing something, or was unsatisfied in any way. But instead, I am more self-confident than i've ever been about my body and have my own self-affirmation (instead of looking for affirmation from others). I feel empowered by being comfortable about myself, my body, and my looks and I get all that from being with my partner. I just can't imagine ever reaching a point where I would be unsatisfied and want to look outwards by opening up the relationship to other people. We are constantly changing, learning and growing with eachother and that's enough for us. We will never reach complacency. Like wilbjammin said, we value our intimacy and it is intimacy that gives our relationship value (among other things). Of course, I realize not everyone experiences that, so perhaps polyamorous relationships are justified in a fragmented society.

[filtherton]

Originally Posted by anti fishstick

No boundaries are completely predetermined because of the experimentory nature of polyamorous relationships. I think the "disneyland ideal" is in the minds of people because the marriage paradigm has been in use for years.

Yeah, i'm just a little burnt out on the marriage paradigm.

My point with that was that you thought it gave polyamorous relationships an advantge over monogamous ones and since we agree that it doesn't really, then what *is* the advantage of polyamorous relationships? If you're trying to avoid monogamous relationships because you think they're mostly codependent, why do you think entering a polyamorous relationship will be different? You seem to be making the argument that you can get all qualities of monogamous relationships except for monogamy itself in polygamous relationships so what is the difference? I understand you can fuck more than one person, that's obvious but how does that fulfill a persons emotional needs other than making it more complicated (and thus harder to attain)? I guess what I don't understand is how polyamorous relationships can be more ideal because it would seem much harder to balance.

That they are more ideal is a matter of perspective. Obviously, you will probably disagree with any advantages i bring up because you believe monogamy is sacred. That's fine, i respect that. I just feel like polyamory, since it is agreeably more difficult to achieve, is a higher standard of relationship. The stakes are higher and so is the payoff. I also believe that if i am going to be with someone who loves me, they should love me for who i am, regardless of who i fuck. The monogamous part of a monogamous commitment is above all about denying one's urges. Even in the most ideal monogamous relationship, there will always be attraction to other people. One can claim that true love wears blinders, but in the end, we are all animals, with animal urges. I don't think the denial of sexual urges is a necessity in proving your love to someone. I think all urges should be acted upon if they can be acted upon in a healthy, respectful, and noncoerced manner. This is why i currently favor the polyamory, it allows the individual participant more freedom.

Your codependent views on monogamous relationships gives me a little perspective of where you are coming from and why you are trying to avoid it. Are you afraid of attachment? You mention that you and your primary partner understand that love does not require attachment, which is what I think your view of a codependent relationship may have. Perhaps you're cynical of what love is and finding the "right" one for you. Each persons individual experiences on relationships are different from the next person. A lot of people haven't experienced a monogamous relationship worth lasting for more than a couple years. I know what it feels like to be discouraged and cynical and closed to the idea that a meaningful relatonship exists. And I guess that's another question. Could a meaninful relationship exist in polyamorous love or is it just a way to escape from the confinements of "meaningful" monogamous relationships?

It is part of my personal philosphy that attachment to anything is to be avoided when possible, and recognized and accounted for when avoidance isn't possible. I don't mean "avoidance" in the avoiding responsibility sense, more in the avoiding influenza sense.

I am not cynical about finding the "right" person for me, because i don't believe that there is a "right" person for me. An athiest isn't cynical about religion. You can't be cynical about something that doesn't exist. I think the idea that there is a "right" person for anybody, in the cosmic, soul mate sense is a convenient hallucination people have when they want to believe that there is justice in the universe. I believe that everybody has something to offer me in terms of emotional and spiritual growth. In light of the belief that all good things monogamous can be achieved through polygamy i feel that monogamy would be limit my opportunities for growth and experience.

I have found a meaningful relationship, with someone who is very special to me, we just choose to give eachother the option of having relations with other people. This doesn't devalue our relationship for me, because i derive the value of our relationship from who we are and how we interact, with who we are fucking being completely irrelevant.

Currently, I come from the experience of basically finding who I want to be with for a very long time, if not my lifetime, so it's very different from yours. In my opinion, love requires at least some attachment because you give yourself a little vulnerability towards the other person. Like i've said before, when we care about someone, and allow ourselves to be vulnerable in any way to another person, we are giving them some power with our feelings. And that can be an attachment, connection, or bond with another person.

I've met many women who i wanted to spend my life with. Now i'm at a point where that isn't a goal. Finding someone to spend my life with isn't even a sub-footnote on the list of things i want to do with my life. I've had the monogamous experience, and i know how quickly soul mates can become distant aquaintances, regardless of how much of the future was already planned. If you found someone who you want to be with for a long time, and actually stay with them for a long time, kudos to you. I'm certain that i can have a life that is just as fullfilling, if not more fulfilling, going an alternate route, and if i can, kudos to me. This isn't to say that i will never spend a long time with the same main partner, just that it isn't a goal.

I don't believe in giving someone else power over my feelings. I believe each and every emotion i experience is my responsibility. You control how you react emotionally, and how you react to your emotions. Certainly your emotional state is effected by the world around you, but in the end, no one has power over your emotions except for you. (not you antifishstick, but the generic you)

Fair enough. How does being with one partner make it worthwhile? I think that by dedicating yourself to one partner, you are choosing to commit to them in a way that makes it special to both of you, and no one else. You give eachother the 'gift' of your bodies and love and it can be almost sacred. Having multiple partners would give you more risk of objectifying yourself and/or your primary partner or any of the other parties involved because it would be harder to maintain balance and love them equally. Open relationships seem to be more about the ability to fuck more than one person, like you've said, than it is to maintain love, committment, growth, trust, etc. Although that certainly happens too, the "trap" with open relationships is that it tends to focus much more on the sexual act.

See, i think that to make a relationship special, all you have to do is realize that all relationships are fundamentally special. The the relationship that i have with my lady is fundamentally unrepeatable. Our relationship is fundamentally special, and to be shared only by us, because it is a relationship between two individuals. It is special, because it exists. I could not have the relationship that i have with her with anyone else because anyone else wouldn't be her, and the relationship would be necessarily different because the ingredients would be different. The same goes for any relationship between any number of people. Sex is something we do together, but it isn't the defining characteristic of the "specialness" of our relationship. I choose to have this relationship with her because it is wonderful. It makes me smile. I am with her because she is who she is, who she fucks is irrelevant because i didn't decide that she is a wonderful person based on whether she was fucking me and me alone.

If my partner and I decided to bring in a third person, we would *obviously* love eachother more, and that other person would just be there to treat us. We would be objectifying the third person, or perhaps eachother, and I don't like reducing myself to others. You may feel empowered, and in control, but I think that all gets lost when you become a sexual object. I know I have the abilities to turn other people on or get into the possibilities of open relationships but for me, I wouldn't even consider that unless I was missing something, or was unsatisfied in any way. But instead, I am more self-confident than i've ever been about my body and have my own self-affirmation (instead of looking for affirmation from others). I feel empowered by being comfortable about myself, my body, and my looks and I get all that from being with my partner. I just can't imagine ever reaching a point where I would be unsatisfied and want to look outwards by opening up the relationship to other people. We are constantly changing, learning and growing with eachother and that's enough for us. We will never reach complacency. Like wilbjammin said, we value our intimacy and it is intimacy that gives our relationship value (among other things). Of course, I realize not everyone experiences that, so perhaps polyamorous relationships are justified in a fragmented society.

If you think you would be objectifying a third person, then you would be. Objectification is a choice and not a fundamental ingredient in polyamory. Objectification happens all of the time in monogamous relationships. You said yourself that you feel "empowered by being comfortable about myself, my body, and my looks and I get all that from being with my partner". It seems to me that this is also a form of objectification, although instead of getting sex, you are getting empowerment. There is nothing fundamentally wrong with objectification as long as it is done with the understanding that all are willing participants.

As far as intimacy goes, monogamy is not a necessity for intimacy. Intimacy requires honesty, trust and respect. I understand that you find value in mongamy, but you must also understand that that value is assigned by you to monogamy and is completely arbitrary.

[pinkie]

It's all I've ever wanted, and I need to be #1, period.

[wilbjammin]

Originally Posted by filtherton

I just feel like polyamory, since it is agreeably more difficult to achieve, is a higher standard of relationship. The stakes are higher and so is the payoff.

It's also harder to sleep on a bed of nails than a normal mattress. It is also harder to subtract 1,508 from 4,389 using your fingers and toes. Making something harder or raising the stakes does not necessarily mean anything is going to be better, it simply means that it is more difficult.

I also believe that if i am going to be with someone who loves me, they should love me for who i am, regardless of who i fuck. The monogamous part of a monogamous commitment is above all about denying one's urges. Even in the most ideal monogamous relationship, there will always be attraction to other people.

If that is all you get out of a monogamous relationship, then I think you're fundamentally living a different sort of life than me. I don't experience a sense of loss or self-denial by committing to someone emotionally, and only desiring to have sex with her. Having attraction to other people is one thing. I find some people to be physically attractive, have attractive personalities, but that does not mean I desire to "fuck" them. There is a distance there, an intimacy gap... when I have that deep sense of intimacy like I have now, I have no desire to be with someone else. I view the potential of such a situation to be an alienating experience. I've been in alienated relationships, I've had alienated sexual experiences... I don't see any reason that someone would seek those while in a great monogamous relationship (that has great sex).

One can claim that true love wears blinders, but in the end, we are all animals, with animal urges. I don't think the denial of sexual urges is a necessity in proving your love to someone.

So having lots of sex with one partner isn't enough?

I think all urges should be acted upon if they can be acted upon in a healthy, respectful, and noncoerced manner. This is why i currently favor the polyamory, it allows the individual participant more freedom.

All urges acted upon? That is the definition of non-discretion. To give value to anything, you have to have discretion. Freedom is the ability to choose for yourself what you want and to act, refusing to decide what you want and to stick with it shows to me a lack conviction and value-setting. The desire for extreme freedom usually is a sign that one feels oppressed in some way. And again, I feel no oppression in my monogamous relationship. The real meaning comes from making that choice. Freedom with no discretion or inaction doesn't have much value.

It is part of my personal philosophy that attachment to anything is to be avoided when possible, and recognized and accounted for when avoidance isn't possible. I don't mean "avoidance" in the avoiding responsibility sense, more in the avoiding influenza sense.

Then what do you have that's yours? What do you have to hold onto in your life? I'm attached to my music, my poetry, my work, and my love. If you don't make that stand and put yourself out there to make the risk to get hurt or fail, then you won't lose anything or win anything. You will simply be dis-affected in a somewhat dis-passionate life.

An atheist isn't cynical about religion. You can't be cynical about something that doesn't exist.

Actually, I'm an atheist, and I'm cynical about religion. Religions exist, god doesn't.

I think the idea that there is a "right" person for anybody, in the cosmic, soul mate sense is a convenient hallucination people have when they want to believe that there is justice in the universe. I believe that everybody has something to offer me in terms of emotional and spiritual growth.

I don't think she was arguing that there was a "right" person.

In light of the belief that all good things monogamous can be achieved through polygamy i feel that monogamy would be limit my opportunities for growth and experience.

What kind of growth? Other than sexually, explain this to me.

I have found a meaningful relationship, with someone who is very special to me, we just choose to give each other the option of having relations with other people. This doesn't devalue our relationship for me, because i derive the value of our relationship from who we are and how we interact, with who we are fucking being completely irrelevant.

Well, that may work for you, but I'm finding the previous arguments unconvincing. I get the sense with your freedom argument, that you really like having some distance. That <i>too much</i> intimacy bothers you, maybe frightens you or suffocates you. Maybe I'm wrong; if I am, I just can't quite fathom how this works.

I've met many women who i wanted to spend my life with. Now i'm at a point where that isn't a goal. Finding someone to spend my life with isn't even a sub-footnote on the list of things i want to do with my life. I've had the monogamous experience, and i know how quickly soul mates can become distant acquaintances, regardless of how much of the future was already planned.

So, did your new philosophy come as a result of being hurt or disillusioned with past failures? It reminds me of the quote, "All philosophy is a justification of one's self" - Albert Camus

If you found someone who you want to be with for a long time, and actually stay with them for a long time, kudos to you. I'm certain that i can have a life that is just as fullfilling, if not more fulfilling, going an alternate route, and if i can, kudos to me. This isn't to say that i will never spend a long time with the same main partner, just that it isn't a goal.

Well, at least here you're showing some passion. That kind of determination and challenge I think is important for a meaningful life. I appreciate the will to take something and make it work, and the "I don't care if you don't think I can, I will anyway" attitude.

I don't believe in giving someone else power over my feelings. I believe each and every emotion i experience is my responsibility. You control how you react emotionally, and how you react to your emotions. Certainly your emotional state is effected by the world around you, but in the end, no one has power over your emotions except for you. (not you antifishstick, but the generic you)

Yes, but is there any point to deciding not to be affected by others? Is it really living not to allow yourself to feel the highs and lows of existence? It reminds me of the Apollonian and Dionysian dichotomy. We're living in Apollonian times - we're very abstract, very image oriented, very much stuck into the logos mode of engaging reality. The Dionysian has its place too. We are feeling creatures, feeling love and suffering is a huge part of humanity.

To say that "fucking" others is such a disconnected experience that you don't feel that another has any emotional power over you while it is happening, then what do you get out of it? A sense of power yourself, maybe? Power does not only come from autonomy; it also comes from creativity, the ability to affect your environment, knowledge, and feeling comfortable with yourself.

See, i think that to make a relationship special, all you have to do is realize that all relationships are fundamentally special. The the relationship that i have with my lady is fundamentally unrepeatable. Our relationship is fundamentally special, and to be shared only by us, because it is a relationship between two individuals. It is special, because it exists.

Are you sure you aren't a mathematician?

I could not have the relationship that i have with her with anyone else because anyone else wouldn't be her, and the relationship would be necessarily different because the ingredients would be different. The same goes for any relationship between any number of people. Sex is something we do together, but it isn't the defining characteristic of the "specialness" of our relationship. I choose to have this relationship with her because it is wonderful. It makes me smile. I am with her because she is who she is, who she fucks is irrelevant because i didn't decide that she is a wonderful person based on whether she was fucking me and me alone.

I just wonder how you'll feel about this if the relationship continues on for an extended amount of time.

If you think you would be objectifying a third person, then you would be. Objectification is a choice and not a fundamental ingredient in polyamory. Objectification happens all of the time in monogamous relationships. You said yourself that you feel "empowered by being comfortable about myself, my body, and my looks and I get all that from being with my partner". It seems to me that this is also a form of objectification, although instead of getting sex, you are getting empowerment.

Empowerment is the opposite of negation (or alienation).

There is nothing fundamentally wrong with objectification as long as it is done with the understanding that all are willing participants.

That's true in the sense that everything is allowed. This is a fundamentally post-modern argument, and it goes along the same lines that I should be able to abuse heroin because I'm not hurting anyone else. I'm just a willing participant. Does that mean that it is good?

As far as intimacy goes, monogamy is not a necessity for intimacy. Intimacy requires honesty, trust and respect. I understand that you find value in mongamy, but you must also understand that that value is assigned by you to monogamy and is completely arbitrary.

In that line of reasoning, assigning value to polyamory is also completely arbitrary.