"ethical polyamory"

Ravenscroft

Banned
Is there such a thing as unethical polyamory?

My understanding is that one of the key defining points of polyamory is communication -- clear, open, honest -- so therefore if something dodges that criterion, it ain't poly.

But, given the mutation of terminology in common use, that may've changed. Seriously: I'd like to understand.
 
My understanding is that one of the key defining points of polyamory is communication -- clear, open, honest -- so therefore if something dodges that criterion, it ain't poly.

That's my understanding too. The thing is that clear, open and honest are all necessary elements for an ethical relationship but on their own they are not enough.

There is nothing special about polyamory that makes its practitioners any more ethical in their approaches than the people who pursue monogamous relationships or even friendships.

All of these can be deeply unethical while being clear, open and honest.

Of course, the thing with ethics is that they are tricky, not the same for everybody and they change over time. There are general broad accepted ethical standards across societies usually but these will be dramatically different from the general standards in the same society 100 years ago.

Even within the current society. So, there are plenty of people around today who consider homosexuality to be deeply unethical if practised. Thankfully that view is changing and there are many more who think otherwise and who are working successfully to change laws that may have allowed those who are openly homosexual to be victimised.

Circumstances change our ethical view all the time too. Most of us would agree that to pick up a gun, go off and shoot random strangers is unethical. Yet there are a great many people who support the military efforts in their country to do just that to random strangers in other countries (the UK and the US are particularly bad for feeling that flying over countries and bombing them is a good thing to do).

So within general ethics, there is a personal ethical code that people tend to follow - either one they've thought out or one that they've picked up from the media, their school, their parents, the people they now spend time with.

To me, marriage tends toward being unethical. Talking, consenting, being open and honest are not enough to make it ethical. That's why I've never married.

Similarly partnered poly folks looking for secondary partners tends toward being unethical. Again, it takes much more than being clear, open and honest to make those situations even start to approach being ethical. That's why I have monogamous relationships and would reserve any poly situations for times I am single.

IP
 
I think we'd all like to think that is the defining point. Maybe that is the defining point of good poly vs bad poly?
 
I still hear the term ethical non-monogamy a lot, where it isn't a pleonasm (cheating on your partner while lying about it is obviously a form of non-monogamy, but most folks would agree it's not ethical).

Can't recall hearing "ethical poly" that often... I'd see that as simply the opposite of "poly in name only" (like in the case of self-proclaimed polyamorists who "are in a poly relationship, but their primary partner doesn't know it yet". Muuuh.). So, yeah "unethical poly" isn't really polyamory... but it gets (mis)labelled as such sometimes due do being a form of non-monogamy.
 
Where did you see "ethical polyamory" written? If you did, it's just a redundant phrase like "added bonus" or "close proximity."
 
So, there are plenty of people around today who consider homosexuality to be deeply unethical if practised. Thankfully that view is changing and there are many more who think otherwise and who are working successfully to change laws that may have allowed those who are openly homosexual to be victimised.

I don't think those that are opposed to homosexuality believe it's unethical. Abhorrent, unnatural, ungodly, immoral, whatever, but not unethical.
 
I'm sure there are people who say they're doing polyamory, who I'd think are practicing unethical non monogamy (lying to themselves or others).

But mostly I think the phrase belongs in the redundancy department of redundancy.
 
Last edited:
Technically, as I see it and have always understood the terminology, non-monogamy in general can be either ethical or unethical. Polyamory, as a subset, falls under the umbrella of ethical non-monogamy, whereas cheating falls under unethical non-monogamy. If it isn't conducted ethically, it is just some form of non-monogamy, but it wouldn't qualify to be poly.

That being said, I've seen some people who act ethically in one relationship and unethically in another relationship. But poly would generally be understood to be ethical.
 
2406922c41921b6cbab110059d1ad132.jpg
 
Similarly partnered poly folks looking for secondary partners tends toward being unethical. Again, it takes much more than being clear, open and honest to make those situations even start to approach being ethical. That's why I have monogamous relationships and would reserve any poly situations for times I am single.

IP

This doesn't make sense. Saying you are poly when single seems like an oxymoron??? :confused:

If you were having multiple relationships then you would not be single? And how would that be more ethical for you than openly acknowledging those as relationships than being single?? so it's more ethical to be single and pretend poly?? Is this what you're trying to say? (Eg. where you consider yourself not in relationship with anyone romantically??) how is that even poly, because I thought poly was saying you cared for someone romantically not just sexually...again which wouldn't make you single.

Or are you saying if you weren't partnered with someone monogamously, you would be with multiple poly partners? I am totally confused by this statement. I do not see any reason for multiple partnerships to be unethical, if all agree to be a part of it. Can you clarify what you mean how they aren't?

Just because your experience says they aren't doesn't meant all poly situations are unethical.
:confused::confused:
 
Just an observation:

People tend to think their way is the right way so they don't acknowledge other ways. They have a view of the perfect...whatever.

It occurred to me that similar discussions go on in all sorts of groups. "Oh that's not bdsm" or "They aren't a real Christian."

That is why I used the terms "good poly" and "bad poly" in the post above. That's because people can be polyamorous and still do the wrong thing occasionally.
 
I should say before I start that this is not stuff I expect anybody else to do or agree with. :) I'm aware that I am the weirdo - which is pretty much standard for me. I was an overthinker as a child, did a degree in philosophy in my early 20s and then have spent the last 18 years working as a computer programmer - a job that encourages overthinking, enormous attention to detail and an ability to understand just how much we all live in our own worlds and find it hard to communicate outside those worlds.

It is no surprise to me that overthinking has spilled out into all of my life and is guiding me through life.

I have no desire to change myself in this regard. It is working out really really well for me but I don't expect anybody else to agree with me or even to understand me. There are many ways to live as happy and fulfilled a life as I do and what I do most likely wouldn't suit very many people.

This doesn't make sense. Saying you are poly when single seems like an oxymoron??? :confused:

Ah - okay. For you, solo poly isn't a thing. Fair enough, poly means different things to different people. I see things differently. I've had and have many friendships over the years that include romance, others that include sex, others that include both and some that include neither. Those have been friendships. None of those people would describe me as girlfriend or romantic partner and I would describe none of them as boyfriend/girlfriend or romantic partner. These people were/are my friends. Under those circumstances I would consider myself single.

If I have a romantic partner then I need it to be a monogamous relationship on both sides because of my own ethical standpoint.

I do not see any reason for multiple partnerships to be unethical, if all agree to be a part of it. Can you clarify what you mean how they aren't?

lol.:) I banged on about it loads on this thread here: http://www.polyamory.com/forum/showthread.php?t=22633

The majority of what I said on the subject was in the post I've pasted here:

PurpleSun - Thank you so much for this conversation and for sharing your painful memories and experiences. I have found this incredibly useful in helping to tease out some of my own emotional responses to thinking about poly. You are a smart woman and I'm really grateful you have taken the time to discuss it with me. :D

For as long as I can remember, I have considered marriage to be on shaky moral ground. It entails making promises that people have no idea if they can keep at the time. It also entails the treating of the spouse like an object rather than a person in their own right - they become 'husband' or 'wife' - half a person who must (due to the promise they made) keep having the same sort of relationship with their other half until one of them dies. This is not something I'd feel comfortable entering into so I haven't.

I was surprised when I started researching polyamory to find myself experiencing some of the same responses to it as I do toward marriage. It had seemed like such a great thing when Art first talked to me about it. Exactly the sort of thing I'd really like. Then I found myself feeling very differently.

I've talked on here and to Art about it loads of times and eventually came to the conclusion that the only kind of poly I'd be happy to participate in is solo poly. That if being actively poly is very important to Art then he and I need to shift our relationship to one of friendship. He doesn't want to hence our agreement to be monogamous. :D

Until this discussion, I hadn't realised fully the root of my problems with some models of poly - in particular models where one relationship is primary and others are secondary. I think it is similar to my objections to marriage - to set relationships up that way is morally tricky.

Not so much because of the promising. It's more about objectifying others. If somebody has a primary partner with whom they share their life, with whom they plan holidays and moves for work or when they retire, who they give support to as they study, who's dependants they help care for and who does the same for them then yay. That person has tons of support and a relationship that society sees as valid. This is all great.

What if they don't want to be monogamous? That would make them feel tied down. Why not explore more? What's wrong with more love in the world? And this person has the the love and support of a great primary partner who is their rock.

So they go ahead and meet one or more secondary partners. Those relationships develop. There are dinners together, concerts, 'I love yous' flow freely, the sex is great, sleepovers and getting to wake up together are wonderful. Who could object?

The thing that I see as morally difficult in all of this is that the secondary partners become like objects. Much loved and deeply cared for objects but objects nonetheless. They (like a married spouse) are there to fulfill a role. There are limits on the relationship they have. No matter what feelings develop, they must never expect to have their life entwined with their love's life. The primary partner has that privilege.

The secondary person must find other sources of help and support for their life projects and their caring responsibilities. They cannot expect that somebody who they have become very close to would be there for them in that way. They must not expect to share a life with their partner - no matter how much love there is between them.

To me, the objectification here is a little worse than it is between married people. At least for folk who are married, they have a life partner, somebody to shape their life around. More - they have that in a shape that is acceptable to the general population around them which makes talking to others about their relationship easier.

For secondary partners in poly relationships, things are not that way. The person they love certainly isn't going to shape a life around them. Plus - the relationship structure is such that finding people to talk to about it will be difficult. Most people have never heard of poly and many people who have consider it to be a form of cheating. So finding help and support is just going to be more difficult for the secondary person.

This strikes me as an unkind way to treat a loved one. It isn't something I'd want to be part of - certainly not as either of the primary partners.

I understand that there are enormous societal pressures on all of us to see others as a way of getting things that we want rather than as individuals who matter just as much as we do. I see the pressures and I think that they tend to make marriage and also a primary/secondary approach to poly understandable as something that people are attracted to.

Thank you again PurpleSun for your help in being able to articulate that. I really do appreciate it and I wish you lots of luck in finding what you seek.

IP
 
Re (from Ravenscroft):
"Is there such a thing as *unethical* polyamory?"

Haha, good freakin' question.

I mean it could be argued that polyamory is a subset of ethical nonmonogamy. And if that's true ...

On the other hand, no relationship is perfect, right? mono or poly. Don't we all do unethical stuff (however small) from time to time? or at least encounter gray areas? I think I do ...
 
I am committed to polyamorous ideals even if I choose to live in a closed monogamous relationship, or to be celibate, just as I could be unpartnered yet gay or straight or bi.
You may feel polyamorous by nature or ideals, but if you are not in a relationship, you don't get to practice neighter monogamy nor polyamorory. A lot of mono folks treat their one night love decent too, does that mean they abide to monogamous ideals?
 
Ravenscroft, your statement makes sense as long as we think of polyamory as an orientation. There is some controversy about that, but I think polyamory can be thought of as an orientation, given the right context.
 
Similarly partnered poly folks looking for secondary partners tends toward being unethical.

On what basis? Why?

I don't do hierarchically stratified relationships (primary, secondary, tertiary), but I see no "ethical" reason why others should not, if it suits them to do so. I simply prefer to never treat anyone as in any way "less than" my partner of many years, simply because we live together and have been together for many years. So if ever I do have another true love in my life, he or she will be completely equal, and thus not "secondary".

This does not mean that all of my partners must live with me in the same house or that we must share our finances ... or any other of the criteria which folks sometimes emply in deciding who is "primary" or "secondary" or "tertiary" -- e.g., child care, parenting, etc.

I automatically place my potential future companions a place in which I'm empathic toward them, and know I'd not want to partner in love with anyone who would see me as ranking as a "secondary" -- so I will not do so.

However some people will prefer to be a secondary -- and some do! So why should they not be able to choose such a relationship?
 
Nonsense. I am committed to polyamorous ideals even if I choose to live in a closed monogamous relationship, or to be celibate, just as I could be unpartnered yet gay or straight or bi.

Total agreement from me on that! I only have one partner, but I'm very strongly polyamorous! And my partner is male, yet I remain very bisexual and bi-amorous.

Single people can be gay, bi, straight, queer, asexual, polyamorous, gardeners, artists, readers, friends.... :rolleyes:
 
I don't think the word "polyamory" suggests anything other than the two root words on which the word polyamory is based. Loving more than one doesn't mean it is done ethically any more than traditional marriage suggests ethical monogamy. Anyone assuming either relationship orientation would automatically be conducted in an ethical manner would likely end up with a bit of egg on his or her face. While there may be a statistical "ideal" polyamorous ethical standard if you were to know knock everyone's heads together, the reality is that there are probably as many individual ideals as there are people practicing this relationship style.
 
Back
Top