And I feel that unsupported "opinions" like this are primarily meant to END conversation. Feel free to elaborate.
Polyamory IS NOT couples therapy. Presenting/defending it as such is denigrating to people like me who've never seen good reason for monogamy to be elevated as "the natural order."
There's nothing wrong with sexual nonmonogamy. IMNSHO, problems begin when people start claiming that sex is a
basic need like breathable air or potable water or nutritious food or affection or love or touch or social contact or whatever. (What is unnatural is not restriction of sexual desire but its
repression, & that's another discussion entirely.)
But let's consider it from another direction: if sex IS a need, then larding all that other stuff onto fulfilling that need is utterly irrational, & looks more like OCD. If you knew someone who felt compelled to Riverdance energetically for five minutes before eating even the smallest snack, wouldn't you eventually wonder whether they were mentally unbalanced?
Whether that dysfunction stems from abnormalities that are physiological, biochemical, environmental, or emotional, or imposed willingly or unwillingly, is irrelevant. If it's truly a survival need, then fulfill that need & go about your otherwise perfect life; if you WANT to take regular chances of screwing up that perfect life, then the conversation has already moved far past "fulfilling a need."
I also can't overlook that statements such as "mismatched libidos in a relationship" begins entirely from
a couplist premise, where The Sacred Dyad MUST be maintained at all costs, for instance finding a pre-packaged touchy-feely rationale for Monogamy But.
In a relationship where one-to-one-forever is NOT a rule -- even a rule that is casually broken while swearing regular fervent oaths to it -- the concept of "mismatched libidos" is totally absurd.