A problem with the way the media portrays polyamory.

Shaya

New member
Summary of my gripe:
When I first heard of polyamory, I was like "hell yeah. Of course you can love more than one person at a time. Makes total sense." The media articles from magazines and news feeds sensationalize polyamory but fail to go into any real depth. I feel many media articles take advantage of the naivety of the monogamous mindframe, find the flaws in monogamy and hammer those flaws home, making the newbie feel that they are polyamorous just because they feel like they could love more than one person at a time. I feel it's a recipe for disaster. The experienced polyamorists on this forum have patiently shown me more depth to polyamory than i initially thought possible. I now believe polyamory is about much more than just being able to love more than one and that marketing it in the media as being able to love more than one is simplistic and harmful to monogamists who are wanting to change to polyamory. I will argue this point more fully below.

Argument fleshed out:
Most people in this world, I believe, are capable at some point in their lives of loving more than 1 person at a time. We were brought up as infants to (usually) love a mother and a father. We play socially with many people and eventually learn that you could have 2 best friends though circumstance may have limited you to just one. We have been primed through childhood, I believe, to be ripe for multiple attractions.

Genetically, I believe, we are ripe for multiple attractions.

Psychologically, I believe, we are ripe for multiple attractions. I state without evidence that most people will, at one time or another in their lives, feel an attraction for someone else despite already being in a committed relationship. Most of the time, these feelings will be quashed or dealt with under the umbrella of monogamous rules. Relatively often, the dual emotions of love and lust (or old love and new love as the case may be) will cause a separation in order for one to reconcile the cognitive dissonance that exists in monogamy when feelings of attraction are felt for two people. During this period, I would argue that you are experiencing multiple attractions despite any protestations that you are monogamous. I summarise this paragraph by restating without evidence that I believe most people will, at some time in their lives, feel an attraction for someone else despite being in a committed relationship.

My last 3 paragraphs show that being able to feel attraction for, or to love multiple people simultaneously, is not enough to then claim you are poly, as it would include most people in this world including those who have never even heard the word 'polyamory', never read any of the theory or philosophy and would also include all the awful narcissists and fetish breeders who have a genuine desire to have multiple relationships but who generally behave in a manner that most of us would puke at due to the lack of consent or lack of consideration of other parties. Polyamory therefore, must be more than just the ability to feel attraction for multiple people and i feel should include an understanding along with an ability to practice the associated philosophy or ethics that we see in the advice we give on the forum every day.

Phrased slightly differently, I don't believe anyone is born polyamorous. I believe you can be born non monogamous (and by my logic above, I have stated I believe that most of the human race naturally falls into this category at least once in their lives). As far as being born one way or another, I believe claiming to be born non monogamous is as far as you can go. You then make a conscious choice to practice non monogamy (which may actually include all the non consensual practices like infidelity). You may refine your choice to limit your non monogamy to the consensual variety which includes polyamory and its arguably close cousins of swinging, group BDSM/kink play, or friends with benefits but differs significantly due to polyamory's theoretical lack of an upper bound for the level of emotional investment you are permitted to attain. Being polyamorous requires more than just an ability to love plurally, it involves an ability to love plurally without discarding old relationships. I believe doing this successfully almost always involves an understanding of other issues including self love, couple privilege, consent and so on. It probably also includes the ability of empathy, communication skills, time management, hinging skills and jealousy management. Without knowledge and ability to handle multiple relationships, newcomers to this forum seem to fail to practice polyamory successfully, resulting in serial monogamy despite their strong protestations that they "are poly." Without the knowledge of the ethics and philosophy that the polyamory movement has self taught itself and without the ability to put this knowledge into practice, it seems to me that many newcomers attempting polyamory end up with serial monogamy instead.



In summary, in my short time on these forums, there seem to be many newcomers who come here, excited to have learnt there is a way to express what they feel in their hearts and that new expression is 'polyamory.' Much of their initial reading comes from all the trashy articles in magazines and news feeds that have what I feel to be the toxic message of "you may be polyamorous if you can love more than one," "love conquers all," "your partner should own their jealousy so that you can enjoy multiple relationships." Polyamory is not just about being able to love more than one - most people do love more than one at some time in their lives and polyamory should include the knowledge of and ability to practice the ethics and philosphy that accompany it. Your love for your two partners will certainly not be the only or even the most important ingredient in successful polyamory. Your partner needs to own their jealousy so that you can enjoy your plural relationships in the same way that you need to manage your NRE (new relationship energy) so that your partner can still feel loved in your old relationship. Polyamory articles in the media are written to be sensational, are mostly targeted at a young audience, are targeted almost exclusively to existing couples and neglect to teach the reality of polyamory, which i feel more often results in serial monogamy than healthy polyamory.


I feel the underlying tone in the media is that polyamory is a bucket full of cake ready to be eaten. It isn't that easy. One relationship is tough enough. Plural relationships are that much harder.
 
There is so much I disagree with here that I'm going to have to process it and come back.

I will say a little about media portrayal though. I think you ignored the fact that monogamy is considered the social norm. Most mainstream articles on polyamory attempt to question that. Of course they are going to paint polyamory in a positive light. Unfortunately, another social norm is that couples are cis-gendered, heterosexual, white people. So you get lots of articles about couples "opening up". Makes sense to me. We aren't out to convert people. We just don't want to be looked down upon. What better way than to frame it within a concept they are familiar with?

Poly people tend to groan at such articles because we know it's not as simple as that. LGBTQ people are always left out. Well...not always. Often there are bi women involved, but they are objectified. So, it's a tightrope walk. Portray poly as it really is and overwhelm people, or homogenize it to make it more palatable.

I think poly articles by poly people for poly people are a lot more in depth. You aren't going to get that in a mainstream article written by someone who is not even poly. I've seen the same thing with vanilla articles on BDSM. Even you seem to keep insisting on lumping BDSM in with "frivolous" activities.
 
Sorry Vince. I'm probably still learning about non monogamy and should not be writing so confidently on polyamory. Every post of mine probably needs to come with a disclaimer that this is still territory I'm exploring intellectually rather than living in reality.

I am aware that BDSM and kink are performed monogamously. I am also aware you can form very meaningful relationships when using BDSM or kink with polyamory. Thank you for pointing this out to me in previous posts. I haven't forgotten. But within the realm of consensual non monogamy, I like to think of polyamory as a philosophy with a more emotional escalator in mind whilst recreational non monogamy is done with more sex in mind, with of course a huge overlap that no one can deny. I recognise that many polyamorists may have started out with swinging and then renegotiated an escalation in the relationship and many swingers may once have identified with polyamory.

I'm sorry if I caused offense. I'm happy to hear more of everyone's thoughts on the issue. My main gripe is that many people seem to come to the forums whilst in an established relationship, singing "I'm polyamorous because an article or two made me feel like I am. Let's go do this polyamorous thing because I can totally love 2 people at the same time." I feel that sort of mentality more often leads to serial monogamy than polyamory. I feel no one ends up happy in that situation. I feel that the allure of polyamory can actually be detrimental in such a scenario and wanted to explore the negative side effects of media portrayal of polyamory in generating that allure. The negative side effects of media portrayal of monogamy as you alluded to definitely bugs me too and will likely crop up in another thread in the future.

Hope we're still cool Vince. Happy for a private chat if you prefer.

Shaya.
 
But within the realm of consensual non monogamy, I like to think of polyamory as a philosophy with a more emotional escalator in mind whilst recreational non monogamy is done with more sex in mind, with of course a huge overlap that no one can deny. I recognise that many polyamorists may have started out with swinging and then renegotiated an escalation in the relationship and many swingers may once have identified with polyamory.

<snip>

I feel that sort of mentality more often leads to serial monogamy than polyamory. I feel no one ends up happy in that situation.

Ok, so two things here @Shaya: one is that you're ur understanding of poly as an intellectual exercise and not something you're actually doing is making you try to overly narrowly define everything - I don't know exactly what good you're trying to accomplish with these definitions (this is an observation across several threads). Patterns you might identify aren't RULES that poly follows - and even the general consensus on this board is wildly different than what you might find in a different forum (seriously, the community here has one flavor, the poly communities on FetLife have different flavors, and the many FB groups around poly each have their own priorities and mores as well. There IS ***no*** one true way.

Secondly, you're STILL assuming that the end of a relationship is intrinsically a tragedy. I understand why you do that, it's a pretty typical thing within the mon and even most of the poly community. But frankly people aren't the same people throughout their lives. If they're lucky, really really really lucky, they change in the same directions. But sometimes they become different people and meet new people that are more compatible with the people that they have become.

The people in the relationship are more important than the form of the relationship. ~Franklin Veaux

This is important. Crucially important. As in part of MY poly is that I love my partners enough that if our relationship wasn't good for them, I would want it to end,and if it wasn't good for me, I would end it. (Ok, that is sometimes an ideal not a reality, see the bit in my blog a few years back about DinoActivist - but I hope I learned that lesson.)
 
I'm going to disagree with much of Vinsanity's disagreement:D

I, personally, have noticed that the few "poly" folk that I have encountered "in real life" and on OKCupid seem to fall into the unicorn-hunting paradigm of We are The Couple (of course) and aren't we So Cool that we "let" each other date other people (although, of course, our relationship comes first and these rules are totally reasonable). This seems to last until the NRE with the IDEA of polyamory wears off and the reality of actual practice sets in.

And, yes, they do seem to come from swinging and/or BDSM and/or FWB/Open angles - just with the added component of "feelings" being OK (just not too many, or too much, or more than what we have together).

I agree that the poly articles that I have seen paint a very "Polyamory-ville" scenario. And I would caution couples to do a LOT more soul searching than "can I love more than one?" YES, OF COURSE YOU CAN - but love IS NOT enough - even in mono-land.

I'd like to wait until Vinsanity completes his processing and continue this conversation...
 
Poly people tend to groan at such articles because we know it's not as simple as that. LGBTQ people are always left out. Well...not always. Often there are bi women involved, but they are objectified. So, it's a tightrope walk. Portray poly as it really is and overwhelm people, or homogenize it to make it more palatable.

This! I agree with this so much - Everything I found online, for the most part, was dealing with MFM, MFF, and MFMF where the men were very rarely even bisexual. This caused so much confusion for the four of us in the beginning because we were trying to relate to people with children and different family dynamics. Then we found an article about five guys who were living polyamorously and it hit home.

Shaya said:
My main gripe is that many people seem to come to the forums whilst in an established relationship, singing "I'm polyamorous because an article or two made me feel like I am. Let's go do this polyamorous thing because I can totally love 2 people at the same time."

I can see how this could be a problem with many individuals and I'm fairly positive that's how CPF has faded out of the picture. I believe the four of us originally started on a "we're sexually attracted to each other and maybe this would fix our already mundane sex lives; yay polyamory!" when, in reality, I think he was looking for a bandaid to fix an already dying relationship. In time, it became more and more apparent that the relationship got much deeper with the remaining three of us and here we are...

I can understand what you mean, though, Shaya. The media really doesn't touch on the item of polyamory and I think it's something that's now just starting to come out to light, so there won't be many "good" articles on it until we make it that way.
 
I dunno if the media is totally to blame for this particular thing. I think it's similar to when people discover their sexuality, or their gender, or another facet of their identity. Suddenly THERE IS A WORD FOR WHO THEY ARE! They can explain themselves to other people. And there are other people like them!

This is super exciting and thrilling. It can be truly affirming. And for a time, it can seem like anything is possible. And sometimes that is actually true.

But telling them that poly is, like, hard isn't really going to register, much less be helpful.There are often posts here that I can tell that the folks involved are a mess and it is not going to end well. I just don't post on those. It would be pointless for me and them.

Eh, now I sound like a cranky old poly dude. "Get off my multiple lawns!'

I often like reading the posts where people are thrilled that they understand a thing about themselves now. Yes, that understanding will change dramatically over time and they might regret all kinds of things later. But I also don't think avoiding pain or avoiding hurting others at all costs is very healthy.

Now other stuff about media portrayals do make me nuts. The relentless focus on couples, the inability to understand there are many ways of 'doing' poly, the whiteness of it all...
 
Last edited:
But telling them that poly is, like, hard isn't really going to register, much less be helpful.

I would like to respectfully disagree with this statement. :) I can say that reading some of the posts in here have actually helped me in that I feel like we aren't the only ones going through "this" or "that". It's nice to see responses and how other people have handled similar situations. It's important for everyone to know that monogamous relationships are hard work and that polyamory isn't any easier, either. Not all are "up for the challenge".

Eh, now I sound like a cranky old poly dude. "Get off my multiple lawns!'

This. I love this! Thank you for that laugh!! :D
 
Shaya summarized in the OP:
I feel the underlying tone in the media is that polyamory is a bucket full of cake ready to be eaten. It isn't that easy. One relationship is tough enough. Plural relationships are that much harder.

Well said - so it seems to me anyway. The recent 12,000 word NY Times Magazine article on poly seemed to be mostly about couples wanting to spice up their sex life. But the truth is - maybe especially for the mono oriented individual coming into poly (whether of their own initiative or to accommodate their spouse/partner) - "more than two" is more difficult than just two - more eggs to juggle.

I am always reminded in discussions such as these of the axiom that I have seen discussed here on occasion: "One is not really poly unless they are comfortable with their partner enjoying their other partners". Having a lover in addition to your spouse is the fun part - handling a night alone with the toddler while your spouse is doing an overnight with their lover - and feeling good about it - is the tough part.

On a different note - Veaux was quoted by icesong:
The people in the relationship are more important than the form of the relationship.
And, actually the original quote from his website leaves out "the form of" - and is simply:
The people in the relationship are more important than the relationship.

(Disclaimer - I very much enjoyed "The Ethical Slut" and "Opening Up" - and I have trudged my way through about half of "More than Two" but I find myself agreeing with one Amazon reviewer who called Veaux's work "dogmatic and condescending" - and overly verbose).

Veaux's above quoted basic principle is not an objective truth, except (as I am sure we would all agree) in the case of abuse. It is a value judgment - but one that is pervasive in the poly community (at least on this forum and the other resources that I have encountered - I did appreciate another poster's comment about "different flavors" on other forums). On the other hand, there are many people who consider the commitment given to a relationship (especially a marriage most likely) and to the other individual who has invested their commitment as well - and the obligation to any children who may be influenced by that relationship - to outweigh the desire of one of the partners to rid themselves of their commitment so that they may be free to pursue other desires. They may very well believe that it would be selfish and irresponsible to leave an established marriage with small children in order to pursue a desire to become "fully actualized".

This is clearly very unpoly-like thinking - but it is not wrong - nor is it right. It is a different value judgment. Veaux's principles and such are not truths - they are merely value judgments. They may strongly resonate - and I have found a nugget or two that do for me - or they may simply come across as opinionated supposition. But, granted, many obviously find "More Than Two" very helpful in navigating the treacherous poly waters.

Just a couple of cents worth for the discussion. Al
 
Last edited:
Shaya, I agree with the summary. The media picture is overly simplistic.

But then, you have to realize, that this goes for pretty much all media pictures of all topics on earth that you could possibly study. Sometimes it's simplistic, sometimes outright misleading.
There's no way around this in our culture. Writers write to be read and to entertain, and people read to be entertained and won't go much deeper. The mainstream media is only a good source for getting a very first idea and sometimes not even that.
It's sad, and it's the way it is. If you seriously entertain a thought, you'll have to go study it beyond the superficial picture of mainstream media. Always.
 
As much as I roll my eyes at my poly life being put up as entertainment, I agree that it's gonna happen. Heck, in the long run, it'll probably be like homosexuality: let the media get all clogged up with the sensational stuff, the flamboyant nonsense, the tittering fantastical garbage... & eventually some of the reality will start to bubble to the top.

However, that perfectly good analogy breaks down. Very few people see a film (documentary, drama, whatever) of drag queens prancing around & decide "hey, that looks like a lot of fun -- I'm going to be gay now!!" :rolleyes:

When nonmonogamy's not presented as an "ain't that awful!" scenario, & cast instead in a positive light, every cheater (past & present, actual or potential) has a chance to rationalize their dishonesty. Anyone who's ever had a passing "what if..." fantasy can see a green light to leap on out & tell the world SCREW YOU, I'M POLY NOW.

I mean, :eek:.

Being as poly is entertainment, nobody's gonna sit still long enough to watch the parts about the problems that can develop, much less how those problems get thought through & sorted out. So the ones that "give poly a try" :( wash up with the rest of the wreckage, & often denounce polyamory as the problem.
 
Sorry for the misquote, y'all, I should check these things before posting! :D
 
The most memorable articles I've seen that I did not find as a result of a share from this very forum...the ones that came across my Facebook for instance...drove me bananas for another reason entirely.

Multiple instances of "THIS IS THE FUTURE OF RELATIONSHIPS" and other sorts of challenging, in your face, "take THAT you stodgy monogamists, we hip kids are doing this THING and soon EVERYBODY'S gonna be doing it, HA!" nonsense BS. It's revolting. It's sensationalized because more clicks equals more advertisement. A well thought out treatise on the reality of polyamorous life is not as clickbaity as a slap in the face for the Great White Majority.

I have talked to so many normal monogamists who have said that they don't see how poly could work, because it sounds like so much drama and a trainwreck waiting to happen. Well, with that speaking individual's perspective on relationships, it would probably be precisely that.

I feel pretty successful as a polyamorist, despite the fact that I chose to be with one partner after a year of it. When I was a teenager, I was happily slutting, and I used to get sad when a FWB would find a "real girlfriend" and could no longer visit me for sex unless it was cheating. I used to sadly ask the question, why can't we all be cool with each other, and with this? Why does it have to be this way? Do we not have the freedom to choose and act otherwise? I was poly at heart, perhaps, even then. The lines between friendship and sex and romance and acquaintanceship were very blurry for me, and the labels not very important.

When my quad relationship ended, I did not and still do not, view that as failure, but rather as a necessary and inevitable evolution. I still feel that I have relationships with these folks...just of a milder flavor. This is very different from many that I know who expect and nearly demand a certain level of huffy hostility between themselves and an ex partner. I don't do hostility. I don't wanna. I have been called a sociopath for this! That's how foreign these ideas are, to many folks that I know.

The fact that I was the way I was, as a teenager even...probably has less to do with "born this way" biological factors, and more to do with early childhood socialization, in my opinion. I had to learn to cope with my own set of family stuff, and it shaped how I interact with other humans. What makes me feel good socially, what makes me feel bad. Certainly the cognitive and social flexibility was in place early on, the groundwork somehow laid down.

Now I consider my ex. His attachment style is so strictly mono and very insecure, and also has causes in his childhood. If he tried to do poly, it would be a trainwreck, exponentially larger than what already tends to happen in his mono relationships.

And the misconception of it being all or mostly about sex is going to prevail in a society where plenty of people think that males and females don't even have any business speaking to one another unless someone is trying to get laid. That mindset is hopelessly toxic and flagrantly untrue.

I will say that with poly, as with BDSM... What I have gained in tools for my relationship toolbox, ideas on how to be more fair and loving and how to ethically approach certain kinds of conflicts and issues, and holy crap the ability to confront and process my own issues, from the COMMUNITIES... Maybe it doesn't make for a sexy headline, but that's where the real gold is. Honestly, I don't know which has taught me more, the poly community or the BDSM community. It would be a very tough call.
 
I suppose it's no surprise if magazines print sugarcoated portraits of polyamory, they may be thinking that a cheerful article is a popular article. But I don't know if that's the actual trend; I don't read many articles.
 
Back
Top