Radical best friends with benefits?

P

polyamy

New member
So I'm not particularly new to ethical non-monogamy, but I am new to self identifying as poly and learning more about ENM/poly culture and relationship dynamics. I've read the ethical slut and more than two, and I've listened to several hours worth of polyweekly podcast and I've been reading a lot of the forums here and participating in some of the threads.

Anyway, to get to the point: all of what I've learned seems to have me thinking that polyamory is strikingly close to friends with benefits without the casual implication of the title.

For example, let me describe my relationship with my best friend:
My best friend and I met in college where we spent a ton of time together because we enjoyed the same activities, had classes together and ate the same foods. We would cook together a lot when he lived on campus because he didn't have a kitchen and I don't like cooking for one. We still spend a lot of time together even though he lives several hours away now. We still go camping together (which really bonded us), we go on multi-day trips together, we talk on the phone to keep updated about each other's lives, we've been there for each other through a lot, we can talk about anything with each other, we give each other massages when we're sore, and always share a bed/tent because we like to cuddle. We're very committed to our friendship and plan to be friends for life. I wouldn't be surprised if we moved across the country together because we're interested in living in the same places. We say "I love you" to each other all the time and express our appreciation for the strong friendship that we have. -to me, this really feels like a committed relationship minus the sex and attraction.
And the ethics in play seem soooooo similar to the poly ethics I read about in More Than Two. Best Friends are open and honest, friends don't try to restrict you from being friends with anyone else, and they understand when you need to make time for other friends. They meet your family and your other friends, and the people you love. They're intimately a part of your life. If they get jealous about time your spending with new friends they don't enforce rules about you being closer to other friends. They don't demand to be considered your one and only best friend. They like hearing about your dating life. And friends typically don't blame each other for their feelings. They seek support. They share life without giving up their autonomy. They don't coerce each other into being friends.
When I think of ideal poly relationships for myself, I really do imagine having multiple intimimate friendships (similar to the friendship I described) with the added intimacy of sex and physical affection. And I can't think of anything I personally find more romantic than that.

This might be an overly innocent/naive perspective. But really a good poly relationship seems like people who are very close to each other, sharing intimacy, and radically practicing the supportive & loving role of a best friend.
It's almost as if polyamory is the practice of having multiple sexual partners that you treat with the same care, loyalty, and honesty you treat friends with and you work towards accepting their other partners as people you may or may not meet that add value to your partner's live (just like mutual friends). And as people with multiple sexual partners, you discuss the things that are necessary for informed sexual consent.

Has anyone else thought like this? Does it sound like I have a grasp of what poly is or am I not fully understanding it? Is poly really just like radically treating your lovers as close friends with the consent of everyone involved?
If this is what I want, should I call it something other than polyamory?
As far as titles go...
I do like the implication of minimal drama that comes with the idea of friendship. But the general concept of friends with benefits seems to contain a loose definition of friends, rather than actually being a good friend that sticks around and is really there for you (not just a fair-weather friend).
And just as it's a radical idea to have polyamorous relationships, I think it's a radical idea to treat your sexual partners as best friends.

I really appreciate any thoughts on this.

Thank you!
 
I mean, that's my goal too. When my (sadly former, details elsewhere) best friend introduced Poly to me, that's kind of how my imagination saw primary partners at least. Time will tell if the reality can be maintained, but I think it's what a lot of us are striving for on some level.

Although this does rub up against another societal "norm" that is wholly different from monocentrism but equally as bullshit and in need of change: the idea of keeping sexual/romantic relationships away from friendships. In spite of all those "I married my best friend" sentiments, there's still a societal throughline of "keep them separated," and more damning euphamisms I'd prefer not to write out in full (BBH, DSWYE, etc). Whereas for a lot of us, physical intimacy is enhanced through a real friendship.
 
Last edited:
That definitely describes how my relationships work in an ideal world - it’s not always been that, because I (and my partners) are not always ideal people, but it’s definitely what I want to aim for - really the spots at which things fail are the ones in which I *forget* that this is a best friend and let romance overwrite that with cultural scripts (of what a relationship “should” look like). (See also large parts of my blog regarding Knight.)

But, otherwise? YES my loves are the people I can share everything with and who tell me to do the hard things and hold me during the tough times and who if I’m lucky I get to kiss a bunch and get naked with.
 
Not sure how radical that is, but I might be in my own bubble. I had a best friend in high school and we had a sexual relationship as well, but not a romantic one. I had girlfriend's and she had boyfriend's. The sexual part only changed after I was in a mono marriage.

Throughout the course of my life I'd say most of my lovers were my best friends, setting aside that "best" usually means one at the top. Maybe best of friends is more accurate.

Putting friendships on the same plane as sexual and romantic partners is approaching relationship anarchy. Maybe that's something you can look into.
 
Hello polyamy,

As a rule of thumb, I define polyamory as, "relationships in which any one person is romantically involved with two or more other people, with their knowledge and consent." There is some leeway on how one might define "romantically." Generally speaking it implies a sexual connection which is "more than just sex." As in, people who are "in love with each other." People who are "emotionally involved with each other." Sometimes it can mean people who are romantically but not (necessarily) sexually involved with each other, especially when one or more of them is asexual. Given all that leeway, "radical best friends with benefits" works as one kind of polyamory, and honestly "just friends with benefits" can work as another kind of polyamory if one stretches the definition a bit. This is my perspective; there are differing views on how polyamory should be defined, and I am willing to work with other people's definitions as needed. As far as I'm concerned, the definition you're suggesting is A-okay.

Sincerely,
Kevin T.
 
polyamy said:
I'm not particularly new to ethical non-monogamy, but I am new to self identifying as poly and learning more about ENM/poly culture and relationship dynamics. I've read the Ethical Slut and More Than Two, I've listened to several hours worth of polyweekly podcast, I've been reading a lot of the forums here, and participating in some of the threads.

All of what I've learned seems to have me thinking that polyamory is strikingly close to friends with benefits, without the casual implication of the title.

For example, let me describe my relationship with my best friend: we met in college, where we spent a ton of time together, because we enjoyed the same activities, had classes together and ate the same foods. We would cook together a lot when he lived on campus, because he didn't have a kitchen and I don't like cooking for one.

We still spend a lot of time together, even though he lives several hours away now. We still go camping together (which really bonded us), we go on multi-day trips together, we talk on the phone to keep updated about each other's lives, we've been there for each other through a lot, we can talk about anything with each other, we give each other massages when we're sore, and always share a bed/tent because we like to cuddle.

We're very committed to our friendship and plan to be friends for life. I wouldn't be surprised if we moved across the country together, because we're interested in living in the same places. We say "I love you" to each other all the time, and express our appreciation for the strong friendship that we have.

To me, this really feels like a committed relationship, minus the sex and attraction.
Click to expand...

Are you female and your friend a gay man? Because I could see doing all this with one of my gay male friends, but not with a bi or straight guy! I can't imagine all that intimacy not leading to horniness on one of our parts, at least occasionally.

Heck, sometimes a woman can get attracted to her gay guy friends as well.

Of course, what you are describing is just a friendship, not a friendship with benefits. I don't personally really believe in FWBs. I believe in play partners, where you have sex but don't really do much platonic stuff. I have a very hard time not feeling at least a little romantic about someone I like enough to have sex with, and see regularly. But I guess some people can do this. It's kind of a newer phenomenon.

I mean, even if I wasn't madly in love with someone I was having sex with on a regular basis, I'd still call him a boyfriend (or her a girlfriend) in my mind. Calling sex "benefits" just doesn't sit well with me.

And the ethics in play seem soooooo similar to the poly ethics I read about in More Than Two. Best friends are open and honest, friends don't try to restrict you from being friends with anyone else, and they understand when you need to make time for other friends. They meet your family and your other friends, and the people you love. They're intimately a part of your life.

If they get jealous about the time you're spending with new friends, they don't enforce rules about you being closer to other friends. They don't demand to be considered your one and only best friend. They like hearing about your dating life.

And friends typically don't blame each other for their feelings. They seek support. They share life without giving up their autonomy. They don't coerce each other into being friends.

When I think of ideal poly relationships for myself, I really do imagine having multiple intimate friendships (similar to the friendship I described), with the added intimacy of sex and physical affection. And I can't think of anything I personally find more romantic than that.

This might be an overly innocent/naive perspective. But really, a good poly relationship seems like people who are very close to each other, sharing intimacy, and radically practicing the supportive and loving role of a best friend.
Click to expand...

Lifelong pair bonding, with all the implications of marriage, unequal power, economic dependence, etc., has been imposed on society ever since the dawn of agriculture, and the invention of the idea of individual ownership of land and goods (and wives and slaves). It's not natural for humans to be monogamous. When we lived in tribes, we were promiscuous and could have several lovers at once, and still be economically secure. The whole tribe would be responsible for the children. A mother didn't need to live in servitude to one man to make sure her children survived.

Read Sex at Dawn.
It's almost as if polyamory is the practice of having multiple sexual partners that you treat with the same care, loyalty, and honesty you treat friends with, and you work towards accepting their other partners, as people you may or may not meet, that add value to your partner's life (just like mutual friends). And, as people with multiple sexual partners, you discuss the things that are necessary for informed sexual consent.

Has anyone else thought like this? Does it sound like I have a grasp of what poly is, or am I not fully understanding it? Is poly really just like radically treating your lovers as close friends, with the consent of everyone involved?
If this is what I want, should I call it something other than polyamory?

I do like the implication of minimal drama that comes with the idea of friendship. But the general concept of friends with benefits seems to contain a loose definition of friends, rather than actually being a good friend that sticks around and is really there for you (not just a fair-weather friend).

And just as it's a radical idea to have polyamorous relationships, I think it's a radical idea to treat your sexual partners as best friends.
Click to expand...
 
Magdlyn said:
Are you female and your friend a gay man? Because I could see doing all this with one of my gay male friends, but not with a bi or straight guy! I can't imagine all that intimacy not leading to horniness on one of our parts, at least occasionally.
Click to expand...

It is possible...I know that it is a common meme that women and men can't be friends without it leading to sexual tension. I am not attracted to gay (or BI) men. I will admit that I do get attracted to my straight male friends (and they to me) - but that doesn't mean that you have to act on that attraction!!

Magdlyn said:
Heck, sometimes a woman can get attracted to her gay guy friends as well.
Click to expand...
...or her straight female friends! But that is somehow seen as "different"...(Why?)...

Magdlyn said:
Of course, what you are describing is just a friendship, not a friendship with benefits. I don't personally really believe in FWBs. I believe in play partners, where you have sex but don't really do much platonic stuff. I have a very hard time not feeling at least a little romantic about someone I like enough to have sex with, and see regularly. But I guess some people can do this. It's kind of a newer phenomenon.
Click to expand...

I don't know that it is "newer" so much as it is now acceptable to talk about! For some of us - Sex is easy, friendship is moderately complicated, and relationships are hard.

Magdlyn said:
I mean, even if I wasn't madly in love with someone I was having sex with on a regular basis, I'd still call him a boyfriend (or her a girlfriend) in my mind. Calling sex "benefits" just doesn't sit well with me.
Click to expand...

OK. I hear that that is a problem for you - but some of us feel differently Love (and feelings in general) are hard for me. Sex is easy - "benefits" seems a perfectly valid term for "non-romantic" sex. "Rubbing sensitive bits together for mutual pleasure" seems, to me, like a perfectly valid option. If we only do that, and nothing else, then it is a ONS. If we do that, and other things (that friends do), then it is FWBs (in my mind).
 
When I think of ideal poly relationships for myself, I really do imagine having multiple intimimate friendships (similar to the friendship I described) with the added intimacy of sex and physical affection. And I can't think of anything I personally find more romantic than that.
Click to expand...

Whatever works for you.

Just be sure to calibrate how you use words with the people you are with so you are all on the same page. As well as what words in what circles.

I had an argument with one of my friends once who REALLY resisted "labeling things."

I told her I didn't care what she wanted to call her lover on her own. She didn't even want to call him that. Where to me if you share sex with someone, that's a lover. She was using words like "fuckboy" and "fwb" and whatever.

I said to call him whatever so long as they both enjoy it in their adult circles. But at MY house? Because there's children around a lot? She could have a choice between

  • This is Mr Y. Ms X's friend.
  • This is Mr Y. Ms X's boyfriend.

So pick one! Because I'm not having one of my kids go up to grandma and go "Hi Grandma. This is Mr Y. Ms X's fuck boy." or "Hi Grandma. This is Mr Y. Ms X's FWB."

She got it then, and picked "friend."

This might be an overly innocent/naive perspective. But really a good poly relationship seems like people who are very close to each other, sharing intimacy, and radically practicing the supportive & loving role of a best friend.
Click to expand...

That made me think "To have a dating partner who is supportive and loving is radical? Who is also a friend? That's just a basic expectation to me."

But I get that other people have other experiences with how love and sex unfolds for them. The triangular theory of love model kinda illustrates some of that. Different people approach relationships differently and have different places they like best. Not everyone is after the relationship escalator thing either.

I cannot get close romantically or sexually to people if I'm not friends with them first. I dislike sharing total stranger sex. Even with FWB, I've been actual friends with the person first. Not like “I had a booty call but I've become casual friends too.” From that direction.

I go from the other direction. “ We've are good friends. We've decided to have some casual sex on the side for a short while.”

Your descriptions above? I would put them in different buckets for myself.

GENERAL HEALTHY RELATIONSHIP (FRIEND OR DATING PARTNER)

  • Open, honest
  • Don't monopolize your schedule
  • Don't stop you from being friends or spending time with others
  • Don't try to isolate you from other friends and family
  • Don't blame shift
  • Don't force things

BEST FRIEND

  • all the above
  • spend a lot of time together
  • plan camping trips together
  • sharing a tent together
  • chat on phone
  • be supportive
  • talk about anything
  • want to be friends for life
  • meet relatives
  • (maybe) plan to move cross country togethe

LONG TERM DATING PARTNER

  • All the above PLUS
  • give massages
  • cuddles
  • Say I love you a lot
  • share sex

I do like the implication of minimal drama that comes with the idea of friendship. But the general concept of friends with benefits seems to contain a loose definition of friends, rather than actually being a good friend that sticks around and is really there for you (not just a fair-weather friend).
Click to expand...

That's what I mean about checking in with the people you are involved with and asking them how THEY use words. Like "friends with benefits."

What is that?

  • Like "Friend with Booty?" The friendship comes first? You could call if you get a flat. Cuz I'm your friend.
  • Or "Booty with Friend?" The booty comes first, casual friends second, and don't call me if you have a flat tire. Call a better friend.

Could also talk about personal boundaries.

I know some people like "fuzzy boundaries" and they kiss and cuddle their friends.

I prefer strict personal boundaries. I don't kiss and cuddle my friends. Hugs hello if they are close friends, but past that? No, thanks.

HTH!
Galagirl
 
Last edited:
Good topic, Polyamy. And lots of great thoughtful responses.

To some degree, I think that this is an issue of semantics, although not entirely. Galagirl makes an excellent point about the importance of how we label things. We use the various terms that we have coined in poly to describe things so that we all can understand each other with reasonable consistency.

I do think Kevin makes an interesting point:
As a rule of thumb, I define polyamory as, "relationships in which any one person is romantically involved with two or more other people, with their knowledge and consent." There is some leeway on how one might define "romantically." Generally speaking it implies a sexual connection which is "more than just sex."
Click to expand...

I would say there is some overlap between a "poly partner" and a "fwb", and that where that overlap begins and ends is largely subjective. Perhaps I might venture that a poly partner is a fwb with all that is expected of a friend, the sexual benefits of a fwb - PLUS - a sense of romantic love that goes beyond just sex.

I do think that hetero men and hetero women can be friends - but I do also believe that in many of those cases, that there is attraction on at least one side of the equation (as JaneQ noted though - the attraction does not have to be acted on).

My local partner, Jill, had been my "platonic" friend for several years - we shared a certain background together that had fostered a genuine friendship. Without either of us saying it, and without any overt flirtation, I do think that both of us felt some greater attraction to the other. But we did not act on it - as I was committed to my mono-marriage, and she respected that.

As my wife and I transitioned to poly, however, I began to consider the possibilities for a local partner (my wife had a partner immediately - full story in signature link below). Realizing there was an underlying attraction there, I hinted that my wife and I were considering an open marriage, to which she responded that if that were the case, that she would like to be the first to know. And soon, our friendship added benefits. But, in our case, that too evolved - from being genuine friends (with benefits) to developing true romantic feelings for each other - yet, while still remaining great friends as well.

Al
 
Last edited:
Interesting response from Mags.

I have a female friend I refer to as Blondie. We've been friends for nearly 20 years. We are very close. We were even roommates at one time and would do it again. We hug and kiss hello and goodbye. We check in with each other. We go out and do things. Sometimes we stay in and watch a movie chilling on the couch together. Everything a girlfriend and boyfriend would do, except for one thing. We have never had sex.

It's not that I don't find her physically attractive, she's hot AF. No idea if she finds me attractive. We've never discussed it. I think we just know that our idea of relationships are too different. But I'm not going to throw away a great friendship/relationship because we aren't having sex.
 
vinsanity0 said:
Interesting response from Mags.
Click to expand...

What's interesting about it? Do you disagree or agree? Polyamy spends a "ton of time" with her beloved male friend, doing all the warm cuddly things romantic couples do. Unless he is really unattractive somehow, or he finds her really unattractive for some reason, I don't understand why one or both of them desiring the other at some point would be considered to be strange, unless one or the other is gay, or asexual or aromantic or has some other issues, maybe psychological issues. Not to be harsh.

Generally, the more time het or bi folks spend together, the greater the chance is for feelings of sexual attraction to crop up. That's just how our minds and bodies work.

I have a female friend I refer to as Blondie. We've been friends for nearly 20 years. We are very close. We were even roommates at one time and would do it again. We hug and kiss hello and goodbye. We check in with each other. We go out and do things. Sometimes we stay in and watch a movie chilling on the couch together. Everything a girlfriend and boyfriend would do, except for one thing. We have never had sex.

It's not that I don't find her physically attractive, she's hot AF. No idea if she finds me attractive. We've never discussed it. I think we just know that our idea of relationships are too different. But I'm not going to throw away a great friendship/relationship because we aren't having sex.
Click to expand...

So, you "think you both know" that how you operate romantically is very different. I am guessing you mean she is monogamous, and wants a one on one thing, if she is indeed inclined to want sex or romance at all.

So, maybe she's an ice queen. Maybe she's asexual or aromantic. I dunno. You'd do her if she invited you, I guess. lol
 
I don't know. I have a close male friend who is bi, and we do a lot of the same kinds of things that polyamy does with her friend. My friend and I have been friends for nearly 25 years. But we have an amazing friendship and connection. I don't want to throw in the drama of sex.

I don't consider him a partner, though, but I do consider him my best platonic friend. He knows me so well, has seen me through all my various partners and I can talk to him about literally anything. We have fun and hang out and travel together, we just don't have sex.
 
Magdlyn said:
What's interesting about it? Do you disagree or agree? Polyamy spends a "ton of time" with her beloved male friend, doing all the warm cuddly things romantic couples do. Unless he is really unattractive somehow, or he finds her really unattractive for some reason, I don't understand why one or both of them desiring the other at some point would be considered to be strange, unless one or the other is gay, or asexual or aromantic or has some other issues, maybe psychological issues. Not to be harsh.

Generally, the more time het or bi folks spend together, the greater the chance is for feelings of sexual attraction to crop up. That's just how our minds and bodies work.



So, you "think you both know" that how you operate romantically is very different. I am guessing you mean she is monogamous, and wants a one on one thing, if she is indeed inclined to want sex or romance at all.

So, maybe she's an ice queen. Maybe she's asexual or aromantic. I dunno. You'd do her if she invited you, I guess. lol
Click to expand...

I thought it was interesting that you fall on the side of thinking men and women can't be friends unless one of them is ugly or gay; but maybe you are only admitting that about yourself? I do disagree with that concept, in general, though I do understand it to be true for some people.

Blondie is not asexual. We do have different views of sex though. To her it is a very serious thing. I'm much more laid back about it. Yes, she is monogamous, but the last woman I dated was as well. I really don't think I would do her if invited because of what that would entail. I don't see her as romantic relationship material. Maybe I've friend-zoned her...lol
 
vinsanity0 said:
I thought it was interesting that you fall on the side of thinking men and women can't be friends unless one of them is ugly or gay...
Click to expand...

I didn't say "ugly." Please do not put words in my mouth. I said, "unattractive for some reason." It could be looks, but that doesn't mean the person is ugly. It could be something about their personality, or hygiene, etc., etc.

...but maybe you are only admitting that about yourself? I do disagree with that concept, in general, though I do understand it to be true for some people.
Click to expand...

I am sure I'm not the only one, and it's possible to generalize.

Blondie is not asexual. We do have different views of sex though. To her it is a very serious thing. I'm much more laid back about it. Yes, she is monogamous, but the last woman I dated was as well. I really don't think I would do her if invited because of what that would entail. I don't see her as romantic relationship material. Maybe I've friend-zoned her...lol
Click to expand...

OK, so maybe the OP and her friend have different ideas about the "meaning of sex." That's entirely possible.
 
I haven't even read other people's posts yet because this made me so excited I had to respond immediately.

YES. THIS. This type of relationship is what made me poly in the first place. I have had 2 of these types of friends and they are my favorite. There's something incredibly beautiful and irreplaceable about two people connecting on this level. It makes you see love in a whole new light.

Good for you for finding this. I am jealous as my first friend like this died and the second is now monogamously married. Enjoy it! It is priceless.
 
more stuff

As my first post on here, I'm really surprised by how much discussion this has brought up. It's awesome! I want to add some things.

on the topic of inevitable attraction between 2 friends that are each other's preferred gender/sex:
I am straight, and the friend I'm talking about is straight.
I like the legos analogy when it comes to relationships - building a relationship together with the blocks you want and leaving out the ones you don't and making your own personalized structure (if you've listened to koe creation before you may have heard this before). I think there are many forms of intimacy and you can experience many forms of intimacy with or without sexual intimacy being present.
The whole idea that two available straight people of the opposite gender can't possibly just remain friends doesn't seem to have held true in my life. And I'd be rather disappointed if I found out that all the ex's I've remained friends with and the single men I'm close with were all lying to me about being satisfied with our current non-sexual friendships. Again this might be an innocent outlook but I really do think it's possible for people to be genuinely appreciative of non-sexual relationships without inevitably desiring sex, even when the appearances and sexual orientations of the individuals don't prevent the potential of mutually sexual feelings.
I have a standard for my own relationships that I want them to be intentional and not entirely subject to biological tendencies or outside influences. Acknowledging that we have choices no matter the circumstance is very important to me What's considered "natural" -according to the pre-mononormative history of humans or human biology or modern social/cultural norms- just isn't important to me.

On labels:
Yeah, I see the potential conflict with FWB and assumptions that come with that. Some very good points have been made about labels that I hadn't considered in-depth.
I do really like putting emphasis on friends, particularly best friends because it implies that the friendship is very important to you. Though I do see how calling someone your best friend could sound a little like primary/secondary language where people may think you're implying that your other friends are secondary or less important. I think you can have multiple best friends, so I didn't initially consider those implications.
-I'm still working on forming a language that describes my relationships to people outside of the relationship. Within the relationships I have or have had lately we know that we're on the same page about what we are and so do our other partners, titles aside. I'm still trying to find the right words for describing relationships to other people, even other poly people, that accurately sum up the arrangement.

casual sex vs friends vs relationships:
The Idea of sex without friendship is pretty easy for me to grasp. I've had a good bit of very fulfilling and sexually intimate connections that were one night or similarly short lived without a friendship-type relationship forming. no problems there.
I have a really hard time finding a natural line that divides platonic from non-platonic or friendship from bf/gf/so/partner. The lines seem kind of arbitrary as some people have sex + friendship but avoid falling in love, while some people are asexual and in love, and other people don't describe their romantic/sexual partners as distinctly different from friendships.
I really do relate with the concept of relationship anarchy but I'm still navigating all the subtle differences between RA, free agent poly, egalitarian poly, ethical sluthood, ethical non-monogamy and so on.
I don't really like to prescribe specific intentions, structures, or feelings to my relationships but I do like being able to describe what they are. and I like describing my general relationship style.
Maybe you guys could help me learn more about ethically non-monogamous relationship styles/philosophies in depth. I appreciate book, website, and podcast recommendations as well as personal thoughts. So far my main resources have been The Ethical Slut (book) and More Than Two (book), morethantwo.com, poly weekly (podcast) and this forum.

Thanks for all the thoughtful responses everyone!
 
Hi polyamy,

Ethical nonmonogamy is usually known as consensual nonmonogamy, or CNM. It covers open, poly, swinging, and pretty much every kind of multiple relationship other than an affair/cheating. If it's consensual and it's nonmonogamous, it's CNM. RA covers even more than that as it blurs the line between romantic and platonic. All consensual relationships and relations, to sum it up. RA does not seek to define or label things, everyone a relationship anarchist is relatively close to is simply a "friend."

You may find the following resources helpful:

A couple of other kinds of CNM are, cuckolding, and, mono/poly relationships.

Regards,
Kevin T.
 
polyamy said:
So I'm not particularly new to ethical non-monogamy, but I am new to self identifying as poly and learning more about ENM/poly culture and relationship dynamics. I've read the ethical slut and more than two, and I've listened to several hours worth of polyweekly podcast and I've been reading a lot of the forums here and participating in some of the threads.

Anyway, to get to the point: all of what I've learned seems to have me thinking that polyamory is strikingly close to friends with benefits without the casual implication of the title. I really appreciate any thoughts on this.
Click to expand...

These days it seems like there are as many versions of polyamory as there are opinions about it. Personally, I find this problematic. I ran across some really good discussions on this subject in some older posts. What do you think? Should poly be whatever anyone wants it to be, or should it be more clearly defined, and if so, what form would that take for you?
 
These days it seems like there are as many versions of polyamory as there are opinions about it. Personally, I find this problematic. I ran across some really good discussions on this subject in some older posts. What do you think? Should poly be whatever anyone wants it to be, or should it be more clearly defined, and if so, what form would that take for you?
Click to expand...

There was an excellent discussion a couple of years back on this this thread, in which many different definitions from around the web were quoted - along with lots of debate about what the best definition was.
http://www.polyamory.com/forum/showthread.php?t=91215

Most of these reflected the definition offered by Morning Glory Zell, who first used the term polyamorous in the article"A Bouquet of Lovers", published in May 1990 in Green Egg Magazine:

The practice, state or ability of having more than one sexual loving relationship at the same time, with the full knowledge and consent of all partners involved.
Click to expand...

So, to use the term polyamory as intended by its inventor, the elements of "loving" (not just sexual), "more than one relationship", knowledge, and consent should all be present. And when one reviews the definitions offered by most of the well established poly authors, these elements are always included.

The debate often centered on the idea that the best definition should be even more restrictive, with a compromise idea being that in addition to a basic definition of poly, there were also "generally accepted poly best practices". For example, couple privilege does not necessarily make a relationship "not poly" (by original definition), but it is certainly not "healthy poly" - and avoiding couple privilege might be considered a best practice.

The above quoted thread is really a quite interesting discussion of the subject - if anyone cares to revive it. (The thread OP, Ravenscroft, was later banned. Be that as it may - he did generate some interesting discussion in this thread).

Al
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top