Big issue, little time

[Ariakas]

You can easily be both open (dating, sex, enjoying life) and poly (adding love in the mix) they are both aspects of non-monogamy that can easily overlap.

 

[SchrodingersCat]

I'm not a big fan of moving anywhere into someones place. I think its setting oneself up for a whole lot of work and difficulties. Especially if a partner is poly! Really I think people should find their own way in the place they live first so as to not become co-dependant. Find friends, places you like to go etc.

I second that opinion. I've never known anyone who moved across the country straight into someone's house and had it work out.

It's funny that people are offended about that line. I thought it was a proven fact that most people do this more or less constantly. I could be wrong.

There's a difference between thinking "about sex" and constantly wanting to have sex with every beautiful woman you see.

It is true that humans think about sex a lot. It is not true that all humans constantly want to have sex all the time. Except teenagers, they're an exception to every generalization.

There are normal people with very active, sometimes overactive, sex drives, who want to have sex all the time with everyone they see. That's not nymphomania, either. Nymphomania is wanting to have sex all the time, and being unable to resist the temptation.

 

[AutumnalTone]

Hm. What's perplexing me now, further, is the idea that polyamory means wanting multiple relationships. Whereas for her I'm pretty sure it's the other way around. she just wants to be able to have sex with someone else. I'm not sure which one is better - for me. If either.

It sounds as though she doesn't want to do poly, but that she wants to have an open relationship. Simply wanting to fuck other people isn't poly--wanting to have serious relationships with other people is. An open relationship involves being able to fuck other people when the urge strikes.

I'd be having problems with her over the lack of honesty, myself. She waits until you're supposed to be moving 800 miles to bring up the fact that she wants to be able to fuck around? I'm thinking that's a bit late. I don't care whether it's due to an innate lack of honesty in dealing with other people or just gross disrespect for you, it's an extremely manipulative thing to do.

So, I'll echo those folks who have urged you to find your own place as soon as possible after arrival. There's a whole lot of things that need to be worked out for this relationship to be any good for you.

 

[rabbit]

Take a look at the "How do you know you're poly?" thread. I think it will give you some insight on this question.

From what I can tell there are:
-People that are innately poly and need a poly lifestyle to be happy.
-People that are innately poly but do not need a poly lifestyle to be happy.
-People that are innately mono but do not need a mono lifestyle to be happy.
-People that are innately mono and need a mono lifestyle to be happy.

Obviously this is way oversimplified and it is much more of a spectrum. There are people on this forum all over the spectrum. There are also of course lots of different styles of what constitutes poly. If you take a look at the thread I mentioned we talk about a gradient between mono and poly and also a gradient between swinger and poly. So poly means different things to different people, and you may need to get a "what would this look like on a daily basis?" type of definition worked out before you can really have this discussion.

 

[jbird]

I'd be having problems with her over the lack of honesty, myself. She waits until you're supposed to be moving 800 miles to bring up the fact that she wants to be able to fuck around? I'm thinking that's a bit late. I don't care whether it's due to an innate lack of honesty in dealing with other people or just gross disrespect for you, it's an extremely manipulative thing to do.

That's really how I was feeling when I started this thread this morning. But she seems to be letting me in on things as she comes to realize them. The timing sucks - and I'm not convinced that there isn't a destructive impulse there unrelated to poly, or open relationships, or whatever- but I can't say it's a case of deliberate lying.

Also, I'm not sure she is exactly saying she wants to be able to fuck around. She seems to expect that she will not be able to, and accepts it.

Am I wrong or is there a bit of a judgement being made that polyamorism is morally superior to other forms of non-monogamy? What does this re-defining do to the discussion about the innateness (versus choosing) of the condition? Is polyamorism more innate - or more legitimate as an identity - then "fucking around?"

Sorry if these questions seem uneducated. But with maybe moving and maybe breaking up, little time for research. I appreciate everyone's input. I don't know anyone I would talk to about this.

 

[jkelly]

Am I wrong or is there a bit of a judgement being made that polyamorism is morally superior to other forms of non-monogamy?

Oh, I don't think you're wrong about that at all. We live in a sex-negative culture; poly- people aren't immune to the effects of that, and so engage in slut-shaming frequently. If you're interested in a long essay exploring this in detail, you can find one here.

What does this re-defining do to the discussion about the innateness (versus choosing) of the condition? Is polyamorism more innate - or more legitimate as an identity - then "fucking around?"

Well, since I don't think that the innate vs. choosing question makes much sense, I would say that it doesn't make any difference at all.

 

[redpepper]

Am I wrong or is there a bit of a judgement being made that polyamorism is morally superior to other forms of non-monogamy? What does this re-defining do to the discussion about the innateness (versus choosing) of the condition? Is polyamorism more innate - or more legitimate as an identity - then "fucking around?"

Well this is a poly forum rather than an open forum, that might be why you pick that up. There has been an on going debate for some time about where the line is between each description for people. I think it is a personal line and when someone comes close to that line and describes themselves as poly when the person reading finds their actions as being more of an open nature, it can cause some discomfort for the person reading/listening.

I don't see how it relates to sex negative myself but more to do with personal boundaries of ones personal description of what their poly means to them.

 

[SayYes]

For me, it's innate. Or at least, non-monogamy is. I have always struggled with monogamy, made it clear to my husband for years that I would prefer a non-monogamous relationship, and ultimately reached a breaking point where I don't think our marriage would have survived if I had tried to remain monogamous any longer. I didn't know for certain that another actual relationship was what I wanted until I found myself in that position, so I didn't necessarily know that poly specifically was right for me, but I knew that monogamy was wrong. I tried to repress that for years, and it was never going to work.

Not everyone feels that non-monogamy is that firmly embedded in who they are, but for me, it's never felt like a choice. My opinion is that it's not necessarily something a person should try to "overcome" for the sake of someone else. But that's only my perspective, having spent years trying to do just that.

 

[EugenePoet]

Jbird, I haven't been on the thread from the beginning so forgive me if I repeat some stuff due to skimming.

You write "Is it possible that I, too, am polyamorous...?"

Yes, it's possible, and you will figure it out if you pay attention to yourself.

1. When you are in a relationship have you ever met another woman and really been fascinated by her -- herself, her personality, her quirks and intellect and emotions, and not just her body? In other words, have you wanted multiple relationships and not just multiple sex partners?

2. Imagine that your girlfriend -- who's been in abusive, crappy relationships in the past -- tells you that she met a gentle, considerate man who makes her feel happy and whole...and she wants to date him but be with you as a full-time partner as well. Do you think your immediate reaction would be jealousy and anger, or would you feel kind of happy that she met someone who helps her feel good about herself?

(I'm not proposing a litmus test for polyness, just tossing out a couple of imagination exercises which may shed light on your feelings about poly.)

My own response to question #2 is a poly response. For question #1 I'm not so sure. So: it's quite possible that you could be monogamous in some ways but poly or poly-friendly in other ways.

And therefore you could, theoretically, live happily with someone who is actively poly while not being poly yourself. Obviously: MonoVCPHG lives that way.

But you gotta know yourself, know your girlfriend, and talk, talk, talk. Poly is not sleeping around, though there are degrees: some poly relationships are more casual; some are so deeply committed they are de facto multiple marriages.

One further question you might ask yourself: why has your GF been with abusive and crappy men? What drew her toward them, and is that still a factor in her personality? If you do have an open relationship, do you think she might be drawn once again into a destructive relationship? What would that do to the relationship she has with you?

Be attentive, be careful; and always remember that we on the forum don't really know either you or your girlfriend...you're the guy on the ground and in the situation. Anything I've written could be completely wrong for you. Good luck!

 

[AutumnalTone]

Am I wrong or is there a bit of a judgement being made that polyamorism is morally superior to other forms of non-monogamy? What does this re-defining do to the discussion about the innateness (versus choosing) of the condition? Is polyamorism more innate - or more legitimate as an identity - then "fucking around?"

No judgement of superiority, just an expectation of accuracy. Some non-monogamous folks who do something other than poly claim to be poly because they think it sounds better than what they do. There are swingers who use the term "poly" in an attempt to find sex partners who aren't interested in swinging. There are people who just want open relationships who hide behind the polyamory label when they have no interest in serious romantic attachments. It's all about accuracy in description.

Just so ya know, my wife and I are poly AND we have an open relationship. We're free to have relationships and casual sex, so I'm certainly not bashing fucking around. I just expect accuracy in descriptions.

 

[FireChild]

So what has come to light during a long day of driving across nebraska, is layers and layers of lies going back at least 8 months. I am in the wrong forum. I should be in borderlinepersonality.com .

Hopefully the new job provides you the ability to find a great new place.

 

[SchrodingersCat]

From what I can tell there are:
-People that are innately poly and need a poly lifestyle to be happy.
-People that are innately poly but do not need a poly lifestyle to be happy.
-People that are innately mono but do not need a mono lifestyle to be happy.
-People that are innately mono and need a mono lifestyle to be happy.

Obviously this is way oversimplified and it is much more of a spectrum.

Actually, I think that pretty concisely sums up the poly spectrum. You're either poly or you're mono, and you either need that lifestyle or you don't. As long as we're assuming that "mono" in that description refers to love... as we've seen, things get complicated when we start talking about open relationships with respect to sex.

Just so ya know, my wife and I are poly AND we have an open relationship. We're free to have relationships and casual sex, so I'm certainly not bashing fucking around. I just expect accuracy in descriptions.

I think this is the most useful description. No one ever said that a couple being polyamorous and swingers are mutually exclusive, only that one is not the same as the other just because someone does both.

I eat beef and I eat chicken, each make me a meat-eater (analogous to non-monogamous). But eating beef is not the same as eating chicken. Some people eat beef but not chicken, some people eat chicken but not beef, but those people are all still meat-eaters. And some people are vegetarians, analogous to monogamous, meaning they eat neither meat nor chicken.