Do you consider poly an orientation or a relationship style?

[bampirevat]

I might be wrong, but what I've seen on this forum so far is that, in general, poly is considered more of a relationship style than an orientation.

However, I don't necessarily agree with that, at least in the context of my life. Relationship style is something I worked on with every partner I've had and it's something we create together. But I am conflicted recently. I believe that I have the capability to romantically love more than one person, but it doesn't necessarily mean that I want to pursue a poly relationship.

I see it the same way I look at my sexuality. I am bisexual, but I am in a straight-presenting relationship. This doesn't invalidate my sexuality in any way. It's just that I chose to be with a man.

While I might have the capability to love multiple people, I don't want to be in a poly relationship if my partner is not okay with that. I know this might be a controversial choice. But this relationship is more important to me than any relationship I've ever had, and thus I value it (and my partner's opinion/preferences) above any other potential relationship.

What is your stance on it? Do you think it's an orientation, a choice or both?

Thank you in advance for your insight,
Bee x

 

[SEASONEDpolyAgain]

I think it depends on the person. It's a personal perspective. I can't argue that it isn't an orientation for you. How we come to our identifies is a process rooted in the social sciences. Not the hard sciences.

 

[LaminarFlow]

For me it is definitely an orientation. Monogamy has felt very unnatural since a young adolescent. Now that wouldn't mean I couldn't "live monogamously" and be saturated at one, but for me, the option to be able to love more should be there.

 

[bampirevat]

I think it depends on the person. It's a personal perspective. I can't argue that it isn't an orientation for you. How we come to our identifies is a process rooted in the social sciences. Not the hard sciences.

Oh yes, of course! I am just interested about how other people view it. I am still discovering my poly side, so any insight from more experienced people gives me more perspective on the topic.

If you are comfortable with answering, how is it for you?

 

[bampirevat]

For me it is definitely an orientation. Monogamy has felt very unnatural since a young adolescent. Now that wouldn't mean I couldn't "live monogamously" and be saturated at one, but for me the option to be able to love more should be there.

If I catch feelings for someone, there's not much I can do about it. But it doesn't mean that I want to pursue a relationship with that person if it puts my current one in jeopardy. This might be a little dramatic, but I am prepared for some sacrifices.

 

[Quasar]

It is both in my situation. I am able to love more than one person, and I choose to want to be with them.

 

[SEASONEDpolyAgain]

I am just interested about how other people view it. I am still discovering my poly side, so any insight from more experienced people gives me more perspective on the topic... How is it for you?

Oh, right. Poly forums often have a debate where people say what one it is for everyone. Some places even have rules forbidding you from saying it is one or the other. It's weird.

Anyway, for me, I'd still say both. There are parts of it that are completely aligned with other aspects of my sexuality. I definitely think my Queerness and my polyness are linked, but that's because of my shift from hereronormativity rather than something intrinsic. It's an aligning of values that occurred when a heteronormative (and by default, monogamous) relationship became something I knew wasn't for me.

What I wouldn't say is that I'm Queer because I'm poly. It would be more (but not completely) accurate to say I'm poly because I am Queer.

At the same time, I choose to structure my relationships in the way that I do. I've changed how I structure them over time. I don't do polyamory quite the same as I used to, and I'm happiest at this time with that change. I'd be unhapppier if I didn't change. So in theory, there could be a time where I choose to not have polyamorous relationships at all, because I'm happiest at that time in one or no relationships.

That speaks of polyamory as a chosen relationship style, rather than an intrinsic orientation.

 

[LaminarFlow]

If I catch feelings for someone, there's not much I can do about it. but it doesn't mean that I want to pursue a relationship with that person if it puts my current one in jeopardy. this might be a little dramatic but I am prepared for some sacrifices.

That's okay. Some people are poly by orientation and choose to live monogamously, and close or not open their relationship. Even after years of doing polyamory, some people go back to monogamy. It depends on your wants and needs at that certain time.

 

[Evie]

For me, I'm in the "both" camp.

I've given monogamy a shot a few times because I thought I had to, but it really didn't work for me. Honestly, I'm more on the RA end of the spectrum. But polyamory is more than just being happy with being in a polycule (as opposed to a dyad), it's a set of skills that enable that polycule to function. So there's the relationship style of it. Personally, I think polyamory is harder than monogamy simply because there are more people involved. It's harder than RA because there are more commitments.

 

[Magdlyn]

I've been in the poly community for many years, and in my experience, being poly can be an orientation or a choice. I've seen people explain their involvement in poly relationships from both places.

For me, I am wired poly. I've always been able to have fond romantic/sexual feelings for more than one person at once. I forced myself to live mono for decades, mostly from social pressure, since I am older and polyamory wasn't really an option for most. We didn't even have the term! I felt nothing but relief when I finally extricated myself from monogamy, and regretted not doing it sooner. I love the freedom of going from one partner to another, and having alone-time in between as well, to love myself. I feel fulfilled this way.

But other people may live happily mono for years, until suddenly, when in a long-term happy mono relationship, a certain other someone comes along, tilts their world sideways, and forces them to reconsider everything they thought they knew about adult relationships.

 

[GalaGirl]

I didn't vote because there's no option for "It depends on the person" or "Sometimes it's both." I think this:

• For some, it is an orientation.
• For some, it is a relationship model or relationship structure that they choose to do.
• For some, it is both of those things.
• For some, it is neither of those things. They want to have something else for themselves -- monogamy or some other kind of thing.

GG

 

[Magdlyn]

I didn't vote, because there's no option for "It depends on the person" or "Sometimes it's both."

You can vote twice, I noticed.

 

[SEASONEDpolyAgain]

I see it the same way I look at my sexuality. I am bisexual, but I am in a straight-presenting relationship. This doesn't invalidate my sexuality in any way. It's just that I chose to be with a man.

But to explore more, this is more about poly/mono than anything else. Nobody suggests that when a straight guy gets in a monogamous relationship, he loses attraction to all women. So why would a bi mono woman lose attraction to all women just because she partnered with a man? She's still attracted to men and women, she's just got a relationship agreement and incentives not to break it.

While I might have the capability to love multiple people, I don't want to be in a poly relationship if my partner is not okay with that. I know this might be a controversial choice. But this relationship is more important to me than any relationship I've ever had, and thus I value it (and my partner's opinion/preferences) above any other potential relationship.

How is this different to people in a monogamous relationship? I think a lot of people, perhaps especially men, feel the same about why they don't seek other sexual or romantic partners. They don't want to lose the partner they have because that relationship is either genuinely fulfilling enough, or adds to their life in other ways more than having additional relationships would.

A lot of people who feel this way happily identify as monogamous despite the fact they'd consider other options with a game partner.

Another identity that is more encompassing is ambiamarous. I think that might be a better term for people who can be content in a monogamous relationship with a compatible partner. I think polyamorous might be a more apt term for those of us who simply could not feel content in a relationship with exclusivity agreements, even with an otherwise highly compatible partner.

That's not to say I couldn't have a "proper" polyamorous relationship with someone ambiamarous. It just speaks of the fact that they could potentially still be happy if we were not.

 

[kdt26417]

Hello Bee,

I think it depends on the person, and on their circumstances. For some people it's a relationship style, a deliberate choice and a concrete set of actions. For others it's an orientation, a feeling deep within that exists independent of choices. There are lots of monogamists who are attracted to multiple people, they just choose not to act on those attractions. So I voted both. It is both a relationship style, and an orientation. And it depends, from one person to the next.

For me it is mostly an orientation, as I have long had crushes on multiple people, and the idea of sharing has never really bothered me. But it is a relationship style for me as well, as I am choosing to physically live a poly life, in my circumstances. I just would always feel oriented toward poly, even if my circumstances didn't give me opportunity to live it.

I also think that polyamory -- as an orientation -- can exist along a spectrum. So if someone was 60% polyamorous, and 40% monogamous, they would probably prefer a polyamorous life, but they could still live monogamously and be pretty happy. Whereas if someone was 90% polyamorous, and 10% monogamous, it's very unlikely that they could be happy in a monogamous life. Hopefully that makes sense.

Just some thoughts,
Kevin T.

 

[bampirevat]

You can vote twice, I noticed.

Yes, I left this option because I know some people see it as both.

I forced myself to live mono for decades, mostly from social pressure, since I am older and polyamory wasn't really an option for most. We didn't even have the term!

This is so interesting to me! Reading that you found yourself and your people makes me genuinely happy. I come from a pretty conservative country, so I did not have much space for self-discovery, but I left it a few years ago and since then I live in a modern western country. it opened my eyes to many forms of love, identity, orientation and more I had no idea existed! Now that I am finally settling down here, I have realized that there are more similarities than differences between me and my poly friends, so here I am.

 

[bampirevat]

It's a set of skills that enable that polycule to function.

I've started realizing that recently which is why I reached for help and insight on this forum. it's definitely not as easy as saying "let's open our relationship" and counting that jealousy and unhealthy attachments won't screw things up.

even if I choose to stay in my mono relationship, the skills I can learn from all of you and the perspective you give me are invaluable. I know that once I start therapy it will get easier but it's a few months away and learning more about polyamory before that can only be helpful.

 

[bampirevat]

I also think that polyamory -- as an orientation -- can exist along a spectrum. So if someone was 60% polyamorous, and 40% monogamous, they would probably prefer a polyamorous life, but they could still live monogamously and be pretty happy. Whereas if someone was 90% polyamorous, and 10% monogamous, it's very unlikely that they could be happy in a monogamous life. Hopefully that makes sense.

it makes a lot of sense actually and is very helpful. one of the reasons why in my case it's mostly an orientation is that I see just by posts on this forum how many forms of poly exist, and even though I don't fit with any of them, I know my feelings are real and experiences of other people don't invalidate them. I would say I'm 60/40 (straight/gay) in my bisexuality so I am thankful for the reminder that it can be a similar case with poly.

I always really enjoy your insights Kevin so thank you for responding to my post

 

[bampirevat]

That's okay. Some people are poly by orientation and choose to live monogamously, and close or not open their relationship. Even after years of doing polyamory, some people go back to monogamy. It depends on your wants and needs at that certain time.

I am young so sometimes I need the reminder that the current situation is not set in stone and relationships change overtime. I don't know where I will live in a year, let alone how this newly discovered side of me will impact my life. so thank you for that perspective.

 

[Bobbi]

I don't want to argue someone's right to decide this for themselves, and I mostly stay away and let people decide for themselves, but you asked, so I'll give my opinion.

Definition: the practice of engaging in multiple romantic (and typically sexual) relationships, with the consent of all the people involved. (Basic Google search.)

I think your own statement supports it's a relationship style for you. I do prefer "love style."

I believe that I have the capability to romantically love more than one person, but it doesn't necessarily mean that I want to pursue a poly relationship.

Everyone can love multiple people. They are called feelings and they do not discriminate. We all can hate multiple people at once, and we can love multiple people at once. EVERYONE HAS THIS ABILITY. That's how feelings work. With sexual orientation, not everyone is the same, and it doesn't change, no matter what type of relationship you are in. You will always be bisexual.

Polyamory is the ACT of having multiple romantic partners with the consent of all involved. Now, I agree that two people can consent to be in a polyamorous relationship, and both can choose not to date others (essentially mono, but not), and still be poly, but if two people agree to be monogamous, then you are monogamous until you change that agreement, unless you are a cheater. It's still not poly.

That's the argument that it's a relationship agreement or structure.

I do understand that, for some people, the aversion to monogamy is so strong they could never do it and because of that they see it as an orientation, not a choice, and I see where they are coming from.

That being said, could I say only being with people of a specific race is an orientation, because I never want to be with someone outside of that race?

Just because you feel something strongly enough to think it's who you are, doesn't make it so.

The problem with using polyamory as an orientation is that it suggests that a monogamous partner must accept it as who they are, and will need to accommodate their poly partner. Orientation is being used to hurt and manipulate others so they don't have to end the monogamous relationship. (It is ended and becomes polyamorous even though one person doesn't want poly.) It's used as an excuse to move on through monkey branching. I've never (or incredibly rarely) seen a person come out as gay and stay in their heterosexual marriage/relationship. They leave to find the right person or persons for them.

For people who have been practicing poly for a long time and will only live poly, I have no issues with them saying it's an orientation to them. But for anyone coming from monogamy and trying to flip their relationship structure, I have big issues with them "coming out" as poly.

 

[SEASONEDpolyAgain]

The problem with using polyamory as an orientation is that it suggests that a monogamous partner must accept it as who they are and will need to accommodate their partner as poly. Orientation is being used to hurt and manipulate others so they don't have to end the monogamous relationship.

This is reddit nonsense. If I'm a straight woman in a heterosexual marriage and my husband comes out as bisexual, I'm not in any way compelled to remain with him just because he is really bisexual. I can decide to break up, especially if this revelation is going to mean that our relationship has to change somehow.

The redditors profess that taking away someone's ability to speak of poly as an orientation will reduce poly under duress. It won't at all. Poly under duress occurs because of complex social issues which leave an imbalance of power in relationships and a general scarcity of resources. It's because people can't afford to divorce and men have the majority of the earning power. It's really not because someone's wife believes their husband was born poly, so they have to accommodate their natural being.

I have no problem telling a married man with four kids that whether or not he's naturally poly, he needs to forget other women and be a decent dad. Nobody else should have a problem saying that, either.