Thoughts on Marriage and Polyamory

Dagferi

Well-known member
I am only legally married for health insurance and to guarantee that I get Butch's pension if he dies.

Honestly in this day and age there is no real need for marriage beyond protecting assets.
 

Polyglamorous

New member
For those of us who are still sappy romantics, there is always the option of marrying multiple people. It doesn't have to be legal. I view it as a milestone. I think there's a term "group marriage" or something. Marriage isn't something that's needed but it can be romantically seen as "hey, I want to do this forever" what if someone legally married no one but had a wedding with more than one person. Basically I dont see this as couple privilege, I think every relationship and develops in its own way.
 

Vicki82

Active member
Honestly in this day and age there is no real need for marriage beyond protecting assets.

See, now this I don't agree with. It's all in how you view it. I'm still a hopeless romantic and I believe that marriage means that you are promising to commit to someone forever, through the rough times and the smooth. The legal stuff? To me, that's the gravy. And I say that as a recent divorcee of a ten year marriage.

My divorce was ugly but I can't shake the idealism. I think there is something to be said for making that commitment to want to be with someone for that length of time; not just as long as it's convenient or things are good or whatnot. And absolutely, you can feel that way without being married, but to me, it just feels different. To make that promise in front of the people who care about you- it's just a ritual, but I believe it's full of meaning.

The last thing I want is to slag other people's way of life; but I have interacted with a lot of people who identify as solo poly and I know that the way that at least these particular people practice isn't a lifestyle I can embrace. It's pretty much the opposite of what I want. I want to have someone who is always on my side, even when they don't agree with me. I want a partner to build a life with together because we are better when we share our resources. I think that people give up too easily on relationships nowadays; when a new person is only a swipe away, why bother to stick it out and fix the problems? I feel that the pendulum has swung too far from people never getting divorced, to people breaking up over nothing. And I feel when you've really got some skin in the game that it motivates you to work harder to solve your problems and make it work together. No relationship is ever going to be perfect.

At the same time, I want us both to still have the freedom to interact and connect with other people in whatever way we choose within the boundaries that we've negotiated. I don't believe love has to be exclusionary, and that we should be able to pursue love or sex or play or whatever combination of those that makes us happy.

I don't think that those have to be mutually exclusive concepts. Yes, I'm aware that we are actively pursuing a hierarchy, as no other relationship will receive equal benefits legally. I'm okay with that; I don't feel that I have enough resources to devote to another primary level relationship, frankly- and my partner feels the same. It's not merely a question of emotions even when you're dating monogamously- I've seen that over and over. It's what you are willing to put into a relationship. So I don't consider myself to be open to another relationship of the level where uneven legal issues is even a concern. And as long as I'm clear in my communication with any potential partner where those limits lie, I don't think I'm being unethical in any way. Different types of connections don't have to be "less", in my opinion. They're just different.

To be honest though I was taken aback by the commentary on how "anti-poly" it is for two single poly people to get married and to plan to continue being poly. Not necessarily here, but in general.
 

kdt26417

Official Greeter
Staff member
Re (from Vicki82):
"If you knew a couple who were nesting partners, but both poly when they met and continuing to be both poly and open, what would you think if they decided to get married?"

I suppose as a rule of thumb, I would be okay with that. After all, they are nesting partners. But my opinion could be different depending on the details of the situation.
 

Taramafor

New member
See, now this I don't agree with. It's all in how you view it. I'm still a hopeless romantic and I believe that marriage means that you are

I'm pointing this out for a reason. You're basically going "I believe you should go about it this way." Or otherwise assuming how others go about it instead of checking in first. Both can be dangerous. I'm sure you never intended to speak about how others go about it though. But I do strongly believe in everyone going about anything they please in their own way. I also once assumed things myself without checking in, so I hope you understand why I express concern on the matter.

We might view it in different ways, which of course is fine. The question I now ask myself is would you end up being with someone that might view it differently? Obviously this would be someone of a loving/caring nature but they simply view marriage as, say, pointless. Or perhaps they might even consider it harmful for whatever reason.

Now sure, someone could just go "This is pointless to me". But then that displays lack of support with your view on it, doesn't it now? So when you said the words "That you are", what I think you mean is "I need someone to support me with what I consider important". This too if fine. Personally I would do something for others as long as I see no harm in it. To make another happy.

But has the other side of the fence been considered? I for example would never marry due to "cutting someone not yet met off". Meaning someone could pop up later and then it would be a position of "This person came first, you get lower rank". I have reasons for this. There can be tons of other reasons for others. This goes more along the line of what may be harmful. Harmful in general? No, of course not. But harmful to them. Simple mental health. Could you never marry if it meant being with someone happily? What if even a simple kiss could cause someone you care about to go into a mental breakdown? And no, that's not a made up example. Some people pass out on simple physical touch with anyone. Would you go "I can't be romantic" or would you then try to find other ways of sharing said romance? I ask this not to just you but to everyone reading. replace "marriage" with "Other romantic things". What can you live with and without and for what reasons? The real question is, has it been considered? Have the alternatives?

Furthermore I don't think it's about "marriage" being romantic. That's one show of support though and I realise it can be romantic to others. Frankly, if you're not "romantic" already (I use the term loosely. Others can view none romantic things in an intimate/supportive fashion but I'd call it their idea of romance) then is it wise to get married? Is marriage in this regard a test of sorts then? To state "Now we're getting serious"? Personally I get serious long before it's a factor. Some treat it as "a test". Others as "Passing the test". Think not what marriage is about but what happens IN marriage itself. Do you have to be married to do those things? Does it even have to be legal and official with paperwork? Perhaps you could even "make" a wedding and have a big party and declare your love to each other. One that isn't "as restrictive". It's real when it's real to you, not to others. Law and perks not withstanding. That said I wouldn't advise doing such a thing at the first opportunity and give matters of the heart careful consideration.

As for romance in general, think along the lines of Beauty and the Beast on the one hand, and Mr and Mrs Smith on the other. Sometimes romance has a "sick and twisted way". Sometimes the two can mingle too. Huh, Beauty and the Beast is a prime example of that come to think of it. In the mingling sense.

But my opinion could be different depending on the details of the situation.

You get a cookie for saying this. ^_^
 
Last edited:

Vicki82

Active member
Taramafor- I'm not really quite sure I understand what you're saying. I've read it multiple times and I feel like it isn't quite clear.

As to the part about future loves not getting the same status, that's true. But I have no issues with that because I do not have the time and energy to put into a relationship to feed it to what I would consider a primary level anyway. It's not something that I think will fit into my life, for a variety of reasons. And yes, I want to continue building a nest with financial entanglements with my current partner, and I have no interest in continuing to mesh financials with a new person, or living with anyone new. Those are not things that I suspect will change, and I'll happily be open about them when I meet new people and we talk about what type of connections we're open to. My partner feels similarly.

The "you" I spoke of is generic. I can't see how one can disagree with me saying that your definition is marriage is based on how you view it. That seems pretty bland to me. Of course our opinions are based on our frame of reference. So I assume I am misunderstanding the point you're making?

My partner and I are on the same wavelength in terms of what marriage means to us. As to what future partners think, it really doesn't matter if they think that it's harmful (although I would definitely want to know why because I think that's weird, or else starts making me think of those solos and might mean we are indeed incompatible romantically), or if they don't care- because I'm not going to marry them. The marriage isn't part of my relationship with that person. They can either be okay with the fact that I'm married and be willing to find a framework that supports our wants and needs within what both of us are willing to put into the relationship, or they can choose not to be and we won't pursue it. What am I missing? I have every expectation that when I find a new partner, that we'll sit down together and talk about mutual wants and needs- I don't have a box built for the relationship before I meet anyone. What I do have is a very good grasp of my own needs and what I am willing to give. I do not have to be open to a relationship of primary level if that's not what I want, and I don't. That's a perfectly valid option. If that doesn't suit their needs, they are free not to pursue a romantic connection with me.

I have no idea where you're going with the part about a kiss making someone pass out. Um, yeah... I think I would choose not to be in a romantic relationship with someone if a kiss might make them pass out. Again- we all have our own choices on what we're willing to invest in a relationship. I'm not sure that's an issue I'd want to work around. Kissing is important to me.

Furthermore, I'm surprised at all the assumptions you're making. And I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about with regards to a test, or bringing up obviously dysfunctional examples of romance. This seems to have no relation to the original discussion.

*shrugs* I'm happy to discuss... but I need to be able to follow your points.
 

SlowPoly

Member
And it kinda looks like YOU not only hate marriage, but married people, particularly those who profess to nonmonogamy, & especially those who got married WHILE nonmonogamous. That's correct, correct? :confused:

"It kinda looks like..." here seems to mean "Without evidence, I want to accuse you of..."

Privilege doesn't cease to exist when you wish it weren't there, or when you only use as much of it as you really need. Taking advantage of privilege isn't even always a conscious act. You are the one reading condemnation (or hate?) here. I didn't write it.

My life is chock full of privilege. I don't accuse people who point it out of hate. I do think dismantling systems that enforce privilege is preferable to promoting them. But I don't get to choose for everyone. Just for myself.

Congrats on all your privilege, I guess? Yay? I'm not sure what it is you want.
 

Ravenscroft

Banned
No no no -- don't use illogic to defend illogic. It's at best disingenuous.

You've clearly indicated that "privilege" is bad. Furthermore, that taking up the privilege of Couplehood after embracing nonmonogamy is especially bad.

You've said that people are bad if they "don't actually reduce their ability to benefit from its advantages." By your logic, that would be pretty much EVERY married person. Therefore, that's you not only anti-marriage but anti-married.

So, I've mostly been quasi-Liberal all my life, & I like looking for more stuff to feel guilty about, maybe a typhoon in Puerto Rico or something. :D But to really do the Liberal thing properly, I have to look for ways to atone for my despicableness, & to reach for Purity.

Clearly, YOU have achieved that state, & know how to rid yourself of malign Privilege -- else you certainly wouldn't be talking down to those who haven't.
 

SlowPoly

Member
No no no -- don't use illogic to defend illogic. It's at best disingenuous.

You've clearly indicated that "privilege" is bad. Furthermore, that taking up the privilege of Couplehood after embracing nonmonogamy is especially bad.

You've said that people are bad if they "don't actually reduce their ability to benefit from its advantages." By your logic, that would be pretty much EVERY married person. Therefore, that's you not only anti-marriage but anti-married.

So, I've mostly been quasi-Liberal all my life, & I like looking for more stuff to feel guilty about, maybe a typhoon in Puerto Rico or something. :D But to really do the Liberal thing properly, I have to look for ways to atone for my despicableness, & to reach for Purity.

Clearly, YOU have achieved that state, & know how to rid yourself of malign Privilege -- else you certainly wouldn't be talking down to those who haven't.

I suppose if you needed someone to write all that stuff you say I wrote, you've done so now. I'll let what I actually wrote speak for me, and I won't bother to read any more of your trolling.
 

dingedheart

Well-known member
Wow interesting discussion. The poly identity folks view marriage as business transaction, taxes, health insurance/ benefits.

The the coupled up poly late arrival poly folks again see marriage as names on a document however the longevity might have some privileges.

Not much talk about love or commitment OR maYbe I missed that part.

Divorce as poly free agency. Not a bad concept.

What should a struggling mono person who just got the poly bomb drop on him infer from this discussion ?
 

Marcus

Well-known member
The the coupled up poly late arrival poly folks again see marriage as names on a document however the longevity might have some privileges.

Relationship longevity has clear advantages and drawbacks, I don't imagine there are many who refuse to recognize that. The distinction you might be seeing is that not everyone conflates relationship longevity and marriage.
 
Wow interesting discussion. The poly identity folks view marriage as business transaction, taxes, health insurance/ benefits.

The the coupled up poly late arrival poly folks again see marriage as names on a document however the longevity might have some privileges.

Not much talk about love or commitment OR maYbe I missed that part.

Divorce as poly free agency. Not a bad concept.

What should a struggling mono person who just got the poly bomb drop on him infer from this discussion ?

Love and commitment are hallmarks of any relationship regardless of marital status.

I'm following this discussion because R and I are planning to get married in November. Yes, financial and legal issues are a consideration, but they're not our only reason for getting married. I am, however, VERY concerned about conveying couples privilege and want to make sure that no one else feels excluded in any way. I'm interested in hearing others' experience on this matter.
 
Last edited:

dingedheart

Well-known member
So you're saying I did miss it ??? Or it went without saying ???


Hey congrats on the up coming wedding and good luck on the marriage.

Why are you concerned about couples privilege ?
 
So you're saying I did miss it ??? Or it went without saying ???


Hey congrats on the up coming wedding and good luck on the marriage.

Why are you concerned about couples privilege ?

I'm very aware of the privileges I have as an educated, middle-class, white, cisgender person. I know better than to think that my being female, disabled, and queer makes the aforementioned privileges go away. Just like the fact that my nesting partner is a trans woman does not negate the fact that our relationship will be legally recognized in less than five months.

My particular concern is for K2. To my knowledge, she's not dating anyone other than R (yes, I know that's none of my business, really). I don't want her to feel left out or like she can't call on R when she needs her.
 
Top