What is holding people back from trying out poly?

[IntuitiveWriter]

Hello,

On my own journey, I found that jealousy and fear of losing my partner were the main issues that kept me from trying something poly. While I was single again and discovering what I wanted to happen next in my life, I wrote a couple of books that introduced new types of relationships and the idea of LOVE-relationship networks.

Now that I have changed my own mindset and feelings about the traditional relationship model, I look around at the world and cannot quite understand why it is still so popular. It even seems unfair and unsocial to me when I see how many people lack LOVE these days.

I see in many relationships that often it is only one of the two who wants to stay closed, and then the fear of loss hinders the other partner and they just accept it. I fully understand that.

But singles? What stops them from trying?

My introduction gives a bit more information about me and the vision of LOVE relationship networks.

 

[kdt26417]

Hello IntuitiveWriter,

The world we live in is obsessed with monogamy. Cheating is looked upon more forgivingly than polyamory, as at least a cheater acknowledges that what they are doing is wrong. People are raised with the notion that monogamy is the only healthy kind of relationship. They are steeped in that notion. It is reinforced by everything from parents to movies. It takes a lot of work to overturn that programming. For most of us, polyamory isn't even thinkable. It doesn't compute. So, long story short, brainwashing is what is holding people back from trying out poly. At least that is my theory.

Regards,
Kevin T.

 

[IntuitiveWriter]

People are raised with the notion that monogamy is the only healthy kind of relationship, they are steeped in that notion. It is reinforced by everything from parents to movies. It takes a lot of work to overturn that programming.

Hi Kevin,

Absolutely! I wrote some lines about this in my vision of intentional communities that are based on love relationship networks:

"Having received the same training as all of us, I once believed in male leadership, because that was what I was trained to do. And I believed in monogamy as it was the only relationship religion offered to me as a child."

It's like a hidden matrix that no one sees.
I wrote a poem about this, as well:

 

[SEASONEDpolyAgain]

It can be lack of time and other resources, e.g., if your husband already does very little around the home, and in terms of childcare, and then he wants a new girlfriend, of course you're going to say no.

 

[Magdlyn]

"Having received the same training as all of us, I once believed in male leadership, because that was what I was trained to do. And I believed in monogamy as it was the only relationship religion offered to me as a child."

It's like a hidden matrix that no one sees.
I wrote a poem about this, as well:

View attachment 4638

Happily, my religion does not conform to patriarchal, monogamous, or polygynous (one man, multiple women marriage) beliefs and practices, AT ALL. I was raised in a Christian church, but my parents only did that to me to please their own parents. Once I turned 13 my parents revealed to me that they were atheists and told me I'd have to make up my own mind about religion.

I'd already begun much earlier (when I was 9 or so) to doubt many things in the Bible. There were too many contradictions and unscientific irrational things we were told to swallow without question. So at this point, all bets were off. I started pulling away from my indoctrination. I was more or less without belief in anything divine, but I was still curious about humanity's attempts to create goddesses and gods in their own image, from time immemorial. So I began to seriously study Eastern religions first, then New Age things like tarot, horoscope, crystal power, and channeling. Finally I discovered that a goddess-based and earth-based religion made the most sense to me.

I did not become a full-blown Wiccan, but my thoughts, feelings, beliefs, and practices had similarities to it.

24 years ago I had the courage to begin to delve into the origins of Judaism (BCE) and the early Christianities (first four centuries CE). This led to studying the other ancient religions of the mid-east and Europe in more detail, where I found goddess-based worship in Babylon, Egypt, Greece, Assyria, Crete, etc. Then, to my surprise, I found that the ancient Hebrews worshipped several goddesses: Asherah, Inanna, Ishtar, Astarte and others. Asherah was even considered Yahweh's consort in some areas, by some Hebrews. I found that Asherah bore a resemblance to the Egyptian goddess HatHor.

The worship of the goddess and the attendant power of human women was only gradually defeated by brute force, harsh patriarchal laws, and the outright control of women, economically and sexually. It is truly a horrific and shameful history, and it is all laid out in the Bible itself, for all to read!

To this day, even in the West, we live in a patriarchy, where most people consider the divine to be male. Even Catholics, who clearly worship a goddess, will deny it and say they just honor Mary as the mother of god's son. lol

All that to say that modern polyamory is a female-led movement, based on the empowerment of women, who can now have sexual and economic autonomy, and do not need to depend on men merely to have the basics of shelter and food and safety for their children. They can have children with a partner, or with an ex-partner or husband, or by the use of a sperm bank, without shame and with pride. They don't need to marry their child's bio-dad just to legitimize the child and "give it a name." They can give their own child their own last name, thank you very much.

Many men feel incredibly threatened by this. They continue to use their brute force to get women "back in their place." We can not and must not allow this to happen. One way for women to fight back is to take their right to multiple lovers (of any gender), if drawn to do so. Men can help by getting over the subconscious idea that they "own their woman," thinking that "allowing" her to date other men is shameful and belittling, emasculating, cuckolding. Know that women own themselves and they have a right to date multiple lovers, just as men have always had the power to do. Everyone just needs to make sure they use protection to prevent STIs and unwanted pregnancies.

 

[LoveBunny]

There's plenty of reasons someone might look at poly, or try poly, and decide it's not for them that are NOT fear, monogamous programming, patriarchy, or caring about what religious people think.

Some people find poly stressful and unfulfilling. For a monogamous-by-orientation person, poly r'ships can seem shallow & unstable.

Being with someone poly can feel like only half a r'ship. You get less romantic vacations with your partner because they're splitting time. You get less nights with them in your bed because they're splitting time. They may be unavailable to you more often than in a monogamous r'ship because..... they're splitting time. And if you're monogamous by orientation, it doesn't work to just fill in your time with other partners, because when you're really into someone, you only want to share sex & romantic love with THAT person, and no one else will do.

If you've been neglected in r'ships, or felt like you're "not enough," poly can open old traumas and wreak havoc on your confidence. (I've found, personally, when someone tells me/shows me that they only want me, it relaxes my nervous system. For someone poly, that might feel stifling.)

Many people don't have the bandwidth for multiple partners, don't want to do all the dating and processing and negotiating and scheduling. They have other priorities in life.

Sexually, one might feel safer and happier in a closed loop where they don't ever have to worry about other people's bodily fluids.

Some value stability, depth & interdependence over autonomy & variety.

 

[Magdlyn]

There's plenty of reasons someone might look at poly, or try poly, and decide it's not for them that are NOT fear, monogamous programming, patriarchy, or caring about what religious people think.

Hi. I am not sure if you're addressing me or Intuitive Writer, but I felt a little called out. I didn't mean to say there weren't other reasons to not want to practice open relationships or polyamory. I was just addressing the religious-monogamous programming point in his poem. Your other reasons for being mono are, of course, perfectly valid.

That's why I said a woman could seek multiple partners if drawn to do so. If I were single, but a mother of small kids, for example, I wouldn't have time or bandwidth to date multiple people. Hell, I probably wouldn't be able to date even one person if I had kids under the age of 8 or so.

Some people find poly stressful and unfulfilling. For a monogamous-by-orientation person, poly r'ships can seem shallow & unstable.

Being with someone poly can feel like only half a r'ship. You get less romantic vacations with your partner because they're splitting time. You get less nights with them in your bed because they're splitting time. They may be unavailable to you more often than in a monogamous r'ship because..... they're splitting time. And if you're monogamous by orientation, it doesn't work to just fill in your time with other partners, because when you're really into someone, you only want to share sex & romantic love with THAT person, and no one else will do.

If you've been neglected in r'ships, or felt like you're "not enough," poly can open old traumas and wreak havoc on your confidence. (I've found, personally, when someone tells me/shows me that they only want me, it relaxes my nervous system. For someone poly, that might feel stifling.)

Many people don't have the bandwidth for multiple partners, don't want to do all the dating and processing and negotiating and scheduling. They have other priorities in life.

Sexually, one might feel safer and happier in a closed loop where they don't ever have to worry about other people's bodily fluids.

Some value stability, depth & interdependence over autonomy & variety.

 

[LoveBunny]

Hi, not tryna to call anyone out, I read that you clearly said "IF she was called to" and I agree. She should. (P.S.. I've researched in depth and written about the Minoan era of Cyclades islands circa 1625 BCE. So fascinating!!!!!)

I do think a lot of poly people assume monogamous folks are just old-fashioned or brainwashed or busy fighting their programming (I used to kind of smugly think that.) Just pointing out that, especially nowadays, lots of people are choosing monogamy consciously. And, of course, if polyamory can be an orientation, so can monogamy.

Same as it might not make sense for a gay man to try sleeping with a woman just to see, it doesn't make sense for everyone to try polyamory.

 

[zestyzed]

My spouse and I were happily monogamous for years, and it wasn't any fear or anything that kept us that way. We talked about it and were open to the idea, but ultimately we felt fine how we were. It seemed like a lot of work to deal with more relationships, and neither of us were feeling driven to seek it out. Then she met someone she clicked with and wanted to open up our marriage, so we did. It is more work, but now it feels worth it.

 

[IntuitiveWriter]

Hi Magdlyn, thank you for the details on your spiritual background, quite a journey! When we talk about goddesses, we for sure need to talk about Gaia, and the other planets and stars, most of them with a female energy. But that is another (super interesting!) topic ...

All that to say that modern polyamory is a female-led movement, based on the empowerment of women, who can now have sexual and economic autonomy, and do not need to depend on men merely to have the basics of shelter and food and safety for their children.
(...)
Many men feel incredibly threatened by this.

About the rivalry between Yin and Yang, well, we need to find true, loving balance now. I also believe that women need to take the first step into their freedom, and I am actually writing about this in some of my poems and fictional stories. But it needs to be in harmony with men, step by step, guiding each other, not one against the other.

When men feel threatened (and I see that happening now in this new time), there is something wrong going on, we need to do this together. This also needs a lot of forgiveness and a lot of loving trust and super good, honest communication on both sides.

 

[IntuitiveWriter]

It can be lack of time and other resources, e.g., if your husband already does very little around the home, and in terms of childcare, and then he wants a new girlfriend, of course you're going to say no.

That's why it may be better for some to live in a relationship network and not in just seperate poly relationships. Then, if trust and some form of love is there, the childcare can be shared.

 

[IntuitiveWriter]

Being with someone poly can feel like only half a r'ship. You get less romantic vacations with your partner because they're splitting time. You get less nights with them in your bed because they're splitting time. They may be unavailable to you more often than in a monogamous r'ship because..... they're splitting time. And if you're monogamous by orientation, it doesn't work to just fill in your time with other partners, because when you're really into someone, you only want to share sex & romantic love with THAT person, and no one else will do.

I can relate to this especially in the beginning times of a relationship when I was "biologically in love" with someone, with all focus completely on my partner, missing her even during short times of not seeing each other. When this turned into a more stable and more balanced love feeling, I was able to also feel love for others (although I have not lived out this part yet). Then, I actually felt MORE love in general, also for my partner, giving her more kisses than ever.

If you've been neglected in r'ships, or felt like you're "not enough," poly can open old traumas and wreak havoc on your confidence. (I've found, personally, when someone tells me/shows me that they only want me, it relaxes my nervous system. For someone poly, that might feel stifling.)

Wow, yes, that is a huge topic, that definetely needs a lot of loving attention, loving care and loving, honest communication on both sides.

Many people don't have the bandwidth for multiple partners, don't want to do all the dating and processing and negotiating and scheduling. They have other priorities in life.

Yes, life gets more intense in many ways, and there is much more work to do. And I think especially when people are caught up a lot in the work hamsterwheel, there may just not be any capacity and time, good point.

Sexually, one might feel safer and happier in a closed loop where they don't ever have to worry about other people's bodily fluids.

True!

Some value stability, depth & interdependence over autonomy & variety.

For me, stability and depth are as important as autonomy. It needs to be in perfect balance to be fulfilling. And variety ... and continously dating: why is it always about having more and more (fluid) partners? Can we not find stability with two or three partners with whom we may have different types of closeness (different permissions) and then stop looking for more? When new people come into our lives naturally, we can hold hands, hug them, feel LOVE, but we don't have to be sensual with everyone new. That brings in a lot of stability.

 

[SEASONEDpolyAgain]

That's why it may be better for some to live in a relationship network and not in just seperate poly relationships. Then, if trust and some form of love is there, the childcare can be shared.

People want their partners to step up. Not their metamours.

 

[LoveBunny]

"For me, stability and depth are as important as autonomy. It needs to be in perfect balance to be fulfilling. "

An ex partner of mine, a married ENM guy who has his wife of 30 years, then maintains several casual sexual r'ships on the side, presented me with the following, which he got from one of his poly girlfriends. I've been thinking about it a lot.

OPEN EASY DEEP

Realistically, most mortals can only accomplish 1 or 2 of these in a relationship. All 3 is somewhat of a mythical beast.

"Can we not find stability with two or three partners with whom we may have different types of closeness (different permissions) and then stop looking for more? When new people come into our lives naturally, we can hold hands, hug them, feel LOVE, but we don't have to be sensual with everyone new. That brings in a lot of stability."

I agree, but why not stop at ONE partner? And of course, for some people poly-fidelity such as you describe is too closed.

One thing I disliked about my last foray into poly was how I felt like it stifled the variety within us as a couple. Instead of exploring the multitude ways of being between the two of us, he sought his variety without instead of within.

 

[Magdlyn]

People want their partners to step up, not their metamours.

I can see many reasons why people would want their monogamous partner, their child's biological parent, to step up and do as much child care as possible. In a mono couple, we like to assume that the mother and father both do equal amounts of child care, especially if both parents also work outside the home. No parent should spend tons of time out enjoying themselves and neglecting their children, as if they were child-free.

And I totally hate the men that come here who decide they are poly while their wives are pregnant and start dating another woman all fancy free, while the pregnant mother is left home alone, uncomfortable, unmassaged, perhaps even underfed and dehydrated, etc. And then after baby comes and needs basically-round-the-clock care, the father is off having uninterrupted sex, eating dinners out, enjoying adult conversation and media, sleeping all night with his lover.

But in reality, humans have always sought their community for help with the children. In my opinion, it should not be left up to just the two bio parents to raise their children. Many of us rely on other family and friends for help with our kids. Some cultures rely on greater social support too. Some countries provide a LOT of help with the kids, (free child care and/or a hefty monetary benefit) so both parents can work outside the home if they want, or stay home to do the child care, and also have time for self-care to prevent burnout.

Another benefit of greater social support for children is to guard their safety when they are being neglected or abused by their bio parents or designated guardians (grandparent, aunt/uncle, family friend, step parent, etc.).

My point is, the issue is nuanced these days. We don't want "deadbeat" neglectful dads. But on the other hand, a dad who is devoted to being a good breadwinner might be absent a lot just because he's struggling to make enough money to feed, house and clothe his family... The stay-at-home mother still needs help with taking care of the daily needs of the children.

Then, a single working mother might depend on her extended family to do child care so she can earn an income to feed, house and clothe her children.

In the olden days (Neolithic, Bronze and Iron ages), when people lived in small tribes or small communities, it was understood that all children belonged to the tribe, and all adults were responsible for their comfort and safety. The kids could run around the village or longhouse or cave or cluster of huts and know that older children, teens or adults were watching out for them, offering snacks, kissing booboos, offering a lap to sit on or a back to ride on, making sure they didn't wander off into the woods or fall off a cliff, teaching them life skills, etc. Also, being responsible for other people's bio kids gave people who were not breeding (queer people, people with disabilities preventing childbirth, older people, etc.) the chance to enjoy the children, and to feel useful and more engaged with the community.

Okay, I'm done. I've put a lot of thought into this topic lol

 

[ref2018]

But in reality, humans have always sought their community for help with the children. In my opinion, it should not be left up to just the two bio parents to raise their children. Many of us rely on other family and friends for help with our kids. Some cultures rely on greater social support too. Some countries provide a LOT of help with the kids, (free child care and/or a hefty monetary benefit) so both parents can work outside the home if they want, or stay home to do the child care, and also have time for self-care to prevent burnout.

Another benefit of greater social support for children is to guard their safety when they are being neglected or abused by their bio parents or designated guardians (grandparent, aunt/uncle, family friend, step parent, etc.).



In the olden days (Neolithic, Bronze and Iron ages), when people lived in small tribes or small communities, it was understood that all children belonged to the tribe, and all adults were responsible for their comfort and safety. The kids could run around the village or longhouse or cave or cluster of huts and know that older children, teens or adults were watching out for them, offering snacks, kissing booboos, offering a lap to sit on or a back to ride on, making sure they didn't wander off into the woods or fall off a cliff, teaching them life skills, etc. Also, being responsible for other people's bio kids gave people who were not breeding (queer people, people with disabilities preventing childbirth, older people, etc.) the chance to enjoy the children, and to feel useful and more engaged with the community.

Okay, I'm done. I've put a lot of thought into this topic lol

We still have those "villages" in the US (and elsewhere). They are called fundamentalist religious cults by people who are not in them. Except they don't usually

guard their safety when they are being neglected or abused by their bio parents or designated guardians (grandparent, aunt/uncle, family friend, step parent, etc.).

(Sorry, I know there are still tribes in Africa and Papua New Guinea and places like that where they are not fundie cults, but you know we have had a few of those come through here.)

 

[zestyzed]

We still have those "villages" in the US (and elsewhere). They are called fundamentalist religious cults by people who are not in them. Except they don't usually

(Sorry, I know there are still tribes in Africa and Papua New Guinea and places like that where they are not fundie cults, but you know we have had a few of those come through here.)

There do exist intentional communities where this sort of communal child rearing is practiced in the West, without the kind of coercion and domination associated with cults. And there are plenty of non-traditional families out there as well, where such practices have developed organically out of necessity. But in the dominant culture in the West, such communities are rarely celebrated, if ever. It serves the hegemony to keep us atomized to the extent possible, to prevent the larger power structure from being challenged.

 

[ref2018]

There do exist intentional communities where this sort of communal child rearing is practiced in the West, without the kind of coercion and domination associated with cults. And there are plenty of non-traditional families out there as well, where such practices have developed organically out of necessity. But in the dominant culture in the West, such communities are rarely celebrated, if ever. It serves the hegemony to keep us atomized to the extent possible, to prevent the larger power structure from being challenged.

I know this is one that's been around for a while. https://www.thefarm.org/. These generally reach a certain size where things start to break down and they have to stop accepting new members. The Farm started out strictly monogamous though, and I'm not sure where they stand on that topic today.

I like their cookbook, though.

 

[SEASONEDpolyAgain]

humans have always sought their community for help with the children

I agree and I've had partners from communities where this is just how things are done. However, that's very, very rarely with a metamour or sister-wife. It's actual family, friends and neighbours. Not women your husband has organised into a harem. That's not the village most people want or need.

 

[SEASONEDpolyAgain]

I know this is one that's been around for a while. https://www.thefarm.org/. These generally reach a certain size where things start to break down and they have to stop accepting new members. The Farm started out strictly monogamous though, and I'm not sure where they stand on that topic today.

I like their cookbook, though.

Is that where the midwife Ina mae is? She delivered a good few of my friends' children.