People are
generally uncomfortable with relationship arrangements that go against the
cultural norms of the society they live in. Marriage, in particular, is
an institutionalized way of organizing relationships based on rigidly defined
social norms. Deviating from these well-defined social norms tends to
scare people because having a rigid understanding of any concept is easier than
recognizing nuance and complexity. It's easier than allow more flexibility and
personal freedom. It's easier than allowing for deviations that might produce
uncertainty or stimulate critical thinking. A rigid construction allows for a
very clear roadmap for life-- a wash, rinse, and repeat lifestyle.
And that's where
polyamory comes in. Polyamory is a philosophy toward love, intimacy, and
relationships that differs greatly from the rigidly defined norms of traditional
marriage. It is defined as, "the state or practice of having
more than one open romantic relationship at a time."
People who learn
about polyamory often react strongly against it and are quick to immediately
reject it. It's difficult for many people to understand how you can have more
than one fully-committed, emotionally intimate relationship. It does
not fit our rigid social norms about relationships. It's different and to the
mainstream, different is scary...it's perceived to be uncertain...it's perceived
to be unstable. It's that "otherness" that makes so many people uncomfortable.
It produces a fight or flight response. People attack difference or run from
it.
But despite
these rigid social norms, you can pave your own way. You can have both. You can have fully committed intimate
relationships with more than one person.
You can fully commit yourself to multiple people. You don’t need to be exclusive to have
commitment. You can have multiple
commitments, love multiple people, and maintain multiple relationships. You can value them all and be secure in them
all. The existence of one commitment
doesn’t invalidate or deprecate the other.
All commitments can be strong, fully committed ones. As one gets stronger, the others do not get
weaker.
So, why do
people react so strongly against non-exclusive love? Our society conditions us
to believe that exclusivity and commitment go hand in hand. We are told that love is a limited resource
and that exclusive love is the ideal and most romantic love of all. You see it in movies, songs, books…but to
quote Robert Heinlein:
“Jealousy
is a disease, love is a healthy condition. The immature mind often mistakes one
for the other, or assumes that the greater the love, the greater the jealousy —
in fact, they are almost incompatible; one emotion hardly leaves room for the
other.”
While
it’s true that you can multiple commitments that you are “fully committed’ to,
the one thing that is limited is a person’s time. And that is sometimes an issue with poly
people. Poly people don’t have an issue
with loving many, but they don’t have all the time in the world to love as many
people as they could potentially love.
As such, they have to be careful about how they delegate their time and
resources. They must nourish and nurture
each relationship and make sure they have enough time to foster them all.
The
book “The Ethical Slut” talks extensively about poly relationships. It talks about navigating one's time and
making sure to appreciate all your partners and relationships. That’s why it’s important for “poly” people
to recognize that they cannot spread themselves too thin. There are many, many people in the world that
you could find to “love” if you opened yourself up to loving those people. At the same time, it would be impossible to
give a large number of people the time they would want and deserve to nurture a
truly loving relationship. Heinlein
talks about time in regard to poly relationships, and he says that:
“The
more you love, the more you can
love — and the more intensely you love. Nor is there any limit on how many you can love. If a person had
time enough, he could love all of that majority who are decent and
just.”
So,
for poly to work, people must be open and honest in their communication. They must express their wants and needs and
establish what their goals and expectations are in their relationship(s). They must be honest with one another and
treat each other with dignity and respect.
In fact, poly people typically view themselves as committed and
fidelitous with their various partners, but they just have a different
definition of that compared with monogamists.
For poly people to be “faithful,” means that they are abiding by the
promises and agreements they made about their individual
relationships.
Like
plants, it’s also important to note that people and relationships need different
levels of nurturance. Some require more
“sun” than others to maintain. Some you
water once a week. Some you water less
frequently. What’s important is that you
consider the needs of each individual relationship and you provide the right
level of nurturance for that relationship.
Like
some plants need more sun and some need more water, some relationships will
require more time and resources—that may vary too, throughout the relationship,
depending on each individual’s needs at the time. What’s important is that you are sensitive to
the needs of the relationship. What’s
important is that you delegate enough time and energy to the needs of each
relationship and that you’re sensitive to changes in those
needs.
One
of
the best things about polyamory is that you can offer different things to
different people that you love.
Different people will appreciate different things about you. Different people will be nurtured by
different qualities in your personality.
Different people can also offer you different things from their own
personalities and experiences.
Why
limit yourself to only having one person that you are intimately close to
in your life when opening yourself up to more committed relationships can
enhance your life and provide you with a larger human family? Why limit the amount of support and
love? Why limit your sense of
family? Why limit your sense of
community?
Why
shrink our worlds so small and limit what we can draw from when there is so much
out there? We can learn so much from
different people, and we can teach different people different things. Why
rely only on the families that we were given by accidents of birth when we can
create our own? It's about making the
life you want. It's about not limiting your life based on arbitrary, rigid
social rules.
Scholars have
also discussed how polyamory allows people to enhance their sense of community
and expand their support system. One of
the best quotes is from Echlin who writes that:
“It
is a hankering for community ... we have become increasingly alienated, partly
because of the 20th century's replacement of the extended family with the
nuclear family. As a result, many of us are striving to create complex and deep
relationships through extended networks of multiple lovers and extended
families ... Polys agree that some people are monogamous by nature. But some of
us are not, and more and more are refusing to be shoehorned into
monogamy."
While strict
monogamy and traditional marriage works for some people, monogamy as a dogma is
problematic, because it limits peoples’ viewpoints and perceptions about the
types of relationships they may want or can have. It’s as if you walked around looking at life
through a paper towel tube and only saw what you could see through that
hole.
There’s no reason to limit, but
our society encourages these limits because they are “safe” and “known.” They provide for (on the face of it) a more
“stable” social order that is more predictable and efficient for our capitalist,
consumerist economic system. But, why serve that system when you can serve
yourself? Why serve that system when you can serve a community that you make
with others? One that is localized and that serves you in return.
Polyamory is
also about not being bound by binary thinking and allowing yourself to live life
in the shades of grey. It acknowledges
that you can be both fully committed and open to loving others at the same
time—these two are not mutually exclusive concepts merely because they sound, on
the face of it, like opposites.
It can be said,
again and again. And it should be said, again and again.
The answer is
both.