Poly Relationships: For or Against. Why?

[huskys]

I feel the same about this as I do about any kind of relationship. If it's agreed upon and working for those involved, more power to them. What makes a relationship work is mutual love, trust and respect...not the gender or number of people.

That having been said, I don't think it would work for me.

How can you have trust if you are sleeping with more than one person??
Do you put a limit on the number? Are there curfew times? My house at this time etc.
I'm not tring to critisize btw I'm just curious as to how it would work???

 

[LD_Tickler]

How can you have trust if you are sleeping with more than one person??
Do you put a limit on the number? Are there curfew times? My house at this time etc.
I'm not tring to critisize btw I'm just curious as to how it would work???

Sleeping with another (specific) person wouldn't be considered a violation of trust in such a relationship.

 

[Deleted member 66627]

I believe Crystal means someone you're in love with but aren't sleeping with.

This. Thank you. Sorry about that.

 

[Deleted member 66627]

How can you have trust if you are sleeping with more than one person??
Do you put a limit on the number? Are there curfew times? My house at this time etc.
I'm not tring to critisize btw I'm just curious as to how it would work???

I understand. I don't know a lot about it like those that are or have been involved in it either and am hoping to have the chance to learn more with Bella being on the show. 🙂

I think the trust thing would be as far as having open communication. Just as you would in any other relationship.

 

[huskys]

Might tune into this show, is it your usual 11.00 pm time slot?

 

[Deleted member 66627]

Yes. 🙂 11 PM Eastern. We're lucky enough to have Bella with us who can school us all. If you can, call in. 🙂

 

[SapphireRose]

From my point of view, it could hurt or help an already stable monogamous relationship.

Allow me to explain:

It could hurt if it was done in a selfish manner. For example, if one person "decided" they were poly due to the fact that they were secure in every other aspect of their relationship but sexually. Or, in a D/s relationship, if the Dom was not satisfied with his/her sub and "needed" another person to fill that void, as said before.

It could help if BOTH parts of a monogamous couple realize that they are struggling sexually or emotionally, but still care enough to try a different approach to stabalizing their relationship. Sometimes, through a third (or fourth etc.) pair of eyes, you realize how much you do love and want to be with a person (NOT THROUGH JEALOUSY).

I don't really know if I am for or against, I have honestly tried things both ways...I don't know where I fit in yet. Still working on it I guess. One thing is for certain, in a poly relationship of any kind, EVERYONE in that relationship needs to be informed sexually and emotionally.

 

[huskys]

Yes. 🙂 11 PM Eastern. We're lucky enough to have Bella with us who can school us all. If you can, call in. 🙂

Just might do that.
I'll put on my best Aussie accent. lol 😉

 

[sasaxrah]

Let me start off by saying that I think the fact that polyandry is illegal is as ridiculous as gay marriage being illegal in 48 states. Let people do what makes them happy, and don't reward only certain kinds of relationships.

For me, I've never tried. I was pretty hurt when a past gf did some minor cheating, but that was because we had agreed to be monogamous. I can't imagine doing it in a young relationship. I've heard of it working out well for couples when they've been monogamous for years. I'm not terribly interested in trying it, as I'm very happy with monogamy right now. I also wouldn't say never.

 

[LD_Tickler]

I hate to bring politics into this (no I don't) but I think a huge reason you find people against polygamy, and that it's commonly illegal, has to do with more than the practice of loving/sleeping with/whatever multiple people.

The fact is routine practice of polyandry tends to happen in conjunction with gender oppression, arranged marriages, enforced familial isolation, and all that stuff.

It's rarely an issue of what two adults of equal standing and options are willing to do. I think that's where most of the legislation and opposition is targeted.



Also, somebody is really going to have to explain to me what the difference is between having a really good friend and engaging in non-sexual polyamory (wherein you love somebody outside your relationship but don't sleep with them).

 

[BellaRisa]

Also, somebody is really going to have to explain to me what the difference is between having a really good friend and engaging in non-sexual polyamory (wherein you love somebody outside your relationship but don't sleep with them).

It's about love; you're not deeply in love with someone who's just a friend. For instance, there are many, many poly relationships where two of the people involved are BDSM play partners, very much in love, who tickle or spank or whatever; but their play isn't of a truly sexual nature and they don't have sex. Many vanilla poly couples spend time together and are truly in love, but don't have sex for whatever reasons 🙂

 

[LD_Tickler]

It's about love; you're not deeply in love with someone who's just a friend. For instance, there are many, many poly relationships where two of the people involved are BDSM play partners, very much in love, who tickle or spank or whatever; but their play isn't of a truly sexual nature and they don't have sex. Many vanilla poly couples spend time together and are truly in love, but don't have sex for whatever reasons 🙂

Interesting, thanks. That makes a lot of sense to me in the BDSM context you provided, but not so much in the vanilla. It calls into question what, if anything, being "truly in love" is.

 

[BellaRisa]

Interesting, thanks. That makes a lot of sense to me in the BDSM context you provided, but not so much in the vanilla. It calls into question what, if anything, being "truly in love" is.

Being in love doesn't have to involve sex, it's about the heart and soul. There are many couples who can't have sex, for personal or physical reasons, but no one would deny their love and passion for one another

 

[vladtickleman22]

Interesting topic. I'm not really sure how i feel about it. Always kinda been of the mindset that if people are not hurting anyone, who gives a crap what they are doing with their own lives.

 

[BostonTickling]

I think it really boils down to the individuals involved. If there is a genuine understanding on both sides, I think it is very possible for a poly relationship work. I honestly think every situation is unique, and it takes two very specific types of people. Jealousy and Possessiveness usually has a tendency to creep into most relationships, so it takes a lot of work.

 

[Perduabo]

Its not for me. I'm an old-fashioned one person gent that I can devote al my love and attention to

But for those individuals who are for it hey, if everyone in the party is consenting then I see nothing wrong with it. If they can make it work and be happy then kudos to them, they're not hurting anyone.

Polygamy is something I think the government should keep its nose out of anyway. Like I said, not for me, but I won't judge those who do participate in it.

 

[BellaRisa]

Its not for me. I'm an old-fashioned one person gent that I can devote al my love and attention to

But for those individuals who are for it hey, if everyone in the party is consenting then I see nothing wrong with it. If they can make it work and be happy then kudos to them, they're not hurting anyone.

Polygamy is something I think the government should keep its nose out of anyway. Like I said, not for me, but I won't judge those who do participate in it.

Just an FYI, monogamy isn't old fashioned, it's very VERY modern compared to multi-person relationships; heck, the Bible will tell you that 🙂

 

[Deleted member 66627]

Wasn't it more of the norm to be involved in multiple relationships years and years ago, then just one?

I reckon I read somewhere that it was even a sign of a Man's status. How many wives he had, or something.

 

[Redmage]

I understand wholly. 🙂 However, there are some folks out there that are against it in however/whatever term you want to place it. And they shouldn't feel like they're 'wrong' for not always being for it.

If they place barriers in the path of those for whom it's right, or if they would do if they could, then I'm sorry, they are wrong.

 

[Redmage]

I hate to bring politics into this (no I don't) but I think a huge reason you find people against polygamy, and that it's commonly illegal, has to do with more than the practice of loving/sleeping with/whatever multiple people.

The fact is routine practice of polyandry tends to happen in conjunction with gender oppression, arranged marriages, enforced familial isolation, and all that stuff.

I think you mean "routine practice of polygamy." I know of no country/culture in which polyandry is routine.

Regardless, those who think this way aren't thinking clearly. The fact that a society that oppresses women also practices polygamy doesn't mean that a society that practices polygamy will therefore oppress women.

Honestly, though, I think the basic political objection is simply that polyamory is "unchristian."

 

[Redmage]

How can you have trust if you are sleeping with more than one person??

Simple: you do it openly, with the knowledge and consent of everyone involved. If everyone knows, and everyone agrees, then how is there a loss of trust?

Do you put a limit on the number? Are there curfew times? My house at this time etc.

In my case I live with two of my partners. I have "dates" with other people, just like any other sort of dating, except that both of my wives know about it.

One of my wives has a lover in Seattle. Sometimes she goes up to spend a week with him; recently he came down and spent a week with us.

I'm not tring to critisize btw I'm just curious as to how it would work???

It works differently for different people. The only essential rule is that everyone involved agree.

 

[LindyHopper]

The way I have always seen it is this... if I cannot fulfill my partners needs and he feels that he needs to seek out someone else to fill the gaps left by me, than he does not need to be with me. I am obviously not what he needs. And the same goes for me if I am the one who is not being fulfilled. If I feel the need to go elsewhere, than the person I am with evidently is not the one for me.

I think the notion that one person has to be the end-all, be-all of your universe puts an awful lot of pressure on a relationship. How many people on this forum have been frustrated and unhappy because their partner was perfect for them in every way except, say, tickling? Isn't it dumb to think you should walk away from the person you want to spend every day with, raise your children with, grow old with... just because they don't fulfill your fetish needs? Isn't is also dumb to think you should just forever forgo that part of who you are, when it could be possible to satisfy those desires without hurting your primary relationship?

Also, I would not want to worry about getting a sexually transmitted disease from him through this other person who may not be seeing him exclusively either. Condoms are not fullproof for protection as they can sometimes slip off leaving the partner (me) wide open for exposure.

Then agree not to have sex with anyone else. Very simple. I'm pretty sure that sexual intercourse is NOT the primary purpose of the vast majority of poly relationships.

 

[Skipadeedoodah]

I think this is an awesome show topic, and an even awesomer thread topic.

From where I stand right now, I don't think I'd be comfortable in a polyamorous relationship. However, if something is introduced to you in the right way, you never really know what you're into or not into until you try it.

I am curious about this in love without sex thing though. I understand what Bella said about two people into the same kinks playing (i.e. spanking, tickling, whatever) and having it not be sexual. But I have harder time swallowing the idea on the vanilla end. Two people, romantically in love, but not having sex?? I get that sometimes people are physically incapable of having sex, and they can still be in love, but in my opinion, sex is a staple in a romantic relationship. It's what draws the line between a friendship and romance. I'd have a very difficult time being in a romantic/non sexual relationship long term. I think in the end, I'd end up feeling like we were just friends.

 

[Redmage]

Then agree not to have sex with anyone else. Very simple. I'm pretty sure that sexual intercourse is NOT the primary purpose of the vast majority of poly relationships.

I don't know that I'd say it's the primary purpose of most monogamous relationships - at least not if the relationship has any staying power.

If you mean that most poly relationships are sexual but don't involve intercourse, then that may be an overstatement. Definitely it's not uncommon for intercourse to be limited to one partner, but neither is it uncommon for a poly relationship to be centered around a fluid-bonded group, with others outside that group limited to non-intercourse forms of sexual expression.

Nor is this always about STDs. I was in a relationship with a lady once who had no problem with intercourse (with condoms, of course), but who reserved kissing as a special expression of intimacy between herself and her husband.

I think the most common standard of sexual expression in poly relationships involves regular STD testing for all partners, and condoms for intercourse with all but a few partners, or one partner. But it's entirely negotiable. It sounds as though Ms Chaos just isn't cut out for poly, so I'm guessing such negotiations simply wouldn't work for her.

Which, in one sense, means more for the rest of us. 😉

I am curious about this in love without sex thing though. I understand what Bella said about two people into the same kinks playing (i.e. spanking, tickling, whatever) and having it not be sexual. But I have harder time swallowing the idea on the vanilla end. Two people, romantically in love, but not having sex?? I get that sometimes people are physically incapable of having sex, and they can still be in love, but in my opinion, sex is a staple in a romantic relationship. It's what draws the line between a friendship and romance. I'd have a very difficult time being in a romantic/non sexual relationship long term. I think in the end, I'd end up feeling like we were just friends.

Well, here are a couple of examples I know of.

I know a poly quad - two men, two women, living in the same house and raising children together. There is a sexual relationship between the men and the women (hence the children 😉 ), but both men are straight. Yet the men do love one another, and not exactly in the way they love their own brothers.

My own wives love each other dearly - in fact if either of them thinks I'm neglecting the other one, believe me I hear about it. 🙂 And again, this isn't a sisterly sort of affection, but neither is it sexual.

I don't know if this is what Bella meant by non-sexual romantic love, but I don't know what else to call it.

 

[Redmage]

Inhibitions about this can get very strange - even irrational at times. I had a (brief) relationship some years ago in which the lady broke up with me because she couldn't handle the fact that my wife knew about her! She would have been fine with a secret affair, but coming home with me and meeting my wife just freaked her out.

I never did figure that one out fully. My pet theory is that she knew "the rules" for an affair - they're party of our cultural baggage. But in a relationship where the wife knew about her she was a fish out of water. She didn't know the rules, and that scared her. But it's also possible that the whole idea of seeing another woman's husband just made her feel guilty, and she could process that guilt only if she didn't have to look the other woman in the eye.

Some people have issues. Some people have subscriptions.