From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Polyamory (from Greek πολύ [poly, meaning many or several] and Latin amor [literally “love”]) is the desire, practice, or acceptance of having more than one loving, intimate relationship at a time with the full knowledge and consent of everyone involved. The term polyamory is sometimes abbreviated to poly, and is sometimes described as consensual, ethical, or responsible non-monogamy. The word is sometimes used more broadly to refer to any sexual or romantic relationships that are not sexually exclusive, though there is disagreement on how broadly it applies.

Polyamory can refer to the practice or status of a relationship at a given time, or used as a description of a lifestyle, philosophy or relationship orientation (much like gender orientation), rather than of an individual's actual relationship status at a given moment. It is an umbrella term that covers many orientations and modes of relationship. There is fluidity in its definition to accommodate the different shades of meaning which might be covered. Polyamorous relationships are themselves varied, reflecting the choices and philosophies of the individuals concerned.

Polyamory differs from polygamy, although the two terms are occasionally used incorrectly as if they are interchangeable. Polygamy more accurately refers to specific structures of recognized relationships, while polyamory is a personal outlook grounded in such concepts as choice, trust, equality of free will, and the idea of compersion, and newer cultural traditions distinct from the religious and cultural traditions of polygamy.


[edit] Overview

Start of polyamory contingent at San Francisco Pride 2004.

The defining characteristic of polyamory is belief in the possibility of, and value of, multiple romantic loving relationships carried out "with the knowledge and consent of all partners concerned."[1] What distinguishes polyamory from traditional forms of non-monogamy (i.e. "cheating") is an ideology that openness, goodwill, intense communication, and ethical behavior should prevail among all the parties involved. Some consider polyamory to be, at its root, the generalization of romantic couple-love beyond two people into something larger.[2]

People who identify as polyamorous typically reject the view that sexual and relational exclusivity are necessary for long-term loving relationships. Those who are open to, or emotionally suited for, a polyamorous lifestyle may be single or in monogamous relationships, but are more typically involved in multiple long term relationships.

Polyamorous relationships, in practice, are highly varied and individualized. Ideally they are built upon values of trust, loyalty, negotiation, and compersion, as well as rejection of jealousy, possessiveness, and restrictive cultural standards.[3] Such relationships are often more fluid than the traditional "dating and marriage" model of long-term relationships, and the participants in a polyamorous relationship may not have preconceptions as to duration.

Sex is not necessarily a primary focus in polyamorous relationships. Polyamorous relationships commonly consist of groups of more than two people seeking to build a long-term future together on mutually agreeable grounds, with sex as only one aspect of their relationship.

[edit] Terminology

Polyamory is a hybrid word: poly is Greek for many (or multiple) and amor is Latin for love. The word has been coined, seemingly independently, by several people, including Morning Glory Zell-Ravenheart, whose article "A Bouquet of Lovers" (1990) is widely cited as its source[4] even though the word did not appear in the article (see below), and Jennifer Wesp who created the Usenet newsgroup alt.polyamory in 1992. [5]. The Oxford English Dictionary cites a proposal for alt.polyamory as the first verified appearance of the word. However, even outside polygamous cultures such relationships existed well before the name was coined; for one example dating from the 1920s, see William Moulton Marston.

The word "polyamory" does not actually appear in "A Bouquet of Lovers", referenced above. The article uses "polyamorous", but in its original version introduced the term in hyphenated form, "poly-amorous". The article consistently uses "polygamy" as the counterpart to "monogamy". This indicates that at the time, the author was not yet using the word "polyamory", and did not consider "polyamorous" an established word either. There are no verifiable sources showing the word "polyamory" in common use until after alt.polyamory was created. The older term polyfidelity, a subset of polyamory, was coined decades earlier at Kerista.

Most definitions center on the concepts of being open to, or engaging in, a lifestyle that potentially encompasses multiple loving relationships (of whatever form) where all parties are informed and consenting to the arrangement. However, no single definition of "polyamory" has universal acceptance; two common areas of difference arise regarding the degree of commitment (when does swinging become polyamory?) and whether it represents a viewpoint or a relational status quo (is a person open to the idea, but without partners at present, still "polyamorous"?). Similarly, an open relationship in which all participants are long-term friends might be considered "polyamorous" under broader usages of the word, but excluded from some of the tighter usages, since polyamorous relationships may or may not also be polyfidelitous (non-open, or faithful within the relationship).

Members of alt.polyamory collaborated on a FAQ (frequently asked questions) post that was updated periodically, and included the group's definition of "polyamory". The latest version of the FAQ on polyamory.org, dated 1997, has this definition:

2). What's polyamory, then? (Glad you asked that. ;-) ) Polyamory means "loving more than one". This love may be sexual, emotional, spiritual, or any combination thereof, according to the desires and agreements of the individuals involved, but you needn't wear yourself out trying to figure out ways to fit fondness for apple pie, or filial piety, or a passion for the Saint Paul Saints baseball club into it. "Polyamorous" is also used as a descriptive term by people who are open to more than one relationship even if they are not currently involved in more than one. (Heck, some are involved in less than one.) Some people think the definition is a bit loose, but it's got to be fairly roomy to fit the wide range of poly arrangements out there.

In 1999, Morning Glory Zell-Ravenheart was asked by the editor of the Oxford English Dictionary to provide a definition of the term (which the dictionary had not previously recognized). The words "polyamory -ous -ist" were formally added to the OED in 2006.[1] The Ravenhearts defined and expanded the term as follows:

The practice, state or ability of having more than one sexual loving relationship at the same time, with the full knowledge and consent of all partners involved. This term was meant to be inclusive, and in that context, we have never intended to particularly exclude "swinging" per se, if practitioners thereof wished to adopt the term and include themselves... The two essential ingredients of the concept of polyamory are more than one; and loving. That is, it is expected that the people in such relationships have a loving emotional bond, are involved in each other's lives multi-dimensionally, and care for each other. This term is not intended to apply to merely casual recreational sex, anonymous orgies, one-night stands, pick-ups, prostitution, "cheating," serial monogamy, or the popular definition of swinging as "mate-swapping" parties.

Ravenhearts FAQ on Polyamory[6]

The terms primary (or primary relationship(s)) and secondary (or secondary relationship(s)) are often used to indicate a hierarchy of different relationships or the place of each relationship in the speaker's life. Thus, a woman with a husband and another partner might refer to the husband as her "primary". (Of course, this is in addition to any other term of endearment). Some polyamorous people use this as an explicit hierarchy of relationships, while others consider it insulting to the people involved, believing that a person's partners should be considered equally important. Another model, sometimes referred to as intimate network, includes relationships that are of varying significance to the people involved, but are not explicitly labeled as "primary" or "secondary." Within this model, any hierarchy may be fluid and vague, or nonexistent.

[edit] Symbols of polyamory

A symbol of polyamory.[7]

Although people who are polyamorous have adopted a number of symbols, none has universal recognition. The most common symbol is the red and white heart () combined with the blue infinity sign ().[7]

The Jim Evans poly pride flag.[7][8]

The poly pride flag consists of three equal horizontal colored stripes with a symbol in the center of the flag. The colors of the stripes, from top to bottom, are as follows:

  • Blue - The openness and honesty among all partners.
  • Red - Love and passion.
  • Black - Solidarity with those who must hide their relationships due to social pressures.

The symbol in the center of the flag is a gold Greek lowercase letter “pi” (π), as the first letter of "polyamory" . The letter's gold color represents the value that people who are polyamorous place on the emotional attachment to others, be the relationship friendly or romantic in nature, as opposed to merely primarily physical relationships.[8]

PAARC ribbon

The color scheme of the the flag was adapted (with permission) for use in the Polyamory Awareness and Acceptance Ribbon Campaign.

The symbol of ILIC (Infinite Love in Infinite Combinations).[7]

The symbol of ILIC (Infinite Love in Infinite Combinations) is a reference to the Star Trek kol-ut-shan or symbol of philosophy of Vulcan IDIC (Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations).[7][9]

Ray Dillinger's Poly Parrot.[10]

Another is the image of a parrot, since "Polly" is a common name for these birds.[10][11][12] Author Mystic Life describes this symbol an ironic reference to Parrot monogamy.[13][14]

[edit] Forms of polyamory

Forms of polyamory include:

  • Polyfidelity, which involves multiple romantic relationships with sexual contact restricted to specific partners in a group (which may include all members of that group) (e.g. group marriage).
  • Sub-relationships, which distinguish between "primary" and "secondary" relationships (e.g. most open marriages).
  • Three people romantically involved. (Commonly initiated by an established couple jointly dating a third person, however there are many possible configurations.) (Triad).
  • Relationships between a couple and another couple (Quad).
  • Polygamy (polygyny and polyandry), in which one person marries several spouses (who may or may not be married to, or have romantic relationships with, one another).
  • Group relationships and group marriage, in which all consider themselves associated to one another, popularized to some extent by Robert A. Heinlein (in novels such as Stranger in a Strange Land, Time Enough For Love, Friday, and The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress). Also works by Robert Rimmer, and Starhawk in her books The Fifth Sacred Thing (1993) and Walking to Mercury (1997).
  • Networks of interconnecting relationships, where a particular person may have relationships of varying degrees of importance with various people.
  • Mono/poly relationships, where one partner is monogamous but agrees to the other having outside relationships.
  • So-called "geometric" arrangements, which are described by the number of people involved and their relationship connections. Examples include "triads" and "quads", along with "V" and "N" geometries. A triad could be either a V or a triangle. (See: Terminology within polyamory.)

[edit] The fringes and outliers of polyamory

The expression open relationship denotes a relationship in which participants may have sexual connections with others. When a married couple makes such an agreement, it may be termed an open marriage. Some forms of polyamorous relationship are not "open" (e.g. polyfidelity). And some open relationships may be open only sexually, while exclusive emotionally. However, there is broad overlap between open relationships and polyamory.

It is possible for a person with polyamorous relationships to also engage in casual sex, traditional swinging, and other open relationships. Sometimes polyamorous people have been known to engage in infidelities or secret affairs, although this is no better accepted in polyamorous communities than in monogamous ones.

[edit] Cultural diversity within polyamory

"Polygamy" is more often used to refer to codified forms of multiple marriage (especially those with a traditional/religious basis), while "modern polyamory" or "egalitarian polyamory" implies a relationship defined by negotiation between its members, rather than by cultural norms. Egalitarian polyamory is culturally rooted in such concepts as choice and individuality, rather than in religious traditions.

Egalitarian polyamory is more closely associated with values, subcultures and ideologies that favor individual freedoms and equality in sexual matters — most notably, those reflected by sexual freedom advocacy groups such as Woodhull Freedom Foundation & Federation, NCSF and ACLU [15]. However, polygamy advocacy groups and activists and egalitarian polyamory advocacy groups and activists can and do work together cooperatively. In addition, the two subcommunities have many common issues (poly parenting, dealing with jealousy, legal and social discrimination, etc.), the discussion and resolution of which are of equal interest to both subcommunities regardless of any cultural differences that may exist. Moreover, there is considerable cultural diversity within both subcommunities. Religiously motivated polygamy has its Islamic, Mormon fundamentalist, Christian Plural Marriage, Jewish[16] and other varieties; similarly, many egalitarian polyamorists have cultural ties to Naturism, Neo-Pagans,[17] BDSM, Modern Tantra,[18] and other special interest groups. For example, egalitarian polyamory and BDSM often face similar challenges (e.g. negotiating the ground rules for unconventional relationships, or the question of coming out to family and friends), and cross-pollination of ideas takes place between the two.[19]

[edit] Legal status

In most countries, it is legal for three or more people to form and share a sexual relationship (subject sometimes to laws against homosexuality). However, no Western countries permit marriage among more than two people. Nor do they give strong and equal legal protection (e.g. of rights relating to children) to non-married partners — the legal regime is not comparable to that applying to married couples. Individuals involved in polyamorous relationships are considered by the law to be no different from people who live together, or "date", under other circumstances. Usually one couple, at most, can be "married" under civil and/or religious law.

Bigamy is the act of marrying one person while already being married to another, and is legally prohibited in most countries where monogamy is the cultural norm. Some bigamy statutes are broad enough to potentially encompass polyamorous relationships involving cohabitation, even if none of the participants claim marriage to more than one partner. For instance, under Utah Code 76-7-101, "A person is guilty of bigamy when, knowing he has a husband or wife or knowing the other person has a husband or wife, the person purports to marry another person or cohabits with another person."

Having multiple non-marital partners, even if married to one, is legal in most U.S. jurisdictions; at most it constitutes grounds for divorce if the spouse is non-consenting (or claims to be), or feels that the interest in a further partner has destabilized the marriage. There are exceptions to this: in North Carolina, a spouse can sue a third party for causing "loss of affection" in or "criminal conversation" (adultery) with their spouse,[20] and more than twenty states in the US have laws against adultery[21] although they are infrequently enforced. Some states were prompted to review their laws criminalizing consensual sexual activity in the wake of the Supreme Court's ruling in Lawrence v. Texas. One reading of Justice Kennedy's opinion in Lawrence is that states may not constitutionally burden any private, consensual sexual activity between adults. Such a reading would throw laws against fornication, adultery, and even adult incest into question.

New Jersey's 2004 Domestic Partnership Act could in theory be used to legally connect more than two persons (albeit imperfectly), perhaps using a combination of marriage and domestic partnership. However, no case law in support of this theory as yet exists.

The late Rev. Jerry Falwell's Liberty Counsel organization filed the following California Supreme Court arguments on May 29, 2008:

... The California same-sex marriage (SSM) ruling] has created a system in which a same-sex couple (or even an opposite-sex couple) could be married, in a domestic partnership, and in a separate civil union all at the same time. A person could have the rights, benefits and obligations of marriage with one same-sex partner in a California domestic partnership and/or a California marriage, and all the rights, benefits and obligations of a civil union with a different partner, especially since California has no residency requirement for marriage licenses. As a result, three or more people could claim community property rights in the same piece of property, parental rights over children, and the rights to alimony, child support, death benefits, insurance proceeds and employee benefits belonging to one of the other parties. Domestic partnerships are available to same-sex couples over the age of 18 and to opposite-sex couples if at least one person is age 62 or older. An unmarried person over the age of 18 and an unmarried person over the [age of] 18 who are not otherwise disqualified are capable of consenting to and consummating a marriage. Domestic partnerships are not marriages.

Therefore, a person who is part of a domestic partnership is "unmarried" and able to enter into marriage with another person over the age of 18. A person can enter into a domestic partnership if he or she is not married to someone else or is not a member of another domestic partnership with someone else that has not been terminated, dissolved, or ajudged a nullity. While this would mean that [people] could not enter into a domestic partnership after they are already married, it does not prevent them from getting married after entering into a domestic partnership. Couples who are part of domestic partnerships or civil unions in other states would be able to get married in California. This would mean that [if] Parties A and B are in a Vermont civil union (or New Jersey or Connecticut civil union), and Parties C and D are also in a civil union, and Parties E and F are also in a civil union, then A and C could come to California to get married, and at the same time B and F could get married, and D and E could get married, all at the same time.

Therefore, [the California SSM ruling] legitimizes polygamy and polyamory.

-Campaign For California Families [22]

At present, the extension to multiple-partner relationships of laws that use a criterion similar to that adopted in the UK, i.e. "married or living together as married" remains largely untested. That is, it is not known whether these laws could treat some trios or larger groups as common-law marriages.

If marriage is intended, most countries provide for both a religious marriage, and a civil ceremony (sometimes combined). These recognize and formalize the relationship. Few Western countries give either religious or legal recognition — or permission — to marriages with three or more partners. While a recent case in the Netherlands was commonly read as demonstrating that the Netherlands permitted multiple-partner civil unions,[23] this belief is mistaken. The relationship in question was a samenlevingscontract, or "cohabitation contract," and not a registered partnership or marriage [24] [25]. The Netherlands' law concerning registered partnerships provides that:

  1. A person may be involved in one only registered partnership with one other person whether of the same or of opposite sex at any one time.
  2. Persons who enter into a registered partnership may not at the same time be married.

When a relationship ends, non-consensual non-fidelity ("cheating") is often grounds for an unfavorable divorce settlement, and non-fidelity generally could easily be seized upon as a prejudicial issue by an antagonistic partner.

[edit] Polyamory as a lifestyle

Separate from polyamory as a philosophical basis for relationship, are the practical ways in which people who live a polyamorous lifestyle arrange their lives, the issues they face, and how these compare to those living a monogamous lifestyle.

[edit] Values within polyamory

Relationships classed as polyamorous involve an emotional bond and often a longer term intent, though these distinctions are a topic open to debate and interpretation. Many people in the swinging and polyamory communities see both practices as part of a broader spectrum of open intimacy and sexuality.

Also note that the values discussed here are ideals. As with any ideals, their adherents sometimes fall short of the mark — but major breaches of a polyamorous relationship's ideals are taken as seriously as such breaches would be in any other relationship. Common values cited within such relationships include:[citation needed]

  • Fidelity and loyalty: Many polyamorists define fidelity as being faithful to the promises and agreements they have made, rather than in terms of per se sexual exclusivity. Having a secret sexual relationship which violated one's negotiated agreements would be seen as lacking fidelity. Polyamorists generally base definitions of commitment on considerations other than sexual exclusivity, e.g. "trust and honesty" or "growing old together".[26]
  • Trust, honesty, dignity and respect: Most polyamorists emphasize respect, trust and honesty for all partners.[27][28] A partner's partners should be accepted as part of that person's life rather than merely tolerated, and a relationship that requires deception, or where partners are not allowed to express their individual lives, is often seen as a poor model.
  • Mutual support: This requires that each partner will support, and not undermine, the other, and will not deliberately use a secondary relationship to harm another party or relationship.
  • Communication and negotiation: Because there is no "standard model" for polyamorous relationships, and reliance upon common expectations may not be realistic, polyamorists often advocate explicitly deciding the ground rules of their relationships with all concerned, and often emphasize that this should be an ongoing process of communication and respect. Polyamorists usually take a pragmatic approach to their relationships; they accept that sometimes they and their partners will make mistakes and fail to live up to these ideals, and that communication is important for repairing any breaches.[27][28]
  • Non-possessiveness: Polyamorists believe that restrictions on other deep relationships are not for the best, as they tend to replace trust with a framework of ownership and control. They tend to see their partner's partners in terms of the gain to their partner's life rather than the threat to their own (see compersion). Poly relationships do vary and some can be possessive or provide for the primary partner's veto or approval, whilst others are asymmetrical—possessive one way, but not the other.

[edit] Sharing of domestic burden

Claimed benefits of a polyamorous lifestyle include the following:[29]

  • The ability for parties to discuss issues with a (separate) partner within the relationship itself, tending to add mediation and stabilization to a relationship, and reduce polarization of viewpoints.
  • Emotional and similar support structure provided by other committed adults within the family unit.
  • A wider range of experience, skills, resources, and perspectives that multiple adults bring to a relationship.
  • The ability to share chores and child supervision, reducing domestic and child rearing pressure upon adults' time without needing to pay for outside child carers.
  • Greatly reduced per capita cost of living.
  • Increased financial stability—the loss of one income is not the entirety of the family income (if only one parent works), or half the family income (if both parents work), but may be far less.

[edit] Specific issues affecting polyamorous relationships

Polyamorists cite the human tendency towards jealousy and possessiveness as major hurdles in polyamory, and also as personal limitations to overcome:[3]

"Possessiveness can be a major stumbling block, and often it prevents what could be a successful polyamourous relationship from forming. When people are viewed, even inadvertently, as possessions, they become a commodity, a valuable one at that. Just as most people are reluctant to let go of what little money that they have, people are also reluctant to "share" their beloved. After all, what if [their beloved] finds someone else who is more attractive/intelligent/well-liked/successful/etc.. than [themselves], and decides to abandon the relationship in favor of the new lover? These sorts of inferiority complexes must be resolved, completely, before a polyamorous relationship can be truly successful"[30]

An editorial article on the polyamory website Polyamoryonline.org as at 2006 proposes the following issues as being worthy of specific coverage and attention:[31]

  • Helping children cope with "being different."
  • "Coming out" as polyamorous (and explaining polyamory) to children.
  • Polyamorous parental interactions.
  • Polyamory social settings (involving children).
  • Legal (parenting) issues.

The author, herself in a polyamorous relationship of three adults, comments that:

"The kids started realizing that there were three adults in the house that they had to answer to. **Big Shock** Then came the onslaught of trying to 'befriend' a particular adult and get what they wanted from that one adult. Another big shock when they found that it didn’t work and that we all communicated about wants or needs of any given child. After this was established, we sort of fell into our patterns of school, practices, just normal life in general. The kids all started realizing that there were three of us to care for them when they were sick, three of us to get scolded from, hugs from, tickles from; three of us to feed the small army of mouths and three of us to trust completely in. After trust was established, they asked more questions. Why do we have to live together? Why can’t I have my own room? ... Why do you guys love each other? Why do I have to listen to them (non-biological parent)? We answered them as truthfully as we could and as much as was appropriate for their age. I found that it was more unnerving for me to think about how to approach a new kid and their parents than it ever was for the kids."

[edit] Polyamory in a same-sex setting

Polyamory is "a well-accepted part of gay subculture", although "often viewed by some therapists as problematic";[32] somewhere between 30%[33] and 67%[34] of men in male couples report being in a sexually non-monogamous relationship. According to Coleman & Rosser (1996), "although a majority of male couples are not sexually exclusive, they are in fact emotionally monogamous."[35] Shernoff states that:

"One of the biggest differences between male couples and mixed sex couples is that many, but by no means all within the gay community have an easier acceptance of sexual nonexclusivity than does heterosexual society in general [....] Research confirms that nonmonogamy in and of itself does not create a problem for male couples when it has been openly negotiated."[36]

[edit] Polyamory and parenting

Many polyamorists have children, either within the relationship(s) or from a previous relationship. Like other elements of polyamory, the way in which children are integrated into the family structure varies widely. Some possibilities are:

  • Parents are primarily responsible for their own children (biological, adoptive, or step-), but other members of the relationship act as an extended family, providing assistance in child-rearing.
  • Adults raise children collectively, all taking equal responsibility for each child regardless of consanguinity.
  • Parents are wholly responsible for their own children, with other members of the relationship relating to the children as friends of the parents.
  • Children treat parents' partners as a form of step-parent.

The choice of structures is affected by timing: an adult who has been present throughout a child's life is likely to have a more parental relationship with that child than one who enters a relationship with people who already have a teenage child. (The issues involved often parallel those of step-parenting.) The degree of logistical and emotional involvement between the members of the relationship is also important: a close-knit triad already living under one roof with shared finances is far more likely to take a collective approach to parenting than would a larger, loose-knit group with separate living arrangements:

"Some poly families are structured so that one parent can be home to care for the children while two or more other adults work outside the home and earn an income, thus providing a better standard of living for all concerned. More adult caretakers means more people available for child care, help with homework, and daily issues such as transportation to extracurricular activities. Children thrive on love. The more adults they have to love them who are part of the family, the happier and more well-adjusted they are. There is no evidence that growing up in a poly family is detrimental to the physical, psychological or moral well being of children. If parents are happy in their intimate relationships, it helps the family. Happy families are good for children."[37]

Whether children are fully informed of the nature of their parents' relationship varies, according to the above considerations and also to whether the parents are "out" to other adults.[citation needed]

In one possible case indicative of the law related to parenting and polyamory in the United States, the Pennsylvania State Supreme Court in 2006 voted 5-1 that a father in a custody case had the right to teach his child (age 13) about polygamy (and hence possibly by implication about other multiple partner relationships), and that this right "trumped" the anti-bigamy and other laws which might apply and was not deemed inherently harmful to the child. (Note: this decision was made in the context of religious freedom, but religious freedom would not apply if there was harm to the child.)[38]

[edit] Custody ramifications

Parents involved in polyamorous relationships often keep it a secret because of the risk that it will be used by an ex-spouse, or other family member, as grounds to deprive them of custody of and/or access to their children. The fear is that it will be used in family disputes much as homosexuality has been used in the past.

In 1998, a Tennessee court granted guardianship of a child to her grandmother and step-grandfather after the child's mother April Divilbiss and partners outed themselves as polyamorous on MTV. After contesting the decision for two years, Divilbiss eventually agreed to relinquish her daughter, acknowledging that she was unable to adequately care for her child and that this, rather than her polyamory, had been the grandparents' real motivation in seeking custody.[39] The Tennessee case is not necessarily normative for the entirety of the United States, since family law varies significantly from state to state, and sometimes even within a state. US state law is, of course, not normative for laws of other countries.

[edit] Geographical and cultural differences

Social views on polyamory vary by country and culture. For example, a 2003 article in The Guardian by Helena Echlin argues that "British people are if anything more tolerant than in America which is perhaps why British polys are less in need of support groups", and quotes a UK source as stating: "We have a tradition of people minding their own business here. People might disapprove, but they won't try to mess up your life. In America, they might call social services."[40]

[edit] Philosophical aspects

As with many lifestyles, there is considerable active discussion about philosophical approaches to polyamory.

In 1929, Marriage and Morals, written by the philosopher, mathematician, and Nobel Prize winner Bertrand Russell, offered a strong precedent to the philosophy of polyamory. At the time of publication, Russell's questioning of the Victorian notions of morality regarding sex and marriage prompted vigorous protests and denunciations, but several intellectuals, led by John Dewey, spoke out against this treatment.[41][42]

In Echlin's article in The Guardian, five reasons for choosing polyamory are identified: a drive towards female independence and equality driven by feminism; disillusionment with monogamy; a yearning for community; honesty and realism in respect of relational nature of human beings; human nature; and individual non-matching of the traditional monogamous stereotype. Jim Fleckenstein, director of the Institute for 21st-Century Relationships, is quoted as stating that the polyamory movement has been driven not only by science fiction, but also by feminism: "Increased financial independence means that women can build relationships the way they want to." The disillusionment with monogamy is said to be "because of widespread cheating and divorce". The longing for community is associated with a felt need for the richness of "complex and deep relationships through extended networks" in response to the replacement and fragmentation of the extended family by nuclear families. "For many," Echlin writes, "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". Others speak of creating an "honest responsible and socially acceptable" version of non-monogamy — "since so many people are already non-monogamous, why not develop a non-monogamy that is honest, responsible and socially acceptable? ...It seems weird that having affairs is OK but being upfront about it is rocking the boat."..." [43] "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."[40]

A sixth reason, a couple's response to a failure of monogamy, by reaching a consensus to accept the additional relationship, is identified by other authors.[44]

[edit] Research

Research into polyamory has been limited. A comprehensive government study of sexual attitudes, behaviors and relationships in Finland in 1992 (age 18-75, around 50% both genders) found that around 200 out of 2250 (8.9%) respondents "agreed or strongly agreed" with the statement "I could maintain several sexual relationships at the same time" and 8.2% indicated a "lifestyle that best suits" at the present stage of life would involve more than one steady partner. By contrast, when asked about other relationships at the same time as a steady relationship, around 17% stated they had had other partners whilst in a steady relationship (50% no, 17% yes, 33% refused to answer). [15] (PDF)

The article, What Psychology Professionals Should Know About Polyamory, based on a paper presented at the 8th Annual Diversity Conference in March 1999 in Albany, New York states the following:

While openly polyamorous relationships are relatively rare (Rubin, 1982), there are indications that private polyamorous arrangements within relationships are actually quite common. Blumstein and Schwartz (1983, cited in Rubin & Adams, 1986) noted that of 3,574 married couples in their sample, 15-28% had "an understanding that allows nonmonogamy under some circumstances. The percentages are higher among cohabitating couples (28%), lesbian couples (29%) and gay male couples (65%)" (p. 312).[45]

[edit] Polyamory in a clinical setting

There is little research at present into the specific needs and requirements for handling polyamory in a clinical context. A notable paper in this regard is Working with polyamorous clients in the clinical setting (Davidson, 2002),[46] which addresses the following areas of inquiry:

  1. Why is it important that we talk about alternatives to monogamy now?
  2. How can therapists prepare to work with people who are exploring polyamory?
  3. What basic understandings about polyamory are needed?
  4. What key issues do therapists need to watch for in the course of working with polyamorous clients?

Its conclusions, summarized, were that "Sweeping changes are occurring in the sexual and relational landscape" (including 'dissatisfaction with limitations of serial monogamy, i.e. exchanging one partner for another in the hope of a better outcome') ... that clinicians need to start by "recognizing the array of possibilities that polyamory encompasses" and "examine the culturally based assumption that only monogamy is acceptable" and how this bias impacts on the practice of therapy ... the need for self-education about polyamory" ... basic understandings about the "rewards of the poly lifestyle" and the common social and relationship challenges faced by those involved ... and the "shadow side" of polyamory – the potential existing for coercion, strong emotions in opposition, and/or jealousy.

The paper also states that the configurations a therapist would be "most likely to see in practice" are individuals involved in primary-plus arrangements, monogamous couples wishing to explore non-monogamy for the first time, and poly singles.

[edit] The decision to explore polyamory

Morin (1999) states that a couple has a very good chance of adjusting to nonexclusivity if at least some of the following conditions exist:[47]

  • Both partners want their relationship to remain primary.
  • The couple has an established reservoir of good will.
  • There is a minimum of lingering resentments from past hurts and betrayals.
  • The partners are not polarized over monogamy/nonmonogamy.
  • The partners are feeling similarly powerful and autonomous.

Green & Mitchell (2002) state that direct discussion of the following issues can provide the basis for honest and important conversations:[48]

  • Openness versus secrecy
  • Volition/equality versus coercion/inequality
  • Clarity/specificity of agreements versus confusion/vagueness
  • Honoring keeping agreements versus violating them
  • How each partner views nonmonogamy.

According to Michael Shernoff[49] if the matter is discussed with a third party, such as a therapist, the task of the therapist is to "engage couples in conversations that let them decide for themselves whether sexual exclusivity or nonexclusivity is functional or dysfunctional for the relationship."

[edit] Criticisms

[edit] Religious objections

Many religions discourage sex outside marriage (or, in some cases, a committed relationship closely resembling marriage). As a consequence, those religions effectively prohibit or permit polyamory to the same degree that they prohibit or permit polygamy. Even where polygamy is permitted, it is often limited to a rigidly-defined form of plural marriage — most commonly polygyny.

At the beginning of the 21st century, polygyny remained common in some parts of the Islamic world but was not recognized by most branches of Christianity and Judaism. There are many scriptural references in the Old Testament to polygyny, such as the story of King Solomon, an important figure to all three major Abrahamic religions. Buddhism and Hinduism do not take a stance for or against.For further discussion and some exceptions see Polygamy and religion.

While most religions offer guidance about sex and family, religious leaders have said relatively little about polyamory, possibly due to its low public profile compared to other relational/ethical issues such as homosexuality.

[edit] Moral objections

In a 2007 editorial by the Chinese newspaper the Shanghai Daily, the moralistic argument was advanced that marriage, a vehicle for true love, should engender the "obligation to give themselves totally and exclusively, to this one person" in order to have meaning, and in consequence of this, all extramarital activity was "worse than immoral. It's unashamed... Mutual conspiracy", and that the concept of mutual consent was "not worth refutation". Even if the partners were honest and supportive of each other, the writer stated that "marriage is considered the consecration of true love", and there was a spirit of marriage which had been betrayed.

The editorial was in response to the case of a Chinese female ex-police officer who ran a swingers website, and discussed various forms of open marriage:

"Then what about polyamory—a lifestyle of having more than one love/sex partner? If it is understood as an alternative to monogamous marriage, it is of the same ilk as swinging. It could be the case that sexual fun and passion are shared by more than two people. But true love and marriage require exclusive mutual fidelity in one couple."[50]

[edit] Division of love

In The Ethical Slut, Dossie Easton and Janet Hardy (writing as 'Catherine Liszt') described an argument against polyamory to the effect that, when one's love is divided among multiple partners, the love is lessened. They referred to this as a "starvation economy" argument, because it treats love as a scarce commodity (like food or other resources) that can be given to one person only by taking it away from another. This is sometimes called a "Malthusian argument", after Malthus' writings on finite resources.

Many polyamorists, including Easton and Hardy, reject the idea that dividing love among multiple partners automatically lessens it. A commonly-invoked argument uses an analogy with a parent who has two children—the parent does not love either of them any less because of the existence of the other.[51] Robert Heinlein expressed this in saying "Love does not divide, it multiplies."

Critics counter that even if love is not a finite resource, time and energy still are.

[edit] Perceived failure rates

Polyamorous relationships are often criticised as "not lasting", for example, Stanley Kurtz takes this as axiomatic when he says "Not only would legally recognized polyamory be unstable..."[52]

The problem of confirmation bias makes it impossible to accurately gauge the stability of polyamorous relationships without carefully-conducted scientific investigation. The complex nature of polyamory presents difficulties in structuring such research. For instance, polyamorists may be reluctant to disclose their relationship status due to potential negative consequences, and researchers may be unfamiliar with the full range of polyamorous behaviours, leading to poorly-framed questions that give misleading results.[53]

While predating the term polyamory, some research has been done on the stability of some forms of what might be considered polyamorous relationships in the Netherlands. Weitzman[54] lists a study by Rubin and Adams in 1986 which found no differences in marital stability based on sexual exclusivity in married relationships.

[edit] See also

[edit] External links

[edit] Informational websites

[edit] Polyamory-related media

  • Polyamory in the News website (a part of the Polyamory Online website).
  • Loving More, a polyamory magazine and nonprofit organization that runs national poly conferences (USA), one-day seminars, and other educational and support activities.
  • Polyamory Weekly, a weekly podcast hosted by Cunning Minx, featuring Poly in the News and frank discussion of the joys and pains of the poly lifestyle in all of its flavors.
  • The Philosophy of Non-Monogamy , a blog that reviews poly and non-monogamous websites, as well personal thoughts on open relationships from the author.

[edit] Research and articles

  1. Working with polyamorous clients in the clinical setting - Davidson (Volume 5, April 16, 2002, also delivered to the Society for the Scientific Study of Sexuality, Western Regional Conference, April 2002)
  2. Polyamory - What it is and what it isn't - McCullough and Hall (Volume 6, February 27, 2003)
  3. Commitment in polyamory - Cook (Volume 8, December 12, 2005)

[edit] Advocacy and awareness

[edit] Notes and references

  1. ^ a b "New edition: pleb to Pomak". Quarterly updates to OED Online. 2006-09-14. http://www.oed.com/help/updates/pleb-Pomak.html. Retrieved on 2007-02-16. 
  2. ^ "Internet Pushes Polyamory to Its Tipping Point". http://polyinthemedia.blogspot.com/2008/02/internet-pushes-polyamory-to-its.html. 
  3. ^ a b For example: When two just won't do, Helen Echlin, The Guardian, November 14, 2003: "For most people, the biggest stumbling block to polyamory is jealousy. But polys try to see jealousy less as a green-eyed monster than as an opportunity for character-building." Retrieved March 27, 2007.
  4. ^ CAWeb. "Church of All Worlds Clergy". http://original.caw.org/clergy/mg/index.html. Retrieved on 2006-10-14. 
  5. ^ [1]
  6. ^ The Ravenhearts. "Frequently-Asked Questions re: Polyamory". http://www.mithrilstar.org/Polyamory%20FAQ-Ravenhearts.htm. Retrieved on 2006-07-18. 
  7. ^ a b c d e West, Alex (2001-02-06). "A List of Poly Symbols". http://www.hevanet.com/alexwest/parrots/symbolist.html. Retrieved on 2002-05-11. "variations on Pi-and-the-three-colors the ILIC symbol. ... The symbol that started this category, Jim Evans' Poly Pride Flag. He has put this image in the public domain. ... "ILIC" stands for Infinite Love in Infinite Combinations (a reference to Star Trek's IDIC credo --- the D in the Star Trek version stands for "Diversity"). When I first listed this symbol, I did not have a copy of this image archived locally (even though the author said on his site that the symbol was public domain)" 
  8. ^ a b Evans, Jim (1999-07-06). "Jim Evans' Polyamory Pride Flag". ISOMEDIA - Business Solutions from Internet to eMedia. ISOMEDIA, INC.. 1. http://www.isomedia.com/homes/jene/flag.html. Retrieved on 2006-02-08. "The poly pride flag consists of three equal horizontal colored stripes with a symbol in the center of the flag. The colors of the stripes, from top to bottom, are as follows: blue, representing the openness and honesty among all partners with which we conduct our multiple relationships; red, representing love and passion; and black, representing solidarity with those who, though they are open and honest with all participants of their relationships, must hide those relationships from the outside world due to societal pressures. The symbol in the center of the flag is a gold Greek lowercase letter 'pi', as the first letter of 'polyamory'. The letter's gold color represents the value that we place on the emotional attachment to others, be the relationship friendly or romantic in nature, as opposed to merely primarily physical relationships. This design is in the public domain. If you decide to use it, credit to Jim Evans would be nice, but is not required." 
  9. ^ Terry Windell (Direcor) Tim Russ (Actor: Tuvok). (1999-02-03). Star Trek: VoyagerGravity [Television production]. Los Angeles, California: Paramount Pictures. "kol-ut-shan"
  10. ^ a b Dillinger, Ray (1997-06-08). "alt.polyamory home page". http://www.polyamory.org/. Retrieved on 2007-10-09. "Parrot graphic by Ray Dillinger, placed in the public domain for use as a poly mascot." 
  11. ^ PolyOz states in its polyamory glossary that "The parrot is a common poly "mascot" or symbol. Punning on 'poly wanna X'".
  12. ^ A 2003 article in The Guardian states "Today America has more than 100 poly email lists and support groups. Their emblem, which marks the table when they meet in restaurants, is the parrot (because of their nickname Polly)."
  13. ^ Mystic Life (December 2003) in "Spiritual Polyamory" ISBN 978-0595305414
  14. ^ Rowley I(1997) "Family Cacatuidae (Cockatoos)" in Handbook of the Birds of the World Volume 4; Sandgrouse to Cuckoos (eds del Hoyo J, Elliott A, Sargatal J) Lynx Edicions:Barcelona. ISBN 84-87334-22-9
  15. ^ [2]
  16. ^ Broward County Jewish Journal, Thursday, May 29, 2008, p. 16, Polygamy and the Right of Privacy, Rabbi Bruce S. Warshal, Publisher Emeritus: "polygamy [...] happens to be legal under halachic rabbinic Judaism and appears throughout the bible"
  17. ^ From PolyOz glossary on the book Stranger in a Strange Land which "served as an inspiration to many poly folks before the term "polyamory" was even invented...[and] ... also inspired the Neopagan Church of All Worlds, which has been a long term poly hotbed" [3]
  18. ^ OneTaste
  19. ^ For instance, Dossie Easton and Janet Hardy, co-authors of The Ethical Slut, are equally well-known as authors on BDSM; in the introduction to The New Bottoming Book, Hardy describes herself as "a standard-issue Northern California bisexual polyamorous switch".
  20. ^ RUBY DEATON PHARR, Plaintiff, v. JOYCE W. BECK, Defendant
  21. ^ Punishing Adultery in Virginia by JOANNA GROSSMAN
  22. ^ Petition for Rehearing and Motion for Stay
  23. ^ First Trio "Married" in The Netherlands by Paul Belien, Brussels Journal Online
  24. ^ Dutch-language source
  25. ^ English-language source
  26. ^ Cook, Elaine (2005). "Commitment in Polyamorous Relationships". http://www.aphroweb.net/papers/thesis/index.htm. Retrieved on 2006-07-10. 
  27. ^ a b From PolyOz glossary: "Not in the [linguistic roots of the term] but very important is the commitment to honesty with all partners, and openly negotiated ground rules." [4]
  28. ^ a b From sexuality.org: "Two of the cultural cornerstones of the polyamory community are honesty and communication: it's expected that you and your existing long-term partner(s) will have talked over what you're comfortable with and what you aren't comfortable with, and that nobody is going around behind anyone else's back."
  29. ^ PolyamoryOnline Polyamory 101: Consensual Non-Monogamy for the 21st Century "In a polyamourous relationship, this ['A burden shared is a burden lessened'] is doubly true. If you are having problems with one of the people in the relationship, often you can talk to another participant about it, with the added advantage of having a confidant with a good perspective on the relationship. When one person has problems, everyone else is there to help them through it. Child rearing benefits greatly in a polyamourous setting as well. Children are exposed to a wide range of viewpoints and experiences. To use a personal example, children raised in my Family... are exposed to my experiences growing up in rural Illinois, two of our Family's childhoods in the city of Chicago, and my fiancee's childhood in South Carolina. Perhaps one day we will have a Family member from outside the United States, offering an entirely different perspective. This also makes it easier to supervise a child. When many people live in the same household, they can take turns supervising the children, offering the rest of the members of the household a chance to catch up on chores, do homework, or simply go out for a while. Try doing that in a two-parent household without paying for a babysitter. On a purely practical note, having ten incomes in a household is much more flexible than just two. If one of the family suffers a loss of income, the others can help to make up for it. It is much easier to get by after losing one tenth of household income than it is after losing one half. Expenses are also significantly reduced in a polyamourous household, as they are in any situation when multiple adults occupy the same house."
  30. ^ Poly 101
  31. ^ A few insights (FAQ)
  32. ^ Michael Shernoff, Family Process, Vol.45 No.4, 2006 [5])
  33. ^ "70% of men in male couples reported being in a monogamous relationship" - Campbell, 2000 (cited by Michael Shernoff, Family Process, Vol.45 No.4, 2006 [6])
  34. ^ "approximately one third of male couples are sexually exclusive" - Bryant & Demian, 1994; Wagner et al, 2000; Advocate Sex Poll, 2002; LaSala, 2004 (cited by Michael Shernoff, Family Process, Vol.45 No.4, 2006 [7])
  35. ^ Cited by Michael Shernoff, Family Process, Vol.45 No.4, 2006 [8])
  36. ^ Michael Shernoff, Family Process, Vol.45 No.4, 2006 [9])
  37. ^ Polyamory Online.
  38. ^ Shepp v. Shepp, J-97-2004, 2006, PA supreme court. The opinion stated that: the state's interest in enforcing the anti-bigamy law "is not an interest of the 'highest order"' that would trump a parent's right to tell a child about deeply held religious beliefs, and that a court may prohibit a parent from advocating religious beliefs that amount to a crime if doing so jeopardizes the child's physical or mental health or safety, or potentially creates significant social burdens, but that in this case it was not felt that discussing multiple partner relationships as a parents' preference or presenting or advocating them as desirable to the parent, was harmful.
  39. ^ Divilbiss Families Case Ends, Polyamory Society].
  40. ^ a b ECHLIN, Helena. Women, The Guardian, 2003.
  41. ^ Haeberle, Erwin J. (1983). ""Pioneers of Sex Education"". The Continuum Publishing Company. http://www2.hu-berlin.de/sexology/ATLAS_EN/html/pioneers_of_sex_education.html. Retrieved on 2008-02-17. 
  42. ^ Leberstein, Stephen (November/December 2001). ""Appointment Denied: The Inquisition of Bertrand Russell"". Academe. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3860/is_200111/ai_n9008065. Retrieved on 2008-02-17. 
  43. ^ Women's Infidelity by Michelle Langley (ISBN 0-9767726-0-4) Straight talk about why women choose non-monogamy, 2005 [10]
  44. ^ Polyamory The New Love without Limits by Dr Deborah Anapol (ISBN 1-880789-08-6) has a chapter called "Making the transition to polyamorous relating", which deals with broken monogamous commitments from both perspectives.
  45. ^ http://www.polyamory.org/~joe/polypaper.htm#Demographic What Psychology Professionals Should Know About Polyamory
  46. ^ Paper delivered to the Society for the Scientific Study of Sexuality, Western Regional Conference, April 2002, and available online: Electronic Journal of Human Sexuality, Volume 5, April 16, 2002 [11]
  47. ^ Cited by Michael Shernoff, Family Process, Vol.45 No.4, 2006, in the context of same-sex relationships [12]
  48. ^ Cited by Michael Shernoff, Family Process, Vol.45 No.4, 2006, in the context of same-sex relationships [13]
  49. ^ Family Process, Vol.45 No.4, 2006, in the context of same-sex relationships [14]
  50. ^ Shanghai Daily.
  51. ^ McCullough, Derek; Hall, David S (February 27, 2003). "Polyamory: What it is and what it isn't". Electronic Journal of Human Sexuality (Institute for Advanced Study of Human Sexuality) 6. http://www.ejhs.org/volume6/polyamory.htm. Retrieved on 2006-07-10. 
  52. ^ Kurtz, Stanley (June 5, 2006). "Polygamy Versus Democracy: You can't have both". Weekly Standard. http://www.weeklystandard.com/Utilities/printer_preview.asp?idArticle=12266. Retrieved on 006-07-10. 
  53. ^ Herek, Gregory M. (September 1991). "Avoiding Heterosexual Bias in Psychological Research". American Psychological Association. http://www.apa.org/pi/lgbc/publications/research.html. Retrieved on 2006-08-15. 
  54. ^ Weitzman, Geri D. (March 12, 1999). "What is known about the psychological and social functioning of polyamorous individuals?". What Psychology Professionals Should Know About Polyamory. http://www.polyamory.org/~joe/polypaper.htm#WhatIsKnown. Retrieved on 2006-07-10. 
Personal tools