angelak | How monogamy and polyamory are similar

How monogamy and polyamory are similar:

Now, I knew this would get the attention of 93% of my list.
Let me tell you this: In my mind, it really is all quite similar. I say this because I know how adamant and sometimes touchy this kind of topic can be. And I refer to inside the magickal community more than anything else.

There have been some conversations with people who are very important to me and very intelligent, that caused me to begin a new chain of thought. Let’s put it simply:

A lot of people accept that polyamory is a reference word, that there is no one definition of what polyamory is, and that this can come in about as many different flavors as there are differently laid out houses. This is something people of our caliber accept frequently.

Only recently did I realize: Why isn’t monogamy categorized similarly? If we vary our polyamorous relationships THAT much – which, I’ve seen living proof that most every poly agreement is NOT the same… why should it be assumed that monogamy isn’t variant too? Is it because we want to group things together and that we’re lazy? Was this also the same reason the word “polyamory” was born?

What are YOUR thoughts about why the terminology (that is widely accepted here and in other communities too) developed?

Now, here’s the other thought. My good friend in Florida, who I just visited – had a conversation with me about this. I had never expressed to her that I, at varying points in my life did walk a polyamorous path. Or shall I say, “lived that lifestyle”?

I had never discussed this with her. Ever. I felt a little shocked that I had thought I’d spoken to almost all of my really important friends about this. Of course, there are always people that fall through the cracks. I like to live my life very “outside the closet.”

I described to herne51 once that my sentiment on hiding things was that of a spike trying to escape the inside of my chest. (You know, gouging my internal organs and eventually puncturing my skin from the inside to the outside.) It BOTHERS me beyond belief. I’m not happy until whatever it is that I feel people should know, know it. That’s how I live my life. This is what makes me honest, this is what causes me to want to be open about almost everything there is to be open about. Sure, we all have our skeletons – and goodness knows no one is perfect.

DIGRESSING. Susan wanted to know why “Polyamory” was different than just outright “dating.” Well, it came down to vocabulary. Although I had many moments where I contemplated the term, and why it differs some much from person to person – I still never really analyzed why it can’t be classified differently. Differently? Like, say – a lot of typically monogamous couples call it “dating,” instead of “polyamory.”

Others call it something akin to an “open relationship.” Is this the same? Is it different? In my mind, I find it a lot the same. As I was describing the merits of polyamory to Susan, it was clear she wanted to view it as “dating.” This was her terminology for what we do. We (collective pagan community) call it that too.

I’ve come to notice through much discussion with mundanes, that MANY people in the greater mundane world accept polyamory more than we perhaps realize – deemed under a different name.

Okay, so moving on from the thoughts that Susan stirred, a few weeks later – last night in fact, I had a longer conversation with Jim on the phone. It wasn’t really about polyamory, or monogamy, however – we did begin discussing some things that we never said outright before. Jim and I have often spoken about accepting that we are not the only attractive humans that walk the earth. This is something that pertains to us as an awareness. We’re not “jealous” people (he and I) as a rule. (Obviously I think there are exceptions to every thing that is a rule).

Perhaps we even refer to different situations like involvements with other people. Now, previously my way of viewing and framing my polyamory was more emotionally based than physically based. I have also been comfortable with (in moderation, as I’m a little less liberal with sexuality than some) the physical side of that. And I’ve been comfortable with my partner exploring and sharing either emotional and/or physical sides to what is generally referred to as poly.

It’s okay by me if they
A- Want to forge emotional connections which some people refer to as friendships, although frankly, I think some intimate connections emotionally are more than *just* friendships.
B- Want to forge a purely physical connection with someone outside of our partnership.

Yes, OBVIOUSLY there are a billion details to specify circumstances for each of the two above, but that’s an outline.

These two things don’t bother me. In fact, I have been in a more or less successful poly relationship (outside of Robert and I) where this in fact, did not bother me. I was relieved that I had a successful experience with this, because I frankly wanted to prove to myself I would not be one of those people who would not accept their partner getting physical with someone else, but wanted to do it themselves.

My point here is convoluted. Cutting to the chase, the conversation that came up was basically about his comfort level in physical flings within our partnership.

Now, my only other poly experience was actually rather similar:
The agreement was basically that physical flings were okay if both parties were involved.

I began to realize: this is really a variant of monogamy as I see it.
I know that my current relationship identifies with monogamy.
This being said: I reiterate the idea that monogamy has its room for definition variation.

In some circles, Jim and my relationship is a conservative version of the primary/secondary model of poly. IE: ultimate veto power, our relationship being the forefront of anything that would stem off of it.

In his mind, this is purely monogamy, without a definition of what the other conceivable “situations” could be – even if he has expressed exactly what would be okay by him.

So, here’s a prime example of vocabulary. I’m living pretty much the same lifestyle I’ve lived in a previous relationship (albeit with WAY more trust from either side of the fence and a much healthier situation).

Same situation, pretty damned close to the SAME rules of thumb…
Primary relationship #1 was referred to as polyamorous.
And this relationship (#2) is referred to as monogamous.

Interesting.
It was not until my boyfriend quoted a line that I have used in polyamory, almost word for word, that the correlation hit me. And then Susan’s discussion followed my brain pattern.

He said: “…. I mean after all I know you love me and all that so there's nothing to worry about.” (There was a precursor, however I’m not given to share some of our personal details.)

He quoted my all time trust-induced, confident favorite, that I have said to myself over and over in poly situations, and that I have been FRUSTRATED over when the other person didn’t have that view. I will re-phrase what I perceive that to mean if I say it, and in this circumstance where I heard it: "The bottom line is that you love me and it's not a threat" (to the primary relationship.)

What I like is that he never heard me SAY this, in spite of the fact this is one of – as I mentioned already, a regular thing that is integral to my view of relationships beyond my primary unit. He didn’t parrot it off of me. He came up with it all on his own, which means…

Drum roll:

WE are on the same page naturally. I FEEL SO DAMNED LUCKY and I am so stoked to have made the realization. So this is what it amounts to in my head:

I found a mainstream man with poly tendencies.
Here I had the fear around the time I began dating him that it would be IMPOSSIBLE to actually find someone outside the OLOTEAS community that could fit my paradigm.

Don’t read that last line wrong. I just knew there were no “long term” potentials for me in the OLO group. What I learned was, the basic way my relationship has developed is pretty much about a greater form of accumulative trust that eventually gets to a point where external situations are possible. It also releases the part of monogamy I think a lot of people see as a “freedom” issue.

The underlying thought I had that made me want to post was:

Poly has many different definitions.
So why can’t monogamy?

Your opinions, like your assholes, exist out there. Feel free to comment - although like your asshole, I may not want to really inhale too much too close. ;) Just a personal thing. Damn I'm vulgar.

Although more seriously and less sarcastically, I am interested.

*grins*
Thank you for tuning into Angela on her soapbox.
Have a fucktastic Friday.

93,
-Angela