Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
A mistake there would be to assume the relationship dynamics and their difficulties would increase proportionally with extra people. All relationships are a challenge - but moving from 2 to 3 people does not mean all the difficulties and stresses of a relationship also increase 50%.
Quite the opposite can be true - and there is an "economies of scale" effect on many of the relationship issues where quite a lot of things simply become easier. Other things become harder. And in the end I think for many it simply balances out so a truple (as we lovingly call it) ends up no tougher a job than being in a couple.
Whether that trend continues - or differs - with the addition of subsequent people up to 4 - 5 - 10 - 50 I simply do not know however.
Oh yeah, it is sufficiently enough to deal with one mother-in-law to understand the hardships of having 2 (or more...)... Or to go through a non-amicable divorce with 1 person, to appreciate you don't have to divorce 2 people at the same time. And if you say, polyamory isn't official, so there's no official divorce proceedings, think about "childsupport". If a guy impregnates 2 women, and then would want to go out from the marriage (or if one of the girls decide to go out... - and asks for child support, ohh it will be so complicated).
I was so much for gay marriages and allowing them to adopt children. Gay couples had it too easy before, all love and no legal obligations. Now, they can enjoy gay divorce as much as straight couples. Mua-gah-hah
Well, whatever goes on behind closed doors with consenting adults is their business. It's not for me or anyone else to judge. Personally, I'd prefer to not have anyone else share in what is deeply treasured by me between my husband and I. Call me selfish, but I want that just for me. Anyone else that wants to practice polyamory, go for it.
Polyamory never solidified as a norm in human cultures because it tends to cause unstable families resulting in less than desirable child-raising outcomes.
Even committed polyamorists deal with jealousy issues drastic enough to include such extreme reactions as spousal murder and child murder. Obviously such extremes are not epidemic in the few polyamorist cultures around, but these occur with enough frequency that such cultures are usually rare, and have strict rules.
We think of the classical Arab and former Mormon cultures as being very permissive in this regard, but they actually had a lot of restrictions such as only allowing polyamory for certain (usually very wealthy or powerful) members of the society who usually had very submissive spouses; legally submissive, as in strong penalties for behaviors that violate the marriage compact.
In fact, in most cultures, polyamory was more like poly-marriage, than 'amory' with one primary spouse and the other spouse, or spouses, effectively subordinate 'family members' whose main purpose was to fulfill practical roles in the household, but who could also be mated with especially when the first spouse passed away or became unable to have children.
In a society like ours, with far more gender egalitarianism, independence, and egoism (in the positive sense), polyamory is rife with complications, especially when children are added to the mix.
Maybe we should eliminate SS survivor benefit? Or maybe we shall make a total payout amount proportionally divided?Just because our current laws are written so, it does not mean they cannot (or should not) be changed. As Mr Huckabee correctly noticed once, even Constitution is not a Bible and can therefore be changed if needed.
I said exactly this in my post. I have no issue with people doing exactly as they choose, but I would want a change to the laws so that SS payment would have to be split among spouses and not that each additional spouse would get another full payment.
Been on this forum for a while now and I can't remember seeing a topic on this. If there was I might of missed it or it was before I got here.
What is it that people have a problem with this idea? Religious? Immoral? Is it considered a form of cheating? Even in a lot of cases there is no sexual contact involved. It's been around for thousands of years and in some countries it's still practice it. Many people practice it here in the U.S as well.
I bring this up because it's something that has always intrigued me not because I feel the need to sleep or have another relationship outside of my marriage. I do believe it's possible to be in love with more then one person at a time. Also I've been reading a book called The Ethical ****. Very interesting read as it talks about open relationships from those who have had them and still are.
My wife is bisexual ( I think a lot of people are.) And she has always wanted to have a third in her first marriage but her ex didn't like the idea. So maybe at some point it might happen either way it doesn't bother me.
I didn't post this in the relationship side because I think this would be a very good discussion instead of hearing about how it's cheating and one might as well stay single.
Would love to hear everyone's thoughts on this.
I can see why it might never work out (hard enough finding one person to love anymore at my age), but there have been times where I had feelings for more than one person, but couldn't explore those and had to cut ties. When you boil it down, it seems really stupid to have loving more than one person be a bad thing. I think it can work, but there has to be a lot of honesty/openness and similar mindsets. No jealousy and not necessarily co-habitating as so many assume. With so many marriages ending in divorce, there is certainly reason to be open to other options. How many marriages might work better if someone could go on dates with someone else now and then? It's not for everyone for sure. I'd be open to it, but I don't see it happening. Maybe if I were much younger and living in a different place, different life. Swinging is fun too, but it can cause problems for those with security/jealousy issues.
It's hard to break people's conditioning. These are the same people who believe everything they hear on TV to be true (I once did too).
I was poly for about a year, following a breakup from a long marriage. It was nice. Maybe I just needed a support network while I was getting out and recovering from the bad stuff. I don't know. There was no fiery explosion of drama. I just reached a point where one relationship with one man felt like it was getting more "serious" and the other relationship with the three others (the quad) was feeling more like a group of FWB to me. And I wanted to re-align how I was spending my time and energy.
I still post on a poly forum, if anyone ever wants more info on that, PM me. Lots of good resources there for anyone considering this whole deal.
One thing often said, "Love is infinite, but time, money, and energy are not." That was true in my case. So I simply asked my quad to let me back out as "girlfriend" but let's please remain close. Friends, chosen family, whatever. I still care for them. And now I am planning to possibly marry the man I was seeing one-on-one outside of that.
There is an intensity of affection between us, that just has a way of shutting out everyone else. Maybe I am just wired for monogamy ultimately, but I'm not sure I can maintain that kind of intensity for more than one person at a time.
I do NOT like the clickbait articles (there have been a few) that try to say that poly is the "future of relationships" or any such thing. It's not. Those headlines make me mad because they're just sensationalistic nonsense, meant to say, "Hey all you normal people out there, here are a bunch of weirdos doing weird stuff that is gonna TAKE OVER and omg, it'll be the NEW NORMAL and it will be IN! YOUR! FACE!! Your kids will do it! Your neighbors will do it! On your lawwwnnnnn! Click -here- for more outrage!"
Poly is not normal in Western culture and I doubt it's going to be, any time soon, or probably ever. As in...common, or the majority. I still think it should be accepted if people want to live their lives that way, consenting adults harming no one, you go right ahead. And agree with others though, that modifying laws to enable more $$ bennies for people is just not necessary. That is a whole other conversation.
For whatever it's worth...from being on that forum, and from knowing a number of people who have done (or are doing) poly... It seems that one of the most stable longterm configurations tends to be two straight guys with one straight woman who all live together, if the men can be ok with the notion of it at all. The guys tend to sort of bond, like battle buddies, brothers, whatever. Men sometimes team up rather well. The most common thing that is attempted is the FMF triad with bisexual women. That also is most likely to have a ton of drama and they often end badly. Couples trying to find "their third" (the "hot bi babe, or HBB) are often rather scornfully referred to as "unicorn hunters" in poly social circles.
Also, poly and swinging are not the same thing. Both fall under "ethical non-monogamy" but swinging is casual sex, often at swinger resorts or events...poly is actually maintaining multiple relationships, and might not always even involve sex in all of them.
For whatever it's worth...from being on that forum, and from knowing a number of people who have done (or are doing) poly... It seems that one of the most stable longterm configurations tends to be two straight guys with one straight woman who all live together, if the men can be ok with the notion of it at all. The guys tend to sort of bond, like battle buddies, brothers, whatever. Men sometimes team up rather well.
To the extent that this is even true and not just more third wave feminist fantasy/propaganda it highlights yet one more reason why such a lifestyle will remain on the fringes. Not only are two guys who would be OK with such an arrangement about as common as hen's teeth, they're also probably not really straight to begin with.
To the extent that this is even true and not just more third wave feminist fantasy/propaganda it highlights yet one more reason why such a lifestyle will remain on the fringes. Not only are two guys who would be OK with such an arrangement about as common as hen's teeth, they're also probably not really straight to begin with.
Right. And guys on sports teams, or guys in the military, and guys who function well in other team environments where they are close and bonded, they're not straight either.
I mean, they see each other naked in locker rooms and stuff, ya know.
No, it ain't common. But when talking about the groups I know that have lasted for YEARS AND YEARS it is exactly this. And no, the men aren't involved sexually with one another at all.
Multiple women = More often tried, not so often successful. When you hear, "every poly group I've known has imploded under the weight of its own drama" this is often the kind they're talking about. The FMF triad, usually with a mono couple that "opens up" and looks for a unicorn. Sometimes they find one, and usually it ends up being a mess.
Multiple men = Less often tried, but seems to work rather well sometimes. The longest running poly groups I've known of with stable configurations (same partners) have been MFM with straight guys, a "V" and not a triad, intimate with the woman but not each other. I assure you, they don't care that you, random internet person, thinks that they're probably gay or something.
I wouldn't know any of this if I had not met actual people living these actual lives, in person and online. But since I figure I've probably got more contact with poly people than most, I thought I'd share my observations.
Propaganda. I don't even know what you're talking about. How would this be propaganda? I'm talking about the fact that more than one woman trying to share a house more often than not devolves into a dramatic mess, but a couple of dudes manage to pull it off with a lot more grace. It's honestly not the most flattering thing to say about female social behavior. And how do you even make something so rare into propaganda anyways? My word. What an odd way of interpreting things you have there.
I have shocking news for you. There are straight men in the world who are not strutting, posturing, insecure roosters. Who are not insanely jealous or driven by an intense need to compete. I know, not common, but they exist. And they're not gay. You can live under the same roof as someone and not be having sex with them, too.
Right. And guys on sports teams, or guys in the military, and guys who function well in other team environments where they are close and bonded, they're not straight either.
I mean, they see each other naked in locker rooms and stuff, ya know.
No, it ain't common. But when talking about the groups I know that have lasted for YEARS AND YEARS it is exactly this. And no, the men aren't involved sexually with one another at all.
Multiple women = More often tried, not so often successful. When you hear, "every poly group I've known has imploded under the weight of its own drama" this is often the kind they're talking about. The FMF triad, usually with a mono couple that "opens up" and looks for a unicorn. Sometimes they find one, and usually it ends up being a mess.
Multiple men = Less often tried, but seems to work rather well sometimes. The longest running poly groups I've known of with stable configurations (same partners) have been MFM with straight guys, a "V" and not a triad, intimate with the woman but not each other. I assure you, they don't care that you, random internet person, thinks that they're probably gay or something.
I wouldn't know any of this if I had not met actual people living these actual lives, in person and online. But since I figure I've probably got more contact with poly people than most, I thought I'd share my observations.
Propaganda. I don't even know what you're talking about. How would this be propaganda? I'm talking about the fact that more than one woman trying to share a house more often than not devolves into a dramatic mess, but a couple of dudes manage to pull it off with a lot more grace. It's honestly not the most flattering thing to say about female social behavior. And how do you even make something so rare into propaganda anyways? My word. What an odd way of interpreting things you have there.
I have shocking news for you. There are straight men in the world who are not strutting, posturing, insecure roosters. Who are not insanely jealous or driven by an intense need to compete. I know, not common, but they exist. And they're not gay. You can live under the same roof as someone and not be having sex with them, too.
Not wanting some other dude to be railing your wife isn't being insanely jealous. The fact that you would suggest it is kind of answers the fantasy/propaganda question.
Believe it or not some people today still have a quaint little thing called "morals' - it keeps you out of a lot of hassle, drama, and heartache -
And - I do not believe most people are bi sexual - I dont know why you would think that.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
