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.
This reminds me of a click bait article that came out years ago with the headline, "Is Polyamory the Future of Relationships?"...something like that, if not that exactly. Even as someone who has experience with it, and many friends who are poly (because I'm involved in an adult alt lifestyle club scene) that headline made me annoyed. No, no it is not "the future of relationships." I seriously doubt that even with the cost of living and housing skyrocketing and the logistical benefits of 3+ adult households that most people will ever embrace this.
And that is FINE. Most polyamorists I know have no drive whatsoever to preach it and convert people. This is not some big movement. It's just a thing that some people do. That's all.
And that's probably the extent to which it's even similar to LGBTQ+ stuff. Poly people might desire for others to just accept that's how they live and what they do, some of them have it as a serious identity thing and would never consider being monogamous, and none of the above groups of people are trying to force anyone or persuade anyone to join any kind of a "team" or do what they're doing. The appropriate reaction is, "OK good for you. Whatever." If maligned by "mainstream society" they'll probably react in similar ways. They are doing their own thing, not harming anybody, and they neither need nor care about anyone's negative judgments.
And certain shows and channels have realized that they can get eyeballs on screens by doing little reality TV type stories on these unusual people with an unusual lifestyle. Probably that will continue.
Im sure its open to debate, but Anthropologists (and primatologists) claim humans are closest to the bonobo chimpanzee in social structure and even genetics. The bonobo chimps are extremely sexual and promiscuous. They use sex as a greeting. Its like shaking hands. Sex strengthens bonds between individuals, which is its main purpose. And, they dont pair bond, like swans do, for instance.
I would say its a throwback, not the "future."
My guess is the future of human relationships is more along the lines of celibacy or asexual pair bonding.
It's not new. I guess like many things, just more socially acceptable.
__________________ ____________________________________________
My posts as a Mod will always be in red.
Be sure to review Terms of Service: TOS
And check this out: FAQ
Moderator: Relationships Forum / Hawaii Forum / Dogs / Pets / Current Events
Im sure its open to debate, but Anthropologists (and primatologists) claim humans are closest to the bonobo chimpanzee in social structure and even genetics. The bonobo chimps are extremely sexual and promiscuous. They use sex as a greeting. Its like shaking hands. Sex strengthens bonds between individuals, which is its main purpose. And, they dont pair bond, like swans do, for instance.
I would say its a throwback, not the "future."
My guess is the future of human relationships is more along the lines of celibacy or asexual pair bonding.
I dunno.
I think that to contemplate polyamory, you've got to understand first that it isn't primarily all about sex.
(Other forms of ethical non-monogamy are, like swinging, but not poly.)
In fact the quad I was with, we rarely had sex. More nights than not, we'd stay up all night talking. Maybe with no clothes, in a hot tub at the married couple's house...but still. Eventually it would be 4 AM and I'd be exhausted and they'd still be going on about politics or economics or "non violent communication" or something and I'd give up and fall asleep on the sofa. We became more like a group of affectionate friends with occasional benefits, at least that's how it felt to me.
And I don't think that's an uncommon experience. Another joke/stereotype-that's-totally-true is the whole Google calendar thing. They share Google calendars to keep track of everybody's date nights and make plans, because it gets really complicated, really fast.
Anyhow bottom line it ain't a non-stop orgy. Definitely not "sex like shaking hands" or even promiscuity really. There are a lot of (serial) monogamists who rack up more partners. A poly group is not more sexual than a monogamous couple, which I know that a lot of them want people to understand, particularly those poly families with kids. They're not really being all that weird. Just like the mono folks, levels of libido and activity do vary of course.
The more significant element by far, can be the communal living component, for those who do that.
For those who can make it all work, and who manage to be compatible enough and all (hard enough with me and one other person, IMO) that they can live together, there are some really clear benefits. They can help one another more with sharing costs, earnings, more hands to do housework and child rearing.
And I think that the isolation of the nuclear family unit, is what's really unnatural for human beings. I think that we are wired to be more comfortable with community and "tribe" like extended family and such, and the thing now where every couple + kids is in this little bubble, on their own, a lot of us don't even have family near by, or we're estranged from them, don't know any of our neighbors, just keeping ourselves to ourselves...that isn't natural to how humans evolved, I don't think. And I don't think it's good for us, either.
I think that to contemplate polyamory, you've got to understand first that it isn't primarily all about sex.
(Other forms of ethical non-monogamy are, like swinging, but not poly.)
In fact the quad I was with, we rarely had sex. More nights than not, we'd stay up all night talking. Maybe with no clothes, in a hot tub at the married couple's house...but still. Eventually it would be 4 AM and I'd be exhausted and they'd still be going on about politics or economics or "non violent communication" or something and I'd give up and fall asleep on the sofa. We became more like a group of affectionate friends with occasional benefits, at least that's how it felt to me.
And I don't think that's an uncommon experience. Another joke/stereotype-that's-totally-true is the whole Google calendar thing. They share Google calendars to keep track of everybody's date nights and make plans, because it gets really complicated, really fast.
Anyhow bottom line it ain't a non-stop orgy. Definitely not "sex like shaking hands" or even promiscuity really. There are a lot of (serial) monogamists who rack up more partners. A poly group is not more sexual than a monogamous couple, which I know that a lot of them want people to understand, particularly those poly families with kids. They're not really being all that weird. Just like the mono folks, levels of libido and activity do vary of course.
The more significant element by far, can be the communal living component, for those who do that.
For those who can make it all work, and who manage to be compatible enough and all (hard enough with me and one other person, IMO) that they can live together, there are some really clear benefits. They can help one another more with sharing costs, earnings, more hands to do housework and child rearing.
And I think that the isolation of the nuclear family unit, is what's really unnatural for human beings. I think that we are wired to be more comfortable with community and "tribe" like extended family and such, and the thing now where every couple + kids is in this little bubble, on their own, a lot of us don't even have family near by, or we're estranged from them, don't know any of our neighbors, just keeping ourselves to ourselves...that isn't natural to how humans evolved, I don't think. And I don't think it's good for us, either.
I was trying to make the point that the open arrangement, opposed to pair bonding, is a throwback. Social ties were open and flexible, whereas now humans are gravitating to the pair bond, or nuclear family.
I wonder if part of the reason is that disease spreads much faster with more contact among people, more communal living.
And while STD has slways been an issue, now we are seeing "super"STDs. HIV is a good example.
So the new organization I foresee is people isolating more. Using more robot sex to avoid std infection. Restricting their social contact to online, to reduce the spread of disease.
Im not saying I like that idea. But if we keep moving in the direction we are, that just my theory on how it will progress.
I think within 20 years polygamy may be legal. They are already reducing fines in Utah. Who would've thought the Mormons and LGBTQ community would have a common point?
As long as it's between consenting adults why not?
I think that to contemplate polyamory, you've got to understand first that it isn't primarily all about sex.
(Other forms of ethical non-monogamy are, like swinging, but not poly.)
In fact the quad I was with, we rarely had sex. More nights than not, we'd stay up all night talking. Maybe with no clothes, in a hot tub at the married couple's house...but still. Eventually it would be 4 AM and I'd be exhausted and they'd still be going on about politics or economics or "non violent communication" or something and I'd give up and fall asleep on the sofa. We became more like a group of affectionate friends with occasional benefits, at least that's how it felt to me.
And I don't think that's an uncommon experience. Another joke/stereotype-that's-totally-true is the whole Google calendar thing. They share Google calendars to keep track of everybody's date nights and make plans, because it gets really complicated, really fast.
Anyhow bottom line it ain't a non-stop orgy. Definitely not "sex like shaking hands" or even promiscuity really. There are a lot of (serial) monogamists who rack up more partners. A poly group is not more sexual than a monogamous couple, which I know that a lot of them want people to understand, particularly those poly families with kids. They're not really being all that weird. Just like the mono folks, levels of libido and activity do vary of course.
The more significant element by far, can be the communal living component, for those who do that.
For those who can make it all work, and who manage to be compatible enough and all (hard enough with me and one other person, IMO) that they can live together, there are some really clear benefits. They can help one another more with sharing costs, earnings, more hands to do housework and child rearing.
And I think that the isolation of the nuclear family unit, is what's really unnatural for human beings. I think that we are wired to be more comfortable with community and "tribe" like extended family and such, and the thing now where every couple + kids is in this little bubble, on their own, a lot of us don't even have family near by, or we're estranged from them, don't know any of our neighbors, just keeping ourselves to ourselves...that isn't natural to how humans evolved, I don't think. And I don't think it's good for us, either.
I would think a poly-group would be having some of wild party...considering what today is.
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.
