Big Love
For Seattle polyamorists, love is a many-partnered thing. And managing the jealousy is a full-time job.
“To be honest, I don’t know how I’d feel knowing you were with another guy either,” Josh confessed. “It’s why I’m asking us to consider polyamory…not sign up today.” He’d been researching it for awhile—long enough to learn that academics and practitioners both count Seattle second only to San Francisco in its number of practicing polyamorists—and much of what he learned resonated with his own philosophy of love.
The basic idea of this practice (the word surfaced in 1990, but the concept is ageless) is that love is too pure to be defined in terms of possession—which turns one’s beloved into a commodity—and too limitless to be contained within a single relationship. “Why do we always assume that taking new lovers will leave us loving our original lover less?” Josh asked Amy at one point, frustrated. “We never assume that will happen when we have more than one child—and, you know what, it never does!” Monogamy, he went on, prizes fidelity—but then defines fidelity as “sexual exclusivity” instead of “trust and honesty.” Indeed, polyamorists work overtime in the full disclosure department.
The basic idea of polyamory is that love is too limitless to be contained within a single relationship.
“It’s all so high-minded,” she sighed, swigging her coffee. “So dripping with integrity.” And, I thought with a stab—so ingrained. By a bizarre coincidence I had just finished reading Anatomy of Love by the anthropologist Helen Fisher, a rollicking natural history of monogamy, adultery, and divorce, primordial ooze to the present. She argues that pair-bonding has forever been characteristic of the human animal, with marriage—the two-person kind—a universal across cultures. Over 90 percent of Americans marry. But what predictably flourishes alongside the monogamy, and always has? Infidelity.
With those two absolutes of human behavior rippling in parallel streams down the ages, maybe polyamory is some sort of enlightened modern synthesis…? I looked into Amy’s welling eyes.
Or maybe not.
“I just don’t think I’m wired for it,” she murmured. “And the thing is—I’d like to be. I know Josh loves me. I love him. Because this means something to him I’d like to be able to at least try it. But I think the jealousy could destroy us.”
Josh had researched the jealousy issue—turns out a disproportionate portion of the polyamory oeuvre is devoted to the topic—and learned that most polyamorists spend a great deal of their energy managing the green-eyed monster. They use strategies for learning to relax within the feeling, and plumb their psyches to unearth the root causes of their jealousy. They even work, from their position as third wheel, at being happy for the happy couple. “There’s this word, ‘compersion,’ ” Amy told me miserably. “Polyamorists made it up to describe the empathetic, selfless feeling of joy one has knowing one’s beloved is enjoying love with someone else.”
“All righty then!” I said, trying for perky. “Whole lotta new words in this game!”
And suddenly I was back in high school humanities class, learning for the first time about the philosophical underpinnings of the political theory called Communism. I’ll never forget running in the door from school that night and telling Mom and Dad all about this life-changing philosophy I’d learned. Pure classlessness, the foundation of the good society. It made so much sense! It felt so just!
“So great in theory,” Dad said. “And so seriously incompatible with the human heart.”
I smiled at Amy, and felt tired for her. Because I’m sure some small percentage of humans genuinely is polyamorist; women and men who, unlike Amy, really are wired that way. All she needs to do now, God help her, is figure out if Josh is one of them.
Or if he’s just, well…a guy.
Published: June 2010
Thanks for the thoughtful comments on this month’s Back Fence. I figured it would be a hot topic and knew that the one anecdotal experience I had room to relate here couldn’t sufficiently mine the territory. So to those who wish I’d talked more about the other issues relating to the practice of polyamory—the scheduling issues, the successful polyamorists—check out my interview with Dr. Elisabeth Sheff, who is one of the nation’s foremost academic experts on polyamory and a practitioner herself. The link’s on the story.
Nice opening, Kathryn. Tightly written. Glib. Smug. Perfect tone for an urbane alternative mag. And ultimately wrong. May I propose that a quick glance at one other person’s incomplete experience (especially since there are two involved and you know them both), a proverb on an tangentially related topic from dear old dad plus your own viewpoint do not a careful analysis make. Interview some successful poly folk, and then complete your article. It seems to cut off abruptly in mid-thought anyway. I know. I write for a couple of alternative pubs and would have been slapped around by my editors had I submitted this piece. Good beginning, however. It has promise.
So often I see articles equating polyamory with “wanting to cheat without having to sneak around”. Told as a morality tale, ending in pain or breakup, with the other person inevitably deciding “I’m not wired for that.”
Cue the choir of successful, vocal polyamorists with successful examples and resources and facts (like the one that marriage is NOT, for instance, universal across cultures), and there’s a divide too great to cross. The debate becomes philosophical, and easy to shut down with the “communism is great… in theory” argument.
So I’ll extend the olive branch by saying what no other male polyamorist dare, at the risk of playing right into the primary, stereotypically “female” fears people try to tiptoe around: Monogamy gets boring. It’s certainly not the ONLY reason for polyamory, but it’s the elephant in the room people most often end up talking past each other about.
You can have the hottest, smartest, best-suited partner in the world- one you’d never in a million years want to leave, but that person will never be the one thing that sparks dopamine-level chemical excitement: newness. A new partner really CAN bring new inspiration, forcing you to reassess yourself with respect to how you want to be perceived, allowing you to be open to new things in a way you can’t really achieve without some vested interest.
And this basically happens to most people anyway – they just call it “cheating”.
Cheating, at best, gives one partner some excitement at the expense of trashing the relationship’s trust & honesty, and at worst, blindsides the partner with a breakup.
The polyamorous version of this requires enhancing communication, trust, & honesty, and the primary relationship gets to share the benefits of the excitement & inspiration (and be forced to deal with jealousies that might have been simmering below the surface anyway), and at worst, both partners experience their breakup in slow motion (but honestly). Though without a supportive community, if something unfortunate happens, the fault is all on HIM for suggesting something nonstandard and YOU for agreeing to it, and your story becomes another morality tale to other “normal” people warning them to stay away from polyamory because look what it did to your relationship (conveniently ignoring monogamy’s role in all the other failed relationships in your life)
So yeah – I can see the resistance. If I weren’t in Seattle in a supportive community, I am not sure I would have had the nerve to try – but I’m happy I did.
P.S. A great example of the type of conversation you show in your article is here:
http://xeromag.com/fvpolydialog.html
“Or if he’s just, well…a guy.”
How narrow minded and insulting of you. Men are not inherently unable to control themselves, and women are not inherently faithful.
I’m a longtime polyamorist and this story is wretched. Although I would never refer to my polyamory as a “lifestyle” (the farthest I’ll go is "lovestyle"), I agree with Theresa B. that it wouldn’t hurt to talk to some people who have real experience with polyamory instead of just recapping a conversation with a friend and calling it journalism. I also agree with Theresa that the hardest part of polyamory for most of us is scheduling, not jealousy! Some polyamorists don’t feel jealousy at all, others only feel it occasionally. If managing jealousy is a full-time job, then I would suggest that the problem is severe insecurity, not polyamory.
Remember when inter-racial relationships were an anomaly? Remember when living together outside of marriage was abject sin?
Only ten years ago when a lover suggested to me that we try polyamory, we couldn’t find living examples of it anywhere. Now I can find them all around me (bless you, Seattle!!).
What we can imagine is limited by what we can see. And it is so difficult to live something that we cannot imagine.
Thank-yous to everyone who share their stories about polyamory. It is wonderful when men (and women) such as Josh can find a path that is about love, and not cheating.
Polyamory, or ethical non-monogamy is more than managing jealousy (as a long-time polyamorist I can tell you the real issue is scheduling). Your article made it feel like this is some high-minded, unachievable theory, when in fact its about looking at your self realistically and being honest about your relationship needs. Most people are not monogamous in actuality. Our culture has simply integrated serial monogamy and cheating into its theory of relationships. Polyamory takes the lying and the cheating out which means communication becomes the only way to have healthy relationships.
Next time you decide to highlight an alternative lifestyle I suggest you find some folks who aren’t new to the idea — find some people who have made a success of the lifestyle. And that being said you could also provide resources for people who are new to the idea or looking for more help in their relationships.
You were right Seattle has a large Poly community. There is the sea-poly@yahoogroups.com online community, a Seattle Meetup (http://www.meetup.com/Seattle-Polyamory/), and several events at the Center for Sex Positive Culture (http://www.sexpositiveculture.org/) and the Sharma Center (http://www.sharmacenter.org/main/) all around polyamory.
Theresa B.
relationships and marriage are not social issues. they are private issues. its not really my place to have an opinion about what other people do with their lives.
It’s too bad that “Amy” hooked up with someone who is so arrogant and delusional. I know that “breaking up is hard to do,” but “Josh” wins the prize for (attempted) creativity.
The polyamory relationships go contrary to atthe continuance of the human race. Where do the children fit into this? When you have an extended family you already have ’BIG LOVE" – and all the challenges you could want in making the relationships work!
I’m disappointed that this article is being billed as about “Seattle Polyamorists” when it is in reality just an anecdote about a woman whose husband has just introduced her to the notion of polyamory. With such a large community and so much information out there, this article could’ve presented something much more in line with its description.
I have been in a polyamorous relationship for more than 10 years. It’s possible, but is it worth it? At this point in my life, after seeing that separate is not equal, I contend, no.
Polyamory is not about honesty & trust. It’s about getting what you want and convincing the person that loves you most that if they aren’t willing to give it to you then they don’t truly love you.
“Amy” my advice to you is be a woman. What do I mean by this? I mean you were born with a gut, with intuition, with a mysterious sixth sense. Use it! If it don’t feel good then don’t try to convince yourself that it could or it will. If people can find find many loves while they are in relationships already. Then, you can find love in a new relationship too, on your terms.
I wish you the best. After all these years, I’m starting over and I know better now.
To all of you poly folks out there who say this is a bad article – I heartily disagree. It’s actually perfect. It doesn’t convey any worthwhile information about polyamory, but it does indeed display the typical reaction of a person unfamiliar with the precepts.
You see, one of the things buried underneath the monogamy/non-monogamy issues that very few people like to discuss is the monster called in-security. Some people are naturally monogamous. However many people use monogamy as a shield for insecurities.
I’m fine with whatever lifestyle people choose for themselves (LGBT, straight, mono, poly – as long as we’re all consenting adults), but something I’ve noticed in almost every conversation I’ve had with a monogamous person unfamiliar with polyamory is that within minutes, all of their personal insecurities come boiling to the surface. It’s almost bolded and highlighted in this article:
“I guess I thought fidelity was the opposite of cheating.”
“But Josh isn’t asking a generation to consider opening its marriage. He is asking his wife to do it—a flesh and blood woman who feels a pang if he gets too animated with the grocery clerk.”
"All righty then!” I said, trying for perky. “Whole lotta new words in this game!”
For quite awhile now (almost ten years) , I’ve played the role of ’let’s all get along’ and it’s gotten me almost no where. I’ve approached this topic as though mono and poly were on equal terms. They aren’t. Monogamy has an insidious hidden allies in insecurity, selfishness and low self-esteem.
Those are battles we can’t win unless we stop playing nice and start calling people out. When was the last time a monogamous person had to defend their monogamy. Maybe it’s time they start.