in case anybody who doesn’t know, poly doesn’t mean everyone is dating each other. Someone in a poly relationship can date someone who has no interest in dating their other partners. ofc a good rule of thumb is that everyone in this metaphorical web should be able to sit down and have dinner with each other without being mean or violent with each other.
Fundamentally they both come from anarchist ways of thinking. If there is no higher order or rule, and nobody has any veto power over anyone else, then the only thing left is to manage each relationship on an equal footing.
Poly for me is about the fundamental idea that nobody gets veto power over anybody else’s relationship, which means exclusivity simply doesn’t happen. It’s just like if you had a friend that said you weren’t allowed to have other friends. That would be weird, and there’s no real reason why romantic relationships should be any different.
While this is certainly a valid form of romance, it’s more accurately described as “non-exclusive simultaneous relationships” than a single “polyamorous relationship”.
Some people really do live in multi-partner committed households, but those seem most often to be dominated by a single person, such as fringe Mormon polygamy. And the most common form of "polyamory’ is probably “affair-tolerant monogamy.”
It’s a big complicated world, and variations of how humans with form intimate relationships fills all possibilities when there is no enforced legal prohibition. (And,.sometimes, even then.)
As a poly person: no, it is not a “affiar-tolerant monogamy”. That is an open relationship.
Polyamorous partnerships are far more committed. Also, sex is not always a part of it.
Of course there is the concept of a primary partner, but there are lot of poly folks that thislike this idea.
But what all of those relationships have in common: there is no case where only one partner is poly. All is about communication and consent.
And to the core topic: There is this thing like a polycule. A network of people with somehow connected relationships. Breakups in those structures are often consensual and no big fuzz. But if it gets dirty, at least in my experience, the offending member of the polycoule gets shown the door. And most of the times, those are the new ones. People that think the could convince their partner to get monogamous because they are the only one that is needed.
No apologies necessary*. I certainly wasn’t trying to offend, just be accurate in model setting.
A more accurate umbrella term for “affair tolerant monogamy” would probably be “non-monogamous”, with the dividing line between that and “polyamory” being exactly what you said : all persons in the relationship cluster knowing the stances of all other participants.
Accurate and non-offensive terminology can be hard.
It does circle us back to OP, though. The answer to “what happens when one couple breaks up in a polucule” is a loud and emphatic that depends on what type of polucule you’re in.
(*: no apologies needed from you. To the extent that I caused you any distress I sincerely apologize. Causing pain was not at all my intent.)
I engaged in the “affair-tolerant monogamy” variant when I was younger. I discovered there’s a positive curvilinear relationship between amount of drama and number of romantic partners. I am sometimes barely able to handle my own incidental drama, so it didn’t last more than a few years.
in case anybody who doesn’t know, poly doesn’t mean everyone is dating each other. Someone in a poly relationship can date someone who has no interest in dating their other partners. ofc a good rule of thumb is that everyone in this metaphorical web should be able to sit down and have dinner with each other without being mean or violent with each other.
So it’s like de-federating
Explain relationship between people using the Fediverse. Please and thank you.
Fuck, I’ll never be able unlink federated social media and polyamory in my head now.
Fundamentally they both come from anarchist ways of thinking. If there is no higher order or rule, and nobody has any veto power over anyone else, then the only thing left is to manage each relationship on an equal footing.
Poly for me is about the fundamental idea that nobody gets veto power over anybody else’s relationship, which means exclusivity simply doesn’t happen. It’s just like if you had a friend that said you weren’t allowed to have other friends. That would be weird, and there’s no real reason why romantic relationships should be any different.
While this is certainly a valid form of romance, it’s more accurately described as “non-exclusive simultaneous relationships” than a single “polyamorous relationship”.
Some people really do live in multi-partner committed households, but those seem most often to be dominated by a single person, such as fringe Mormon polygamy. And the most common form of "polyamory’ is probably “affair-tolerant monogamy.”
It’s a big complicated world, and variations of how humans with form intimate relationships fills all possibilities when there is no enforced legal prohibition. (And,.sometimes, even then.)
As a poly person: no, it is not a “affiar-tolerant monogamy”. That is an open relationship.
Polyamorous partnerships are far more committed. Also, sex is not always a part of it.
Of course there is the concept of a primary partner, but there are lot of poly folks that thislike this idea.
But what all of those relationships have in common: there is no case where only one partner is poly. All is about communication and consent.
And to the core topic: There is this thing like a polycule. A network of people with somehow connected relationships. Breakups in those structures are often consensual and no big fuzz. But if it gets dirty, at least in my experience, the offending member of the polycoule gets shown the door. And most of the times, those are the new ones. People that think the could convince their partner to get monogamous because they are the only one that is needed.
Sorry for the long post, you hit a nerve there ;)
No apologies necessary*. I certainly wasn’t trying to offend, just be accurate in model setting.
A more accurate umbrella term for “affair tolerant monogamy” would probably be “non-monogamous”, with the dividing line between that and “polyamory” being exactly what you said : all persons in the relationship cluster knowing the stances of all other participants.
Accurate and non-offensive terminology can be hard.
It does circle us back to OP, though. The answer to “what happens when one couple breaks up in a polucule” is a loud and emphatic that depends on what type of polucule you’re in.
(*: no apologies needed from you. To the extent that I caused you any distress I sincerely apologize. Causing pain was not at all my intent.)
I engaged in the “affair-tolerant monogamy” variant when I was younger. I discovered there’s a positive curvilinear relationship between amount of drama and number of romantic partners. I am sometimes barely able to handle my own incidental drama, so it didn’t last more than a few years.
Having been divorced from one monogamous relationship
That graph sounds plainly exponential rather than needing its own coordinate system.
Like a walrus
Yeah people not dating their partners partners is much more common than everybody dating everybody.
I know people living in a “polyamorate” or something, so they are as a group of people in a relationship
La Vie Bohème!