Another random post -- poly stuff

[moominmuppet]

Again, from an email conversation, from someone who was asking about poly stuff, and starting poly relationships.

I tend to think of relationship-style orientation as another spectrum like gender or sexual orientation or kink preference -- even to get reductively two-dimensional about it, there's a wide range, and a lot of people somewhere in the middle. For example, I would describe myself as being pretty much at the far end of the monogamy/polyamory spectrum. I don't seem to be able to function in officially monogamous relationships (although de facto monogamous seems to be ok for periods). I've never been able to. It never made sense to me. It's a bit like being gay in a straight world -- I just didn't _get_ it -- what I saw modelled around me didn't connect with me emotionally at all. The few mentions of open relationships (almost exclusively in SF/F -- thank god I was a geek) were absolute fantasies for me, before I could even explain why. It felt right. I also know a lot of people who are very, deep-down, inherently monogamous. They're not going to be happy in an open relationship. It's not even a possessiveness thing -- it's just not how they connect emotionally. They bond deeply to one person, period. And a lot of people are somewhere in the middle, but deeply influenced by our culture (similar to how so many people have some level of bisexual desire, but cultural pressures make it less likely to be expressed, and more high drama and stressful when it is). The people in the middle may be able to function in an open or closed relationship, depending on the people, the dynamics, the point in their life, the other practical life stressors and considerations... A decent number of people I know to have been successfully happy and poly at some points in their lives are monogamous at others just because it's simpler, and life is complicated enough. That said, I'd say that early conversations about relationship styles are a good way of sorting things out, although hampered by the fact that most people haven't even been told that's something they get to consider, and have trouble wrapping their brains around it. First poly relationships can be rocky, largely for those sorts of reasons -- it's a rethinking of all sorts of engrained assumptions, and sorting out personal needs from cultural chaff. As I've been more aware of my own relationship-style needs, (and had enough relationships go "BOOM" over me not understanding mine or my partners), I've learned better how to recognize potential compatibility and, conversely, "warning signs" (which aren't necessarily a reflection on the person -- simply on the likelihood of them having a happy relationship with me). I can be comfortably involved with people who are somewhere in the middle of the range, as long as we find a dynamic that makes it work for both of us, but I tend to be happiest with people who have a similar need for an open relationship, because it does sort of balance a bit better for me when it's something we are both actively invested in making maintainable for our own happiness as well as our partner's. Although I have seen poly/mono mixed relationships that work, it's generally seemed to be a very hard road to travel, and I try to avoid that dynamic, personally. In terms of trying to have a poly relationship, I'd say start with the old chestnuts -- honesty, communication, and going slow, with an awareness that it simply may not work with that person -- it may not be a relationship style that'll make that individual happy.

Comments

[moominmuppet.livejournal.com]

I get a bit miffed at those who seem to think bi must mean 50/50

Well, aside from any other factors, the math just doesn't work out.

In terms of the most basic orientation compatibility (generally agreed to mostly be necessary for any further development of a romantic/sexual relationship), the skew is dramatic.

Let's go with the arbitrary 10% figure for gayness. And let's say maybe another 10% are bi -- very rough figures here, since I'm only illustrating the point. So, I'm female. Basic orientation compatibility with straight men, bi men, lesbians, and bi women. According to the previous arbitrary numbers, that's about 90% of men, and only 20% of women. Even if I'm equally likely to be attracted to any given woman as any given man -- even if I'm exactly, precisely 50/50, my dating life won't likely reflect that unless I intentionally force it to. And that doesn't even begin to touch all the cultural issues that feed into it being more difficult to pursue involvements outside of the "approved system". Why would we expect that bi people, in general, would somehow have all turned that 90/20 skew into a 50/50 pattern in their own lives, while fighting upstream against all the systemic homophobia out there?

It's just a silly expectation, and I don't have overwhelming respect for the statistical abilities of people who expect to see 50/50 in daily life on a regular basis.

[marnanel.livejournal.com]

I'm broadly in agreement with what you say, although I think it's likely that queer people tend to hang around with queer people more, so the figures may not be quite as biased as your arithmetic shows.

[moominmuppet.livejournal.com]

Oh, that's definitely part of the "all other things aside" aspect. It's part of why despite that math, for the past five years or so, my number of involvements with other women have outnumbered my involvements with men. In the larger scheme of things, though, many people don't have access to that kind of queer commmunity, or don't feel a part of it, especially given biphobia issues.