alteregoliz | What's the point?

The subject of a "polyamorous" (or "open") marriage has recently come up. My strictly monogamous friends love to ask this question: "What's the point?" and sometimes in a rather snide (denigrating) tone of voice. Meaning, what's the point of getting married if you're going to continue to date other people?

My response: Do you seriously believe the only purpose in getting married is to secure your partner's sexual exclusivity?**

Really?

Yikes.

Isn't marriage actually about partnership? Isn't it a commitment to share joys, sorrows, time, space, energy, resources?

The elements of partnership look different for every couple. Just as no two people are alike, no two relationships are alike. They have unique traits, characteristics, personalities of their own. In the formation of any successful partnership, needs will be met, desires will be fulfilled and concessions will be made.

The obvious questions to ask when considering a new partnership: Will my essential needs and desires be met? Will the concessions I have to make be acceptable or too much sacrifice? Will the same be true for my partner(s)?

To those who sneer at polyamory marriages I say this: if the persons entering into the partnership can find their happiness within the framework of their agreement, then who are you to judge the shape that agreement takes?

What's the point of a polyamorous marriage? The same as a monogamous marriage. To commit to sharing your life with someone you love.

----------------------------------

PS: You don't have to personally understand it to respect it. How about a little education.

From the Wikipedia article:
**Fidelity and loyalty: Many polyamorists define fidelity as being faithful to the promises and agreements they have made, rather than in terms of per se sexual exclusivity. Having a secret sexual relationship which violated one's negotiated agreements would be seen as lacking fidelity. Polyamorists generally base definitions of commitment on considerations other than sexual exclusivity, e.g. "trust and honesty" or "growing old together".

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

In case anyone is wondering, this is not an indication of a personal decision for me, one way or the other. Just venting my frustration at the negativity I've encountered on the subject matter itself.

I may or may not be able to enter into such a marriage, but either way I understand and respect it.

Well said.

Thank you! :)

My answer to any sort of situation like this is "Whatever floats your boat". ;>

That being said, it's important to always be true to yourself, your needs and feelings, and aware of the needs and feelings of those you are close with. If that means with one partner or multiple, awesome....have at it!

The only thing I have against polyamory (or anything where people aren't being honest with themselves or others) is when individuals use it as a blank check to act skeezy...and worse, hide behind the title of polyamory as some sort of defense to their bad behavior. That to me is not being honest with anyone, and reprehensible as a whole.

Anyhow, hope your situation resolves itself in the best possible way for all parties involved. :>

Egan

I understand what you're saying. Poly is an easy cover for people who are really just players. But there is a difference. True poly's do their best to adhere to a code of ethics which value honesty and respect. Players don't even know what those are...

Thanks very much for your input and well wishes! :)

Thank you for sharing this! You are addressing such a narrow-minded question with great insight. Well said, indeed.

Did your questioners have a rebuttal to YOUR response?

Thank you very much! :)

Unfortunately, I've been so taken aback at the more snide versions of this question that my immediate response was probably fairly incoherent - lol. I'll be prepared for the next time, though!

Which probably won't happen now that I'm all prepared. :-|

And LJ probably isn't the best forum either, as my pals here are unlikely to look down their noses at an alternative lifestyle. I did make the note public in case I decide to link to it elsewhere. Might save me a lot of time...

L: Well written! Thanks for the link.

S: Thanks for the link. Nicely put. It is interesting to me that so many people seem to think that the only "commitment" two people can make to each other is one of sexual exclusivity. Surely that's only a tiny part of the possible ways we can relate.

T: Excellently put. I'm reposting it, I like it so much. :)

L: Wow. I like S's formulation too.

L: ... although upon reflection, I don't think that people think of sexual exclusivity as the *only* commitment two people can make. I think they think of it as somehow the highest or most admirable or most important commitment. Which I totally don't get. Why is it more important than "I'll feed you when you're hungry" or "I'll take care of you when you're sick" or "I'll comfort you when you're sad"?

alteregoliz: Thanks so much for the great feedback and the repost! :) I don't suppose if someone were asked to describe marriage that sexual exclusivity would be the first thing they mention, but "What's the point?!" sure is the first question I've been asked most of the time when I introduce the subject. "Things that make you go hmmm..."

What's the point?

btw...

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

Some additional comments from some non-LJ pals.