The opposite of monogamy -- quick. Polygamy, right? Wrong. Polygamy is when one man has many wives (often with bad handmade dresses and a fierce need for some eyebrow threading). The correct answer is: polyamory -- literally, "having many loves." Doesn't sound bad in theory - lots of love, right? However, it seems that monogamy is something we hold in very high regard. Before you start your nasty email to me, calling me a home-wrecking "whore with a pen" who wants your husband, let's make it clear that I am writing this in response to hundreds of my clinical patients over the years who have been in my office asking if it's normal to be monogamous. "Why is it so hard?" they ask. "Does a long monogamous marriage equal a good marriage?" My personal opinion is irrelevant, really. We discuss boundaries, truth, guilt, safety, respect - the things your Maury Povich trailer park swingers tend not to do on day-time TV.
I talked about this with Neil Cavuto on Fox TV, who sneered at my answer that "it's better to have a truthful relationship, where both people are happy, and that is not monogamous, than one that is supposedly monogamous but is full of lies and guilt." Or a monogamous relationship that is bored and resentful but, gosh darn it, we are the emblem of a successful marriage even if we haven't had sex with each other since World War I.
While I've sat across from couples that are either "healing from infidelity" or negotiating kooky rules like "no kissing on the lips or hook-ups in the same zip code," fact is, thanks to the Internet, there are a lot of "updates" happening related to "swinging." But let's stick with the term "polyamorous," which sounds more romantic and less like a circus act. I finally interrupted one patient to ask where the polyamory bulletin board was in the library. This young, professional Manhattanite scoffed, "Ever go out with a guy and --sure you know you can relate as far as movies, books, three things you can't live without, you play coy for a date or two, then sleep with him, only to find that he doesn't like oral sex (and you do), and he loves anal sex (and you don't)?" She didn't pause for an answer, thankfully.
The answer? Rather than Match.com or Nerve.com, a more 'adult' site asks those questions and cuts out a lot of time consuming dinners and chit chat that might lead to the fact that he insists on full Brazilians, you won't give up your landing strip. "Lets face it," she adds "Patterson's 'bilateral cheating' was actually an open marriage."
Sites like Adultfriendfinder.com and Passion.com actually have their fair percentage of singles looking for another single who doesn't mind cutting out the anticipation of not knowing genital anatomy size ("Hell, everyone else waited and all that it's gotten them is a 52% divorce rate and desperate housewives. We have to make some new rules").
In the name of science and being up on my pop culture (and widening my vocabulary to include terms like bi-curious and "soft" swap), I logged on. If only our voting system could have a small percentage of the organization, rules, and clarity of these relationships! "Have some manners and call or write my wife the next day" lists one man in a couple who swing together. That sounds reasonable. "If you don't have basic hygiene down, don't bother emailing me." Again, something I've wanted to say to a blind date or two. Testimonials with accolades and even photo albums make the whole idea very nonchalant. For those who don't want skin-on-skin contact, plenty of members only want chats and video-camming - though I still haven't managed to visualize the tap-and-wank coordination. I'm sure there's a trick. Plenty of married men and women state staunchly, "I'm married and happy, not planning to leave my significant other." Some add that their "other" knows and takes the "don't ask don't tell stance"; others have elaborated a pretty damn sophisticated plan that only shows pictures of body parts and gives alternate email addresses. In most, I'm glad to see, condoms and safe sex aren't a question, they often a non-negotiable.
Is there a darker flip side to this, one where sexual addiction takes over or significant others find those cams and want a divorce? I'm sure. But many many other scenarios exist. "A guy I met last night has been happily married for 14 years," my patient quipped. "That is more than anyone I know!"
We didn't get to talk about how these experiences are making her question old rules and her own views of love and marriage (or singlehood) yet. She ends the session asking rhetorically, "Once you go polyamorous, can you ever go back? Do you want to?"
Don't shoot the messenger. Again, I don't want to sleep with your husband, or wife, or both. Shoot me an email with your opinion.
The superior attitude of some people is sickening. "We're waiting for others to evolve." Get over yourselves. Do whatever you do. Not all people are driven by their animal urges. Evolution should go in an intellectual, spiritual direction IMO.
Stay independent and have all the loves you want. Why try to bring more lovers into a marriage?
It may not always be about sex, but the examples in the article make it seem that way.... oral or not, anal or not, brazilian vs. landing strips..... better to know before wasting time with someone, write my wife a note in the morning, etc. Silly crap that sounds like some people wanna emulate Hugh Heffner or they've read too many Penthouse Forums (do they still have those? I'm completely out of touch.)
Poligamy is having more than one spouse, polygyny is having more than one wife, and polyandry is having more than one husband. Polygyny is overwhelmingly the most common form of polygamy, but the words are, strictly speaking, not synonymous.
I'm not sure that the concept of "opposite" applies to monogamy, but polygamy seems to be about as opposite as polyamory.
http://www.metrotimes.com/editorial/story.asp?id=2967
But I don't believe polyamory is the new monogamy. Monogamy is a great choice if that's what two people want, other choices shouldn't wreck that.
For a vast majority of people, sexual drive changes dramatically over a lifetime. In many instances people lose their sex drive almost entirely. And what happens in these relationships when that occurs? A relationship characterized by sex but where the partners no longer have sex (or not very much sex) disentigrates.
I'm not trying to make a moral argument. It just seems to me that the law of the harvest eventually catches up to people in this type of relationship. Honestly, sounds like lots of fun during the early years of marriage. Sounds like a complete disaster as the years move on.
As do ones where they don't. My wife lost interest in me after she got pregnant, and we spent the next 20 years as partners in parenting. Then the kids went off to college.
She made very clear that she was not interested in reviving the relationship. I suggested that we could work out an arrangement, but she was cold to that idea as well. So we're divorcing.
I think poly sounds very appealing.
I enjoyed your article in the Huffington Post today.
My husband and I (second marriages for both) have been
living and exploring these themes for 10 years +.
Among other very exciting dates with other people and
without, we have been having a 6 year long
relationship with another woman (single). She also
dates many others from time to time. There are some
quirks like the fact that there is BDSM activity
infused in our relationship with her. But mostly the
topic you write about is quite apropos to our life. We
struggle (mostly I do) with all the things you
mention, like every now and then getting insecure
about my being "enough" for my husband. Your last
question inspired me to write you back and that is one
I ask myself often. If I ask it out loud, it is often
the beginning of a bad conversation. The only answer
to what will there be when this ends, is we will need
to find that out at the time. If you are open to what
presents itself in the marriage, the same logic should
hold for what is lost. Otherwise you don't live the
life you have. You are living it by avoiding things
that you are afraid MIGHT happen. Not a good place to
be.
Anyway, thanks for the article.
Karen
Jenny Block
Author of "Open: Love, Sex, and Life in an Open Marriage
http://www.jennyonthepage.com
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jenny-block
I'm not liberal, but I do agree with the position above. Society does function much better and people find real happiness when they think beyond themselves and have a concern for others that trumps their concern for personal gratification (whether it be sexual or otherwise).
I'm sure multi partner open relationships work for a few people. But, what are the costs associated with that lifestyle? Everytime I read of someone who is in such a relationship, they only talk about how everythings peachy and everyone is happy. In a monogamous relationship, the cost is that I have sex with one woman forever. I'll only have children with one woman...I'll only experience the closeness that intamacy brings with one woman. And, there are times when we struggle, when things are hard and we don't find each other attractive because we wear on one another. I'm just being honest.
I'd like to see someone in a "successfull" open relationship take honset inventory of the costs of such a relationship.
For me this brings up the “fine line†issue of what are the necessary social concessions required to satisfy human animal, verses the question of what human concessions are necessary for social stability and to a lesser degree, social, non-religious morality.
I think it’s pretty well established that both male and female humans are by nature polyamorous, with males being more so, which is primarily due to male sexual physiology. Our Western social norms were originally defined by very outdated religious concepts, and are much more difficult to use as valid social boundaries in the modern day. And like so many other areas where what is acceptable to a person or a couple [married or unmarried] is subject to legal governance, civil unions and the rules that apply to them are far more restrictive than what is actually practiced in reality.
And here’s an example that tangential, but still relevant, IMO:
We continually see on national and local newscasts stories of adults with teenage sex partners--as prescribed by our current cultural norms and laws, these stories are always in context to criminal prosecution. But a look at the evolution of human society and previous social norms reveals that this is not only a practice that has been tolerated, but in some instances even encouraged in our past societies.
The point being that while there are certainly multiple and valid reasons for our prohibitions for sexual age of consent, we sometimes see a case or situation that makes us feel as though our social and legal norms are just too antiquated and unrealistic. My example of this would be the MSNBC program “To Catch a Predator†series; for me the borderline entrapment setup is far more distasteful than the individuals and activities they pursue. While I am certainly opposed to thirty-something males stalking girls in their early teens online, when I see a young man in his early twenties charged with a crime for having sex with a teenager—even though I know I would object as a protective father--I can’t get past the idea that while restrictions should be applied, no actual “crime†has been committed [as long as the situation was consentual].
I also feel that our legal requirements for exclusive male/female marriage are absurd and impractical, as well as the legal confines of such a union, in regards to polyamorous situations. But a reasonable argument against an “anything goes†policy is the complexity of the division of wealth and property upon the dissolution of complex unions.
But I fear that nothing in this realm will change much; as long as we depend on antiquated religions for the foundations of morality and law, we will remain stagnant in regards to the legality of evolving human unions and relationships.
Omigod, what horse patootie. Polyamory does not mean careless sleeping around, as you seem to imagine. It means mutual love and respect among more than two. For this to work well, it demands unusual levels of discipline, honesty all around, excellent communication skills and the courage to use them; kindness, willingness to sacrifice cheerfully for the good of others, willingness to stand up for yourself against others, the wisdom to know which of these to choose when... and much else.