![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Irony: I have fewer concurrent sexual partners as a polyamorous person than I did as either a "monogamous" person, or an openly poly person with monogamous-identified partners.
In a conversation today, I realized something funny. We were talking about couple-privilege and how some people who come to polyamory from within a previously-monogamous marriage have never had to experience poly dating as a single person, and how that seems to affect how they manage their relationships, often to the detriment of the single person coming into the relationship.
We were comparing our own entry into polyamory, and I pointed out how I had discovered and decided to explore polyamory when I had absolutely no sexual partners at all, so my experience has been shaped by that of a single poly. Because of that, when I finally started having poly relationships, it never occurred to me to date "as a couple" because I had always dated as an individual.
So then I started reminiscing about my past relationship patterns. I have never had a boyfriend, that I can recall, that I remained sexually fidelitous to. I do not defend my actions. I was wrong. But I can explain the motivation. Loving my then-boyfriend has never been enough to prevent me from either falling in love with, or becoming attracted to, someone else. Without any examples of ethical non-monogamy to guide me, I resorted to cheating. Sometimes, I had one boyfriend and one fuckbuddy, but quite a few times I had more than one fuckbuddy and a handful of guys that I just "made out" with, and a couple more that I had phone sex with.
When I was single and in between "real boyfriends", I usually had a couple or a few guys I could turn to for sex - guys I considered friends and we could talk and do things together that wasn't sex, but it wasn't the same kind of stifling, possessive "relationship" that I would have with "boyfriends". But it was rarely fewer than 3 guys I could call on. The lack of commitment from these casual partners meant that I needed to have more than one on standby, for when they were unavailable.
Later, when I discovered the word "polyamory" and began trying to date polyamorously, I met a lot of guys who had never heard of the word before, but who said they could "try it out" - in other words, guys I call "playas" who were just looking for casual sex anyway and thought that polyamory was effectively "permission to cheat" or honest casual sex. These same guys always dumped me when they got a "real girlfriend" because "real relationships" are monogamous. So, when I was dating mono-identified men, guys who always chose monogamy, I had more sexual partners than when I date poly-identified men, mostly because the mono-identified "playas" were not emotionally fulfilling, so I had plenty of room and emotional energy for more people, and they had no interest in how many people I was fucking because it was just casual sex to them, even though they never admitted that, but it was crystal clear in the difference in behaviour between how they treated me, and how they treated the girls they called "girlfriend".
Once I started dating actual, poly-identified men, I have pretty much tapped out at 2 concurrent romantic partners, but only 1 partner that included intercourse (that has historically always been a point of contention with me, actually, and not my own preference - I'd much rather have 2 partners who both included intercourse). Right now, I have 3 partners - 1 partner who is, in every sense of the word, my romantic partner, 1 who is only vaguely defined as "partner" and does not include intercourse, and 1 who is also my romantic partner that includes intercourse, but I only see him twice a year, at most. So, in practice, it could be argued that I still only have 2 partners and only 1 of whom includes intercourse, with a twice-a-year exception, although our emotional relationship spans the distance & the time.
So I find it ironic that being polyamorous has actually reduced my partners and limited my options. This isn't a complaint. I'm not interested in polyamory for the numbers. I'm interested in polyamory for the freedom. But I come away from these musings with 2 observations.
1) People who think polyamory is all about racking up points on a sexual score card, collecting a harem, or regular debauchery, have no idea what polyamory really is.
2) People who think monogamy is the safety net, where you can limit yourself and your partner for physical and/or emotional safety have no idea what monogamy really is either.
**Note**
It should be noted that I am, of course, aware of plenty of polyamorous people who have handfuls of romantic partners, even handfuls of sexual partners. I am not saying that polyamory necessarily places limits on the numbers of partners. After all, that's contrary to the whole point of polyamory, which is "multiple" and usually preferred by people who want "freedom", as I do. I'm just saying that polyamory also doesn't necessarily mean that you will have lots of partners. Sometimes, being polyamorous means that you only have one partner, or that you have none at all.
I find that, for those of us who are seeking freedom within our relationships, often getting that freedom satisfies the need for freedom, whereas getting lots of partners does not necessarily mean that we feel free. Sometimes, just knowing that I *could* have another partner is enough, and I don't have to go out and get another partner just to make myself feel free.
**Note 2**
It should also be noted that I am, of course, also aware of plenty of monogamous relationships that actually are monogamous, meaning that there are no additional sexual/romantic partners, and that monogamy does not necessarily have to include cheating or that not all monogamous people are interested in casual non-monogamy. My point here is that monogamy also doesn't necessarily mean that you will have that sexually exclusive arrangement, even if that's what you signed up for, and that the word "monogamy" does not mean the same thing to everyone. (there's a Sex And The City episode on that:
)
In a conversation today, I realized something funny. We were talking about couple-privilege and how some people who come to polyamory from within a previously-monogamous marriage have never had to experience poly dating as a single person, and how that seems to affect how they manage their relationships, often to the detriment of the single person coming into the relationship.
We were comparing our own entry into polyamory, and I pointed out how I had discovered and decided to explore polyamory when I had absolutely no sexual partners at all, so my experience has been shaped by that of a single poly. Because of that, when I finally started having poly relationships, it never occurred to me to date "as a couple" because I had always dated as an individual.
So then I started reminiscing about my past relationship patterns. I have never had a boyfriend, that I can recall, that I remained sexually fidelitous to. I do not defend my actions. I was wrong. But I can explain the motivation. Loving my then-boyfriend has never been enough to prevent me from either falling in love with, or becoming attracted to, someone else. Without any examples of ethical non-monogamy to guide me, I resorted to cheating. Sometimes, I had one boyfriend and one fuckbuddy, but quite a few times I had more than one fuckbuddy and a handful of guys that I just "made out" with, and a couple more that I had phone sex with.
When I was single and in between "real boyfriends", I usually had a couple or a few guys I could turn to for sex - guys I considered friends and we could talk and do things together that wasn't sex, but it wasn't the same kind of stifling, possessive "relationship" that I would have with "boyfriends". But it was rarely fewer than 3 guys I could call on. The lack of commitment from these casual partners meant that I needed to have more than one on standby, for when they were unavailable.
Later, when I discovered the word "polyamory" and began trying to date polyamorously, I met a lot of guys who had never heard of the word before, but who said they could "try it out" - in other words, guys I call "playas" who were just looking for casual sex anyway and thought that polyamory was effectively "permission to cheat" or honest casual sex. These same guys always dumped me when they got a "real girlfriend" because "real relationships" are monogamous. So, when I was dating mono-identified men, guys who always chose monogamy, I had more sexual partners than when I date poly-identified men, mostly because the mono-identified "playas" were not emotionally fulfilling, so I had plenty of room and emotional energy for more people, and they had no interest in how many people I was fucking because it was just casual sex to them, even though they never admitted that, but it was crystal clear in the difference in behaviour between how they treated me, and how they treated the girls they called "girlfriend".
Once I started dating actual, poly-identified men, I have pretty much tapped out at 2 concurrent romantic partners, but only 1 partner that included intercourse (that has historically always been a point of contention with me, actually, and not my own preference - I'd much rather have 2 partners who both included intercourse). Right now, I have 3 partners - 1 partner who is, in every sense of the word, my romantic partner, 1 who is only vaguely defined as "partner" and does not include intercourse, and 1 who is also my romantic partner that includes intercourse, but I only see him twice a year, at most. So, in practice, it could be argued that I still only have 2 partners and only 1 of whom includes intercourse, with a twice-a-year exception, although our emotional relationship spans the distance & the time.
So I find it ironic that being polyamorous has actually reduced my partners and limited my options. This isn't a complaint. I'm not interested in polyamory for the numbers. I'm interested in polyamory for the freedom. But I come away from these musings with 2 observations.
1) People who think polyamory is all about racking up points on a sexual score card, collecting a harem, or regular debauchery, have no idea what polyamory really is.
2) People who think monogamy is the safety net, where you can limit yourself and your partner for physical and/or emotional safety have no idea what monogamy really is either.
**Note**
It should be noted that I am, of course, aware of plenty of polyamorous people who have handfuls of romantic partners, even handfuls of sexual partners. I am not saying that polyamory necessarily places limits on the numbers of partners. After all, that's contrary to the whole point of polyamory, which is "multiple" and usually preferred by people who want "freedom", as I do. I'm just saying that polyamory also doesn't necessarily mean that you will have lots of partners. Sometimes, being polyamorous means that you only have one partner, or that you have none at all.
I find that, for those of us who are seeking freedom within our relationships, often getting that freedom satisfies the need for freedom, whereas getting lots of partners does not necessarily mean that we feel free. Sometimes, just knowing that I *could* have another partner is enough, and I don't have to go out and get another partner just to make myself feel free.
**Note 2**
It should also be noted that I am, of course, also aware of plenty of monogamous relationships that actually are monogamous, meaning that there are no additional sexual/romantic partners, and that monogamy does not necessarily have to include cheating or that not all monogamous people are interested in casual non-monogamy. My point here is that monogamy also doesn't necessarily mean that you will have that sexually exclusive arrangement, even if that's what you signed up for, and that the word "monogamy" does not mean the same thing to everyone. (there's a Sex And The City episode on that:
)
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 8/5/11 12:18 am (UTC)From:Part of it for me is that I'm only sexually attracted to males, and my partners tend to be attracted to females. This means that we do not share partners. I think it'd be a bit easier to have three partners if at least one of them were shared with one of my partners. Then we could do more things as a group. I mean, I do do a lot of things with both of my partners together, but certain types of activities are right out. I'm sure, even if I did share a partner, one on one time would still be important to have sometimes, but I think we could manage with a bit less.
I've never been tempted to date as a couple though, but then, I've never been in a relationship with someone where we were looking for the same things. So it doesn't make much sense to date as a couple.
no subject
Date: 8/5/11 01:36 am (UTC)From:I think that's what bothers me about those who "date as a couple" - it's not that they just happen to end up with the same partner because they have similar tastes in partners, it's that they are seeking a single person to date them both as a single entity and are using their similar tastes as justification. I have no issue with people who happen to have the same partner just because that's how it works out. In fact, I find that if my partner likes someone, it's a pretty good indicator that I'll like them too. Not a guarantee, but a good chance.
One of my partners has 4 local partners (including me). And I think the only reason it works is because there is some cross-dating going on. His wife and his girlfriend are dating each other. His wife is dating his girlfriend's husband, so they can have "alone time" while partner-swapping so no one is "left out". His wife is *also* considering dating his *other* girlfriend. I'm the outlier, where I'm not dating anyone that he's dating, so it sometimes feels like there is a bit of a division between me and the rest of the group. But even as friends, if all of us women were totally independent from each other, and I don't mean compartmentalized and kept separate, I don't think he'd have time for 4, even with the partner-swapping being convenient for some alone-time. He and his wife no longer date "as a couple", so even though they are both dating the same person, it's not as a single entity-couple dating a single individual - each relationship is its own.
I think that the only reason why it works with me having 3 right now is because that vaguely-defined "partner" happens to be his wife's boyfriend/girlfriend's husband, so most of my time with him is spent when the group is together as a whole. Again, if there wasn't that cross-partnering going on, I just don't see how that many people could be worked into our overly-full schedules. It certainly has nothing to do with how much we love people, it's really all time management. Since I'm 2 hours away, I could probably also fit in another partner who lived in my own town, but then there would be more compartmentalization than I prefer, and I'm often peopled-out by my weekends with the group, so I kind of relish my time alone back at home. Maybe if we all lived together and could overlap our "relationship time" with our "doing stuff around the house time", I could see having more time for more partners.
Maybe.
But maybe I just don't need a lot of time from my partners, and I think I'm more attracted to polyamory for the freedom it gives me by giving my partners other people to focus on than for how many people I can love, or screw, at once.
no subject
Date: 8/5/11 01:56 am (UTC)From:And yeah, I'd view it as coincidence more than anything else if I ended up involved with someone who was involved with one of my partners. It'd be interesting to me, because I've never done that, but it's not something I've ever felt a need for. And my earliest poly experiences were with straight males, so my initial options just did not make that a possibility.
I do like getting along with my OSOs though. They can potentially be good friends. I quite like when it works out that way.