Cav's Place

I’ve been meaning to write this since the day I “moved in” here and if this won’t make me do it then nothing will…
Before I start, have to mention that I wrote the first post on the topic years ago.

Imagine a world where bleeding hearts will get healed, not broken. A world where souls won’t get torn apart, leaving only empty shells behind. A world where there would be nothing dreadful to leave behind, to “get over”, to forget. A world without a “rut” to get stuck into. A world where support will always be just a sigh away and where problems will get solved from within. A world where compromise will no longer mean doing what all dislike the least, but actually what each likes best, separately, but without being apart. A world where all will be winners and none will have to settle for a part for fear of being left with nothing if they don’t. A world where we will finally accept that nobody’s perfect, knowing that nobody needs to be. A world where we will work and fight for, and not against, each other. A world where we will learn to be the best that we can be, not just to appear better than another.
Can we achieve that? Maybe we could and perhaps we won’t, but is it not a worthy goal to work towards, a worthy cause to fight for? And if it can’t be achieved in its entirety within our lifetime, isn’t it worth trying to at least achieve a part of it? And if not even part of it could be achieved globally, shouldn’t we at least try to achieve it for ourselves, for our lives and the lives of those we have touched and imprinted forever?
Perhaps doing it for ourselves will even be enough. As long as we will let everyone else see, we could teach by example, and that is often the best way.

What does all that have to do with polyamory? It’s a part of it, and the part I have chosen to talk about at this time. A part that could perhaps be achieved, which would mean a huge step towards the goal.
There’s that saying, “as within, so without”, which is usually taken to mean that you should create inside yourself that which you wish to see around you. But silence and peace are often harder to attain alone, so would it not be a logical step to achieve these goals within our relationships first and then let our resulting state of mind rub off on the world?
I’m not saying polyamory in general, and my view of it especially, is the best way to achieve that goal, as there’s always something better. It is likely a solution better than some and worse than others, but it is the best I can think of and all I ask is for you to hear me out and then think it over for yourselves. Pass it through your own reasoning and come up with your own answers, but make sure your own minds are giving those answers and making those choices.
Chains are hard to break and freedom is sometimes a scary prospect…

From minor arguments among friends to major wars, misunderstanding is the main cause for conflict. That said, I must define what I’m talking about before I can ask you to consider it. Reclaim the term, if you will, since some use it to justify cheating, fear of commitment or putting one gender in a position of authority over the other.
While, if taken in the most general of contexts, any person involved in a relationship with two or more others can be considered polyamorous, I would like to remind people that the second half of the word links it specifically to love. It doesn’t mean having sex with multiple people, it doesn’t mean running around from one person to another and it certainly doesn’t mean having slaves to satisfy your every whim and desire. It means loving more than one person at a time. It describes a loving relationship between three or more people.
It also does not describe open relationships for the simple reason that the term “open relationship” is a separate term coined to describe them. Open relationships have a “core” that represents the actual relationship, but those involved in it also have the freedom to find others to be with, usually for short periods of time, with the full knowledge and approval of their partner(s), as long as they respect certain rules. I’m not saying there’s anything wrong with this, everybody has the right to do whatever they want as long as all know how things stand and aren’t tricked into believing something else, it’s simply not what I’m talking about.
And, very importantly, polyamory doesn’t put any gender above the other. It can mean one woman with two or more men or two or more of each just as well as it can mean one man with two or more women.

Now that I’ve told you what I don’t mean by it, I should say what I do mean when I use the term…
What I mean is a closed, or mostly closed, committed relationship between three or more people bonded by love, not necessarily mutual in all cases. A relationship where people don’t go around dating and having sex with others whenever they want, but usually stick to their long-term partners, either simultaneously or alternating according to a more or less predetermined schedule. A relationship based on honesty and trust where each cares and fights for all others.

Problems are solved by all and you are more likely to find support since there is more than one person around you. Relationship problems are especially easily solved, since friction between any two partners, if not resolved, can destabilize the entire relationship, so it is in the best interest of all to help. Also, one person that is part of the relationship can help two others solve their differences better than anyone else, having been there to know all the data but also being removed enough to think clearly and see the potential solutions.
The possibility of getting tired of one person is also ruled out, since you can alternate or be with more than one at once, as is the need to accept that some of your needs will never be met or the pressure to meet needs you aren’t able to meet, since what one doesn’t meet, the other(s) will. This greatly reduces friction and the feeling that you need a change, that you need someone else, which is usually a natural reaction after a certain amount of time spent in a monogamous relationship, even a very successful one.
The advantages when it comes to sharing the workload are even more obvious and I don’t think I even need to mention them. Though more people will require a certain extra amount of work, some things will be more or less the same, so splitting that work between three, four or even more people is certainly better than splitting it between two. And with splitting chores being one of the major reasons for being unhappy in a relationship, this will greatly reduce the risk of arguments.
And another major advantage that I need to mention here is the possibility of being in a relationship with a person that truly loves you but that you don’t love yourself, as long as they are truly willing to do what it takes and you have grown to at least somewhat like them, of course, since you will still be able to be with the one(s) you love at the same time. And keep in mind that someday you can be in that person’s situation, if you haven’t been there already, so it also gives you the chance of being in a relationship with someone you truly love but who doesn’t love you back.

Such a relationship can involve both primary and secondary connections between people.
A primary relationship is one that takes up a lot of your time and attention, the relationship you focus on, usually with the person you live with. Having two primary relationships is certainly possible, if you are careful not to end up putting one above the other in the long run, your job and social life take up very little of your time and you either live with both of your “primaries” or alternate between living with each. In case of alternating, keeping a strong secondary relationship with one while living with the other is crucial for long-term stability. Alternating also makes a little more time available for your other activities, but not much more, since you will need to make up for the time spent apart each time and the secondary relationship with the one you don’t live with at the time will also need to be quite strong. Having more than two “primaries”, however, seems impossible to me. Even with no time spent on anyone or anything else and without any alone time, you simply won’t be able to offer enough to each of them.
A secondary relationship is one that you spend less time on, generally with a person that can meet a certain need of yours that isn’t met in your primary relationship. The difference between this and cheating is that this is all in the open and the primary partner sets the ground rules. A secondary partner can be someone you go out with Saturday night if you like to do that and your primary partner doesn’t, someone you have sex with when your primary partner just doesn’t feel like it, someone you go to when you simply need a short-term “change of scenery”, from all points of view, and so on. You could have two or three “secondaries” and perhaps alternate between them, but for them to count as secondary relationships they have to be long-term. If you want someone new for this role every so often then what you really want is an open relationship and not what I’m talking about here. What I said about two or three “secondaries” applies if you have just one primary relationship. If you have two “primaries”, even a single “secondary” would be a terrible strain if you ask me, but I can see how some might be able to pull it off…

To me, the most stable relationship seems to be that between four people where each has a primary relationship with two of the others, alternating as I described above, regardless of whether they’re straight, bisexual or gay. But that between three people where either the two that are of the same gender are bisexual or all are of the same gender and gay, creating a solid and permanent “core”, each having a primary relationship with each of the others, could also work almost equally well.
This doesn’t mean that relationships between more people can’t be stable. With enough care and planning, there are certainly ways to achieve similar stability with five, six, seven or even eight people, and possibly even more, but those are the easiest to describe and also seem the easiest to achieve, so that’s why I mentioned them here.

Considering the possibility of secondary relationships, the “networking” can get quite interesting, but since a person’s involvement with their secondary partner’s other partner’s partner would be non-existant I won’t consider connections that far removed. Still, besides the inner peace and security that such relationships can bring, having people connected like that might have interesting consequences for the world at large, make people care more and be less selfish…

But this is getting too long already and I don’t want to scare you away, so I’ll continue another time. Until then, just open your mind and think about it, nothing more…