(no subject)
Sep. 21st, 2011 03:43 pmThis is a RANTY RANTY RANTY post! Rant on!
SO INTERNET! Let's have us a little talk about relationships.
See, I have this friend, Turquoise1, who considers themself to be monogamous. Recently, they have entered into a relationship with a polyamorous person (Green) who already had another partner (SIlver). Turquoise is monoamorous in relation to Green --T doesn't have any other partners, nor does T wish to find any. Turquoise is perfectly happy being romantically entangled ONLY with Green.
An ex-partner of theirs accused T, because of this relationship, of "Pretending to be monogamous."
This? This is not right in a big way.
The biggest problem is that T is still monogamous, and monoamorous. They are only dating Green. They are only romantically entangled with Green. They hold sexual fidelity towards Green2. Turquoise is entirely monogamous, and implying that they were "pretending" to be such implies that they no longer ARE. Patently false.
Now, is T in a polyamorous relationship? I'd say kindof --I wouldn't call T's relationship poly, but I would call Green's relationship thus. I would call the relationship as a whole a mono-poly relationship, because oh hey, those exist and flourish, no matter how hard you pretend they don't or can't.
Because sometimes a monoamorous person falls in love with a polyamorous person, and they are willing to put in the work to keep the relationship strong, and not limit either partner or illegitimate their sexuality. They are hard, and require a lot of communication, and people who can be open and honest about their wants and needs, and otherwise are in relatively good standing with themselves3. But they happen, and they can be just as happy and healthy as any other relationship.
The second problem is the fact that, oh gasp, sexuality is fluid.
Seriously. Please let your mind wrap around that a little. Sexuality is fluid, and the types or number of people you were attracted to at one point in your life may not be the same as the types or number of people you are attracted to at another point.
Now, before you release your fury, keep in mind that sexuality doesn't *HAVE* to change, and for many people it doesn't at all. Sometimes it doesn't change so much as encounter new information --a previously monoamorous person being introduced to the concept of poly and realizing that it fits their brain better than the strictly mono structures they'd grown up with. And sometimes it absolutely radically shifts, as someone grows older and changes what they want and desire.
And none of that means the person was "pretending" earlier in life.
As an aside, I would just like to remind the audience that "relationship structure" is not necessarily equal to "personal sexuality". I know several mono folk who are in mono-poly, or full poly relationships. I know a few poly-folk who are currently, or have been in the past, in strictly mono relationships4. People make relationships work for them, as they need to.
And really, I think that's what all this boils down to: Does your relationship structure work for you. If you are happy, and your partner(s) are happy, (and ideally, *their* partner(s) are happy) then that's about the best you can hope for. "All relevant parties" does not include your friends, your parents, your exes, or anyone on the internet who thinks you're a dirty perv. If your relationship works for you, then don't let _anyone_ tell you you're doing it wrong.
As a final (unrelated) aside, I have a friend who has no interest in being in relationships at all. I hesitently suggested "asexual", but we both agreed that's not the word being looked for, as that's a totally different set of things (And indeed, many asexual people can form happy relationships, with each other or with sexual people (or both!)). He proposed "anamorous", which I think is a lovely term --and one I fully intend to use.
Rant off.
~Sor
MOOP!
1: I have friends named Red and Blue. Writing this post got a little difficult as I navigated around that to choose arbitrary names.
2: Which is to say, the only sexual contact Turquoise has had outside of Green was with Silver, and this was part of the three of them being together with everyone communicating and having full knowledge of what was going on. There is no love between T and S, and no relationship --this wouldn't have happened were they not both dating Green.
3: Oh hey, did I just describe every relationship ever! I think I did!
4: Myself included --I was well aware I was polyamorous before I started dating kSatyr, but it was an agreement from the beginning that I would be strictly monoamorous while dating him. Now, this was an unhealthy situation for me personally to be in, but that's certainly not true of all poly-folk-in-mono-relationships, and more importantly, just because I am poly doesn't mean I *had* to be in a relationship thus.
PostScript: Oh and THIRDLY, because I forgot to mention it, it is not your right to declare other people's sexuality. Ever! You cannot say "they are not doing [sexuality] the way I think you should do [sexuality] and therefore I will accuse them of pretending", because you don't know what they're thinking, you don't know how they're reacting, and you have no way of knowing what they consider themself short of asking. So, unless you are a member of the relationship police (hint: That doesn't exist.) you do not get the right to decide if someone else is doing an adequete enough job of representing the sexualities they claim to represent.
SO INTERNET! Let's have us a little talk about relationships.
See, I have this friend, Turquoise1, who considers themself to be monogamous. Recently, they have entered into a relationship with a polyamorous person (Green) who already had another partner (SIlver). Turquoise is monoamorous in relation to Green --T doesn't have any other partners, nor does T wish to find any. Turquoise is perfectly happy being romantically entangled ONLY with Green.
An ex-partner of theirs accused T, because of this relationship, of "Pretending to be monogamous."
This? This is not right in a big way.
The biggest problem is that T is still monogamous, and monoamorous. They are only dating Green. They are only romantically entangled with Green. They hold sexual fidelity towards Green2. Turquoise is entirely monogamous, and implying that they were "pretending" to be such implies that they no longer ARE. Patently false.
Now, is T in a polyamorous relationship? I'd say kindof --I wouldn't call T's relationship poly, but I would call Green's relationship thus. I would call the relationship as a whole a mono-poly relationship, because oh hey, those exist and flourish, no matter how hard you pretend they don't or can't.
Because sometimes a monoamorous person falls in love with a polyamorous person, and they are willing to put in the work to keep the relationship strong, and not limit either partner or illegitimate their sexuality. They are hard, and require a lot of communication, and people who can be open and honest about their wants and needs, and otherwise are in relatively good standing with themselves3. But they happen, and they can be just as happy and healthy as any other relationship.
The second problem is the fact that, oh gasp, sexuality is fluid.
Seriously. Please let your mind wrap around that a little. Sexuality is fluid, and the types or number of people you were attracted to at one point in your life may not be the same as the types or number of people you are attracted to at another point.
Now, before you release your fury, keep in mind that sexuality doesn't *HAVE* to change, and for many people it doesn't at all. Sometimes it doesn't change so much as encounter new information --a previously monoamorous person being introduced to the concept of poly and realizing that it fits their brain better than the strictly mono structures they'd grown up with. And sometimes it absolutely radically shifts, as someone grows older and changes what they want and desire.
And none of that means the person was "pretending" earlier in life.
As an aside, I would just like to remind the audience that "relationship structure" is not necessarily equal to "personal sexuality". I know several mono folk who are in mono-poly, or full poly relationships. I know a few poly-folk who are currently, or have been in the past, in strictly mono relationships4. People make relationships work for them, as they need to.
And really, I think that's what all this boils down to: Does your relationship structure work for you. If you are happy, and your partner(s) are happy, (and ideally, *their* partner(s) are happy) then that's about the best you can hope for. "All relevant parties" does not include your friends, your parents, your exes, or anyone on the internet who thinks you're a dirty perv. If your relationship works for you, then don't let _anyone_ tell you you're doing it wrong.
As a final (unrelated) aside, I have a friend who has no interest in being in relationships at all. I hesitently suggested "asexual", but we both agreed that's not the word being looked for, as that's a totally different set of things (And indeed, many asexual people can form happy relationships, with each other or with sexual people (or both!)). He proposed "anamorous", which I think is a lovely term --and one I fully intend to use.
Rant off.
~Sor
MOOP!
1: I have friends named Red and Blue. Writing this post got a little difficult as I navigated around that to choose arbitrary names.
2: Which is to say, the only sexual contact Turquoise has had outside of Green was with Silver, and this was part of the three of them being together with everyone communicating and having full knowledge of what was going on. There is no love between T and S, and no relationship --this wouldn't have happened were they not both dating Green.
3: Oh hey, did I just describe every relationship ever! I think I did!
4: Myself included --I was well aware I was polyamorous before I started dating kSatyr, but it was an agreement from the beginning that I would be strictly monoamorous while dating him. Now, this was an unhealthy situation for me personally to be in, but that's certainly not true of all poly-folk-in-mono-relationships, and more importantly, just because I am poly doesn't mean I *had* to be in a relationship thus.
PostScript: Oh and THIRDLY, because I forgot to mention it, it is not your right to declare other people's sexuality. Ever! You cannot say "they are not doing [sexuality] the way I think you should do [sexuality] and therefore I will accuse them of pretending", because you don't know what they're thinking, you don't know how they're reacting, and you have no way of knowing what they consider themself short of asking. So, unless you are a member of the relationship police (hint: That doesn't exist.) you do not get the right to decide if someone else is doing an adequete enough job of representing the sexualities they claim to represent.