Polyamory.com Forum

Polyamory.com Forum (http://www.polyamory.com/forum/index.php)
-   General Poly Discussions (http://www.polyamory.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=2)
-   -   Exploring (http://www.polyamory.com/forum/showthread.php?t=62292)

MichiganMusic 10-31-2013 10:41 PM

Exploring
 
Hello everyone,

I am considering being open to a polyamorous lifestyle and was hoping to possibly find insight from those who currently live it. I am presently seeing someone, though we have never placed a term of exclusivity on the relationship. I do plan on opening dialogue with her after enough reflection on the matter of polyamory. I should note that I'm a male and would be considered straight on the spectrum.

INTENT
I am beginning to think that I would be most fulfilled with two life-partners without expanding beyond that (as in them or me finding other life-partners).


QUESTION
Do you consider it misogynistic to ask a partner to not look elsewhere for long-term companionship but not do the same?

FUNDAMENTAL ARGUMENTS
The argument I make to myself is that everyone is looking for something, and for some the inverse could be the right thing (one female, two men, as one example).

The counter argument is that it is not an equitable dynamic for 2/3 (in this potential instance) of those involved.



Thank you for your time and Happy Halloween! (-:

Natja 10-31-2013 10:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MichiganMusic (Post 244042)

QUESTION
Do you consider it misogynistic to ask a partner to not look elsewhere for long-term companionship but not do the same?


Yep, it is.

LovingRadiance 10-31-2013 11:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MichiganMusic (Post 244042)
INTENT
I am beginning to think that I would be most fulfilled with two life-partners without expanding beyond that (as in them or me finding other life-partners).


QUESTION
Do you consider it misogynistic to ask a partner to not look elsewhere for long-term companionship but not do the same?
(-:

Yes-it would be.

It is TOTALLY REASONABLE to end up in a scenario with someone who doesn't want to look for other partners.
But to tell someone that you reserve that right for yourself and they are forbidden is hypocritical at best and somewhere along the spectrum as you are a male it is also misogynistic. If you a female it would be whatever the word is that is opposite-as in a female to a male.
But either way-it's a fucked up a way to manage a relationship.

Treating a partner as if they should not have the RIGHT to whatever right you want-is messed up.

BigGuy 11-01-2013 01:05 AM

It is a valid relationship structure for one polyamorous person to seek a closed relationship with two monogamous people. Whether they be men or women.

Is it inherently misogynistic? No. I dont think so. Theoretically. As long as everyone consents to the agreement freely. In practice, I think misogyny or it's anti-male counterpart is more likely to be prevalent. This has historically been true when societal pressures subtlety (or not so subtlety) coerce the monogamous partner to remain monogamous.

Sucessful polyamory requires great introspection.

The question you should ask is, if your needs are being met, why would you need to control the actions of another?

MichiganMusic 11-01-2013 01:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigGuy (Post 244065)
It is a valid relationship structure for one polyamorous person to seek a closed relationship with two monogamous people. Whether they be men or women.

Is it inherently misogynistic? No. I dont think so. Theoretically. As long as everyone consents to the agreement freely. In practice, I think misogyny or it's anti-male counterpart is more likely to be prevalent. This has historically been true when societal pressures subtlety (or not so subtlety) coerce the monogamous partner to remain monogamous.

Sucessful polyamory requires great introspection.

The question you should ask is, if your needs are being met, why would you need to control the actions of another?

Thank you for the thoughtful response.

I agree with you - successful polyamory does require great introspection, something I am in the midst of.

You pose a good question and I think it's something I would need to think about.

My initial line of thought, and perhaps you could shed some light that would alter my perspective, is that it is simply not practical to have too many long term relationships intertwined. How would a family or household be established?

Aside from that, other elements of an open relationship, in terms of non-monogamy, are not an issue.

MichiganMusic 11-01-2013 02:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LovingRadiance (Post 244045)
Yes-it would be.

It is TOTALLY REASONABLE to end up in a scenario with someone who doesn't want to look for other partners.
But to tell someone that you reserve that right for yourself and they are forbidden is hypocritical at best and somewhere along the spectrum as you are a male it is also misogynistic. If you a female it would be whatever the word is that is opposite-as in a female to a male.
But either way-it's a fucked up a way to manage a relationship.

Treating a partner as if they should not have the RIGHT to whatever right you want-is messed up.

Thank you for the response, but it is rather presumptuous.

I think BigGuy is correct in that there is nothing inherently misogynistic (or the opposite) about it - only the historical context. Gender has nothing to do with it, and there are easy scenarios to create that would illustrate that point.

There is a hypocritical element to it, that I wouldn't debate. This is where your argument becomes presumptuous - you are not not necessarily forbidding or removing the rights of the other person. Rather, the parties involved could have been looking for things that happen to compatible.

Example:
Some couples have one member who desires to stay home and take care of the kids while the other works...if this was something that was desirable for both parties then where is the fault? How is this different would be the question? I ask inquisitively, not combatively.

PolyinPractice 11-01-2013 02:06 AM

Hmmmm
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Natja (Post 244044)
Yep, it is.

Well, maybe. But it's a bit of a moot point, no? Look, I know the idea of two women sounds amazing....but there's such a thing as getting what you wish for ;)

Having two women....wanting their needs met from you...and only you...

You might not be able to handle all the joy :)

bookbug 11-01-2013 03:02 AM

Hypocritical yes - if your partners do nor share your desire that you are their one and only.

That said, I have been a member of two households composed of a male and two females. The first scenario lasted a couple of decades until his passing. The other female and I were not sexually involved with each other, but she and I had mutual interests outside of our guy. With the second, I thought I was joining a similar, but more sexually integrated configuration. It didn't work out, but not for the reason you mentioned in your question.

For me, it is a dynamic I hope to experience again some day. However, I lie somewhere along the bisexual spectrum. Definitely bi amorous. (I'm still determining the extent of my bisexuality.)

In both of the above mentioned examples, the lone male did meet my sexual needs and I felt well-loved in the group. If that had not been the case, then I would have considered it grossly unfair to have been forbidden from expanding my prospects. I would suggest that the best way to form your MFF closed triad is to make sure that you keep your girls happy. Due to your desire for exclusivity, it really does put the onus on you.

Anneintherain 11-01-2013 03:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MichiganMusic (Post 244042)

QUESTION
Do you consider it misogynistic to ask a partner to not look elsewhere for long-term companionship but not do the same?

Only if you are a guy who asking a woman to do this and doing so because you think they owe you monogamy or don't deserve the same joy and freedom you do. I agree with what LovingRadiance said - and your response about how one party wants to stay home and raise kids while the other works is not really the same as asking a partner to not date while you do. If the other person wants to be at home with the kids, great! If the other partner wants to be monogamous while you date, great! If they want to NOT do what you'd like, but do the same as you, be it work outside the home or date, that can be misogynistic or hypocritical, or sexist or none or all of the above, depending on your reasoning for asking.

london 11-01-2013 04:34 AM

It's only misogynistic if a man believes that women should not have multiple sexual partners or other beliefs about how women should be. More than anything, I believe that these wishes and rules are based on insecurity, fear and low self esteem. If you meet someone who only wants one man in their life, fair dos. You won't need an official rule then. My partner wouldn't need a rule stopping me having lesbian sex because I don't want to have sex with women.


All times are GMT. The time now is 07:58 PM.