poly fidelity... what is it?

redpepper

Active member
I just realized something. My idea about poly fidelity is on the extreme end of what it means. I think that it is like some monogamous relationships whereby the two involved don’t have much going on outside of their partnership. They don’t have friends of their own and don’t do anything without the other. Not only that there is a notion that if they did then they would somehow be coerced into leaving the other because of a perceived deeper connection being developed.

I have been seeing poly fidelity in the same light as some monogamous co-dependant relationships. Sure there are some like that and that is fine, but there are not all… it’s a continuum (much like many things… poly/swinging, straight/gay, deep connection/acquaintance). I haven’t embraced poly-fi as a possible description for myself because I have several relationships going on at once and intend to have others. I am deeply connected to some people and have a lovely warm connection that makes my heart happy with others.

It comes down to sex really. Is Poly-fi is about sex? Sex with only a select few and is that group closed? Is there other options outside of that or is that not an option because you chose it or because it means losing someone you love?

Why does this come down to sex? I have sex with a select few and have deep relationships with many that I won’t be having sex with. Why is this a description at all? Why do I feel as if I am forced to use the term poly-fi as a description of my relationship dynamics when it doesn’t fit somehow? Is it because I see sex as a means to deep connection yet can have that connection otherwise? Does it somehow make light of my connections that aren’t sexual? I find this annoying for some reason… and am looking to get at the bottom of it….
 
My guess? Because sex is a more discrete boundary. Emotional fidelity is much harder to break out - what's the difference between close friends and something else all together.

I have a very close friend that's close enough to threaten other women when I was "pretending" to be mono (that's how I'm currently describing my pre-poly world). We have never had sex, never kissed, and never had a girlfriend/boyfriend type relationship. But, it is still hard not to describe our dynamic as less than romantic, deep loving connection. If you took a film of us at a restaurant, you would believe we were sleeping together. But, it's still hard to assess when a relationship passes from friendly to an emotional entanglement that violates the typical restraints in a mono or poly-fidelity arrangement.

Sex is a big bright line that is much easier to describe the boundaries.

My 2 cents.
 
I'm saying that emotional entanglement (or romantic love) is harder to gauge when it begins; there's no bright line. So, I can be in a fedility situation (mono or poly) and develop a non-sexual relationship with someone that becomes very close. And, let's say at some point I fall in love with this new person. No sex takes place. However, the emotional connection is viewed as a violation of the commitments I've made to my partner(s). There's no easy gauge as to when that relationship crossed the line.


There's often an expectation that there's both sexual and emotional fidelity with these kinds of commitments. Emotional fidelity is often implied because it's too hard to figure out violations of the rule. So, sexual fidelity is the rule that carries the hammer and tries to do the work on providing limits
on both kinds of entanglements.

I'm not sure that's clarifying, but I tried.
 
I like what Mindful Agony said.

For us, poly-fidelity is pretty much about sex. We have all agreed to only have sex within the quad. For my peace of mind, it's been agreed that anything else will be negotiated in advance.

I find it interesting to note, Asha doesn't feel threatened by sex, but sometimes she feels threatened by emotional involvement with someone else.

ETA: I meant to say, of course we all allow friends outside of the relationship, and of course we can have friends that aren't friends with the others. But, at least for me, because I love my partners and want them to be a big part of my life, I usually try to introduce them all. To make this example easier, when Easy and I were monogamous, he had lots of friends that weren't all that familiar with me, and I had a smaller group who weren't all that familiar with him. But because we have limited time together, and we attend some things together, we usually introduce the spouse who isn't involved in the social group at some point.
 
Last edited:
thanks... i'm not sure I get this bit, explain more please? thanks... :)

Let's say that you wanted to bust someone on emotional infidelity. What proof would you use? How would you distinguish that from someone who was just a close friend? How would you make a strong case as opposed to, "Well I just know" ? How would you establish the line in such a way as the emotional infidelity was still wrong but expected social connections were ethical(such as one's family)?

Sexual infidelity, on the other hand, is much easier to define and prove. Lipstick on collar, unaccounted for time, shirt on backwards, whatever.
 
hm, interesting. So there is a connection yet a difference between sexual and emotional fidelity? Where does poly-fi fit then?

For me it's about sex, not both. I relate emotions to sex, but can be emotionally connected without it. I am connected when I have sex. I am connected in other ways too.

Does that make sense?

I find it interesting because some people in my community call me poly-fi, yet I wonder if sex for them is based on the same things I experience. There seems, from the outside, that they have sex for recreation as well as to connect... yet I wonder if they have the capacity to do so without the sex?

I wonder this because I have known people who, when they here that I am not available for sex, they don't know how to act around me, don't know how to relate to me and aren't used to being friends or close to someone that is not sexually available. I have known this in my mono life for sure. It's like, "she is not available so I won't bother getting to know her."

It makes me feel that I am not worth anything to them and it makes me feel in turn that the term poly-fi is in someway less than or not valid and that the people who decide on this kind of poly, what ever it means to them, are secluded and in their own world that is a part from the rest of the poly world. They have in some way sold out... or are on a different path that is far from poly that is more open sexually.

Really, who cares... I am confident in what I do and how I engage in my relationships with others. It's ashame that there is a rift that is caused sometimes, but I at least do my best to build bridges. I keep at it for that reason.

sorry, I feel like I am not being clear as this is all emerging for me.. thanks for baring with me. I appreciate all the insight.
 
I wonder this because I have known people who, when they here that I am not available for sex, they don't know how to act around me, don't know how to relate to me and aren't used to being friends or close to someone that is not sexually available. I have known this in my mono life for sure. It's like, "she is not available so I won't bother getting to know her."

It makes me feel that I am not worth anything to them and it makes me feel in turn that the term poly-fi is in someway less than or not valid and that the people who decide on this kind of poly, what ever it means to them, are secluded and in their own world that is a part from the rest of the poly world. They have in some way sold out... or are on a different path that is far from poly that is more open sexually.

Hrm. That's a tough one and it is understandable that you would feel put out by this.

I think at least a small part of it might be(and I can't say for certain as I don't know the people or community in question) part of the purpose of the larger poly community.

From what I've noticed, people seem to get involved in the larger community for four reasons. Either to date, to get their "Poly 101" info, because something has gone horribly wrong, or they want a social circle.

The people that are there for 101 tend to fall out pretty quickly(and are easy to spot). The people for whom things have gone horribly wrong also tend to fall out fairly quickly(and are even easier to spot). That leaves the social circle people and the daters.

The thing is that nobody wants to admit that they are a dater(it's like The Game. If you admit you are a dater, you lose.) and(as they don't have a something wrong story and have gotten the basics) tend to pass themselves off as social circle people(in some cases even to themselves).

I would imagine you have(unfortunately) stumbled across a great way to find out if someone is a social circle person or a dater. If someone is in it just for the friends, they don't care what you do in your sex life. A dater on the other hand would find out you are unavailable, tick you off their "girls what I can have sex with" list and move on.
 
yes, D that is exactly it.

I guess I should move on an hide in my poly-fi house with only those I fuck, cause there is no room for us poly-fiers in the outside poly world... too bad that those who are looking for what I have don't have any outside evidence of this working or existing ... I guess they will have to suffice with the poly daters... :p :D

sarcastic, but frustrated. It extends to everywhere really... not just in the poly world. There seems to be a struggle to have depth with most people.
 
yes, D that is exactly it.

I guess I should move on an hide in my poly-fi house with only those I fuck, cause there is no room for us poly-fiers in the outside poly world... too bad that those who are looking for what I have don't have any outside evidence of this working or existing ... I guess they will have to suffice with the poly daters... :p :D

sarcastic, but frustrated. It extends to everywhere really... not just in the poly world. There seems to be a struggle to have depth with most people.

Maybe. To be blunt, I tend to recommend people to the poly community when something has gone wrong or they need their "Poly 101" cred. The larger poly community is really, really good at teaching new ways to communicate and do poly.

Once that's done,however, it is a lot easier to find a social circle where people don't care what you do with your naughty bits and go from there. You get an occasional dater, but as most activities around which social circles are built are explicitly non-sexual(i.e., the SCA or political parties), you tend to get people who are there for either the socializing or the activity itself. For better or for worse poly/sex-positive communities are based around sex and so will draw people who are interested in sex.

In regards to having depth with most people I know exactly how you feel there. In my case it is intellectual(I am guessing for you it is more emotional), but I think the overall feel is similar.
 
I find it interesting because some people in my community call me poly-fi, yet I wonder if sex for them is based on the same things I experience. There seems, from the outside, that they have sex for recreation as well as to connect... yet I wonder if they have the capacity to do so without the sex?

I wonder this because I have known people who, when they here that I am not available for sex, they don't know how to act around me, don't know how to relate to me and aren't used to being friends or close to someone that is not sexually available. I have known this in my mono life for sure. It's like, "she is not available so I won't bother getting to know her."

It makes me feel that I am not worth anything to them and it makes me feel in turn that the term poly-fi is in someway less than or not valid and that the people who decide on this kind of poly, what ever it means to them, are secluded and in their own world that is a part from the rest of the poly world. They have in some way sold out... or are on a different path that is far from poly that is more open sexually.

The people who are worth getting to know are going to be people who are willing to put in the time to get to know you, and not just with the hope of one day being able to get into your pants! I know that there are some out there who just see everyone as a potential bedmate but it isn't the majority.

I know from experience that people can find close, non-sexual friendships very threatening. My best friend's partner recently admitted that to me. She couldn't figure out how 2 people could be so intimately connected with each other and it not be a sexual thing. It never has been though and never will be, neither of us are interested in pursuing that.

You shouldn't have to be available to everyone for sex for them to appreciate you for who you are. Isn't there something about poly thinking of letting relationships with people develop into whatever they're going to be? Just let them label you however they want to, if you don't want the label for yourself, don't take it on! There is no one right way to do poly. There are plenty of people who love and appreciate you for who you are and not for how you conduct your relationships.

-Derby
 
Time to melt into poly fi land... Maybe things are getting way normal and I should disappear.

Thanks derby. Its actually not that important to me. What I wanted to know also about poly fi is if its something that is a goal for people? Is it something to strive for that is honourable? Or is it a cop out kind of poly? I see it as such for others, but maybe its what I have experienced so far. And maybe its an age and stage thing.
 
Last edited:
I think the word just means long term / life long commitments involving multiple people. It seems that a lot of people use it to imply exclusivity (no adding of partners) but I don't think it has to mean that.

Regardless of the meaning, people should not be using the word as an insult or labeling you. You are the only one who is allowed to stick labels on yourself!:)
 
Time to melt into poly fi land... Maybe things are getting way normal and I should disappear.

Thanks derby. Its actually not that important to me. What I wanted to know also about poly fi is if its something that is a goal for people? Is it something to strive for that is honourable? Or is it a cop out kind of poly? I see it as such for others, but maybe its what I have experienced so far. And maybe its an age and stage thing.

I don't think it's a cop out at all. Not any more than I think Monogamy is a cop out. I imagine a polyfi family could be quite a powerful, loving experience. I'm not sure it's right for me. But, I can see the attraction to it. It is not a goal for me though I wouldn't rule it out with the right wickedly awesome bunch of folks.

I think the word just means long term / life long commitments involving multiple people. It seems that a lot of people use it to imply exclusivity (no adding of partners) but I don't think it has to mean that.

Regardless of the meaning, people should not be using the word as an insult or labeling you. You are the only one who is allowed to stick labels on yourself!:)

As I understand, the differentiating factor in poly-fi arrrangments is the commitment to exclusivity within the group. As such, introducing new partners is a full group exercise. Perhaps not. I imagine that for this to work, you'd have to be very slow to add and slow to remove (akin to the barriers to entry and exit that exist with marriage). They are good for the stability of the unit. I've never heard anyone assume that they are closed, hermitcally sealed. On the other hand, the requirements for taking on new members may indeed seem too involved for some.

Maybe even the above contains too many assumptions beyond the basic notion of exclusivity within a defined group of people. How that group gets defined and redefined could be as varied as the number of groups out there.... at some point, however, you slip out of polyfi and into something else if the group is too easily or frequently redefined.

So, maybe, nevermind. :confused:
 
What I wanted to know also about poly fi is if its something that is a goal for people? Is it something to strive for that is honourable?

I would think that only the people involved can decide whether it is a goal to strive for or not. What is everyone comfortable with.
 
It is some peoples goal. I think I like the idea of it. Its partially a limitation in time and emotion.

poly-fidelity as far as I have read is usually a grouping ALL locked into themselves. When someone else comes in EVERYONE has to decide it healthy

But IU have seen it more micro managed. Like 3 of the 4 partners are poly-fidelious and the 4th is in the grouping but remains open.

Lots of variations of a theme imo.
 
I was under the impression that polyfidelity meant the same as your typical monogamous relationship: no new partners, ever, and even bringing it up might cause you to be dumped. Difference being, it would be with more than two people involved.

I thought it wasn't for me, in the same way monogamy wasn't for me: even though I didn't have anyone in mind, the concept of "if you fall in love, too bad! It's not allowed!" felt way too restrictive to me. Because polyfidelity seemed to me to be the same, I was similarly not too interested in it.

However, if it's "if you have someone you like, you need to tell everyone about it, and we'll all work in making that relationship work and adding it to our family"... Then, it sounds exactly like the relationship we have, the one I'd feel most comfortable with. No casual sex, no dates prior to warning everyone, we all get to meet the person or hear about him/her and see pictures, things like that.

But the relationship isn't really closed, the network isn't "complete". It is... until one of us meets someone.
So I don't know if that qualifies as polyfidelity or not. It seems to me polifidelity involves having a "complete" family that never gets any more members... Like a traditional couple.
 
I would say both or either.

For me, if you can have sex outside the relationship, then the relationship isn't closed.
However, my problem with closed relationship is that I feel it tells me I'm not allowed to fall in love, which isn't under my control and therefore doesn't seem fair.

So I would say a relationship can be opened one way, the other, or both, but can only be considered closed if neither are allowed.
 
Back
Top