Evolved polyamory?

alexi

Member
A tourist once told me that while on a trip to some country he came across families who exchanged their members for sex regularly. Any children born belong to the mother's family. The bonds within the family were very strong while physical intimacy with other families in the village was arranged by the women themselves.... maybe with the consent of the men. The men did all the outside work while women were mainly engaged in household work.

The concept makes interesting reading though I doubt its reality. Maybe we can adapt.
 
Yes, the Mosuo are one example. They are also known as the Na. Read the "Walking Marriages" section of that Wiki page that Opalescent linked to. Very interesting people. There is a book called A Society without Fathers or Husbands: The Na of China. From a book review in the publication American Ethnologist:

The Na have shocked Han Chinese ethnologists
by not having marriage; rather, they practice
"visiting relations" -- consensual sexual relations
in which both partners remain members
of their natal households and never form an
economic or social union recognizable as
marriage. Na men visit their partners in the
evening and return home by morning to mothers,
aunts, uncles, and siblings, to join in their
own household's work. Either partner can end
a relationship at any time, and both can take
other lovers during or between longer-term
relationships.

In Na matrilineal households, the father is
considered socially unimportant, and, prior to
the Na's inclusion in the communist state, his
identity was often unknown.

The Na share an understanding, albeit flexible,
of the family as the blood or adopted members
of the household; they see the family as central
to their emotional, economic, and social existence
. . . it is because the Na believe that families should
be stable and harmonious that they do not base
family structure on romantic relationships. These
Na say that love for family members is enduring,
whereas passion is fleeting.​

Just makes one think a bit about what's important. The Na's system enables a separation between familial love and sexual love/passion, which frees the adults to take on as many lovers as they wish without recrimination.

The Na live communally and the men don't rule the households nor have any ownership over the women or their offspring. Paternity is not integral for the community to thrive and function well, nor for any of the children to be loved, cherished, and raised well. The women who have children raise them with the help of their siblings, and family is preserved that way. The women's brothers (uncles to their sisters' children) help raise them. Men with only brothers probably share in raising children of other related households, or work to support the larger village. Men's contributions to their society are important, but it doesn't matter which children are theirs and there is not an emphasis on preferring male children to be born.

I think it's a great model for communal living but it would be a very brave endeavor in modern Western societies, where paternity is usually considered of utmost importance (a belief that was useful when woman and children were considered property). Yes, there maybe medical reasons for knowing paternity, but the Na live in a way that shows how possible it is to have a functioning society in which having sexual liaisons purely for pleasure and outside a bond like marriage is not something shameful! They also teach us how unimportant socially and culturally it can be to know whose seed the children come from. Loving and raising a child shouldn't be limited to biological offspring only, IMO.
 
Great information!! The thing I like most about these systems is the economic and emotional security it provides. The family wealth keeps increasing as there is no division. There is no problem of taking care of children and the families can really go for good genes for better progeny.

Maybe if people in small communities can get together for short periods (to start with) and become like the Na or Mosuo there will a lot more fulfillment in our lives. They can also look for funding through contributions or raising funds for children (if any, though it must be rare, but one can be atleast be free of any financial anxiety in this regard) born out of such brief encounters. Once these experiments are successful the idea can be established on a more permanent basis within these communities and even expand them. Initially it may need to be discreet.

Alexi
 
Last edited:
My idea is if a few couples who share similar views can get together and form a close-knit group, it would be ideal. The problem is we do not know who these couples are in a given place. And if they exist how to get them together. Plus there is the factor of inhibitions brought about by centuries of brainwashing.

Most couples have a desire to experience a change of partners in bed once in a way (am I right?) just to get rid of the ennui of a monogamous relationship.

If there is the simple joy of of sharing ourselves with others in a detached manner; and also benefiting from a mutual support system; and without all the complications that seem inevitable at times like jealousy etc., nothing could be better. The group has to be selfless and be more in the nature of rendering a service - compersion.
 
Last edited:
A thought struck me - what are the practical limitations of polyamory? And what could be the solution? It is just to help me understand better the concept.

Alexi
 
A thought struck me - what are the practical limitations of polyamory? And what could be the solution? It is just to help me understand better the concept.

Alexi
I'm new here, but the only limitations to polyamory that I know of are legal ones (more than one spouse is currently not legal in the US, and in some States, having a lover that's not your legal spouse is actually illegal, for 2 examples) and mental ones (jealousy or monogamous "programming").
 
I think the greatest drawbacks are its highly individualistic and patriarchal nature besides the non-existence of any family support either morally or economically in case of pregnancy for instance.

These negatives are the very things that do not plague the aforementioned Mosuo or the Na communities. Maybe the poly community needs to adapt and evolve.
 
You write that one of your researchers views monogamy as a “cultural cage” that distorts women’s libido. Is monogamy more suited for men than women?

Certainly, women are no better suited for monogamy than men are. That, I think, is clear. It seems possible, if you look at some of the data, that women are even less well-suited for monogamy than men. It’s important to distinguish between the sexual level of desire, and what we choose in our relationships for all kinds of reasons. But on a sexual level, women are even less suited to monogamy.

Partly, I do think that, ironically, has to do with the force of culture. Now that would take us to a really complex part of neuroscience that maybe is best left for another time. I do think that men who’ve been blessed to happily think that it’s only they who are having trouble with monogamy, and that their wives or long-committed girlfriends are more or less just fine with it, they may have a lot to worry about.

The Truth About Female Desire: It’s Base, Animalistic and Ravenous
A new book on women's sexuality turns everything we think we know on its head.
================================================================================================

"I want the community at large to see polyamory as a reasonable and honorable relationship choice. Poly people are often told that what they are doing is too complicated or weird and that it would be better if they just cheated which is just strange to me."
The Polyamorist On The Couch: Q&A With Tamara Pincus On What Therapists Should Know About Big Love
 
Last edited:
If you haven't read "Sex at Dawn" by Christopher Ryan and Cacilda Jethá, I highly recommend it. The Mosuo and other cultures are discussed in the book.
 
Thank you. I have seen most of his videos. All the more it supports the case for non-monogamous relationships.
However I feel unless there is the natural family support polyamory as practised now will still exhibit lacunae and endless mutations.
 
For what it's worth, I've been in a stable poly-fi unit for almost eight years (the whole of my time lived as a polyamorist so far), and lived far away from any other family members (and without outing ourselves to any family members) for most of that time. With the passing of time (and little to no external support), the three of us have grown steadier and more solid together, but we haven't (and won't) have any children (unless our pets count).

During the 5+ years I've participated on poly forums (and the time much of this year that I've spent among the people of a live local poly group), I've found that poly is wonderful in its diversity of successful models. That's strictly my own observation, but I don't worry too much about changing the whole poly landscape, outside promoting thorough honesty and consideration, and supporting those who wish to live a life similar to that of the Mosuo. I think there are many good ways to live polyamorously, which suits the human species well.
 
Thank you for the clarification. So Polyamory is just a synonym of FWB.
Polyamory has as much to do with FWB as Monogamy has to do with FWB.

They are equal in comparison because they both are separate from it.
 
Is polyamory very much different from FWB? If so, in what way?
Is monogamy very much different from one-on-one FWB? If so, in what way?
Polyamory has as much to do with FWB as Monogamy has to do with FWB.

They are equal in comparison because they both are separate from it.
I'd actually say that neither mono nor poly is all that different from FWB, if the 'ship(s) in question is/are healthy. The exact type of benefits can vary.

I can't relate to why some folks say FWB as if it's a bad/inferior thing, or as if it were synonymous with "fuck buddy" (worlds of difference between those two concepts, IYAM).
 
Its common for FWB to get some backlash.. FWB's like lots of labels have full range of meanings.

.From friends that simply fuck without commitment or even honesty (aka the booty call) which likely relates more to swinging.
.Or Friends that you love sharing intimate time with you, like your lovers.

So it can be poly and can be excluded from poly. Just depends on how you view FWB's. But no, it is not a synonym. They can overlap in meaning.. but not always :)

For the record, I really dislike the term evolved polyamory. haha.. it wigs me out since it makes poly sound like something occurring as a logical progression to monogamy. Which I don't believe it is. Its a whole different staircase, not a better one haha..
 
@ Ariakas ... agreed.

Re (from alexi):
"Maybe the poly community needs to adapt and evolve."

No offense, but you should definitely know what polyamory is before proposing a plan to change its landscape.

According to Wiktionary, polyamory is "any of various practices involving romantic or sexual relationships with multiple partners with the knowledge and consent of all involved."

While Wikipedia says,

"Polyamory (from Greek poly, meaning 'many' or 'several,' and Latin amor, 'love') is the practice, desire, or acceptance of having more than one intimate relationship at a time with the knowledge and consent of everyone involved. It is distinct from swinging (which emphasizes sex with others as merely recreational) and may or may not include polysexuality (attraction towards multiple genders and/or sexes).
Polyamory, often abbreviated as poly, is often described as 'consensual, ethical, and responsible non-monogamy.' The word is sometimes used in a broader sense to refer to sexual or romantic relationships that are not sexually exclusive, though there is disagreement on how broadly it applies; an emphasis on ethics, honesty, and transparency all around is widely regarded as the crucial defining characteristic."

It continues:

"In 1999, [I think it was Morning Glory] Zell-Ravenheart [the apparent originator of the word] was asked by the editor of the Oxford English Dictionary to provide a definition of the term (which the dictionary had not yet recognized; the words "polyamory, -ous, and -ist" were added to the OED in 2006). On their website, the Ravenhearts [Morning Glory and Oberon] shared their submission to the OED, which follows:

'The practice, state or ability of having more than one sexual loving relationship at the same time, with the full knowledge and consent of all partners involved.'

The Ravenhearts then further explained their views on the above definition:

'This term was meant to be inclusive, and in that context, we have never intended to particularly exclude "swinging" per se, if practitioners thereof wished to adopt the term and include themselves. As far as we have understood, swinging specifically does not involve "cheating," and it certainly does involve having "multiple lovers!" Moreover, we understand from speaking with a few swinging activists that many swingers are closely bonded with their various lovers, as best friends and regular partners.
The two essential ingredients of the concept of "polyamory" are "more than one;" and "loving." That is, it is expected that the people in such relationships have a loving emotional bond, are involved in each other's lives multi-dimensionally, and care for each other. This term is not intended to apply to merely casual recreational sex, anonymous orgies, one-night stands, pick-ups, prostitution, "cheating," serial monogamy, or the popular definition of swinging as "mate-swapping" parties.
Polyamory is about truthful communication with all concerned parties, loving intent, erotic meeting, and inclusivity (as opposed to the exclusivity of monogamy and monamory). On the basis of our own personal friendships with a few participants in the very large, diverse groundswell of human energy sometimes called the "Swinger's Movement," many -- perhaps most -- self-identified "swingers" do seem to fulfill our criteria of being polyamorous.
However, Ryam Nearing of Loving More says: "In all my talks with swingers it seems that the traditional (and most widespread) way of swinging is not polyamory as it is primarily sexual and specifically not relationship oriented. Some swingers and some locals allow for/choose more emotional connection, but they are the exception rather than the rule."'"

Opinions will vary on whether and how much poly and FWB overlap.

The Mosuo seem to me to be practicing one model of polyamory.

Perhaps it's worth noting that on thing Wikipedia says about the Mosuo is,

"The large majority of women know their children's fathers; it is actually a source of embarrassment if a mother cannot identify a child's father. But, 'unlike many cultures which castigate mothers and children without clear paternity, Na children induce no such censure.' At a child's birth, the father, his mother and sisters come to celebrate, and bring gifts. On New Year's Day, a child visits the father to pay respect to him and his household. A father also participates in the coming-of-age ceremony. Though he does not have an everyday role, the father is nevertheless an important partner."

You could do further research but the above links are a place to start.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top