poly fidelity- the poly version of monogamy

[redpepper]

Someone told me awhile back that they considered poly fidelity the same as monogamy. Now my assumption was that their definition of monogamy was a couple who do everything together; sexually and in terms of friendship and achieving life goals. To him poly is determined by the freedom to have sexual partners whenever it suited him and without regard to anyone else.

Is this a common thought in the community?

[AnnabelMore]

I certainly wouldn't agree. Poly, to me, is the practice of (or intention to, or ability to) love more than one person romantically. A polyfi triad would certainly fall under that definition. In terms of this board, for instance, a person in a polyfi situation would probably be able to offer all the same helpful advice to newbies in regards to navigating things like jealousy, boundaries, time management etc... because they deal with those things and their unique implications and manifestations in the poly lifestyle, mostly like those who are in more open arrangements but with maybe a few twists.

[AutumnalTone]

Originally Posted by redpepper

Someone told me awhile back that they considered poly fidelity the same as monogamy.

That strikes me as very odd. It also strikes me as a very stupid thing to say. It shows a complete lack of understanding of what monogamy is, which understandably leads to having no clue as to what polyamory is.

To him poly is determined by the freedom to have sexual partners whenever it suited him and without regard to anyone else.

Oh, my. I suspect this is what comes of greater visibility due to efforts to gain greater acceptance. The more people learn about poly, the more people there will be trying to attach the term to any old thing they do.

Did you explain to him what he was talking about is called "open" and is only ethical if his existing partners agree to it?

Is this a common thought in the community?

I imagine not. I suspect there will be more people showing up with nonsense of this sort because they think associating themselves with polyamory provides cover for what they do. I also suspect they'll get disabused of the nonsense before long and as our visibility increases even more, other people can figure out the nonsense isn't actually what poly is about.

[redpepper]

He was in no way identifying as "open." He had been practicing (is that a valid term?) Poly for years with people who also have as he won't date people who are new. In his world, it seems to me, there is no jealousy, no anything really, kind of a bunch of people who come and go who all are flavours of the month to each other. All over lapping each other. This to him seems to be what poly is and if anyone comes along who is either interested in a poly fi triad or quad or whatever, then that is as "bad" as monogamy and is just not poly enough.

Its been a good lesson to me actually. Its reminded me to keep my eyes open and not settle into my comfy little life in terms of believing others would be as comfy if they only knew what they could have. I, by no means, have, what others want. If anyone ever thought that then they are dead wrong. I certainly don't believe that.

Thank goodness we are all different; remembering we are and accepting that I think is the key to full acceptance.

(I think I just answered my question for myself on how to facilitate our community coming together and not separating over some of the issues.)

[Inyourendo]

Well being in a closed relationship be it with 1 or many feels the same to me as being mono does.

[MonoVCPHG]

It seems to me that the person you were talking to approaches the fundamental aspects of monogamy and polyamory in a different way than I do. Both are valid but make understanding each other difficult. For me, monogamy and polyamory are no different than being gay or straight...they are products of who I am and how I function internally...they have very little to do with how I act.

I think he sees monogamy as a set of rules for having relationships where I see it as merely an identifier to how we form romantic bonds one at a time.

Take our relationship for example: I love you monogamously but I will never feel like you could love me monogamously. Maybe you could conduct a relationship in a monogamous way but your ability to romantically love more than me simultaneously will always be present....therefore you will always be polyamorous regardless of your relationship structure.

[SNeacail]

Originally Posted by Inyourendo

Well being in a closed relationship be it with 1 or many feels the same to me as being mono does.

Problem here is that a closed relationship with more than one is NOT mono. However, I guess I understand why it might seem that way. In a closed relationship, the thrill of the "new" is gone (after a while) and life becomes settled and in a respect normal and to some mundane.

[Inyourendo]

yeah i know it's not mono.

[Senga]

Originally Posted by MonoVCPHG

It seems to me that the person you were talking to approaches the fundamental aspects of monogamy and polyamory in a different way than I do. Both are valid but make understanding each other difficult. For me, monogamy and polyamory are no different than being gay or straight...they are products of who I am and how I function internally...they have very little to do with how I act.

I think he sees monogamy as a set of rules for having relationships where I see it as merely an identifier to how we form romantic bonds one at a time.

Take our relationship for example: I love you monogamously but I will never feel like you could love me monogamously. Maybe you could conduct a relationship in a monogamous way but your ability to romantically love more than me simultaneously will always be present....therefore you will always be polyamorous regardless of your relationship structure.

leave it to the monogamous person to explain polyamory I totally agree.

[River]

Originally Posted by AutumnalTone

The more people learn about poly, the more people there will be trying to attach the term to any old thing they do.

Yeah. >Blech<

More and more people these days are under the very strange impression that words can mean just anything we want them to mean--anything at all. And the result is that too many people are getting poorer and poorer at communicating. Sad. Very sad.