Online now
Online now

Ethical Non-Monogamy

↑ ↓
Dromus​(sub male)
5 days ago • 02/23/2021 7:20 am
Dromus​(sub male) • 02/23/2021 7:20 am
What kind of variables?
DaddyAnt​(dom male)
5 days ago • 02/23/2021 8:34 am
DaddyAnt​(dom male) • 02/23/2021 8:34 am
Thank you Black Earth Duke and TVS, I appreciate your clarification. I feel I have made a great decision and appreciate this blog.
-DA
WholesomeWhore​(sub female){SwellDaddy}
5 days ago • 02/23/2021 12:14 pm
Dromus wrote:
How does one know whether or not they are monogamous vs being non-monogamous, or is that subjective? Or does it require actually trying out one or the other to know for sure?


Regarding monogamy vs polyam - It may be that you identify as ambiamorous as opposed to monogamous or polyam, because (IMHO) this is not a binary preference/lifestyle choice, but rather a spectrum and one's position on this spectrum can be influenced by so many things and can change depending on their circumstances. Essentially ambiamorous people can be happy in polyam or monogamous relationships (again depending on the circumstances). I feel this term is a much more inclusive categorisation of those who don't see monogamy as the choice for them, as it allows for the fact that when ambiamorous people are in a relationship with one person, they don't automatically feel that their romantic or sexual connections are lacking something, but rather are open to the possibility of new relationships etc. given the right conditions.

Regarding the question of whether one needs to actually try it out to be sure if it's the right choice for them - I'd say that if you are curious about ethical non-monogamy, then experience is invaluable because you will never really know how you feel about it until you are living it and actually having to navigate the issues that arise within ENM relationships. Personally, I was utterly unprepared for the emotional complexities it raised and how I would deal with those, and as others have commented previously - open and honest communication with those involved is key to conquering problems that arise within these relationships, as keeping any issues to yourself will only exacerbate them or lead to misdirected resentment which is ultimately toxic.
The Velveteen Slave​(sub female){~ENM~}
5 days ago • 02/23/2021 12:58 pm
@ WholesomeWhore thank you. I'd not run into ambiamorous before * thumbs up* I appreciate you adding that to the conversation. I think,for me, it revolves around my honest and sincere desire to see my partner " deliriously happy" and " completely satisfied". If I add value to their life, and they add value to mine, then I'm a content person. I USED to focus so much on being my partner's sole satisfaction... it was not positive. Now I focus on being the best partner I can be in who I am and what aligns with me every minute of every day. In so doing *i* satisfy my Partner. I also accept and understand and hold no self judgment or disappointment if there are areas I * can not* fulfill because those areas arent in alignment with me, who I am, or what would ge healthy for me. Allowing my Partner to experience those areas with others who it would be positive and constructive with. That, to me, is healthy love. Love of self, respect of self, love for and of my Partner and respect for and of His/Her/Their needs.
MrFulmen
5 days ago • 02/23/2021 6:47 pm
MrFulmen • 02/23/2021 6:47 pm
Or you don't have to identify as any of it.

Some people find it helpful to think of themselves as "wired" for monogamy or polyamory. To say "I am polyamorous" in the same way you'd say "I am five feet tall"--like it's a fixed part of their being.

But you don't have to do that. Unlike height, mono-poly orientation isn't actually a physical characteristic common to all humans. You can enjoy having monogamous relationships now and nonmonogamous ones later, or vice versa. It can depend on how you vibe with a specific partner. It can depend on where you're at in your life.

It can be like whether you prefer pancakes or eggs for breakfast: something that you can let change with your authentic desires without it changing your identity.

So if you hear all this stuff about mono and poly and you think, "Wow! This describes what I've been feeling! I'm poly!" then great. Run with that.

But if you see it and you're thinking, "Oh no! How do I figure out which one I am?" consider that you don't need to be either. And you don't need to be "ambiamorous," any more than someone who isn't fanatically attached to pancakes or eggs has to be "ambibreakfasterous." It can just not be a thing that you hang your identity on.
WholesomeWhore​(sub female){SwellDaddy}
5 days ago • 02/23/2021 8:31 pm
@MrFulmen
I think most people find it helpful to categorise certain aspects of their life/personality in order to effectively communicate specifics surrounding their choices to others. So, when one decides upon which term they want to identify with when discussing their view on monogamy, like with sexuality, they are attempting to highlight differences from what society considers "the norm" - because unfortunately at this point in time not choosing a label means you're automatically labelled by society as conforming to that norm.

As ethical non-monogamy become more normalised within society, the language that we use to categorise different aspects of our choices evolves and grows, and by doing so we are better equipped to communicate our individual needs and wants to those we are contemplating embarking on a relationship with, which in turn helps us manage the expectations of all those involved.

You're right when you say you don't *have* to choose a label to associate with, but choosing which term you feels fits best enables accurate communication... and if there isn't a term which you feel does fit your specifics accurately, maybe you should pick and define a label for it, so others who feel as you do can find solace in the fact that there are other people like them out there and it would give them a description/parameters to help them explain to others what may be complicated feelings for them 😊
MrFulmen
4 days ago • 02/23/2021 10:20 pm
MrFulmen • 02/23/2021 10:20 pm
There's a difference between having a word for what you do, and identifying something as an aspect of who you are.

I'm responding to someone asking how they figure out whether they *are* polyamorous or monogamous, and my answer is that if you don't feel intrinsically called to an identity around your preferences regarding relationship styles, you don't have to go scrounging for one.

I'd go so far as to say that, for a lot of people, the pressure to treat everything like an identity is actively counterproductive. It comes with an assumption that these preferences have to be a fixed part of your nature. So somebody goes through all the work of figuring out whether they are poly or are a dom or whatever, and then they're plunged into an identity crisis as soon as they find themselves wanting something different.
OraclePollon​(sub female){AlphaWolfe}
4 days ago • 02/24/2021 12:48 am
OraclePollon​(sub female){AlphaWolfe} • 02/24/2021 12:48 am
MrFulmen wrote:
Or you don't have to identify as any of it.

But if you see it and you're thinking, "Oh no! How do I figure out which one I am?" consider that you don't need to be either. And you don't need to be "ambiamorous," any more than someone who isn't fanatically attached to pancakes or eggs has to be "ambibreakfasterous." It can just not be a thing that you hang your identity on.


This is why I have trust issues. You can be a pancake, and the person you are with just decides after, 3 days, 3 months or 3 years, that you are Pancakes and they want Eggs.

So you then get to either: agree you also want eggs and try and make that work, even though you don't, or start all over... because they never let you know they weren't sure if they liked pancakes, but they liked your blueberry pancakes 'enough', because someone told them they didn't have to know and could just choose whichever, whenever, and not need to worry that they are making decisions for more than one person, just themselves. Yes, communicate, that would fix it. But that is the fantasy.

@mr.Fulmen, I am wondering if you could clarify. You did a little when you elaborated on it being an option for people who aren't sure. I can understand, don't be something you aren't, but do you think this is something someone should be changing multiple times in their lifetime? I fear this same mentality in things like sex changes - sure some could argue in a sex change you are doing something irreversible... but in this case, you are dealing with other people, not just yourself. Shouldn't you try and be sure?

To completely dismiss "categories" and get "snowflake" or "entitlement" syndrome, turn into "grass is always greener" syndrome and it ends up making people depressed or lose themselves because they go looking for something unrealistic or fantastical to make them happy. Consistency and Reliability are the path to completion. https://medium.com/@teunvanderlugt/why-the-grass-is-never-greener-on-the-other-side-25e557340e9f

This in no way is meant to degrade Poly people. You can't stop people from lying. But it does make it very scary to think about when debate comes up about not even committing to poly, just jumping around as you see fit and using pieces that people build their lives around, as just play things meant to help YOU find you.
MrFulmen
4 days ago • 02/24/2021 1:36 am
MrFulmen • 02/24/2021 1:36 am
I've known a few people who were fully, firmly poly identified, were organizers for poly groups, and swore to high heaven that poly is who they were... who are now happily settled down in monogamous relationships.

I know at least one person who was 100% convinced that they were "wired for monogamy" who is now enjoying an open relationship and (when not in a pandemic) going to sex parties.

I've known so many people who trumpeted being Natural Dominants with "not a submissive bone" in their bodies, who eventually found themselves excited to submit sometimes.

None of those people were lying. They weren't unsure. Their desires just changed, or found new expressions in response to different circumstances.

The fantasy is that these things are fixed. The fantasy is that you have within you an array of permanent settings and that once you've figured out what your settings are it's guaranteed that that's how you'll be and what you'll want forever.

It's always possible that someone you're in a relationship with will come to want different things than they did when you got together. If you wanted monogamy and you started out with monogamy and one day your partner says "I want to talk about opening our relationship," it doesn't have to mean that they were secretly a poly person pretending to be a mono person. They can just be a person who, at this time, has a desire to open their relationship.

It sounds like you've had a hard experience with a partner changing what they wanted out of your relationship? I'm saying that looking for "Pancakeamorous" partners won't guarantee you protection from that, because those identities aren't as fixed as we like to think they are. Someone who's been wildly enthusiastic about pancakes their whole life is probably a lot less likely to switch and decide they want eggs, but they aren't really a member of separate species that is incapable of ever wanting eggs.

I think communication really is the answer, but not communication after they announce that they want eggs now: communication *before* you trip over a big difference like that. I think big, deep desires like this usually don't change overnight. If you and your partner are talking with one another as human beings--not insisting that both of you be locked to a set of identities, but making space to talk about how you really feel and what you want and how you're changing and growing--you get a very good chance to see shifts in desire as they're just forming and to figure out what to do about them together. I think the most enduring kind of commitment isn't a promise to stay the same forever, but a promise to change together.
OraclePollon​(sub female){AlphaWolfe}
4 days ago • 02/24/2021 2:04 am
That is Lovely Mr.Fulmen.

Thank you from the bottom of my heart. This point of view is stellar and very enlightening.

I think everything should be "pancakeamorous!"

Not that is belongs here, but my personal experience is actually being the one who hurt people, thought it was because they were unhappy and only admitted it after I destroyed my own self worth and lived my guilt in finally letting them go, to which they still tried to try and be the hurt one. But I was also not being my true self. So if I come across as guiltless, or faultless, definitely not the case. I am more remorseful that I had to let people go that were trying to be something they were not, at the same time, I can't say I was then who I am now either. So I like the perspective of both sides.

Thank you so much for taking the time ❤

I do also agree, communication for the better, not suddenly voicing something you have been feeling for a long time that only one side was aware of. Your whole last paragraph is just *feels*