Francais | English | Espanõl

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Close Relationships

Image:KarenWhimseyValentineMain.png

Affinity Asexuality Attachment Bisexuality Bride price Brideservice Bonding Boyfriend Casual relationship Cohabitation Compersion Courtship Domestic violence Dower Dowry Divorce Friendship Family Girlfriend Heterosexuality Homosexuality Incest Intimacy Jealousy Limerence Love Marriage Monogamy Open marriage Partner Pederasty Platonic love Polyamory Polyandry Polygamy Polygynandry Polygyny Sexuality Separation Serial monogamy Swinging Widowhood v • d • e</div>

Image:Poliamory pride in San Francisco 2004.jpgPolyamory is the practice or lifestyle of being open to having more than one loving, intimate relationship at a time, with the full knowledge and consent of all partners involved. The word is often used more broadly to refer to relationships that are not sexually exclusive, but there is disagreement on how broadly it applies (for example, many people contend that swinging is not polyamory). Persons who consider themselves open to or emotionally suited for such relationships may define themselves as polyamorous, often abbreviated to poly.

Contents 1 Terminology 2 Symbols of polyamory 3 Forms of polyamory 3.1 Open relationships 4 Legal status of polyamorous relationships 5 Values within polyamory 5.1 Fidelity and loyalty 5.2 Trust, honesty, dignity and respect 5.3 Communication and negotiation 5.4 Non-possessiveness 6 Polyamory as a lifestyle 6.1 Sharing of domestic burden 6.2 Specific issues affecting polyamorous relationships 6.3 Polyamory and parenting 6.3.1 Custody ramifications 7 Related groups and concepts 8 Philosophical aspects 9 Criticisms 9.1 Religious objections 9.2 Division of love 9.3 Perceived failure rates 10 Sociobiology: monogamy in other species 11 Famous polyamorous people 12 Notes and references 13 See also 14 External links

[edit] Terminology

Polyamory is a hybrid word: poly is Greek for many and amor is Latin for love. It has been independently coined by several people, including Morning Glory Zell-Ravenheart whose article "A Bouquet of Lovers" (1990) is widely cited as the source of the word <ref>CAWeb. Church of All Worlds Clergy. Retrieved on 2006-10-14.</ref> (but see below), and Jennifer Wesp who created the Usenet newsgroup alt.polyamory in 1992 [1]. However, the term has been reported in occasional use since the 1960s ^{[citation needed]}, and even outside polygamous cultures such relationships existed well before the name was coined; for one example dating from the 1920s, see William Moulton Marston.

The word "polyamory" does not actually appear in "A Bouquet of Lovers", referenced above. The article uses "polyamorous", but its original version introduced the term in hyphenated form, "poly-amorous". The article consistently uses "polygamy" as the counterpart to "monogamy". This indicates that at the time, the author was not yet using the word "polyamory", and did not consider "polyamorous" an established word either. There are no verifiable sources showing the word polyamory in common use until after alt.polyamory was created. The older term polyfidelity, a subset of polyamory, was coined decades earlier at Kerista.

alt.polyamory participants collaborated on a FAQ (frequently asked questions) post that was updated periodically, and included the group's definition of "polyamory". The latest version of the FAQ on polyamory.org, dated 1997, has this definition:

"Polyamory means "loving more than one". This love may be sexual, emotional, spiritual, or any combination thereof, according to the desires and agreements of the individuals involved, but you needn't wear yourself out trying to figure out ways to fit fondness for apple pie, or filial piety, or a passion for the Saint Paul Saints baseball club into it. "Polyamorous" is also used as a descriptive term by people who are open to more than one relationship even if they are not currently involved in more than one. (Heck, some are involved in less than one.) Some people think the definition is a bit loose, but it's got to be fairly roomy to fit the wide range of poly arrangements out there."

In 1999, Morning Glory Zell-Ravenheart was asked by the editor of the Oxford English Dictionary to provide a definition of the term (which the dictionary had not previously recognised). Her definition was:

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.<ref name="ravenhearts poly faq">The Ravenhearts. Frequently-Asked Questions re: Polyamory. Retrieved on 2006-07-18.</ref>

In their FAQ on polyamory, the Ravenhearts expand on this:

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... 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.<ref name="ravenhearts poly faq"/>

Webster's New Millennium Dictionary of English defines polyamory as, "participation in multiple and simultaneous loving or sexual relationships."

Merriam Webster's Dictionary gives the definition as, " The state or practice of having more than one open romantic relationship at a time.".

However, no single definition of "polyamory" has universal acceptance. Some object to the idea that one must currently be participating in multiple relationships to be considered polyamorous. It is generally agreed that polyamory involves multiple consensual, loving relationships (or openness to such), but beyond that the term is as ambiguous as the word love itself. A relationship is more likely to be called "polyamorous" if at least one relationship is long-term, involves some sort of commitment (e.g. a formal ceremony), and involves shared living arrangements and/or finances, but none of these criteria are necessary or definitive.

For instance, somebody who has multiple sexual partners might form strong loving friendships with them, without feeling romantic love for them. Whether such a person identifies as "polyamorous", or as a swinger, or uses some other term, often depends more on their attitude towards other "polyamorists", "swingers", etc., than on the exact nature of their relationships. Different terms emphasise different aspects of the interaction, but "swinging" and "polyamory" are both broad in what they can refer to. This allows for a certain degree of overlap.

Similarly, an open relationship in which all participants are long-term friends might be considered "polyamorous" under broader usages of the word but excluded from some of the tighter usages (see further discussion below). There is enough overlap between these concepts that the expression "open relationship" is also sometimes used as a catch-all substitute when speaking to people who may not be familiar with the term "polyamory". However, some practitioners of polyfidelity have posed objection to the idea that having multiple partners necessitates that they are open.

The terms primary (or primary relationship(s)) and secondary (or secondary relationship(s)) are often used as a means to indicate a hierarchy of different relationships in a person's life. Thus a woman with a husband and another partner might refer to the husband as her "primary". (Of course, this is in addition to any other terms a person might use, such as "lover", "casual date", "friend", "other half", and so on.) The term tertiary can refer to ongoing casual relationships, though it is much less commonly used. Some polyamorous people refer to "primary/secondary" as a style of polyamory that involves an explicit hierarchy of relationships. Another model, sometimes referred to as intimate network, may include relationships of varying significance to the people involved, but people who practice it do not explicitly label relationships primary or secondary, and hierarchies may be fluid and vague or nonexistent. The terms primary & secondary usually refer to the relationship, not the partner, but the common shorthand of referring to someone you have a secondary relationship with as "my secondary", etc., sometimes causes confusion on that point when communicating with people not familiar with polyamory. Some polyamorous individuals regard the "primary/secondary" model as insulting to the people involved, believing that instead, all partners should be considered equally important.

[edit] Symbols of polyamory

Image:Polyamory large.png Although a number of symbols have been adopted by polyamorous people, none have universal recognition. The most common symbol is the heart combined with the infinity sign. Another symbol is an image of a parrot, since "Polly" is a common name for these birds.

[edit] Forms of polyamory

Forms of polyamory include:

• Polyfidelity, which involves multiple romantic relationships with sexual contact restricted to specific partners in a group (which may include all members of that group).
• Sub-relationships, which distinguish between "primary" and "secondary" relationships (e.g. most open marriages).
• Polygamy (polygyny and polyandry), in which one person marries several spouses (who may or may not be married to or have a romantic relationship with one another).
• Group relationships and group marriage, in which all consider themselves associated to one another, popularized to some extent by Robert A. Heinlein (in novels such as Stranger in a Strange Land, Time Enough For Love,Friday, and The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress), by Robert Rimmer and also by the author Starhawk in her books The Fifth Sacred Thing (1993) and Walking to Mercury (1997).
• Networks of interconnecting relationships, where a particular person may have relationships of varying degrees of importance with various people.
• Mono/poly relationships where one partner is monogamous but agrees to the other having outside relationships.
• So-called "geometric" arrangements, which are described by the number of people involved and their relationship connections. Examples include "triads" and "quads", along with "V" and "N" geometries. The connecting member of a V relationship is sometimes referred to as a "hinge" or "pivot", and the partners thereby indirectly connected are referred to as the "arms". The arm partners are not as closely bonded to each other as each arm partner is to the pivot. This can be contrasted with a "triangle", in which all partners are directly connected and all are bonded to each other with comparable strength. A triad could be either a V or a triangle.

Some people in sexually exclusive relationships may still self-describe as polyamorous, if they have significant emotional ties to more than one other person. Additionally, people who self-describe as polyamorous may accept monogamous relationships with specific partners, either because this is the negotiated agreement, or because with that partner monogamy feels "right" (whereas for a different partner perhaps it would not be as appropriate).

[edit] Open relationships

Open relationship denotes a relationship (usually between two people) in which participants are free to take other partners; where the couple making this agreement are married, it is an open marriage. "Open relationship" and "polyamorous" are not identical terms. Broadly, "open" usually refers to the sexual aspect of a non-closed relationship, whereas polyamory involves the extension of a relationship by allowing bonds to form (which may be sexual or otherwise) as additional long term relationships:

• Some relationships place strict restrictions on partners (e.g. polyfidelity); such relationships are polyamorous, but not open.
• Some relationships permit sex outside the primary relationship, but not love (cf swinging); such relationships are open, but not polyamorous.
• Some polyamorists do not accept the dichotomies of "in a relationship/not in a relationship" and "partners/not partners"; without these divisions, it is meaningless to class a relationship as "open" and "closed".
• Some polyamorists consider "polyamory" to be their philosophical orientation -- they believe themselves capable and desirous of multiple loves -- whereas "open relationship" is used as a logistical description: that is, it is how their polyamory is expressed or implemented. They would say of themselves, for instance, "I am polyamorous; my primary partner and I have an open relationship..."

See also forms of nonmonogamy for other types of nonmonogamous relationship (not all of them polyamorous).

[edit] Legal status of polyamorous relationships

Three or more people may form and share a relationship in most countries legally (subject sometimes to laws against homosexuality). But such laws do not usually permit marriage, nor do they give full legal protection to all partners equally, nor as strong protection (e.g., parental rights) as they do to married couples. They are considered no different from people who live together or date under other circumstances. Usually one couple, at most, can elect to be treated as "married".

Bigamy is the act of marrying one person while already being married to another, and is legally prohibited in most jurisdictions. Some bigamy statutes are broad enough to potentially encompass polyamorous relationships involving cohabitation, even if none of the participants claim marriage to more than one partner. For instance, under Utah Code 76-7-101, 'A person is guilty of bigamy when, knowing he has a husband or wife or knowing the other person has a husband or wife, the person purports to marry another person or cohabits with another person.'

Having multiple non-marital partners, even if married to one, is legal in most jurisdictions; at most it constitutes grounds for divorce if the spouse is non-consenting (or claims to be) or feels that the interest in a further partner has destabilized the marriage. There are exceptions to this; in North Carolina a spouse can sue a third party for causing "loss of affection" in or "criminal conversation" (adultery) with their spouse [2], and more than twenty states in the US have laws against adultery [3] although they are infrequently enforced.

New Jersey's 2004 Domestic Partnership Act can be combined with marriage in order to legally connect any N-ary group of persons (imperfectly, though) using a combination of marriage and domestic partnership, provided that any of the following is true: (a) the number of males and the number of females are equal; (b) the number of males and the number of females differ by one; (c) the number of males and the number of females differ by two and both numbers are even.^{[citation needed]} For example, 8 females and 6 males would work. But 8 females and 5 males would not; nor would 5 females and 3 males; nor would a single-sex community of more than two people.

The extension of laws which use a test similar to the UK test of "married or living together as married" to multiple-partner relationships (i.e. treating them as common-law marriage) to trios or larger groups is largely untested at present.

If marriage is intended, most countries provide for both a religious marriage, and a civil ceremony (sometimes combined), both of which recognize and formalize the relationship. Few countries recognize or will permit marriages with three or more partners either legally or religiously. While a recent case in the Netherlands was commonly read as demonstrating that the Netherlands permitted multiple-partner civil unions, [4], this belief is mistaken. The relationship in question was a samenlevingscontract or "cohabitation contract" and not a registered partnership or marriage (Dutch-language source, English-language source). The Netherlands' law concerning registered partnerships clearly states:

1. A person may only be involved in one registered partnership with one other person whether of the same or of opposite sex at any one time.
2. Persons who enter into a registered partnership may not at the same time be married.

(source)

When a couple split up, non-consensual non-fidelity ("cheating") is often grounds for an unfavorable divorce settlement, and non-fidelity generally could easily be seized upon as a prejudicial issue by an antagonistic partner. Married people with partners external to their marriage (or other primary relationship) might need to consider carefully the laws in their jurisdiction, to ensure that they are complied with, and consider how to ensure that the mutuality of their decision within their marriage is clear.

[edit] Values within polyamory

Unlike swinging, polyamorous relationships also involve an emotional bond, though the distinctions made between swinging and polyamory are a topic open to debate and interpretation. Many people in both the swinging and polyamory communities see both practices as part of a continuum of open intimacy and sexuality.

Also note that the values discussed here are ideals. As with any ideals, their adherents sometimes fall short of the mark - but major breaches of a polyamorous relationship's ideals are taken as seriously as such breaches would be in any other relationship.

[edit] Fidelity and loyalty

Most monogamists define fidelity as committing to only one partner (at a time), and having no other sexual or relational partners during such commitment.

The poly version of this is polyfidelity, a specific form of polyamory defined by a lasting, sexually exclusive commitment to multiple partners. But some polyamorists define fidelity as being honest and forthcoming with their partners with respect to their relational lives, and keeping to the commitments they have made in those relationships, rather than basing it on sexual exclusivity. This can be read as the same definition used in monogamy: If fidelity means honoring the agreements you have made about the relationship, then fidelity in the context of monogamy means you've agreed to be monogamous, and honor that. Others prefer to emphasise loyalty, sometimes defined as the ability to rely upon the other person's support, care, and presence.

Polyamorists generally base definitions of 'commitment' on considerations other than sexual exclusivity, e.g. 'trust and honesty' or 'growing old together'.<ref>Cook, Elaine (2005). Commitment in Polyamorous Relationships. Retrieved on 2006-07-10.</ref>

[edit] Trust, honesty, dignity and respect

Most polyamorists emphasize respect for all partners. Withholding information—even a "Don't ask, don't tell" agreement—is often frowned upon, because it implies that partners cannot handle the truth or trust those they love to keep their commitments. A partner's partners should be accepted as part of that person's life rather than merely tolerated.

A relationship that requires deception, or where partners are not allowed to express their individual lives, is often seen as a poor model for a relationship. The trust in a polyamorous relationship is that they love (or care about) you, and will come back, and will treat you and your relationship with them honestly and appropriately, as something of value and to be respected.

As part of this, dignity is often taken as a key value in a relationship. The idea here is that each partner will support, and not undermine, the other, and (where relevant) will not use a secondary relationship in a way that deliberately harms or destabilizes the other party or other relationships.

[edit] Communication and negotiation

Because there is no "standard model" for polyamorous relationships, participants in a relationship may have differing ideas about how that relationship should work. If unaddressed, such mismatched expectations can be extremely harmful to the relationship. For this reason, many polyamorists advocate explicitly deciding the ground rules of a relationship with all concerned.

In contrast to some other forms of negotiated relationship (e.g. the prenuptial agreement) polyamorists commonly view this negotiation as an ongoing process throughout the lifetime of the relationship.

In more conventional relationships, participants can settle on a common set of expectations without having to consciously negotiate them, simply by following societal standards (a husband and wife are expected to support one another financially, for instance). Because polyamorous relationships cannot rely on societal standards as a starting point, much more within the relationship must be chosen along the way by talking and by mutual respect and understanding, rather than assumed.

Polyamorists usually take a pragmatic approach to their relationships; they accept that sometimes they and their partners will make mistakes and fail to live up to these ideals. When this happens, communication is an important channel for repairing any damage caused by such breaches.

[edit] Non-possessiveness

People in conventional relationships often agree not to seek other relationships under any circumstances, as they would threaten, dilute or substitute for the primary relationship. Polyamorists believe these restrictions are in fact not for the best in their relationships, since they tend to replace trust with possessive prohibitions, and place relationships into a framework of ownership and control. This reflects cultural assumptions that restrictions are needed to stop partners "drifting", and that additional close relationships would be a serious threat or dilution of that bond.

Polyamorists tend to see their partner's partners in terms of the gain to their partner's life rather than the threat to their own. The old saying "If you love someone, set them free; if they come back, they are yours -- if not, they never were" describes a similar type of outlook. For this reason, many polyamorists see a "possessive" view of relationships as something to be avoided. This takes a great deal of trust. (A simple test of success: would seeing one's lover find another partner be cause for happiness [compersion] or alarm?)

Although non-possessiveness is an important part of many polyamorous relationships, it is not as universal as the other values discussed above. Alternatives include arrangements in which one possessive primary relationship is combined with non-possessive secondary relationships (common in open marriages), and asymmetrical relationships in which "ownership" applies in only one direction.

[edit] Polyamory as a lifestyle

Separate from polyamory as a philosophical basis for relationship, are the practical ways in which people who live a polyamorous lifestyle arrange their lives, the issues they see, and how these compare to those living a traditional monogamous lifestyle.

[edit] Sharing of domestic burden

Other benefits of a polyamorous lifestyle cited by such people<ref>PolyamoryOnline Polyamory 101: Consensual Non-Monogamy for the 21st Century: "In a polyamourous relationship, this ['A burden shared is a burden lessened'] is doubly true. If you are having problems with one of the people in the relationship, often you can talk to another participant about it, with the added advantage of having a confidant with a good perspective on the relationship. When one person has problems, everyone else is there to help them through it. Child rearing benefits greatly in a polyamourous setting as well. Children are exposed to a wide range of viewpoints and experiences. To use a personal expample, children raised in my Family ... are exposed to my experiences growing up in rural Illinois, two of our Family's childhoods in the city of Chicago, and my fiancee's chilhood in South Carolina. Perhaps one day we will have a Family member from outside the United States, offering an entirely different perspective. This also makes it easier to supervise a child. When many people live in the same household, they can take turns supervising the children, offering the rest of the members of the household a chance to catch up on chores, do homework, or simply go out for a while. Try doing that in a two-parent household without paying for a babysitter. On a purely practical note, having ten incomes in a household is much more flexible than just two. If one of the family suffers a loss of income, the others can help to make up for it. It is much easier to get by after losing one tenth of household income than it is after losing one half. Expenses are also significantly reduced in a polyamourous household, as they are in any situation when multiple adults occupy the same house." [5]</ref> include:

• Ability for parties to discuss relational issues with a (separate) partner, within the relationship itself, tending to add mediation and stabilization to a relationship, and reduce polarization of relationships and viewpoints in disputes.
• Emotional and similar support structure provided by other committed adults within the nuclear family unit.
• Wider range of experience, skills, resources and perspectives that multiple adults bring to a relationship.
• Ability to share chores and child supervision, reducing domestic and child rearing pressure upon adults' time without needing to pay for less well known third party child carers.
• Greatly reduced per capita cost of living
• Increased financial stability - the loss of one income is not the entirety of the family income (if only one parent works), or half the family income (if both parents work), but may be as little as 10% of family income in some families.

[edit] Specific issues affecting polyamorous relationships

Polyamorists cite the human tendency towards jealousy and possessiveness as major hurdles in polyamory, and as personal limitations to overcome:

"Possessiveness can be a major stumbling block, and often it prevents what could be a successful polyamourous relationship from forming. When people are viewed, even inadvertently, as posessions, they become a commodity, a valuable one at that. Just as most people are reluctant to let go of what little money that they have, people are also reluctant to "share" their beloved. After all, what if [someone] finds someone else who is more attractive/intelligent/well-liked/successful/etc.. than [themselves], and decides to abandon the relationship in favor of the new lover? These sorts of inferiority complexes must be resolved, completely, before a polyamourous relationship can be truly successful" [6]

An editorial article on the polyamory website Polyamoryonline.org as at 2006 proposes the following issues as being worthy of specific coverage and attention: [7]

• Helping children cope with "being different"
• "Coming out" as polyamorous (and explaining polyamory) to children
• Polyamorous parental interactions
• Polyamory social settings (involving kids)
• Legal (parenting) issues

The author, herself in a polyamorous relationship of three adults, comments that:

"The kids started realizing that there were three adults in the house that they had to answer to. **Big Shock** Then came the onslaught of trying to 'befriend' a particular adult and get what they wanted from that one adult. Another big shock when they found that it didn’t work and that we all communicated about wants or needs of any given child. After this was established, we sort of fell into our patterns of school, practices, just normal life in general. The kids all started realizing that there were three of us to care for them when they were sick, three of us to get scolded from, hugs from, tickles from; three of us to feed the small army of mouths and three of us to trust completely in. After trust was established, they asked more questions. Why do we have to live together? Why can’t I have my own room? ... Why do you guys love each other? Why do I have to listen to them (non-biological parent)? We answered them as truthfully as we could and as much as was appropriate for their age. I found that it was more unnerving for me to think about how to approach a new kid and their parents than it ever was for the kids."

[edit] Polyamory and parenting

Many polyamorists have children, either within the relationship(s) or from a previous relationship. Like other elements of polyamory, the way in which children are integrated into the family structure varies widely. Some possibilities are:

• Parents are primarily responsible for their own children (biological, adoptive, or step-), but other members of the relationship act as an extended family, providing assistance in child-rearing.
• Adults raise children collectively, all taking equal responsibility for each child regardless of consanguinity.
• Parents are wholly responsible for their own children, with other members of the relationship relating to the children as friends of the parents.
• Children treat parents' partners as a form of step-parent.

The choice of structures is affected by timing: an adult who has been present throughout a child's life is likely to have a more parental relationship with that child than one who enters a relationship with people who already have a teenage child. (The issues involved often parallel those of step-parenting.)

The degree of logistical and emotional involvement between the members of the relationship is also important: a close-knit triad already living under one roof with shared finances is far more likely to take a collective approach to parenting than would a larger, loose-knit group with separate living arrangements:

"Some poly families are structured so that one parent can be home to care for the children while two or more other adults work outside the home and earn an income, thus providing a better standard of living for all concerned. More adult caretakers means more people available for child care, help with homework, and daily issues such as transportation to extracurricular activities. Children thrive on love. The more adults they have to love them who are part of the family, the happier and more well-adjusted they are. There is no evidence that growing up in a poly family is detrimental to the physical, psychological or moral well being of children. If parents are happy in their intimate relationships, it helps the family. Happy families are good for children." [8]

Whether children are fully informed of the nature of their parents' relationship varies, according to the above considerations and also to whether the parents are 'out' to other adults.

In one possible case indicative of the law related to parenting and polyamory in the United States, the Pennsylvania State Supreme Court in 2006 voted 5-1 that a father in a custody case had the right to teach his child (age 13) about polygamy (and hence possibly by implication about other mutliple partner relationships), and that this right "trumped" the anti-bigamy and other laws which might apply and was not deemed inherently harmful to the child. (Note: this decision was made in the context of religious freedom, but religious freedom would not apply if there was harm to the child.)<ref>Shepp, 2006, PA supreme court. The opinion stated that: the state's interest in enforcing the anti-bigamy law "is not an interest of the 'highest order"' that would trump a parent's right to tell a child about deeply held religious beliefs, and that a court may prohibit a parent from advocating religious beliefs that amount to a crime if doing so jeopardizes the child's physical or mental health or safety, or potentially creates significant social burdens, but that in this case it was not felt that discussing multiple partner relationships as a parents' preference or presenting or advocating them as desirable to the parent, was harmful. [9]</ref>

[edit] Custody ramifications

Parents involved in polyamorous relationships often keep this status a secret because of the risk that their polyamory will be used by an ex-spouse or other family member as grounds to deprive them of custody of and/or access to their children, much as homosexuality has been used in the past.

In 1998, a Tennessee court granted guardianship of a child to her grandmother and step-grandfather after the child's mother April Divilbiss and partners outed themselves as polyamorous on MTV. After contesting the decision for two years, Divilbiss eventually agreed to relinquish her daughter, acknowledging that she was unable to adequately care for her child and that this, rather than her polyamory, had been the grandparents' real motivation in seeking custody.[10] The Tennessee case is not necessarily normative for the entirety of the United States, since family law varies significantly on a state-by-state basis, and sometimes even within a state. US state law is, of course, not normative for laws of other countries.

[edit] Related groups and concepts

The definitions of polygamy and polyamory allow a great deal of overlap: any loving polygamous relationship could also be considered polyamorous, and many polyamorists consider themselves to be married to more than one person. In practice, however, usage separates the words: "polygamy" is more often used to refer to codified forms of multiple marriage (especially those with a traditional/religious basis), while "polyamory" implies a relationship defined by negotiation between its members rather than cultural norms.

Thus, although polygamy and polyamory are often treated by outsiders as similar concepts, the two groups are based on very different philosophies and ideals, and little interaction occurs between self-described "polygamists" and "polyamorists". Instead, polyamory is more closely associated with those subcultures and ideologies that favour individual freedoms in sexual matters - most notably, gay and BDSM advocacy.

The polyamorous values of respect, honesty, communication and negotiation are akin to those espoused by the BDSM subculture. (Indeed, several prominent polyamory advocates are also BDSM advocates.) Many of the problems encountered in polyamorous relationships have close parallels in BDSM, and can be resolved by similar methods; both groups benefit from a cross-pollination of ideas.

[edit] Philosophical aspects

As with many lifestyles, there is considerable active discussion about philosophical approaches to polyamory.

One way of studying the presumptions behind relationships is in the escalation of values known as Lawrence Kohlberg's stages of moral development. In this schema, which examines the assumptions and presuppositions of relationships, the presumption that monogamy is the only acceptable form of long term relationships is an example of stage four of this schema. Polyamory is a common structure of relationships in stage five or six.

Another is by looking at Ken Wilber's stages of personal and spiritual development, Abraham Maslow's self-needs, and Jane Loevinger's "self-sense", which are similar schemata and which are based upon the findings of many researchers in human development<ref>See Ken Wilber's book A Brief History of Everything, table 9-3 p.146, and discussion of "fulcrum 5" p. 186 for sources and citations. On page 145, "This model of consciousness development is based on the work of perhaps 60 or 70 theorists, East and West." He goes on to say, "All developmentalists, with virtually no exceptions, have a stage-like or even a ladder-list list... of growth and development - Kohlberg, Carol Gilligan, Heinz Werner, Jean Piaget, R. Peck, Habermas, Robert Selman, Erik Erikson, J. M. Baldwin, Silvano Arieti, even the contemplative traditions from Plotinus to Padmasambhava to Chih-i and Fa-tsang. And they have this ladder-like holarchy because that is what fits their data. These stages are the result of empirical, phenomenological, and interpretive evidence and massive amounts of research data. These folks are not making this stuff up because they like ladders." (p.147-8)</ref>:

• Each recognizes that there is a classic stage in personal development, which is conventional and based upon approval and laws (Kohlberg), conformist or conscientious-conformist (Loevinger), based upon belongingness and safety (Maslow), and whose structure is based upon "rules and roles" (Wilber).

• Each also recognizes a more developed post-conventional stage, based upon individual principles of conscience (Kohlberg), conscientious-individualistic or autonomous (Loevinger), based upon self-esteem and self-actualization (Maslow) and whose structure is formal-reflexive (Wilber), allowing the possibility to think about, judge, and critique ones own previous ways of thinking and those of one's society.

Because of the heightened trust and self-determination required for a polyamorous relationship, some who practice polyamory consider it a superior form of relating to people. One response common amongst monogamists or others not familiar with polyamorous people and families, is that polyamory can sometimes appear as a weakening or failure to adhere to the values that others in society agree to. Realistically, most who practice it do not philosophize, instead they simply suggest that it is the right way for them.

[edit] Criticisms

[edit] Religious objections

Many religions discourage sex outside marriage (or, in some cases, a committed relationship closely resembling marriage). As a consequence, those religions effectively prohibit or permit polyamory to the same degree that they prohibit or permit polygamy, but only within the bounds of the allowed or proscribed polygamy. Even where polygamy is permitted, it is typically limited to one rigidly-defined form of plural marriage — most commonly polygyny — and other forms of plural marriage are not recognized.

King Solomon, an important figure to all three major Abrahamic religions, epitomizes the widespread recognition (if not endorsement) of polygyny throughout the ancient world. At the beginning of the 21st century, polygyny remained common in many parts of the Islamic world but was not recognised by many branches of Christianity and Judaism; Buddhism, Hinduism and Paganism did not take a stance for or against, but are filled with many people who participate in it. For further discussion and some exceptions see Polygamy and religion.

While most religions offer guidance about sex and family, religious leaders have said little about polyamory directly (i.e., by that name), possibly due to its relatively low public profile compared to other relational/ethical issues such as homosexuality.

[edit] Division of love

In The Ethical Slut, Easton and Liszt described an argument against polyamory, rooted in the belief that by dividing one's love among multiple partners, that love is lessened. They referred to this as a "starvation economy" argument, because it treats love as a commodity (like food or other resources) that can only be given to one person by taking it away from another; this is also sometimes called a "Malthusian argument", after Malthus' writings on finite resources.

Many polyamorists, including Easton and Liszt, reject the idea that dividing love among multiple partners automatically lessens it. A commonly-invoked argument is by parallel to the idea that a parent who has two children does not love either of them any less because of the existence of the other.<ref>McCullough, Derek, Hall, David S (February 27 2003). "Polyamory: What it is and what it isn't". Electronic Journal of Human Sexuality 6. Retrieved on 2006-07-10.</ref>

[edit] Perceived failure rates

Polyamorous relationships are often criticised as "not lasting", for example, Stanley Kurtz takes this as axiomatic when he says "Not only would legally recognized polyamory be unstable..."<ref>Kurtz, Stanley (June 05 2006). Polygamy Versus Democracy: You can't have both. Weekly Standard. Retrieved on 006-07-10.</ref>

The problem of confirmation bias makes it impossible to accurately gauge the stability of polyamorous relationships without carefully-conducted scientific investigation. The complex nature of polyamory presents difficulties in structuring such research. For instance, polyamorists may be reluctant to disclose their relationship status due to potential negative consequences, and researchers may be unfamiliar with the full range of polyamorous behaviours, leading to poorly-framed questions that give misleading results. (Note that the American Psychological Association has identified these same issues as potential causes of error in the context of gay/lesbian/bisexual populations.<ref>Herek, Gregory M. (September 1991). Avoiding Heterosexual Bias in Psychological Research. American Psychological Association. Retrieved on 2006-08-15.</ref>)

While predating the term polyamory, some research has been done on the stability of some forms of what might be considered polyamorous relationships. Weitzman<ref>Weitzman, Geri D. (March 12 1999). What is known about the psychological and social functioning of polyamorous individuals?. What Psychology Professionals Should Know About Polyamory. Retrieved on 2006-07-10.</ref> lists a study by Rubin and Adams in 1986 which found no differences in marital stability based on sexual exclusivity in married relationships.

Still, without more disciplined academic study in this area, the question is currently open. There is simply not enough consistent and high quality research at present comparing monogamous relationships with polyamorous ones, either in terms of longevity (as a measure for those relationships which do make a "life-long" commitment), in terms of satisfaction with the results, or in terms of meeting the expectations of those participating.

[edit] Sociobiology: monogamy in other species

See also: Sociobiology, Evolution of Monogamy, Pair bonding

Amongst other species of mammals, social pair-bonding and stability is not usually found to be strongly related to sexual monogamy. For example, only 15% of primate species are socially monogamous (for mammalian species in general the figure is 3%). Genetic testing of offspring has confirmed sexual monogamy (previously believed to be the norm) to be very rare in both birds and other mammals, including species such as swans, songbirds, wolves, and the like previously described as "faithful" or "mating for life".^{[citation needed]}

[edit] Famous polyamorous people

Because of the difficulty in distinguishing between romantic historical relationships and sexual relationships between friends, this list is based on a broad usage of "polyamory" that includes the latter. For more specific information, see individual pages and the included external references.

• Natalie Barney
• Simone de Beauvoir, Jean-Paul Sartre, and Olga Kosakiewicz
• Warren Buffett[11]
• CT Butler, a founder of Food Not Bombs
• Amelia Earhart
• Robert A. Heinlein
• Augustus John
• Alfred Kinsey
• Paxus Calta
• Dora Carrington
• William Marston (creator of Wonder Woman), Elizabeth Marston, and Olive Byrne
• E. Nesbit
• Eric S. Raymond [12]
• Vita Sackville-West, Harold Nicolson, and various other members of the Bloomsbury Group [13][14]
• Percy Shelley
• Jimmy Barnes, Australian singer^{[citation needed]}
• Alan Moore^{[citation needed]}
• Lytton Strachey
• Erwin Schrödinger
• Edna St. Vincent Millay
• Dieter Wedel, movie director[15]<ref> From an interview with the newspaper Passauer Neue Presse, Januar 4th, 2006, http://www.pnp.de/nachrichten/artikel.php?cid=29-10760777&Ressort=feu&BNR=0

"Frage: Sie haben derzeit zwei Lebensgefährtinnen. Wie geht das? Dieter Wedel: Die beiden wissen nicht nur voneinander, sie schätzen sich auch sehr. Ich lebe vermutlich nicht anders als viele Männer, nur dass ich mich dazu bekenne. Frage: Aber als Formel für ein glückliches Liebesleben taugt so ein Dreiecksverhältnis doch nur bedingt, meinen Sie nicht? Dieter Wedel: Ich erhebe für meine Lebensform keinen Anspruch auf Allgemeingültigkeit." </ref>

• Nan Wise poly therapist and author
• Vincent M. Wales novelist and founder of Polyamory Awareness & Acceptance Ribbon Campaign
• Victoria Woodhull
• Karlheinz Stockhausen composer

Many historical figures had multiple simultaneous relationships that nevertheless would not be considered "polyamorous" by modern usage because they lacked 'full knowledge and consent'. In Victorian England, for instance, the difficulty and stigma of divorce often left a rich man's wife with little option but to tolerate his mistresses, who in turn might be dependent on him for financial support. Such relationships are not included in this list.

[edit] Notes and references

<references />

[edit] See also

• Monamory
• Safer sex
• The Ethical Slut (book)
• Compersion
• Limerence
• Free love
• Open marriage
• Serial monogamy

The band Breaking Benjamin released a song titled 'Polyamorous' on their album Saturate.

[edit] External links

• polyamory.org, the official homepage of the alt.polyamory newsgroup
• Polyamory page at Sexuality.org
• Monogamy's Law: Compulsory Monogamy and Polyamorous Existence Analyzes social and legal perspectives on polyamory.
• Poly in the Media website (a part of the Polyamory Online website)
• Frequently-Asked Questions by the Ravenhearts
• The Challenge Of Post-Modern Polygamy: Considering Polyamory Analyzes monogamy, polygamy, polyfidelity and polyparenting and considers how polyfidelitous marriage might fit into Western culture within a Hegelian framework.
• Unitarian Universalists for Polyamory Awareness
• Electronic Journal of Human Sexuality: Polyamory
• National Coalition for Sexual Freedom Polyamory Sound Bites Includes some data on frequency of nonmonogamy and psychiatric health of the polyamorous.
• PolyFamilies: Polyamory for the Practical A site about creating a polyamorous household and raising children in one.
• What Psychology Professionals Should Know About Polyamory A guide for mental health professionals which is favorable to polyamory.
• Poly-Friendly Professionals mental health and other professionals tolerant of or supportive of polyamory
• Polyamory Weekly Podcast A podcast regarding polyamory and related issues.
• newgroup control message creating alt.polyamory, May 29, 1992, as archived at ftp.uu.net (primary source for the Usenet control message archive)
• World Polyamory Association A synergistic network of polyamorists.
• Loving More A quarterly polyamory magazine that also runs two national poly conferences on the East and West coasts of the USA.
• With Open Hands: A Guidebook to Open Relationships A short advice booklet for people new to polyamory by Paxus Calta.
• PolyMatchmaker.com A polyamory-specific dating, support and resource site

da:Polyamory

de:Polyamorie es:Poliamoría eo:Pluramemo fr:Polyamour it:Poliamore he:פוליאמוריה nl:Polyamorie ja:ポリアモリー no:Polyamori pl:Poliamoria pt:Poliamor ro:Poliamor fi:Polyamoria sv:Polyamori