HPIA
Hofstra Papers in Anthropology
Article #1, 2006
Polyamory: An Anthropological Study
by Natalie Perry
[An Honors Thesis submitted to The Department of Anthropology, Hofstra University. Honors Committee: Dr. Daniel Martin Varisco, Chair, Dr. Sharryn Kasmir, Dr. John Kreniske, May, 2006]
Abstract
The purpose of this paper is to conduct an ethnography presenting the emic depiction of polyamory, supplemented by analysis of websites about polyamory. This would help people better understand why polyamorists say they choose to live this lifestyle. I will also present an etic depiction of the concept in relation to anthropological concepts of gender and sex roles. This will be done through analyzing the dynamics of group behavior by participant observation. I also will analyze the role of the internet in promoting interaction among those who identify themselves as practicing polyamory. This is especially relevant because of the significant role the internet plays in facilitating meeting and keeping in touch in the poly lifestyle.
Methods
There is very little academic analysis written about polyamory. The literature which does exist has been printed mostly in magazine articles or posted on the web. There are books on the topic, but these are usually written by people who live a polyamorous lifestyle. As a result, there appears to be no anthropological research done on this topic at this point in time. For that reason, the literature that I have read for this project has been mostly from the emic perspective.
I have conducted most of my research through two venues. The first is meetings that I have attended in New York City. I attended meetings through two discussion and social groups: Poly NYC and Tristate Poly which includes New York, Connecticut, and New Jersey. I went to these meetings three times a month and received permission from the members at each meeting to use anything I learned for this paper. In addition, I attended other events that were introduced at these meetings or run by people in the poly community. This included an Intimate Erotic Encounter Group Meeting, an S&M sex party, and a Cuddle Party which I am not ethically allowed to discuss in this paper. Due to issues of confidentially I signed a waiver at the Cuddle Party stating that I would not use the experience for media or research purposes. Also, any names of any participants at the various events I attended have been changed for this paper.
The other main venue in which I conducted research was online. I posted a profile on Polymatcher.com, an online dating website created specifically for poly people, which allowed me to meet poly people that did not attend meetings in this area. In addition, I joined poly mailing lists through yahoo.com. Through these lists I was able to participate in and receive email conversations and posts regarding issues that the poly community is currently discussing. It also allowed me to research the insight of people that I had not met through the meetings and to go into more depth on topics such as polygamy versus polyamory.
I intended to conduct interviews and surveys through the meetings and online. However, I chose not to once I started attending the meetings. I did not get to talk with people one on one for long periods of time, so interviewing them was not possible. Also, many people that came to meetings did not attend every one. Therefore, there were also a lot of people at each meeting that I had not met before. Since my presence seemed to make some people uncomfortable when I first met them, I chose not to conduct a formal survey. Instead, I focused on the conversations that occurred naturally within the group and asked questions if there was something that I did not understand or if I wanted clarification. The result was an emphasis on participant observation.
This paper focuses on what I’ve observed at the meetings and the discussions that came up through online postings. Many of these issues are intertwined between the two. In addition, at the end of the paper there is a glossary that defines the terminology that pertains to polyamory, as well as some examples of different types of relationships. Some of these types I came into contact with in my research, others I did not. However, when studying polyamory it’s important to know the different types of formations that can exist in order to better understand the relationships when people are discussing them. If one does not know the difference between primary and secondary or know the definition of a vee or triad they can easily become confused when discussing relationships with the community. Often when people are discussing their own relationships or that of people they know they use this terminology. They also often us abbreviations, such as SO, for significant other, so it’s important to be familiar with the language of the community.
Introduction
Cultural relativism is the idea that “evaluations are relative to the cultural background out of which they arise.” (Herskovits 1972:14). This means that it is important to understand other cultures and their explanations for their actions based on their own perspective and definitions. Herskovits uses the example of polygamy to show this point. He discusses a man with many wives in Dahomey. He mentions that in this society prestige comes from living in larger units. In addition, each woman helps to support the unit by making pottery or selling their goods. Herskovits mentions that there is competition between the women regarding which son will be the heir to their husband. However, the unit provides strong emotional ties. The children of all the wives play together. This example shows that when other cultures, such as polygamy, are looked at from the point of view from the perspective of those involved, one may see values that were not apparent from the outside. (Herskovits 1972: 13-14). This idea of cultural relativism is extremely important when conducting an ethnography. Cultural relativism does not mandate that as an anthropologist you have to agree with the emic perspective. However, it is important to listen to the explanations that people provide so that you can better understand their point of view.
One significant thing that arises in the methodologies of cultural anthropology is the issue of morality. Often people are quick to judge others and say that certain actions that they commit are not moral. Even though something that one person does may not be moral by our societal rules, this doesn’t mean that it is not moral by their own codes of conduct. This is why it is important to understand the societal rules of the group that you are researching.
The idea of cultural relativism is extremely important in this study of polyamory. The word polyamory comes from the Greek and Latin roots meaning “many loves.” (Anapol 1997:4). The word itself is most often credited as first being coined in the 1980’s by Oberon and Morning Glory Zell to replace the expression ‘responsible nonmonogamy.’ (Anapol, 1997:5). However, it has not yet been put into dictionaries, not even those that focus on American Slang. It is worth noting that there is a substantial entry for “Polyamory” in the online free encyclopedia Wikipedia. (2006 Wikipedia).
Polyamorists are people who are in multiple committed, loving relationships at the same time. It was explained in one online post in comparison to growing flowers in a pot. The commentator stated
“One single flower is fairly easy but looks so lonely in this big pot all by itself. So you plant another. You can’t plant them too closely or they might smother each other. Each needs the equal amount of love, caring, food, water, earth, and sun to flourish. Now add a third. There is room in the pot as long as the first two flowers are willing to make some room, some adjustments. Again all three can only survive with equal amounts of attention, caring, love, food, water, earth, and sun to flourish. In time and sharing they all do very well together in the pot and look better and stronger as three in the pot rather than the one. Can you add more? Should you add more? It now depends on the three existing flowers, not the first original one. This should be a decision of love, space, and acceptance by all in the group.”
This is a good comparison for polyamory. It shows that love and commitment are necessary to maintain multiple relationships. It also shows that in order for these relationships to work, each person must make some adjustments to accept a lifestyle that is not the norm in our society. This quote demonstrates that the choice of whether or not to add another person depends on all people involved and is not the decision of only one person. In addition, it reflects the idea that these are loving, committed relationships, and that each partner needs attention, love, and care. No one partner is to be neglected.
In our society, monogamy is the norm, although at times this becomes serial monogamy. Polyamory is a lifestyle that is outside of society and often outside of its understanding as well. Often times people mention that polyamory can not possibly be moral and monogamous people who are not familiar with the lifestyle often compare it to swinging or cheating. In reality, polyamory is not the same (although there is some overlap with the swinging community). Swinging focuses on having sexual relationships with others with your partner’s knowledge, while cheating focuses on having sexual or intimate relationships with others outside your partner’s knowledge. Polyamory is different in that it focuses on having multiple intimate and loving relationships while being open and honest with each partner about your relationship status. One of the most important things in a poly relationship is honesty. And while some people may use poly as an excuse to have multiple sexual partners, this is not truly polyamory. According to those that attend the Poly NYC meetings, occasionally they have had people who are only interested in sex attend the meetings. They say that these people focus on sex in the discussion and ask questions regarding where they can meet people solely for sexual encounters. Poly NYC informs them that while many of the intimate relationships that poly people have are sexual, this is not the main significance of the relationship. Polyamory focuses on intimate loving relationships, not sex.
Polyamorists consider their lifestyle to be moral and are concerned that many other people do not. They follow their own set of ethics. There is not a guidebook on how to live a polyamorous lifestyle, and there are different rules that people abide by. The most important thing in poly relationship though, is that people are honest with each other. Communication is key. People need to be able to discuss their relationship, how they feel about it, and if they think things should change. It people in the relationship are not honest with one another then polyamory does not work. It is also important that all people in a specific relationship agree with the ethics that they decide they need to abide by. As with the example of the flower pot above, each person in the relationship has a say in what ethics they follow. These relationships can only work if every person involved follows the ethics.
Even though there is no guide book for how to live a polyamorous lifestyle, the book most commonly recommended when first looking for information on polyamory is The Ethical Slut. Chapter six of this text focuses on the skills that are necessary to living a successful poly life. The skills that are mentioned are: communication, emotional honesty, affection, faithfulness, limit-setting, planning, knowing yourself, owning your own feelings, going easy on yourself, and telling the truth. According to the authors these are the skills that people need in order to live an ethical and moral poly life. (Easton 1997:61-68)
In my opinion, the most interesting of these skills when speaking of morality is faithfulness. The authors acknowledge that faithfulness may not be something that people would expect to read when discussing polyamory. But they define faithfulness as “honoring your commitments and respecting your friends and lovers, about caring for their well-being as well as your own.” (Easton 1997:63) By this definition, faithfulness is not solely about having sex with only one person, which is a common definition in our society. However, by using their definition they allow themselves to use the term ‘faithful’ in a way that can create boundaries for ethics for their lifestyle and not solely for monogamy.
Background
Polyamorists believe that many people are actually polyamorous, but don’t choose to live the lifestyle because of society and what it says is moral. Anapol points out that our society needs a new set of sexual ethics because monogamy is outdated. Yet many don’t entirely understand polyamory. As a result there are many people that believe that it is morally wrong, and some that practice it incorrectly because they see it as an excuse to have sex with many partners. True polyamorists, those that practice it honestly and ethically, see many monogamists as closeted polyamorists. They use the argument of serial monogamy as evidence. Serial monogamy is when people have multiple partners in their life but separated by linear time. In other words, one person has a partner, stops the relationship, and then finds another partner. In this way, they are monogamous because they only have one partner at a time, but they have many partners throughout their life because they can not find one partner to satisfy their needs, so they break off the relationship and search for another. This also supports the polyamorist view that very rarely does a person find one other to satisfy their every need. This is why they find having multiple relationships beneficial. They are able to have different needs met by different people at different levels. In this way, they can be satisfied by having multiple partners and not dissatisfied with any one relationship because of something that one person/relationship may be “missing.”
In our society we are taught that we will meet one other person who will fulfill us or complete us; this is also a common theme in romance novels and films. Polyamorists disagree with this view. They believe that only in some situations will one person have every quality that one will need in order to feel satisfied. This does not mean that they cannot love or have intimate relationships with people that do not possess every quality. But they have other relationships with other people that they can relate to in new and different ways.
With saying that, polyamorists do not believe that monogamy is wrong. Most polyamorists that I have spoken with, such as Susan, believe that polyamory and monogamy are a relationship orientation, while others consider it a sexual orientation in the same way that we look at heterosexual, homosexual, and bisexual. With this said, polyamorists believe that people that are truly monogamous (those that are not closeted polyamorists) are naturally that way. They believe that there are some people that this lifestyle is not for because they’re not ‘wired’ for it, in the same way that straight people are simply not ‘wired’ with homosexual urges. They look at themselves as naturally being able to love more than one person at the same time, and therefore, naturally being poly. To not allow themselves to live the lifestyle would be to closet themselves the same way that homosexuals can closet or hide their sexual identity.
Field Observations
To an outside observer polyamory comes across as a “white” dominated group. Only on three occasions did I meet non-white members of the group. The first time was a Tristate Poly Munch where I met a Latino male, the second time was a Poly NYC discussion group where there were two black males and one Asian female, and the third time was also a Tristate Poly Munch where a black couple attended./1/ In these groups the ratio of male to female was usually 1:1 or close to it. And at two of the Tristate Munches members brought their children as well. I found that many people were not religious, even if raised in a religious home as a child. However, there is a large group in the poly community that could be described as New Age. These are the people that may not be religious but that consider themselves spiritual. Some consider polyamory to be a spiritual path and focus to be critical. They believe in searching for inner harmony and believe that this will help them to react with love and compassion to the drama that can occur in life (Anapol 1997:45-46).
The people attending meetings ranged in age from 25 to 65,/2/ and there was not a noticeably larger number of one age group over another. I even found quite a wide span as far as people’s occupations. Some were lawyers, teachers or computer programmers, and some ran their own businesses. The only area of group dynamics where I saw a noticeable difference was sexual orientation. Most of the people that I met described themselves as heterosexual. Even in the online posts, generally the responses (especially regarding the institution of marriage) focused on heterosexual poly relationships. Only when Ben (who is homosexual) questioned the group on thinking outside the heterosexuality box did some people respond with a non-heterosexual focus. However, even the responses to his remarks were given by heterosexuals, with one exception.
The Poly NYC meetings are held once a month on Wednesday evenings./3/ This group focuses more on the LGBT community, however, all are welcome. They rent out a room in the Lesbian and Gay Center of New York and each person attending is charged $6 to help pay for the room. Snacks are provided and people mingle for the first half hour, getting food, catching up with people that they have not seen for awhile, and signing in. People attend in a variety of dress. Some were in comfortable clothes such as jeans and t-shirts, while others wore business suits because they had come to the group straight from work.
There is a comfortable atmosphere at these meetings. Even after the meeting started people were allowed to get up for food and drinks. Also, people seemed very willing to talk to me, especially when I said I was an anthropologist. Most people in the group know of anthropology and what it is. Once I explained the purpose of my paper to them they opened up and were willing to help. Beth’s first question to me when I told her what I was doing was “What can we do to help?”
At the first meeting that I went to Beth conducted a presentation on “Do’s and Don’t of Poly Dating.” However, the second meeting that I attended was less formal. They organized the group in a large circle, same as before. But when we went around to introduce ourselves Beth asked us to each pick a topic that we would like to discuss. There were three main topics that came up: negotiations in poly relationships, couples, and the importance of media influence. When we split into groups I chose to go with the last group since there had been so much discussion online of the new HBO show “Big Love.” Ben felt that it is very important to organize an activist group like the LGBT community did in order to better communicate to the media how the poly community should be represented.
After each meeting the group goes to dinner. I was struck by the jokes that people would tell at the table. The first meeting was shortly after Vice President Cheney had his hunting accident and many of the jokes were political. It became evident that the majority of the group was very liberal and strongly disliked our current administration. In addition, I realized that humor is very important. Throughout the meeting people were joking around with one another, even with those that they did not necessarily know that well.
In my opinion, humor is extremely important in the poly community. Every meeting I attended had people that were attending the meeting for the first time. Going to a new place for the first time is something that can often make people a little uncomfortable in our society. The poly community uses humor which seemed to make people a little more comfortable. It allowed people to joke a little bit and let their guard down. This could be a difficult process for those that are new to poly and have not transitioned to the lifestyle but are looking for information about it. The humor that exists is a great way for people to get to know one another and to make people feel part of the group.
Polyamorists are able to communicate and joke about things that are usually taboo in our society, such as sex, sexual orientation, and fetishes. However, in this community there is no discussion topic that is taboo, especially when it comes to sex. When attending a meeting, you will not hear someone say “Now is not the time to discuss that,” or “That is not an appropriate topic.” This is one way that poly people are able to be more open and more comfortable with each other because they know that they are able to ask any questions that they may have and that people are accepting of their opinions and their problems.
Tristate Poly holds two different types of meetings each month. There is a discussion group that meets once a month on Sunday at Open Spaces. Each person attending contributes $5 at the end of the meeting to help pay for the room. The other meeting is a munch that is held once a month on Thursday at the Empire Szechuan Village Restaurant.
The discussion group last for three hours with the first thirty minutes devoted to new members. These meetings were small in numbers, although I was told that at times they had a large group attending. There is no set topic to discuss. People show up and start talking and are able to bring up things that they feel they need to discuss or are able to ask questions. The first meeting that I attended much time was spent on discussing the different conferences and meetings that were going on in the near future. Joey was confused about the differences between some of the conferences so he questioned James about the details of each. In addition, this Sunday discussion group allows people to discuss non-poly topics since there is no set discussion topic. As a result, politics and the influence of the media came up and were discussed for much of the meeting.
The other meeting that Tristate holds is the Thursday night munch. This meeting is held at a restaurant and following dinner the group goes for dessert. This is a social event where people are able to bring their family. The top floor of the restaurant is reserved for the group so there is plenty of room for children to play. At the first meeting I attended there were nine people. At this meeting I met Sam and Diane. They are a couple that has been married for 26 years and tried polyamory four years ago. Their polyamorous lifestyle lasted for three years at which point they decided that the lifestyle was not for them at this point in their lives. However, they still come to the munches when they are able to because they enjoy the community. They are currently practicing monogamy but have not ruled out polyamory in their future. However, Diane shared with me that she has some doubts about one’s ability to love more than one.
This munch was also the first time that I met poly couples that had kids. Sam and Diane have four kids. When I questioned them about how their kids felt about the situation they said that they had not told their kids at first. However, once their kids realized that their ‘friends’ at a party may be more than just friends they were open with them about their intimate relationship status.
I also met two other people that have families. One was Carlos, who is married with two children. However, his children are currently living in Japan with their mother. I also met Jack and his son, Tyler. Tyler is 18 years old and is thinking about college. He discussed his interests with Carlos during dinner. Jack has been poly most of his son’s life. When I asked about the situation of being a child growing up with polyamory, he told me that he had always considered it normal and that he did not have any difficulties growing up in a poly family. He mentioned that he did not have issues at school and he never questioned it as being strange or out of the ordinary.
The conversation had a good flow throughout the evening. Different from the discussion groups, I was able to ask questions when things came up that I did not understand or if there were things that I was curious about. The poly community is very open and Carlos especially was very willing to talk to me about his family and his life. He even invited me to the Intimate Erotic Encounter Group and told me that I could go for free since they wanted more females.
At the end of the evening I got a ride home from Sam and Diane which gave me an opportunity to have a deeper conversation and interview them. They told me that in their opinion, there are some people that try poly in order to save a current relationship that is going bad. Diane mentions that this is only destined to fail. Poly relationships are a lot more work and if a couple is already having problems with their relationship then trying polyamory is not a good option for them. She mentions that she and Sam have problems with their marriage. She does not blame these problems on trying poly, but she does not think that their period of attempting a poly lifestyle helped either. However, she and Sam both said that they did not regret that period of their life, even though they are now encountering difficulties.
The second munch that I attended had 24 attendees. I spent most of my time talking to Kristen. Kristen has been married to her husband, Mike, since 1984. There have been two periods in their life when they wanted to focus on their relationship, so they did not practice polyamory. However, they found that monogamy does not work for them so they have returned to poly. They have a son, Tom, who is nine years old. Kristen says that he has grown up with poly being the norm in his family. She and her husband don’t discuss their sexual relationships with him. All he knows is that his parents have ‘friends.’ Kristen says that she is not sure if his friend’s parents know about their relationships. She says that Tom seems to choose how much he tells and to whom. She also said that so far he has not experienced any problems in school with other children or with teasing as a result of his parents’ poly lifestyle.
In addition to Tom, there was another child, Sarah, at this munch. She is seven years old and is the foster child of Kristen’s lover. Her lover’s wife was Sarah’s Godmother. When Sarah was abandoned by her mother it became the Godmother’s responsibility to raise her. Sarah has lived with Kristen’s lover for four years. She used to have a lot of behavior problems according to Kristen, but she is doing much better now.
I only met these three children through the poly groups, but I know that many couples either have children or aspire to have them in the future. Polyamory is interesting because it provides children with extra caregivers. They have more than just their biological parents taking care of them and caring for them. In addition, this can be a support for the adults involved. Kristen and Mike are able to take their own son and Sarah out to the munch. This allows Sarah’s parents to have the night off from being a parent. It also allows the kids to have a playmate while at dinner since both Tom and Sarah will be there. I notice this system at work again at the following meeting. Kristen was there with her lover and with Mike. Mike left early leaving both kids with Kristen and her lover. This time it was his turn to get the night off.
I wish that I had the opportunity to meet more kids of poly parents and to do more in depth interview of kids of all ages in this situation. It would be interesting to question how these kids feel about their parents’ situations, and if they feel that they are also wired for polyamory or for monogamy. In addition, I would like to see how they describe their upbringing, especially when considering if their childhood has been enhanced by the fact that they have been brought up with more adults in their lives.
The examples above can be compared to Herskovits analysis of the polygamy society previously discussed. Polyamory provides people with an extended support system. This allows the children to have additional playmates other than their siblings and to have additional adults as a parenting figure in their life. Another example of the extended system is when Beth broke up with her primary partner. She discussed this openly in the Poly NYC discussion group only a couple weeks after it occurred. She was upset about the breakup but said that it had not been as difficult as when past relationships had ended because she already had a support system in place. She mentioned that she was still going on dates and still having sex. She did not need to worry about a rebound relationship, because she was in other relationships where she was still receiving love and affection. Even though she was hurting over losing her primary partner there were many things that she did not lose because she was still in her secondary relationships.
The more meetings that I attended the more I repeatedly saw the same people. When I would see people repeatedly they would ask me about my own relationship orientation and if this project was ‘opening my eyes’ and if I was realizing that I might be poly. At first I laughed and politely said that I did not feel that it was right for me. However, over the last 3 months, I have been asked five times by different people if I had considered polyamory for myself. I was surprised at the subtle ways that people are encouraged to embrace the lifestyle. I think that this is partially because at this time polyamory is not big in the academic world. Poly people are not accustomed to having anthropologists attend their meetings. Many of the people that identify as poly-friendly are curious about or have some interest in the lifestyle. Therefore, the poly community feels that it is acceptable to check in with people as they keep attending meetings and see how they are feeling about their own orientation.
Another thing that I found very interesting in the community is the level of touch. People greet each other at dinner or at the discussion groups with kisses on the cheeks and hugs. It is not unusual during a dinner to see a person stroking another’s arm, or rubbing someone’s back. Massages were sometimes given over dessert. The poly community believes that touch is very important and that often times people don’t get enough of it. According to James, this is why Cuddle Parties were created and have become so popular. Observing this level of touch made me aware of how many insecurities the rest of the country has. In the United States we have strong limits for what it socially acceptable when it comes to touch, sex, and nudity. People in the poly community do not have these same insecurities. They are comfortable with their bodies and their identities. They have a strong level of self confidence. They are not afraid to be themselves, even in public situations.
As an anthropologist I found that there were situations that I was uncomfortable with because I had not been exposed to them before. Someone would rub my back and I would automatically think, “What does this person want from me” as if any form of physical touch outside of the family has to be related to sex. I’m not used to going to a restaurant and having a friend rub my back. Usually we are sitting across the table from one another keeping our hands to ourselves and our food. Polyamorists get rid of these societal limitations that restrict physical contact realizing that it is acceptable to touch one another and to be affectionate in nonsexual ways.
Online Discussions
Many interesting discussions arose over the internet and people were often posting about one topic or another. The postings, however, are monitored by the group leaders and some groups send out a reminder every month of the list rules. For the most part Tristate takes these rules from the Chesapeake Polyamory Network. These rules include: not using the list to convert people to your religion, no solicitation (although announcements about poly related events are allowed as long as it is not announced in a ‘pushy’ way), no harassment, no personal attacks, being clear and concise, keeping the conversation on topic, not posting to individuals via the whole mailing list and avoiding ‘me too’ responses. In addition the rules encourage people to share their experiences, questions, and advice that relate to the poly lifestyle. Controversial topics, such as politics, are not allowed. Poly NYC follows the same rules. However, Poly NYC has three focuses for their group: polyamory, New York City, and the LGBT community. In addition, PolyNYC has created an area for personals through their website.
One of the most popular questions that has come up multiple times through the discussion groups is how to meet people. Often, people who are new to the poly community join the discussion group and post that they are new and that they don’t know where to meet people. They usually do not know of the different websites, pages to place personals, or where the discussion and social groups are in their area. Since they are new to the group they did not receive the postings in the past when people asked these same questions. For this reason, the questions are often repeated by new people. Since these fall into the individual category, people do not usually respond to the whole mailing group. However, it seems as if people are helpful with their responses, because often the new person will do a post of gratitude. One such person is John. I first met John at a Tristate Poly Munch. He was very quiet the whole night even though he attended dinner and dessert. A few days later he posted saying thank you to everyone, that he had a good time, and they he was planning on attending future events. A few days later he posted again asking for advice on where to meet people. There were three responses that were sent out to the whole group mentioning Ok.cupid.com, the personals through Poly NYC, and another mentioning polymatcher.com and with a link to an article. This article discusses how people often think that the only way to meet people is at bars or through the internet. It suggests that people should have a broader scope. People are perfectly capable of meeting others through a class, an activist group, a volunteer organization, through hobbies, sports or through joining a church. The point is that you meet people by putting yourself out there and having a good time. You can do this without going to a bar. There are lots of venues that exist in the world where you can meet new people.
With that said, many poly people meet others online. There are two main websites that people use: Okcupid.com and polymatchmaker.com. I created a profile on both sites in order to meet people for this project. Unfortunately, I did not meet any poly people through Okcupid.com. However, I did converse online with three people through polymatchmaker.com. The people that I met online and at the meetings all said that they had success on both sites at one time or another, so this seemed to be a major place for people to meet.
In addition to these websites there are multiple recreational activities that have been organized in the past few years for people to meet others that live the poly lifestyle. There are conferences that are run on the East and West coast by the magazine “Loving More.” There are also many camps that have been created such as the PolycampNW. There is also a cruise that has been created specifically for poly people. There are also various other conferences or festivals that are posted on the poly mailing lists that focus on sexuality, such as the Sacred Sexuality Beltane Festival. While this is not solely a poly event, there are lectures on polyamory as well as, sexual trance, spirituality and SM, and Chakras. These are some of the main events that have been created in the past few years. As polyamory continues to grow, I believe that even more social events will be created to help people meet others that live the lifestyle.
Polygamy vs. Polyamory
One thing that comes up a lot when people are first trying to understand polyamory is how it’s different from polygamy. The most common response that you will receive from a polyamorist is that polyamory represents gender equality. In polygamy one person, either the male or the female depending on the type of polygamy, will have more than one spouse. Usually, especially in the United States, the form of polygamy practiced is polygyny where the husband has more than one wife. However, the wives are not allowed to have multiple husbands. In polyamory, both males and females are allowed to have multiple partners. There aren’t restrictions based on gender.
The other part that is important for this distinction is the institution of marriage. Polygamy is having multiple wedded spouses at the same time through the institution of marriage while polyamory does not focus on marriage. There are very different opinions in the poly community regarding the institution of marriage and whether this is something that should be worked towards. This will be discussed in more detail later in the paper.
Often polygamy and polyamory are lumped together by society which causes a huge debate in the poly community of whether or not this is acceptable and what can be done to change it. While some believe that polygamy is a subset of polyamory, others do not think that they have much to do with each other at the moment and feel that there is a real danger in how perception will be shaped if the two are linked. This is a major debate that has arisen over the new HBO show “Big Love.”
The show “Big Love” on HBO follows the Mormon model of polygamy. Bill Paxton plays the husband who has three wives. Each time he marries a woman younger than his last wife. They own three houses next to each other and have no fences separating the backyard so they can go from home to home freely. This is also done so that they can hide their polygamous lifestyle from their neighbors. They have an elaborate story about how two of the wives are single mothers that they (Bill Paxton’s character and his first wife, Barb) have taken under their wing.
One main difference that Mark points out in one of the email discussions titled “Polygamy, Polyamory, and the Future of Marriage” is that Mormon polygamy is a way for a man to have many children and is not necessarily based on maximizing love in the community. The Mormon faith teaches that it is important to have many children so that you can teach them to follow the Mormon way. They in turn teach others by having their own children and by participating in missions. This allows Mormons to spread their religion to more people. Polyamory could not be further from this. Polyamory is about loving more than one, whether or not children or the institution of marriage are involved. Also, it has nothing to do with the institution of religion.
Another important difference between the show “Big Love” and the practice of polyamory is who people have multiple relationships with. Following the Mormon model, the man marries younger women, once again, so he is able to continue to procreate. He wouldn’t marry a woman his own age who would be going through menopause because then he wouldn’t be able to have children with her. Polyamory, on the other hand, doesn’t discriminate based on age. People fall in love with others because of who they are as people, not because of how old they are. There were some examples of people that I met where men were with younger women, but there are also many times when people are with people the same age as themselves.
In this same online discussion Bill questioned what others were saying. He mentions that people miss an important opportunity when they argue that polygamy and polyamory are not the same. According to Bill, the fact that HBO is willing to put a show in mainstream America that challenges the idea that there is only one form of marriage signifies that this could be a period of change in our country. The institution of marriage is being challenged and not only by the gay community. He even goes as far as to bring up the point that some are calling polygamy the “next civil rights battleground.”
It is possible based on talking to different people in the community that some would marry if given the opportunity, thus linking polyamory to polygamy. However, there is a danger in linking it to the Mormon idea of polygamy. “Big Love” has people in and outside of the community talking about polyamory and what this could mean for the institution of marriage. But for those that do not understand it, thinking that it is similar to the Mormon ideal is dangerous because it does not show it as polyamorists think it truly is. It allows people to think that it s a religious or fundamental thing, that it is not practiced that often, or that it is something that people hide from those around them. In reality, polyamory is not religious, there is a growing number practicing it, and here in New York most people are very open about their lifestyle. This is one thing that has made this project so easy to study. People were willing to talk to me because I was interested in learning and willing to ask.
The show “Big Love” has had a positive influence on the poly community in one way. It has opened the door for discussion. Polyamory has gone from something that was practiced, but not really known about to something that people are dying to talk about. Reporters from the United States and Britain have contacted either Poly NYC or Tristate Poly to conduct interviews for stories./4/ People Magazine wants to profile a poly family with children. In addition they specify that it not be a Mormon family because they want to focus on a family that “their readers can relate to.” Unfortunately, they’re looking for group marriage with one spouse married to multiple people which is the polygamy model of group marriage. And while this can be considered by some to be polyamory, it is still not looking at the whole picture.
The HBO show has made polyamory a hot topic. Many in the poly community are embracing this as a positive thing. By participating in these interviews with the media they are able to have a say in what is put out there and how it is stated. One example of this is when Montel Williams decided to do a show on polyamory. He contacted the head of Poly NYC and he picked some people that he thought would be good for the show. They agreed to be on it. During this process Montel asked a person of opposing views to be on the show. Ben became very upset with this addition, because he felt the show could easily be slanted to turn poly into a negative thing. He threatened to pull his people off the show unless Montel agreed to not put this person on. Montel complied with Ben’s requests and the show continued. After it aired the poly community felt that it was a huge success and they were pleased with how their community was portrayed.
As an anthropologist I would have to agree with James’ assessment of polygamy and polyamory. Polygamy can be a subset of polyamory. What makes this distinction difficult in the community is the issue of choice. There are formations in the poly community, such as a vee, where one partner would have two partners that do not necessarily have relationships with other people. The way that this is different from polygamy (forgetting about the institution of marriage) is that these two partners have the option of having multiple partners. If they choose not to, then that is their choice. However, in polygamy, this is not the case. As seen in “Big Love” the women do not have the option of seeking other partners.
In my opinion, it is important for people to understand this distinction because it is one thing that poly people pride themselves on. They view their community as one that practices gender equality. Even if people choose to be involved in the poly community while not taking extra partners themselves, they always have that option. Another main difference between polyamory and the Mormon polygynist lifestyle is that in the poly community, sexual orientation is not an issue. When people take more than one partner these partners can be of either the same or opposite sex.
I have been watching “Big Love” since it first aired because it had been so highly discussed in the poly community. I have found it to be an interesting show. Some in the poly community says that it represents the difficulties of group marriage well (in the situation that only one person is having sexual relationships with the rest). It shows the difficulty in maintaining a group marriage, keeping everyone satisfied, and making sure everyone get enough attention and affection. However, I also find that it is a show made for Hollywood. There is a lot of drama that exists and there are many ways in which the group is not honest with each other, hide their lives, or let jealousy create arguments in the group. Nicki, the second wife, develops a shopping obsession and put herself over 58,000 dollars in debt and does not tell her husband or anyone in the family, nor does she ask for help. She is also the most jealous of the group, constantly bickering with the other wives about Barb having the most control or the chores that she has to do. I find that some of the problems that exist in this show are written in the script for pure entertainment purposes and not to represent Mormon polygamists as they are. While this is normal for a television show, I think it is important to keep in mind, especially when it comes to using this show as a comparison for polyamory.
Institution of Marriage
The discussion of the show “Big Love” and how it relates to poly geared the group towards another discussion: that of the institution of marriage. Shawn spoke out about the problems that would be created for lawmakers if polygamy was allowed, and polyamorists took advantage of it. He mentions divorce, inheritance, belongings, children, and medical insurance as just a few. He received a response from Ben stating that lawmakers would have to adopt similar changes to rewrite laws regarding same sex marriages. However, Shawn points out that this is not necessarily true. Same sex marriage would follow the same model as heterosexual marriage with changes only necessary in the language. While he points out that models could be constructed to include polygamy he also argues that unless the majority of the people supported polygamy this would not occur because people do not want to pay the taxes for it. The systems that would have to be in place to maintain polygamy could be quite expensive. He also says that this can only take place once all other barriers, such as fear and religion, have been removed and he admits that our country is far from there.
Billy responded to Shawn sharing that poly marriage could conceivably give other parents visitation rights in hospitals and in the case of a divorce, and custody rights in the case of a biological parent’s death. He said that the real issue is health insurance. A company would not want to support a family with six adults and ten children on one person’s health plan.
Alice responds to this by stating that this is why family coverage needs to stop. She said that it should not matter who one is legally marriage to, nor should marriage be something that people do simply for health insurance or other benefits tied to the institution. Shawn points out in response to Alice that he agrees, but that it would be near impossible to convince conventional nuclear families that their benefits would have to be cut or their contributions increased to accommodate a new family model. Unfortunately for the poly community, the conventional family is the majority, so they have little pull in the changes that they feel should occur. Shawn mentions that in the end to get something, someone else has to give something up, and this is the reason that it is so difficult to make change happen. People are not willing to give something up for themselves, even if in doing so they can better the lives of other.
This topic led the group to discuss a deeper level of the institution of marriage. Brian posted that this entire discussion reminded him of ‘the inherent silliness of marriage as an institution.’ He went on to say that he has respect for marriage and for what it is supposed to represent, but the idea that one has to engage in marriage to prove this commitment and obtain certain rights is absurd. He agrees with the single payer health care system and does not feel that the institution of marriage is necessary, especially to prove one’s love for another.
Ben adds to this by showing that the institution of marriage would not have to exist if we could obtain three things: universal health insurance or health care, civil unions (to cover child custody and inheritance) and civil rights. He points out that if people obtain these things then there is no advantage to marriage. He mentions that he remembers the 60’s and the 70’s when people disliked the idea of marriage. He points out that the fact that most of them fell into it says more about our society and how it views marriage that it does about the advantages of the institution itself.
Shawn adds to this by commenting that marriage is also a means of being accepted into mainstream society. He also compares it to voting. He says that it is nice to be allowed to do it; but that you do not have to if you do not want to. He agrees with Brian that it is something people do because it is expected of them, not because it is something that they really want. He even speculates that if/when homosexuals and poly people get the right to marry that some will still view it as a ‘monster’ institution and choose not to participate in it. He also points out the difficulties that these people will face in society by making this choice. He mentions that if/when this is a possibility and people are asked when they are getting married, they will not be able to use, ‘I’m gay’ or ‘I’m poly” as an excuse for not getting married. As a result, many more people will feel pressured to join the institution.
I find it very interesting that people in the poly community would debate the institution of marriage. But despite the criticism above of the institution itself, there are some in the poly community that are interested in marrying one or more of their partners. It seems at first glance that the lifestyle would be one that would not allow people to be open to the idea of marriage, unless it was a polyfidelitous group that wanted to practice group marriage. However, there are people in other types of poly relationships that are interested in the institution of marriage as well.
The idea that those who have primary and secondary relationships would be interested in marriage is extremely interesting, because even though they as polyamorists do not believe in monogamy, some are interested in only marrying their primary partner. While I don’t have enough information on this topic to draw any anthropological conclusions, I mention it because I find it interesting that some people in the poly community have openly stated that they would want to marry only their primary partner and in some cases have children with them, but then keep their secondary partners without any institution of commitment. I am not sure if these poly people are interested in marriage solely because of the ‘bundle of rights’ that comes along with it (as Leach refers to it), or if this is because they believe there should be a legal division between their primary and secondary relationships. (Ingold 1994:798). However, I think that this is one area in polyamory where further field work should be conducted, especially if the institution of marriage is plausibly going to be challenged by the idea of group marriage in the future.
Reactions to poly
Another thing that came up through the online discussion in the past couple months is how people react to poly. One member, Sandra, was having difficulty with a couple that her and her partners kept inviting to spend time with them. She said that the couple knew her and both her partners and that they had many mutual friends, but would never accept her invitations. She posted asking whether or not it would be too forward to say something to them because she felt as if it was due to her ‘poly-ness.’
She received a few responses that were very interesting. Karen mentioned that it may not be poly at all, and that this was an assumption on her part. She brought up the fact that they may not be that social with most people. She also pointed out that they expressed what they wanted by declining her invitations and that it was Sandra’s job to respect that. Darla also responded to this post. She brought up many of the same points as Karen, but she also mentioned that if this couple does not want to be social with Sandra that they are under no obligation to explain why. She also pointed out that they do not have to be interested in Sandra. Everyone has the right to turn down being social with another person. Paula adds to the responses by questioning why Sandra feels so eager to make this couple her friends, especially when they have no interest in wanting to be friends with her. She also mentions that her philosophy for these types of problems is that ‘if it has to be forced from the start, then it is not worth pursuing.’
These responses show the stress on being honest among polyamorists. They believe that people are capable of owning their feelings and saying what they mean. If one says that they do not want to be social then the other party should accept that and move on. There is no need to dwell over it or to hate yourself for it, but to admit that not everyone in the world is going to want to be your friend and to deal with that.
Another important thing about poly is the ability and the right to say no. In about 1/3 of the meetings, discussion and social events that I went to there were exercises where people practiced asking people out and rejecting them. Polyamorists understand and accept the difficulties of approaching people. They also understand that it is important for people to be able to say ‘no’ when asked to do something that they do not want to participate in. As a result, the poly community faces this problem head on in these groups by creating a ‘safe’ environment. This means that it is stated upfront that it is a safe environment and that everyone has the right to say no. Also, they mention that if someone is asked to do something and they are unsure about whether they want to, then ‘maybe’ is a ‘no.’ People always have the ability to change their mind later, but this keeps people from saying ‘yes’ to things that they are not sure they really want. In addition, the poly community stresses, that if someone is not interested in you in the way that you want them to be, that this is not a reflection on you. They may not be looking for a relationship, may be looking for a different gender, or simply not wanting to meet someone that night. Whatever the reason, they acknowledge that often adults feel that it is their ‘fault’ that someone is not interested in them, instead of accepting that the person may not be and moving on without taking it as a personal reflection on them.
A few weeks after this email conversation there was another post from Janice about how her teaching contract had not been renewed after three years at a Catholic school because she had come out in a national newspaper. She is bipoly and does not self identify as a lesbian. However, she has the ability as “the protected class of Lesbian” to file a discrimination lawsuit. Now she is faced with the difficult decision if she wants to go down that road. She is not sure if she wants to be that out. One person suggested that she make two lists over a cup of coffee listing the pros and cons of the situation. He also mentioned that she should question whether the damages they caused by not renewing her contract would be corrected by filing the suit and if the time it would take from her life worth correcting those damages. While she has not decided what she is going to do about the situation (or at least has not posted her decision), some mentioned online that it may be a personal struggle for her, but one that when worth fighting can benefit the community as a whole.
Why Polyamory is important to anthropology
Polyamory is important to anthropology because it has existed as a lifestyle generally looked down upon, but only recently has it become a serial movement in our society. Not only has it become a movement in the last few decades, but it is continuing to grow as an alternative lifestyle in a society in which the ideal of the traditional marriage is being challenged. According to the leaders in the poly community, a few years ago there were very few websites regarding polyamory and even fewer discussion or social groups. The groups that did exist began only in the larger, more sexually liberal cities. Today, however, if you google the term “polyamory” there are almost one million sites that appear. There are also discussion groups in many cities across the country and websites that allow people to meet others that live the lifestyle or to participate in debates or discussions that currently exist in the poly community.
Even though the movement keeps growing, there is no anthropological work written on this topic./5/ Because there is no anthropological work written on the topic and the movement in flourishing it is important that it is studied in academia. At the moment, polyamory is getting much media attention, from Montel Williams, to People Magazine, to The New York Times. However, academia is somewhat behind when it comes to this area. I am not sure why the academic world has not seen this movement and begun to research it. The poly community, especially in New York, is open to accepting academia into their meetings and their discussions so that research can be done. It is important that academic research be done on polyamory because otherwise the only thing that people have to base their information from is the media which can be misleading depending on who is representing the issue. Also, academic research allows long-term studies to be done. This would allow researchers to study further the idea of the nuclear family, the institution of marriage and the challenges that may come to it, and the possibility that a relationship orientation exists. This would help society to understand people, our society, and the poly lifestyle in much more detail.
As I mentioned earlier in the paper, cultural relativism is an extremely important topic when looking at other cultures. It is important that people are able to look at other cultures through their context so that they can understand them. Whether or not one finds that polyamory is the relationship orientation for them, they should understand it as one. It is easy for people to draw judgment on those that live ‘outside’ their society. However, I find that often times when I take the time to understand these different cultures that exist, judgment disappears. Even if I do not agree that this may be a culture that I want to adopt, I can accept it as the culture of others and respect it as such. Anthropology is in an important field in that it allows others in our society to learn about these cultures as well. Anthropology brings these studies to light and introduces these ideas to the rest of the world. Polyamory is a lifestyle that is growing rapidly and is starting to be discussed in the mainstream. It is the obligation of anthropologists to do research on this topic and to share their research with the world so that people in mainstream society can understand polyamory and can tolerate, if not accept it, as an emerging moral alternative lifestyle.
Endnotes
/1 The Asian female did not actually stay for the meeting. She left shortly after they stated that each person had to pay $6 for attending the event.
/2 65 is an estimated age since the older members of the group did not feel comfortable sharing their age with me.
/3 Poly NYC also began having a social event once a month. To date they have held two events. Unfortunately, I have not been able to attend these events, so my field work with this group is solely from the discussion groups.
/4 I mention Britain here because I have received emails regarding the poly community and the reporters there. I do not have information regarding polyamory in other European countries. However, I do believe that it would be interesting to do further research on polyamory as a global phenomena.
/5. There is one student at Northwestern University in Chicago who is currently doing her masters thesis on the topic.
Bibliography
2006 Wikipedia: The Free Encyclopedia <(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyamory>
Anapol, Dr. Deborah M.
1997 Polyamory The New Love Without Limits: Secrets of Sustainable Intimate Relationships. San Rafael, California: Internet Resource Center.
Easton, Dossie and Catherine A. Liszt
1997 The Ethical Slut: A Guide to Infinite Sexual Possibilities. San Francisco, California: Greenery Press
Herskovits, Melville J.
1972 Cultural Relativism: Perspectives in Cultural Pluralism. New York: Random House.
Ingold, Tim, editor
1994 Companion Encyclopedia of Anthropology: Humanity, Culture and Social Life. New York: Routledge
Glossary
[These terms are from the online glossary at the site below unless cited otherwise. <http://www.xeromag.com/fvpolyglossary.html>]
ABUNDANT LOVE: The belief or philosophy that it is possible to love more than one person at the same time.
BDSM:A composite acronym for "B&D" (bondage & discipline); "D&S" (dominance & submission); and "S&M" (sadomasochism). Used to refer to any consensual activities or lifestyles between adults which include some or all of these things. The term "BDSM" is used in a general sense to describe any situation or practice which includes erotic power exchange, dominance and submission, pain play, bondage, sensation play, or anything related to these. <http://www.xeromag.com/bdsm>
BIPOLY: A person who is both bisexual and polyamorous.
BI POLY SWITCH: A person who is bisexual and polyamorous and who is a BDSM switch, capable of taking on a dominant or submissive role in sex.
BISEXUAL: A person who is sexually attracted to or sexually active with partners of both sexes.
BODY FLUID MONOGAMY: The practice of limiting any activity which involves the exchange of bodily fluids to only one partner.
CHEATING:In a relationship, any activity which violates the rules or agreements of that relationship, whether tacit or explicit. In a polyamorous relationship, sexual activity with people outside the relationship may or may not be seen as cheating, depending on the context of that sexual activity and whether or not it violates the agreements of the people in that relationship.
CLOSED MARRIAGE: The most common form of marriage in most Western countries. Any marriages where there is no emotional intimacy or sexuality outside the marriage; monogamous marriage.
CLOSED GROUP MARRIAGE:A polyfidelitous relationship in which all the members consider themselves to be married.
CLOSED RELATIONSHIP: Any romantic relationship, (monogamous or polyfidelitous) which specifically excludes the possibility of sexual or romantic connections outside that relationship.
CLUSTER MARRIAGE:A polyamorous relationship in which two or more married couples cohabitate and exchange partners.
CROSS-COUPLE: A relationship between one person who is part a couple and a second person who is part of another couple.
COMPERSION: A feeling of joy when a partner invests in and takes pleasure from another romantic or sexual relationship. Compersion can be thought of as the opposite of jealousy; it is a positive emotional reaction to a lover's other relationship. The term was coined by the Kerista Commune.
CONDOM CONTRACT: A formal agreement within a relationship to confine exchange of bodily fluids and barrier-free sexual contact to the people in that relationship, each of whom has previously been screened for sexually transmitted diseases. This contract may specify under what conditions a member of that group may exchange body fluids or have sexual contact without barriers with a new partner, or may specify that such contact is not permissible with any new partner.
CO-PRIMARY:A person who is one of two or more primary partners in a polyamorous relationship.
CUDDLE PARTY: A social gathering of adults which encourages consensual physical affection, such as cuddling, massage, and other forms of physical expression, but which forbids overt sexual activity or sexual stimulation.
CYCLIC MONOGAMY: A relationship in which a person has several partners, and spends a set period of time with each partner, during which time he is sexually involved only with that partner.
DON'T ASK, DON'T TELL (DADT): A relationship in which a person who is partnered is permitted to have additional sexual or romantic relationships on the condition that his or her partner does not know anything about those additional relationships and does not meet any of those other people. Many people in the poly community frown on these types of relationships. They are a way of avoiding and not dealing with emotional issues such as jealousy and are built on a foundation of lack of communication.
DYAD: A relationship involving exactly two people. The most common form of romantic relationship in most Western countries is a monogamous dyad.
EMOTIONAL FIDELITY: A belief or practice that emotional intimacy or love must be kept exclusive to a particular relationship, though sexual activity or other forms of activity may occur outside that relationship.
ETHICAL SLUT: A person who openly chooses to have multiple simultaneous sexual relationships in an ethical and responsible way, and who openly revels in that decision.
EXCLUSION JEALOUSY: A fear, which may be irrational, of being neglected or abandoned by a lover, particularly if that lover takes another partner or expresses sexual or romantic interest in another.
EXCLUSIVE RELATIONSHIP: Any relationship which does not permit its partners to seek other romantic or sexual partners.
FLUID BONDING: Of or related to sexual practices which involve the exchange of bodily fluids, such as barrier-free sexual intercourse.
FREE AGENT: A person who practices polyamory in a way that tends to separate or isolate all of his or her romantic relationships from one another, treating each as a separate entity.
FREE LOVE: The belief that sexual relationships should be unrestricted and disassociated from ideas of love, commitment, marriage, or obligation. Many advocates of free love object to the concept of marriage altogether, as they see it as a way to impose constraints and obligation on sexuality.
FRUBBLE: A pleasant emotion of happiness arising from seeing one's partner with another partner. Primarily used in the U.K.
GROUP MARRIAGE: A relationship in which three or more people consider themselves married to one another; in the polyamory community, most often a relationship involving more than one man and more than one woman, who may live together, share finances, raise children together, and otherwise share those responsibilities normally associated with marriage.
INTIMATE NETWORK: The sum total of a person's partners, those partners' partners, and so on. Usage: The term "intimate network" is most often used to describe the set of romantic and sexual relationships and friendships involved in a polyamorous relationship structure that is not closed; that is, the term intimate network is not often used to describe a polyfidelitous relationship or a closed group marriage, though it can be. The term is also sometimes used in a way that includes people who are close friends, but are not necessarily romantically or sexually involved, with a person or that person's partners.
LIFE PARTNER: A partner, usually a romantic and sexual partner, with whom one has the intent of a long-lasted and intertwined committed relationship.
LOVE TRIANGLE: In contemporary American vernacular outside of the poly community, a relationship in which two people both love a third; in this usage, the assumption is that each of the two is competing for the undivided affections of the third, and that the third is being placed in a position where he or she is expected to choose one of the two competing partners.
LOVING MORE: A magazine and organization dedicated to polyamory. The organization which publishes Loving More also sponsors a series of annual conventions by the same name.
MARRIAGE: A relationship, most commonly between one man and one woman in Western countries, which is sanctioned by the State and/or by a religious institution and which confers upon its members certain social and economic conditions, typically including rights of joint property ownership, rights of inheritance and of decision-making in legal and medical matters, and certain legal rights and responsibilities concerning mutual childrearing.
METAMOUR: The partner of one's partner, with whom one does not share a direct sexual or loving relationship.
MONOAMORY; also MONAMORY: The state or practice of loving only one person at a time. In practice, it means essentially the same thing as monogamy, though it is sometimes applied to a person who self-identifies as monogamous but is involved in a romantic relationship with a person who self-defines as polyamorous.
MONOGAMY: Formally, the state or practice of having only one wedded spouse. Informally, the state or practice of having only one wedded spouse at a time, or more generally, having only one sexual partner or only one romantic relationship at a time.
NEW RELATIONSHIP ENERGY (NRE): A strong, almost giddy feeling of excitement and infatuation common in the beginning of any new romantic relationship.
NONEXCLUSIVE MONOGAMY: Of or related to any marriage involving exactly two people, whereby each of the two is permitted to have sex with others outside the relationship but may not marry (or in some cases conduct emotionally intimate relationships) outside the relationship.
OLD RELATIONSHIP ENERGY (ORE): The feeling of comfort, security, and stability often associated with a long-standing romantic relationship.
OMNISEXUAL: Bisexual. In some communities, particularly some parts of the lesbian and gay community, antipathy toward or hostility to people who self-identify as bisexual has become common. The term omnisexual has started to become popular as a synonym for bisexual but without the negative connotations of the word.
OPEN MARRIAGE: Any marriage whose structures or arrangements permit one or both of the members involved to have outside sexual relationships, outside romantic relationships, or both.
OTHER SIGNIFICANT OTHER (OSO): 1. A partner's other partner; metamour
PANSEXUAL: 1. Of or relating to all sexual orientations, sexes, and gender identities. 2. One who engages in sexual or erotic activities with partners of all sexes and orientations. Pansexual event: an event catering to people of any sexual orientation or identity. Pansexual group: any group open to membership by any person regardless of sex, sexual orientation, or sexual identity <http://www.xeromag.com/pans>
PARAMOUR: A married person's outside lover. 2
PIVOT: In a vee relationship, the person who has two partners.
POLY: Of or related to polyamory; as, a poly relationship, a poly person.
POLYAMORY: (Literally, poly many + amor love)The state or practice of maintaining multiple sexual and/or romantic relationships simultaneously, with the full knowledge and consent of all the people involved.
POLYANDRY: The state or practice of having multiple wedded husbands at the same time.
POLYFIDELITY also Polyfi: A romantic or sexual relationship which involves more than two people, but which does not permit the members of that relationship to seek additional partners outside the relationship.
POLYGAMY: The state or practice of having multiple wedded spouses at the same time, regardless of the sex of those spouses.
POLYGYNY: The state or practice of having multiple wedded wives at the same time.
POLY/MONO; also, MONO/POLY: Of or relating to a relationship between a person who self-identifies as polyamorous and a person who self-identifies as monogamous.
POLYSEXUAL: Of or related to relationships which are sexually non-monogamous but which are not emotionally intimate. Sometimes used in a condescending or derogatory way such as ‘Bill is not really polyamorous, but only polysexual.’
PRIMARY/SECONDARY:A polyamorous relationship structure in which a person has multiple partners who are not equal to one another in terms of interconnection, emotional intensity, intertwinement in practical or financial matters, or power within the relationship
PRIMARY: In a primary/secondary relationship, the person (or persons) in the relationship with the highest degree of involvement or entanglement, or sometimes the person accorded the most importance.
QUAD:A polyamorous relationship involving four people, each of whom may or may not be sexually and emotionally involved with all the other members.
RELATIONSHIP ORIENTATION: A preference for sexual or loving relationships of a particular form; as, for example, a preference for relationships which are monogamous, for relationships which are polyfidelitous, for relationships which are polyamorous, and so forth.
RESPONSIBLE NON-MONOGAMY: Any relationship which is not sexually and/or emotionally exclusive by the explicit agreement and with the full knowledge of all the parties involved. Responsible non-monogamy can take several forms, the two most common of which are polyamory and swinging, and is distinct from cheating in that everyone involved knows about and agrees to the activity. Responsible non-monogamy often explicitly spells out the conditions under which it is permissible for one person to take on additional partners, and often includes some form of safer-sex agreement such as a condom contract as well.
SECONDARY: In a primary/secondary relationship, the person (or persons) in the relationship who, either by intent or by circumstance, have a relationship which is given less in terms of time, energy and priority in a person’s life than a primary relationship, and usually involves fewer ongoing commitments such as plans or financial/legal involvements.
SERIAL MONOGAMY: A relationship pattern in which a person has only one sexual or romantic partner at a time, but has multiple sexual or romantic partners in a lifetime, and may change partners frequently. Arguably the most common form of relationship in the United States, serial monogamy is predicated on the idea that a person can love more than one other person romantically in a lifetime, but not at the same time.
SIGNIFICANT OTHER (SO): A romantic partner. This term is intended to be free of assumptions about the gender of that partner.
SWINGING: The practice of having multiple sexual partners outside of an existing romantic relationship, most often with the understanding that the focus of those relationships is primarily sexual rather than romantic or emotionally intimate.
SWITCH: A person capable of being happy in either a monogamous or a polyamorous relationship.
TANTRA: A form of sexual expression or activity which emphasizes spiritual connection, and holds that sex is a sacred act which can bring those who engage in it to a higher spiritual plane. Tantra is not directly related to polyamory; however, some people, particularly those involved with New Age spirituality, often combine the two.
TRIAD:A polyamorous relationship composed of three people. Generally, the word triad is most often applied to a relationship in which each of the three people is sexually and emotionally involved with all the other members of the triad, however, it can also be applied to vee relationships.
VEE: A polyamorous relationship involving three people, in which one person is romantically or sexually involved with two partners who are not romantically or sexually involved with each other.
VETO: A relationship agreement, most common in prescriptive primary/secondary relationships, which gives one person the power to end another person's additional relationships, or in some cases to disallow some specific activity, such as some specific sexual or BDSM-related activity. A veto may be absolute, in which one partner may reject another partner's additional relationships unconditionally, or may be conditional and used more as a way to indicate a serious problem in a relationship. Not all polyamorous recognize or permit veto power. Veto is most common in primary/secondary relationship configurations, particularly in relationship configurations where an established couple is seeking additional partners. Veto is typically limited only to the primary partners.
WIBBLE: A feeling of insecurity, typically temporary or fleeting, when seeing a partner being affectionate with someone else. Primarily used in the U.K.
ZIE: A proposed gender-neutral pronoun meaning "he" or "she."
ZIR: A proposed gender-neutral pronoun meaning "him" or "her
[Citation Reference: Natalie Perry, "Polyamory: An Anthropological Study" Hofstra Papers in Anthropology 1(2006):#1. http://people.hofstra.edu/daniel_m_varisco/hpiaperry.html.]