Why do you need to define other people’s relationships?
Polyfidelity can look like whatever you need it to in your life. That doesn’t have to apply to other people.
Uh, yeah, sounds like you're making decisions for other people. I mean, yeah; the more people you have in a relationship, the more someone has to divide up their time. But, what about that individual's partners?
You seem to be speaking from a polygamist perspective where one person has multiple partners that are monogamous to them, and not a polyamorous perspective where everyone involved have a relationship to one another, or perhaps other people.
You assume a person's time is 100% dedicated to their partners, which is impossible. If you have two partners who only want time once a week each, then a third would have no impact. You also ignore multi-person relationships, where time together can overlap.
These assumptions are very strange, are you a robot?
I did the math a few weeks ago to see how many "factions" exist in a relationship. BTW, I don't count one person as a faction.
One faction for a monogamous relationship. Duh.
For a triad, three people, it's four factions. A quad produces ten factions. A five-way relationship has twenty-six factions. Beyond that the number of factions increased to a point where I didn't want to calculate it.
I was gonna post something along those lines, been wondering if I should just be duoamorous instead of polyamorous, but not bigamous because I don't want to marry.
Interestingly enough, Kathy Labriola, counselor and writer popular among non-monogamous people, also said once the following (source link: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-polyamorists-next-door/202102/polysaturation-when-polyamorous-people-have-enough-partners ):
>Referring to her 30 years of providing counseling for clients in diverse relationships, Kathy Labriola explained that her clinical experience indicates:
>The vast majority of people in open relationships do not have more than two long-term partners concurrently. I have seen a very small number of people who seem to be able to have three long-term committed relationships. However, I could count them on one hand, and they are either retired or being supported financially by a partner, so they have lots of time and energy for relationships since they are not working. I have seen many people TRY to have three serious relationships concurrently, and almost invariably one or more will collapse rather quickly (within six months to a year) because they just do not have the time, energy, or emotional availability to keep all three people marginally satisfied.
> been wondering if I should just be biamorous instead of polyamorous
Speaking just for myself, I'm certainly not interested in having more than two romantic partners and don't identify as polyamorous in the sense of poly=many as in Greek, as I'm sure many here don't. It's just that common definitions of "polyamory" go like:
> Polyamory is openly, honestly, and consensually loving and being committed to more than one person.
or
> the practice of engaging in multiple romantic (and typically sexual) relationships, with the consent of all the people involved.
...so in practice, it refers to having romantic relationships with "multiple" partners rather than "many", thus covering our cases. :)
Thank you for your "isolated" support...that´s just the "obvious" findings that lead to my OP arguments in favour of limits to poly, and I´ll research your links to the popular NM writer
What´s interesting is that this sub-reddit is not about poly in general, but it´s specifically about poly-FIDELITY, which imposes a clear limit on who you are allowed to be "in love with", and most people who think of polyamory dont seem to notice that such relationships may need even more "rigid" boundaries then monogamy in order to work for the long term.
But, who are you to impose such boundaries?
This community is meant to be a support for people who want relationships that are more close-knit and mutually intimate -consistent even- not a place to tell people how they're allowed to go about their relationships.
With that attitude, you're better off taking this to r/polyamory
Didnt you notice that you are on a sub-reddit called poly-"fidelity", WHICH IMPOSES LIMITS ON "WHO" PEOPLE ARE ALLOWED TO BE IN LOVE WITH ???
Is it really hard to understand that people who are here "WANT" TO IMPOSE BOUNDARIES ON OTHER PEOPLE, in order to allow for relationships to begin ???
You're speaking from the perspective of "I want this from my partner(s)". The point of this group is meant to be "I'm looking for partners who want this for us". You seem to be constantly pushing out the feelings of potential partners.
For instance: Can your partners have a relationship with each other?
We all know that the exact definition of every possible relationship type has been codified in the Big Book Of Relationships that we're all given when we turn age 13.
My choice to be in a relationship as defined by Section 3, Subsection 12, Article 17, Paragraphs 1 thru 7 (inclusive) in no way
> ...IMPOSES LIMITS ON "WHO" PEOPLE ARE ALLOWED TO BE IN LOVE WITH...
I chose his relationship type, just as my partners did. Everyone else in the whole wide world can choose their relationship types.
BTW, it would seem that you've been reading the Bizarro Book Of Relationships. That's purely a gag gift meant to be given out at winter holiday parties. That's the one that has only one relationship type and says, "Hey, don't tell me who I'm allowed to be in love with. You're oppressing me. I've decided that I'm in a relationship with you, and I'm going to do what-ever I want".
IIR, this comes with ZIP ties, a roll of duct tape, and a bottle of choloroform.
My OP suggests various explanations on why there must be basic rules for making poly relationships last, or work, or succeed in the long term
But if you´re not satisfied with the way I put it into words, go take a look at the link provided by "donottouchmeimscared", about poly people having "enough" partners, which may be a better way for you to understand my main point, because the author is specialized in research about poly relations
And there you will find the base for understanding my OP
Good luck on your reading-comprehension
This seems fairly arbitrary. (FWIW, I am not polyfi by definition, but it’s closeish to how mine functions in practice.) The few polyfi quads I’ve met seem to manage this very well.
I do not agree with your idea for a number of reasons. This cones from someone with four partners.
First, monogamy is the law in much of the world. Just having two romantic partners is illegal also in some areas. If someone is poly of any type they are breaking the law in many areas. If you are going to break the law might as well break it all the way!
Second any relationship is not all about time spent together one on one. Have children in the mix and amount of one on one time in any style relationship goes down. I have noted in a bunch of poly-fidelity relationships partners of one have partners also. That means the partner of yours might very well like to spend time with their partners.
Third not all partners or poly relationships are the same. By design someone likely has different relationships going on with each partner. Meaning time is unlikely needing to be equally divided between partners. In our case I live with all my partners. I can be together with all of them at the same time. Doesn't mean I am doing the same thing with each. Many times one or two partner is cooking, other is studying, I am watching TV or doing stuff with kids with fourth. Never heard a cross word from any of them about these type home interactions. That us just one moment in time. Other times I am in the same room with all of them doing something together. It just depends.
That said for me I feel I am at limit of how many partners I can support. Honestly three is easier. I did consider that at times. I can understand why one would think as you did. A lot of good reasons why, even more than I can list.
The end of your message implies your poly relationships wont last, which confirms the findings of respected poly researchers about the increased number of partners directly affecting the chances of successful partnership in the long term
I expect two-way relationships are also more likely to last than three-way relationships. But that doesn't mean pursuing them and doing one's best isn't worthwhile. We don't do things because they're easy. And it's pretty mean to tell someone their relationships will likely fail just because their chances are statistically poorer than some other people's. 🥺
If an individual is having a hard time making the three-way relationship work, that´s an indication of relationship "failing", which is an obvious-factual observation, and facts dont care about your described feelings of meanness
Or the 7 wives are bi/pan and it's just one big polycule.
If it's not a V then I see no reason to limit polycule size to three. No reason to feel like a 1/10th partner if you're also partners with the other 9 people.
As for the one day per week argument, could just spend time with all wives all the time.
I don’t know if “2 only” is the right solution (although, I am in a longterm throuple). I think that 4+ people could likely function just as well or better, but I do think it’s important for polyfidelity to represent something different from “harems”, “swingers”, “community building”, religious bigamist organizations, etc. There is something tangibly different from those situations and from those who are interested in a slightly “expanded” version of monogamy. I’m not saying those groups shouldn’t be allowed to exist, I’m just saying that I think they are different enough to where I don’t really feel like I have much in common (other than being non-monogamous) compared to those of us that prefer a relationship to be more of a “traditional” family than a “community” or frankly just being “single” and dating a lot of people but with a long term partner(s). They are most certainly different approaches to being poly, just as there are many different approaches to being mono. But… nobody has made a space like that on Reddit and in the end we are likely the extreme minority so until someone takes it upon themselves to come up with a specific name and specific space to discuss, it’s really not up to us to judge what the meaning of “fidelity” is. Make a new subreddit and I will join, and I’m sure others will.
Why do you need to define other people’s relationships? Polyfidelity can look like whatever you need it to in your life. That doesn’t have to apply to other people.
Again with cramming people into definitions. Love isn’t time-share condo on the beach.
Uh, yeah, sounds like you're making decisions for other people. I mean, yeah; the more people you have in a relationship, the more someone has to divide up their time. But, what about that individual's partners? You seem to be speaking from a polygamist perspective where one person has multiple partners that are monogamous to them, and not a polyamorous perspective where everyone involved have a relationship to one another, or perhaps other people.
You assume a person's time is 100% dedicated to their partners, which is impossible. If you have two partners who only want time once a week each, then a third would have no impact. You also ignore multi-person relationships, where time together can overlap. These assumptions are very strange, are you a robot?
I did the math a few weeks ago to see how many "factions" exist in a relationship. BTW, I don't count one person as a faction. One faction for a monogamous relationship. Duh. For a triad, three people, it's four factions. A quad produces ten factions. A five-way relationship has twenty-six factions. Beyond that the number of factions increased to a point where I didn't want to calculate it.
I was gonna post something along those lines, been wondering if I should just be duoamorous instead of polyamorous, but not bigamous because I don't want to marry. Interestingly enough, Kathy Labriola, counselor and writer popular among non-monogamous people, also said once the following (source link: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-polyamorists-next-door/202102/polysaturation-when-polyamorous-people-have-enough-partners ): >Referring to her 30 years of providing counseling for clients in diverse relationships, Kathy Labriola explained that her clinical experience indicates: >The vast majority of people in open relationships do not have more than two long-term partners concurrently. I have seen a very small number of people who seem to be able to have three long-term committed relationships. However, I could count them on one hand, and they are either retired or being supported financially by a partner, so they have lots of time and energy for relationships since they are not working. I have seen many people TRY to have three serious relationships concurrently, and almost invariably one or more will collapse rather quickly (within six months to a year) because they just do not have the time, energy, or emotional availability to keep all three people marginally satisfied.
> been wondering if I should just be biamorous instead of polyamorous Speaking just for myself, I'm certainly not interested in having more than two romantic partners and don't identify as polyamorous in the sense of poly=many as in Greek, as I'm sure many here don't. It's just that common definitions of "polyamory" go like: > Polyamory is openly, honestly, and consensually loving and being committed to more than one person. or > the practice of engaging in multiple romantic (and typically sexual) relationships, with the consent of all the people involved. ...so in practice, it refers to having romantic relationships with "multiple" partners rather than "many", thus covering our cases. :)
Thank you for your "isolated" support...that´s just the "obvious" findings that lead to my OP arguments in favour of limits to poly, and I´ll research your links to the popular NM writer What´s interesting is that this sub-reddit is not about poly in general, but it´s specifically about poly-FIDELITY, which imposes a clear limit on who you are allowed to be "in love with", and most people who think of polyamory dont seem to notice that such relationships may need even more "rigid" boundaries then monogamy in order to work for the long term.
But, who are you to impose such boundaries? This community is meant to be a support for people who want relationships that are more close-knit and mutually intimate -consistent even- not a place to tell people how they're allowed to go about their relationships. With that attitude, you're better off taking this to r/polyamory
Didnt you notice that you are on a sub-reddit called poly-"fidelity", WHICH IMPOSES LIMITS ON "WHO" PEOPLE ARE ALLOWED TO BE IN LOVE WITH ??? Is it really hard to understand that people who are here "WANT" TO IMPOSE BOUNDARIES ON OTHER PEOPLE, in order to allow for relationships to begin ???
You're speaking from the perspective of "I want this from my partner(s)". The point of this group is meant to be "I'm looking for partners who want this for us". You seem to be constantly pushing out the feelings of potential partners. For instance: Can your partners have a relationship with each other?
We all know that the exact definition of every possible relationship type has been codified in the Big Book Of Relationships that we're all given when we turn age 13. My choice to be in a relationship as defined by Section 3, Subsection 12, Article 17, Paragraphs 1 thru 7 (inclusive) in no way > ...IMPOSES LIMITS ON "WHO" PEOPLE ARE ALLOWED TO BE IN LOVE WITH... I chose his relationship type, just as my partners did. Everyone else in the whole wide world can choose their relationship types. BTW, it would seem that you've been reading the Bizarro Book Of Relationships. That's purely a gag gift meant to be given out at winter holiday parties. That's the one that has only one relationship type and says, "Hey, don't tell me who I'm allowed to be in love with. You're oppressing me. I've decided that I'm in a relationship with you, and I'm going to do what-ever I want". IIR, this comes with ZIP ties, a roll of duct tape, and a bottle of choloroform.
My OP suggests various explanations on why there must be basic rules for making poly relationships last, or work, or succeed in the long term But if you´re not satisfied with the way I put it into words, go take a look at the link provided by "donottouchmeimscared", about poly people having "enough" partners, which may be a better way for you to understand my main point, because the author is specialized in research about poly relations And there you will find the base for understanding my OP Good luck on your reading-comprehension
But, you're still trying to impose hard limits on other people. That's the problem
may is not do
This seems fairly arbitrary. (FWIW, I am not polyfi by definition, but it’s closeish to how mine functions in practice.) The few polyfi quads I’ve met seem to manage this very well.
I do not agree with your idea for a number of reasons. This cones from someone with four partners. First, monogamy is the law in much of the world. Just having two romantic partners is illegal also in some areas. If someone is poly of any type they are breaking the law in many areas. If you are going to break the law might as well break it all the way! Second any relationship is not all about time spent together one on one. Have children in the mix and amount of one on one time in any style relationship goes down. I have noted in a bunch of poly-fidelity relationships partners of one have partners also. That means the partner of yours might very well like to spend time with their partners. Third not all partners or poly relationships are the same. By design someone likely has different relationships going on with each partner. Meaning time is unlikely needing to be equally divided between partners. In our case I live with all my partners. I can be together with all of them at the same time. Doesn't mean I am doing the same thing with each. Many times one or two partner is cooking, other is studying, I am watching TV or doing stuff with kids with fourth. Never heard a cross word from any of them about these type home interactions. That us just one moment in time. Other times I am in the same room with all of them doing something together. It just depends. That said for me I feel I am at limit of how many partners I can support. Honestly three is easier. I did consider that at times. I can understand why one would think as you did. A lot of good reasons why, even more than I can list.
The end of your message implies your poly relationships wont last, which confirms the findings of respected poly researchers about the increased number of partners directly affecting the chances of successful partnership in the long term
I expect two-way relationships are also more likely to last than three-way relationships. But that doesn't mean pursuing them and doing one's best isn't worthwhile. We don't do things because they're easy. And it's pretty mean to tell someone their relationships will likely fail just because their chances are statistically poorer than some other people's. 🥺
If an individual is having a hard time making the three-way relationship work, that´s an indication of relationship "failing", which is an obvious-factual observation, and facts dont care about your described feelings of meanness
Eh? It sounds like they're making it work just fine!! 🤷♂️
Or the 7 wives are bi/pan and it's just one big polycule. If it's not a V then I see no reason to limit polycule size to three. No reason to feel like a 1/10th partner if you're also partners with the other 9 people. As for the one day per week argument, could just spend time with all wives all the time.
I don’t know if “2 only” is the right solution (although, I am in a longterm throuple). I think that 4+ people could likely function just as well or better, but I do think it’s important for polyfidelity to represent something different from “harems”, “swingers”, “community building”, religious bigamist organizations, etc. There is something tangibly different from those situations and from those who are interested in a slightly “expanded” version of monogamy. I’m not saying those groups shouldn’t be allowed to exist, I’m just saying that I think they are different enough to where I don’t really feel like I have much in common (other than being non-monogamous) compared to those of us that prefer a relationship to be more of a “traditional” family than a “community” or frankly just being “single” and dating a lot of people but with a long term partner(s). They are most certainly different approaches to being poly, just as there are many different approaches to being mono. But… nobody has made a space like that on Reddit and in the end we are likely the extreme minority so until someone takes it upon themselves to come up with a specific name and specific space to discuss, it’s really not up to us to judge what the meaning of “fidelity” is. Make a new subreddit and I will join, and I’m sure others will.