A popular New Year’s resolution is to be more loving. Jasper Taylor looks into the lives of the people that take that quite literally.
Terisa Greenan is 44 and an actress. She lives with her husband, her boyfriend and down the road lives her other boyfriend, Matt. He lives with his wife, Vera, whose boyfriend is Terisa’s husband. Confused? This is polyamory.
Many people have misconceptions about polyamory – that it was dreamt up by an aggravated guy who couldn’t act on his office crush because of the restrictions of monogamy or that it is just a ‘posh’ form of ‘swinging’.
The reality of polyamory is very different though. It goes a lot deeper than just sex. Polyamory is a lifestyle based around relationships with multiple partners in an open, honest and non-possessive way. The emotional fulfilment comes from not limiting themselves, or their partners, to one significant other.
It seems that this way of living is internal to some people, Terisa being one of them. ‘It’s been an idea in my head for a very long time. Since my early teens I’ve thought that only one partner was limiting and stifling, and also that having multiple partners could be viable.’ But one of her partners, Matt Bullen, has only been polyamorous for five years. ‘I thought there was something very workable and enjoyable in consensual sexual variety and sharing.’ His wife of sixteen years, Vera, said she thought it would ‘enrich my life, and the life of my spouse’.
So far, it appears the ‘newbies’ to polyamory haven’t been let down. Matt and Vera have been with their new partners (Terisa and her husband) for three years now and are still enjoying the varied nature of their lifestyle. Matt said, ‘It has hugely enriched my romantic and social life. It has made it possible for me to savour and enjoy my partners, who are so different in so many ways.’
They all live in Seattle now, although Matt grew up in England, and have two separate households. Matt, Vera and their son live in one house and Terisa lives with her two other partners. Monogamy was never an option for her. ‘Polyamory gives you a sense of total security and freedom in your relationships that I don’t think is possible in monogamy. It encourages you to give your partner freedom and relinquish control.’
Dr Sue Johnson, the Director of the Ottawa Couple and Family Institute and the International Center for Excellence in Emotionally Focused Therapy, had a different opinion. ‘We are programmed to “prefer” monogamous relationships. Polyamory is no alternative at all as it sets up competing attachments. Essentially it goes against our need for secure bonds where we know we matter and come first and someone will come when we call.’
Currently, there are more than 500,000 ‘poly’ households in the U.S. but, like most things in life, poly comes with its problems too. Matt highlighted some of these, ‘Poly relationships can feel like they are constantly changing. Sometimes, it seems that every half-day brings a new challenge and that can be tiring.’
Polyamory is often challenged on the grounds of jealousy. Many people would shudder at the thought of their significant other even sharing a passionate kiss with someone else, let alone passionate sex. So, is jealousy an issue in polyamory? ‘There is always some element of jealousy’, said Terisa, and Matt backed this up, ‘Yes, but it is usually very specific and temporary’.
Jealousy in poly, it appears, is very similar to that of any other kind of relationship. ‘I am more jealous or envious if my boyfriend is on a date than if my husband is,’ says Vera, ‘as I feel that my boyfriend could more easily replace me with someone new.’
Given the situation though, jealousy as an emotion is easier to deal with than if, say, a husband cheats on his wife and breaks that bond without consent. Matt talked about how jealousy is dealt with when it arises. ‘The best approach is to try and identify what you’re jealous of very, very specifically. Once this is clear, the talking really needs to start. If you can trap the exact nature of this jealousy, it can be pretty easy to handle and negotiate. Often the ‘sufferer’ just needs genuine reassurance.’
Practical challenges also emerge through poly. For Terisa, ‘Scheduling is one of the most difficult aspects of poly and an ongoing, dynamic challenge.’ The solution? ‘You try to meet everyone’s needs, and your own. You ask if they are getting everything they want from you, and if they aren’t, you adjust. You try to do what works for everyone as an individual.’ Matt added his own tip, ‘What’s far more important is to become content with the exact ‘shape’ and constraints of each relationship.’
The child in the middle of all these relationships must be considered though, for he has not specifically chosen to be involved in this lifestyle choice. There will be an impact on his childhood, but Matt and Vera, his parents, believe that the impact is a positive one. ‘Children grow up loved by many caring adults in poly households,’ says Vera, ‘and get more of their day-to-day needs met.’ Terisa agrees too, ‘It helps a child feel more supported and loved having more than two loving adults in his/her life.’
Dr Johnson does not agree though, ‘Growing up in any household where close relationships are ambiguous and unclear will likely impact any child, evidence says that one or two main bonds are essential for optimal child development, and loss or change of attachment figures is very difficult for kids.’
Ultimately, polyamory is a matter of personal taste. It is clearly better than cheating in a monogamous relationship although it is not enough to suddenly announce a state of polyamory, as it takes a lot of work. A joke is often shared in the poly community that ‘polyamory’ is inherently wrong – a word should never mix Latin and Greek roots.
Follow Matt Bullen’s polyamory blog at http://matt-bullen.blogspot.com/
Terisa Greenan here – my family is profiled in this article. I agree with Dr. Johnson that ‘Growing up in any household where close relationships are ambiguous and unclear will likely impact any child [negatively]…” but what the doctor does not seem to understand is that there is nothing either ambiguous or unclear about the relationships in my poly family. I also agree that “loss or change of attachment figures is very difficult for kids,” but this is not particular to polyamory. Any number of children of divorced or single parents have and will feel this kind of loss, therefore this is not a valid argument against polyamory, only an argument against forming attachments with children and then severing them, which we don’t do and don’t have any more likelihood of doing, than any monogamous couple. It seems the doctor is attributing lots of different characteristics to all poly families, and this manner of stereotyping (and then drawing conclusions based on those stereotypes) is neither useful, nor scientific.
Teresa,
I agree with your critique of Dr. Johnson 100%. I am not polyamorous or polygamous. I have practiced serial monogamy for my entire adult life, but only because I was “trained” to do so, or as Dr. Johnson claims, “programmed” to do so. I just finished reading the book, “Sex at Dawn: The Prehistoric Origins of Modern Sexuality,” by Christopher Ryan and Cacilda Jetha. The information in this book is forcing me to deeply question my programming and confront my genetic, evolutionary, and biological heritage as one of three higher primates who evolved to live in small, sexually egalitarian troops/tribes where reproduction is based on sperm competition wherein all mature males have sex with any mature females who are at their monthly ovulating peak. This is what many extant hunter-gatherer human tribes do as a matter of course. You can read the book (if you haven’t done so already) to discover the evolutionary and societal advantages of this type of sexual expression. In very general terms, this pattern results in sperm competition instead of male vs. male competition and consequently means that the sperm of the male most biochemically and genetically compatible with the ovulating female is the lucky guy who passes on his genes without any of strife, angst, “ownership” issues, or jealousy inherent in an imposed, forced monogamous culture. Another side benefit is that in these natural human societies, is that all males in the tribe feel they are all the fathers of all the offspring of all the women of the tribe, and so all adult members of the tribe are equally invested in loving, nurturing, and raising all the children of the tribe. The authors have done meticulous research on this topic and I came away convinced that the biggest mistake human primates ever made was to embrace sedentary agricultural societies based on private property, hoarding, greed, ownership, and subjugation of women by men who quickly came to think of women as a commodity and just another piece of property. Physiological developments seem to support their contentions as well. To wit, male genital size and sperm production has decreased over that last 10,000 years to half of what it was before humans chose to abandon their nomadic, egalitarian ways in favor of agriculture and private property, with Asian males suffering the greatest reduction in genitalia size and sperm production, followed by Europeans, and finally Africans. Interestingly, this testicular shrinkage has not occurred in extant hunter-gatherer societies. Among our primate cousins, bonobos have the largest testes, followed by chimps, and Humans, while Gibbons (furthest from humans genetically), the only great apes who live in monogamous, bonded pairs, have the smallest penises and testicles, followed by the Mormon-like Gorillas, who have evolutionarily developed a uniformly polygamous sexuality. The testes of an adult male silver back gorilla are the size of raisins and his penis is less than one inch long when fully erect. This is in a creature who is typically about 7 to 8 feet tall when bi-pedal and can weigh upwards of 500 to 600 pounds. On the opposite side of the spectrum, bonobo males who typically weigh about 60 to 80 pounds have testes more than twice as large as modern, shrinking, forced monogamous humans. By embracing or fooling ourselves that monogamy is a “natural” human sexual proclivity, we have weakened our genetic heritage, are continuing to select against the best genetically compatible possibilities, and are failing at monogamy in ever greater numbers.
I don’t know if polyamory as it currently is practiced or can practically be practiced in this sexually repressed society is the answer to our dilemma, but it’s a start. However, to really get back to our evolutionary true path, I think we’ll have to lose our fascination with private property, ownership, jealousy, object worship, and get back to a simpler, healthier, smaller society(ies) where all people are embraced, and loved, and encouraged to share themselves psychically and sexually with each other in a truly egalitarian manner. We may have to experience one or more cataclysmal events to get there, but life has its ways of protecting itself when threatened within or without.
I am curious about Dr. Johnson’s assertion that, “We are programmed to prefer monogamous relationships.” Where is the literature reference for this statement? On the other hand, a strong case for non-monogamy as our human preference is made by Christopher Ryan, Ph. D. & Cacilda Jethá, M.D. in their book Sex at Dawn, The Prehistoric Origins of Modern Sexuality. It is a well referenced look at the scientific literature that is at odds with Dr. Johnson’s statements.
And think about this, if humans “prefer monogamy” why are we so bad at it?
I too am a bit concerned that Dr. Johnson seems to assume that Poly=transient and unstable. I know a fair few monogamous parents who have had new ‘parents’ come in and out of their life every year…one woman insisted that her children call every new boyfriend she had ‘Daddy’. Is that more preferable because she only has one boyfriend at a time?
Poly parents, like any responsible parents, think hard and long who they want around their children, assuming that Polyamorous parents are less responsible is just bigotry.
I disagree strongly with some of Dr Johnson’s assertions. I feel, that, although she knows her subject, she has no understanding of how poly actually works.
1) ‘[Polyamory] sets up competing attachments’
Does it set up competing attachments when we have more than one child? To some extent, I guess, but most of us can cope with that. Certainly I manage to parent more than one child without having a ‘favourite’ who gets the majority of my time and attention, and my parents managed the same feat. Most kids learn to cope with it. To their benefit, often, as learning to share toys, time, attention, is a vital life-skill. Seriously, adults can cope with ‘competing attachments’.
2) ‘Essentially it goes against our need for secure bonds where we know we matter and come first…’
Consider this, please, Dr Johnson: When a couple has a child, both parents put the baby first *as they should do*, not one another. Should either parent feel that they are less important to the other because their primacy has been challenged by the infant? Of course not. That would be very unhealthy for the relationship and for the child. In a healthy couple relationship, when a couple has a child, the adults still feel securely bonded to one another, and still know that they can rely upon one another.
As adults, we learn (hopefully!) that we cannot possibly *always* come first in another person’s life. To assume that they should invariably put our needs and wants above their own and above any other responsibility they may have would be incredibly selfish and, frankly, immature. Similarly, in a healthy poly relationship, there is still a sense of being securely bonded to one’s partners.
3) ‘…and someone will come when we call.’
This idea appears to assume complete free agency, which few of us have. What if our partner is disabled and unable to get up when we have a serious fall? Can they come when we call? Of course not. But they will do what they can – perhaps phone for an ambulance. What if our partner is injured and needs to go to hospital, but we also have to look after the children and there is nobody to babysit? Then the injured partner has to go in the ambulance alone. What if our partner is at work and cannot leave without losing the job that supports us both? Can they be expected to drop everything and come home because we have just heard that our mother died and we need their support? Of course not. To do so would simply put us – as a family – in a worse position than before, once the crisis is over.
Again, what we have as a couple is the same thing we have in a poly relationship: a knowledge that our partners will do what they can to help us *within the limits of their capabilities and responsibilities*. This is just a fact of adult life. Any adult who expects more is going to be sorely disappointed, not to mention incredibly demanding and hard to live with!
4) ‘Growing up in any household where close relationships are ambiguous and unclear will likely impact any child’
A poly relationship does not necessarily entail ‘ambiguous or unclear’ close relationships. If a child’s parents are argumentative or if they separate, that, of course, is likely to bring some strain. But if they do not, it’s hard to see why the addition of an adult to the household – or to the family’s life – should be any more stressful and confusing to a child than if Granny comes to live with them because she’s too old to manage by herself anymore. Or if a parent dies and a disabled sibling moves in with the family. Or if the couple meets someone they get on with really well (as friends) and the families start to visit back and forth frequently. Or if an aunt who has lived in another country for most of the child’s life moves to the same city and they see more of her for a few years… till she moves country again (as my sister has, for work). None of these life-events is likely to make a child confused about who their parents are, nor is the novelty of a new routine likely to confuse a child for long.
5) ‘…evidence says that one or two main bonds are essential for optimal child development, and loss or change of attachment figures is very difficult for kids.’
As I said above, parental separation or serious arguments will, of course, negatively impact a child. But if they are still together, how are the child’s bonds to their parents lost or changed? Granted, if a parent starts to spend all of their time with the new partner and a lot less with the child, then that will have an impact on the child, but that is simply poor parenting, and nothing to do specifically with poly. It is the kind of thing that can (but should not) also happen when a single parent is starting a new relationship, when a new baby is born, when a parent is dealing with emotional or work overload etc. It is not unique to poly, and it should not happen in poly any more than it should happen when a single parent finds a new partner. It’s a matter of self-discipline, a child-centred approach and, frankly, being a responsible adult.
6) As Richard says above, I would like to see some peer-reviewed evidence that we are ‘programmed to prefer monogamous relationships’. It is a frankly astonishing assertion that, without supporting evidence, seems likely to be based more in cultural prejudice than in logical thinking. I would be very interested in reading any empirical data on either side of this argument, in fact.
I accept that Dr Johnson is a medical professional, and is deservedly respected within her field. However, I believe that further investigation into how poly families actually function, and into how the children of poly families develop as compared with their peers in mono or single parent families would benefit anybody who plans to make a public statement regarding polyamory, or polyamorous families.
well I am really new to the whole idea of polyamorous relationships. In fact it was trouble in my marriage in a monogamaus one that clued me into it. My wife told me that she did’nt care if I messed around on her as long as I dident fall in love and leave her. She then told me latter on that I shouldnt consider it cheating if she gave me permission. I asked her well are you wanting to step outside the tradintional marriage lines? she said no but knows how much I enjoy sex with her. but she doesnt care much about sex and just wants me to be happy. i am struggeling with this reality and did try to get involve with another women I was successful and we had an absalute mind blowing time. This other women did fill an emotional part of me that my wife of 17years has not been able too. however when the weekend was over the other women kissed me goodbye and said “your wife has to be crazy to want to share you with anyone.” So in staying with the nature of the other bloggers I would have to be inclined to think God origianlly created us for exclusve one on one. But this would be an irrelivent argument to make if you choose not to believe in him or have a relationship with him. To be fair to those of us who have this bent, the bible infact is full of major prominant figures that were involved in polyamorus relationships. Check it for yourselves. From Abraham to Jacub to king david and beyond, even as you go through the new testement you see that haveing more then one partner was common and its not till 2nd corrinthians that a more traditional approach to marriage was required to be an elder in the early christian church. In fact today in other parts of our world polygomy in various forms is alive and well. In conclusion for me it will continue to be a struggle, I see it as just one more detirioraton of the human race before we all are held accountable for our behavior. But Gods grace is good and his understanding of our fraility surpasses anything we can comprehend. He is forgiiving and like the polyamoris parents in the artical he only wants the best for us. He is worth persuing a relationship with. As for me I may go down the road of polyamors relationships for now but there is plenty of evidence that suggests that is not how we were origionaly created. If you belive int the theroy of evalution and embrace it whole hardedly then you have more faith then I but I will have is more hope then you. We as humas have not done such a good job caring for our planet, i will not cast my let with us the fallen.
I know this family personally. They are all loving, accepting people who want nothing more than everyone’s happiness, which is very selfless. I do have to say that I feel monogamy is a choice just as polyamory is a choice (I’ve tried both). Why try to define the lines when they are already so blurred? I am in a very loving, caring, monogamous relationship with someone who allows me freedom to be myself and trusts me in a way no one else ever has. We have discussed the idea of somewhat opening our relationship (specifically because I identify as queer/pansexual) and have both agreed that we don’t feel a need to do so and most likely never will if it would cause our dynamic to change. I do believe you can find happiness and freedom in a monogamous relationship just as much as you can find happiness and freedom in a polyamorous relationship… every relationship should involve honesty, communication, and trust. I feel terribly for anyone that doesn’t have all these things, in mono or poly relationships. That said, this is a very good article written with amazing people as subjects.
Hello, very interesting conversation. I totally agree with has been said about polyamory and totally disagree with Dr. Johnson. Would it be possible to find the source of her declarations? I would like to read the full article/interview/declaration to be able to better refute it.
Pingback: The Rock – Issue 4 | Jasper Taylor
Spot on with this write-up, I really believe that this web site needs a lot more attention. I’ll probably be back again to see more, thanks for the info!
Very good post. I’m going through some of these issues as well..