27 ms·
How Did Polyamory Become So Popular?
- pinewurst 3y agohttps://archive.vn/I4cU8 https://archive.vn/I4cU8
- hotdogscout 3y agoBecause the author got the Baader-Meinhof phenomenon.
- fasthands9 3y agoThe data suggests it truly is more popular. The Gallup poll below shows that the percent of people who find it "acceptable" has tripled since 2000. The generational data, which admittedly would be more useful if it was over time, still shows younger generations are more into it. https://news.gallup.com/opinion/polling-matters/313112/understanding-increase-moral-acceptability-polygamy.aspx https://news.gallup.com/opinion/polling-matters/313112/under... https://sexualalpha.com/polyamory-statistics/ https://sexualalpha.com/polyamory-statistics/ What data or info do you have to believe things haven't changed? Other than your own anecdotal interpretation of vibes? I realize that some of this could be changing labels for the same behavior, but nonetheless I don't think the author is incorrect at all for observing it is more popular.
- lolinder 3y agoNote that Gallup changed the question in 2011: before the question defined polygamy as "when one husband has more than one wife at the same time", after 2011 it was defined as "when a married person has more than one spouse at the same time". That may not account for the slope post-2011, but it's a significant enough difference that it's important to call it out. A lot of people who were opposed to polygamy when it was framed as patriarchal switched their opinion when it was made gender-neutral.
- fasthands9 3y agoThat is a good clarification. From 2012 to the most recent poll it went from 11% to 20%. I realize "moral acceptance" is not the same as "widely popular" but still think it directionally shows a meaningful change, even if its a change from "very rare" to "uncommon".
- lolinder 3y agoYeah, I'd be more interested to see the numbers of people who are actually interested in polyamory rather than those who think it's okay for someone else to do it. 38% of the population believe that gender can be different than biological sex [0], but only ~1% of the population identifies as transgender. All the data from Gallup shows is that people are increasingly open to alternative marriage arrangements, but it doesn't indicate anything about how many people are interested in those arrangements. [0] https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2022/06/28/americans-complex-views-on-gender-identity-and-transgender-issues/ https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2022/06/28/america...
- voidwtf 3y agoJust to be clear... Polygamy/Polygyny IS NOT polyamory, and it is very much incompatible with the ENM and polyamory ethos afaik.
- lolinder 3y agoI'm aware that that's a distinction people make, but I was just responding to what OP was citing. I would expect that the numbers wouldn't move much if you could do a poll on polyamory as distinct from polygamy. The distinction is so far removed from most people's experience that it's not likely to change their sentiment.
- voidwtf 3y agoMaybe so. There is definitely a lot of confusion and misunderstanding for those that have only ever been taught and only ever experienced monogamy. I'm polyamorous but I find polygamy to be pretty vile. I've never seen polygamy mentioned or practiced outside the context of religion, cults, or seeing people as property. Polygamy almost never benefits all the people involved and when I've heard of it practiced in the U.S. it's often commingled with the absolutely vile practice of child marriage. edit: I'm surprised this is an unpopular opinion, curious what I said that people don't like.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- hotdogscout 3y agoBecause this isn't new fangled, it goes back to the dawn of civilization and in many instances it's standard practice. I oppose the "become" part because no, it wasn't HBO that changed this needle, it's religion. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polygyny https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polygyny
- fasthands9 3y agoThe link you sent is polygyny, in which one man has many wives who are all his. The woman is not allowed to have more than one partner. It's perfectly acceptable for someone to write an article on trends in America or New York (it is still called The New Yorker after all) even if something similar existed once and waned in popularity before modern times. Imagine if someone saw that homeschooling rates were up in the US over ten years. Would you not want people to write on that - because 5,000 years ago technically everyone was taught by family members?
- happynacho 3y agoIt didn't
- api 3y agoHonest polyamory got more popular, which is an improvement over secret polyamory and infidelity.
- irrational 3y agoI’m convinced this is the next big legal/political marriage change after gay marriage. Though, this one might be a bit harder for developers. I imagine most government databases are setup to assume a 1-to-1 marriage relationship rather than a many-to-many relationship.
- dvngnt_ 3y agothat was my primary concern too. schema normalization
- api 3y agoEvery relationship in a relational database eventually requires a join table.
- some_furry 3y agoThis is the funniest take on polyamory I've read in years.
- magospietato 3y agoIt's Christmas, why do you have to be giving me panic attacks like this ;-)
- ryandrake 3y agoThere will be plenty of time to fix the code. Like most social change, it will be politicized, fought against bitterly by the usual suspects, and the battle will drag on until enough of the detractors die of old age so that finally another piece of society can move on. We'll have entirely different databases by the time the 1:1 mappings have to be fixed.
- Podgajski 3y ago[flagged]
- jurynulifcation 3y agoI'm not spiritual, I'm entirely materialistic and hold no stock in notions of the metaphysical, but I'm neither of the right nor left. To me your comment is the outcome of smug, baseless superiority. Before you disagree with me on this think about it. Assuming you're speaking only of those people, then whatever. Fair dues, I suppose you know them better than I do. If your comment is meant to be generalized then lol. lmao, even. Why do you believe polyamory is necessarily a consequence of boredom, greed, and selfishness? Why is your preferred relationship dynamic the one borne out of the correct social dynamics? (Hint: I highly doubt this as a premise.)
- Podgajski 3y agoNone of them were happy, none of them had less problems only more. It’s a stupid idea that’s been trying to pass and never works. The reason I bought they were spiritual is because we talked a lot about selflessness. I am not spiritual I was just hanging out with these people. I’m assuming they were seeking spirituality to massage their guilt and hide their greed. I’m saying this new popularity of polyamory is based on the liberalism because it’s the belief that you can have whatever you want and there’s no consequences for it. You end up, externalizing the pollution like all the corporations do. Even calling it polyamory is idiotic because these people were just in mutual, romantic and sexual relationships, many of them had kids. There been any studies on what polyamory does to children.? One woman in the group even admitted she wasn’t telling her children. Is that healthy? A healthy thing is something you could tell your children. To think that people can be in relationships and there be no jealousy and no problems or they can manage it somehow, and have everything they want is Ludacris and it’s never worked in the history of humanity. I don’t care have sex with all the people you want, but just don’t try to rationalize it as some healthy lifestyle if one of the people in the relationship is in a long-term commitment with you.
- Podgajski 3y agoI’m going to say too. It’s exactly like people not being satisfied with one house they need two. That’s why I bought up the neoliberalism. Peoples lives are empty and doll and so they’re looking for more ways to excite themselves. In their lives are empty and because of neoliberalism.
- Quinzel 3y agoIf I felt secure in a relationship, having a partner that wants to experiment with others/date others wouldn’t really bother me. Everyone likes a little novelty from time to time.
- drekipus 3y agoIf you felt secure in the relationship you probably wouldn't feel the need. The desire for novelty comes from bored or unfulfilled from your current relationship, which would contest the "security" of the relationship if it is impossible to live without it.
- ben_w 3y agoI have access to far more food than I can physically (let alone healthily) eat. That I am clearly fulfilled with my existing diet doesn't stop me from trying new things on the menu, nor new restaurants with entirely new menus. And the desire to try new things doesn't imply that the absence of them is "impossible to live without" — even back out of metaphor land and back to human sexuality, lot of gay people used to live straight lives.
- drekipus 3y agoA person isn't a food item, and "formally straight" relationships (including marriages) fall apart, obviously because that person isn't straight anymore.. Which is my point: the relationship isn't "secure" if you're to find out that you're actually gay.
- ben_w 3y agoYou appear to be shifting the goalposts, and not just because this comment of yours right here looks like it's mixing up formerly and formally. Are you unfamiliar with the concept of a metaphor? I did explicitly note that food was a metaphor. After all, your original comment said: > if it is impossible to live without it. Which is a much higher standard than you're now using, one where food is a useful metaphor as one does actually need it to live, albeit as a category and not any specific food — I like capsaicin, alliums, and fresh coriander, and yet I can live without them (e.g. if I had a partner who was allergic). And are you unaware of the history (and indeed current diversity) of rules about sexuality, including the cases where couples aren't/weren't allowed to separate and gay relationships are/were forbidden? You can know full well what you like, and still be bound unfulfilled but alive. Thus, that question of fulfilment is still present when your relationship is not merely "secure", but the security is enforced by law.
- MisterBastahrd 3y agoIt isn't. I don't know of a single couple in my personal life or extended group of friends that went poly and remained a couple past 5 years. They all eventually split up. Why get married if you're going to be polyamorous. Seems like a bit of a hassle to tie yourself up legally and financially when you've otherwise thrown all other parts of the relationship to the wind.
- magospietato 3y agoI don't think this anecdote nullifies the question. A thing being popular doesn't necessarily mean it is a successful approach.
- MisterBastahrd 3y agoThe question is a lie at face value. Polyamory isn't popular at all. It's just not as much of a taboo as it used to be. There's a giant difference between "what would your opinion of someone be if they were in an open relationship" and "would YOU want an open relationship?" The first has nothing to do with you personally past your opinion of how you would relate to someone else.
- magospietato 3y agoWell, you've beaten me here. It would probably serve me better to read the article before posting. But it's Christmas, and there is gin, so I hope I have your forgiveness.
- krisoft 3y ago> Polyamory isn't popular at all. “Become so popular” is about a relative change in popularity, not about absolute numbers. Almost everyone eats breakfast, yet nobody would say it “become so popular”. On the other hand if a very obscure thing becomes a bit less obscure that can be aptly described as becoming popular. > It's just not as much of a taboo as it used to be. Yes, that is what the article says too.
- 3y ago
- demondemidi 3y agoI think people are confusing poly with open. Open is just consensually fucking other people typically without any commitment. Poly is basically a serious relationship with multiple people. The biggest challenge to real poly is dealing with legit feelings of jealousy, commitment, loyalty, authenticity… I think they two are confused often.
- krisoft 3y agoIt doesn’t help that the article itself mixes in the concept of threesomes with poly. One is, in the usage I have encountered so far, refers to a sex act with three people, while the other is a relationship type. You can have a poly relationship without ever having more than two people in the same bedroom at the same time. And of course you can have a threesome without being in a polyamorous relationship. Mixing the two concepts does not help clarity at all.
- Gigachad 3y agoOpen relationships seem extremely common. I've met loads of people like this and they seem happy and the relationships last. I've only met one proper poly person and it didn't seem to work that well. They have now gone back to a typical open couple relationship.
- joegibbs 3y agoIs it really that popular? I've never met a single polyamorous person in my entire life, they just seem very vocal on the internet.
- tobinfricke 3y agoYou must not live in San Francisco!
- foobarchu 3y agoDoesn't that support their point? If its mostly just more popular in a relatively small, famously progressive area, then has it really gotten that much more popular? IMO we're still at the stage where the localized waves of ENM could see a heavy backlash as a lot of the participants who are pressured into it start to reverse course and leave those relationships. I myself know one Midwest couple with an open marriage, and it's pretty clear from speaking to them that it was a one sided deal. Note: I am not saying all ENM relationships are based on pressure, but frankly many are, and that's not sustainable.
- ruined 3y agoStatistically, you've met many. So either they just didn't feel the need to bring it up, or they felt a specific need to avoid the subject in front of you.
- Eridrus 3y agoBased on what statistics?
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- spinach 3y agoWhat statistic? A national one? Because the variation from place to place would be drastic, like comparing rural to urban, and the various politics and cultures that have more hold over different cities. I wouldn't say that a national statistic could say much about one single place or person's experience.
- hintymad 3y agoI wonder how middle-aged couples deal with the sexual desires. Numerous reports, let alone anecdotes and shows, mentioned that couples with each other for many years lost sexual desire towards each other, while their libido still flowed free. To quote one of such publications: "Sexual arousal and desire appear to decrease in response to partner familiarity and increase in response to partner novelty". I guess it's a little price to pay for a stable marriage?
- throwuxiytayq 3y agoI've always found this really sad to think about. I'm attracted to my partner and I'd like to stay this way indefinitely, but I'm also aware my own biology isn't on my side. I really hope we figure out ways (medicine? mind tricks? fork in the brain?) to keep the candle burning in the long term.
- ToucanLoucan 3y agoThat's more or less what got my wife started in it, not lacking attraction to one another, but wondering about others. We loved each other to bits (still do in fact!) but we'd only ever had each other in that way. We were curious. Started as swinging, but eventually we settled more into poly with a dedicated side piece for each of us that we have strong feelings for too. For us at least, it's completely normal to be madly in love with two people at the same time. Maybe even more to be honest, but we're happy with what we have and don't want to rock the boat further. We're still #1 for each other both emotionally and legally, and always thought we'd only ever be that connected to one another. But when it became obvious for both of us that we had "caught feelings" to use the phrasing the kids use, well, we were still madly in love with each other and had less than no desire to split up and all the emotional and financial hell involved with that, so, we have each other, we each have a side piece, and occasionally we even double-date too. Idk, it's fun. I have two women in my life that bring me joy and my wife has another man that does the same. I'm sure it's not for everyone but I will admit that I find myself wondering how many marriages that end in infidelity could've been saved if the people in them just accepted that it was pretty understandable to not remain completely 100% committed to one person for the rest of your natural life.
- teunispeters 3y agoWhen two incomes are not sufficient to live somewhere. When it takes a town to raise a child and the local town is ... cruel ... When people get less attached to mythical ideas like "nuclear family" (which is a pretty modern myth), or like the myth of "man and woman" as only model to a family. That some of the really old male-centric cultures are coming out more visible with polygamy, along with some of the "free love" movement and their crossover with the libertarians with (eg) Heinlein's "Stranger in a Strange Land" ideas, well that's likely happening too. I think a lot of reasons people explore this. Likely multiple often. All of the sustained groups I've encountered though have been mixed, distributed and really supportive of both each other, and others. A joy to be around.
- SCAQTony 3y agoI thought this issue was settled in the late sixties and seventies. As "hot" as threesomes sound, the result of polyamorous consequences was once considered settled when the early '80s struck. i.e., Drug-resistant STDs and the emergence of HIV. Monogamy can turn into a boring gated garden whereas a threesome is a potential vector threat if not an emotional threat as well.
- some_furry 3y agoThe risk of STDs in a closed poly relationship isn't any different than a closed monogamous relationship.
- Levitz 3y agoThat's just false. More people equals more risk. It's evident if you imagine a 100 person polycule.
- some_furry 3y agoThe key word of my statement is "closed". If none of your partners have an STI, and none of you are promiscuous, your risk is low. That said: It's important to know your status, even if you're monogamous.
- voidwtf 3y agoPolyamory requires communication and consent, a healthy polycule is no different than a healthy monogamous relationship when it comes to the expectation that your partner(s) will care for their sexual health and make decisions with you in mind. In one way you are correct, more people involved means an increased possibility that someone will be dishonest or take risks that will expose you. However, in the same way that bringing an STD into a monogamous relationship has consequences so would bringing an STD into a polyamorous relationship. You risk damaging your standing in the relationship.
- bitshiftfaced 3y agoEach person carries some chance of carrying an STI. Some people aren't aware of their status or may deliberately hide it. For those two probabilistic variables alone, while the absolute risk may be small, it's still at least double that of 2-people relationships. If someone is more likely to enter a 3-person relationship after leaving another 3-person relationship, you have added network effects increasing the risk. How could it be true that the risk isn't different? What have I missed?
- hnthrowaway6543 3y ago> How Did Polyamory Become So Popular? Housing prices. Seriously. Polyamory is on the rise, and divorces are at a 50-year low[0]. This isn't a coincidence. Where a couple would have divorced in the past, it now is financially infeasible in many cases. Living with a partner you're no longer compatible sucks, but not being able to afford rent sucks worse. So couples are pulling out all the stops to be not-divorced, including looking for other partners and keeping a marriage-in-name-only. [0] https://ifstudies.org/blog/the-us-divorce-rate-has-hit-a-50-year-low https://ifstudies.org/blog/the-us-divorce-rate-has-hit-a-50-...
- scotty79 3y agoThis really reinforces my belief that all social changes, big and small, have economical and technological underpinnings.
- solumunus 3y agoI see the correlation but I don’t think I buy the causation on this one. Evidence required.
- voidwtf 3y agoThat's a fairly dark view and I think a misunderstanding of what polyamory is. Couples looking to non-monogamy to solve their relationship issues is not what polyamory is, that's not healthy. Non-monogamy != Polyamory, ethical or otherwise. While polyamory takes many forms, all of them include mutual respect and communication between partners. Polyamory is having love for one or more individuals and actively being in a relationship with those individuals. I don't think you can ever expect one person to be everything, and I think for some polyamory is an alternative to leaving needs unfulfilled.
- hnthrowaway6543 3y agoYou're gatekeeping a lot here. I realize that some poly people are much more dedicated to the lifestyle and truly believe in being able to maintain multiple partners. But there's no way to distinguish between that and the "we've been married for 3 years but we're turning poly" case, nor do you or I have the authority to say that's not really polyamory.
- slibhb 3y agoThe article hints throughout that polyamory is just for the rich. I don't have the data but it's not clear to me that the rich are having more non-monogamous sex than the poor. As far as the concept itself goes, I don't think it's possible to divorce possessiveness from sex. I'm suspicious of people who claim to have conquered jealously. And then there's children. It's hard for me to see how polyamory won't be a disaster for children. I hope polyarmory is a fad and I suspect it is, just like "free love" in the 60s.
- more_corn 3y agoThere have been reports of children brought up on communes with multiple parent figures. None of them seem to be deeply disturbed.
- robocat 3y ago> I don't think it's possible to divorce possessiveness from sex. I don't get jealous: and I've definitely been in situations which I would judge that many men would get jealous. Maybe I'm on the spectrum or something. As a second example, I presume the majority of Johns that pay for sex don't get jealous about the sex worker having multiple partners. > It's hard for me to see how polyamory won't be a disaster for children I reckon the western nuclear family (mum, dad and kids) is unhealthy. I believe kids do better if they have more than two adults in their lives. Certainly added difficulties: but extended families have been managing similar issues for centuries.
- chownie 3y ago> As far as the concept itself goes, I don't think it's possible to divorce possessiveness from sex. I'm suspicious of people who claim to have conquered jealously. It depends on what you mean by "jealousy", because that term wraps a bunch of disparate ideas, especially given the modern use encompasses envy too. Possessiveness and jealousy are not the same, and jealousy and envy are not the same either. Here's a few different scenarios: 1. My partner sleeps with someone else and this upsets me because I want to sleep with my partner 2. My partner sleeps with someone else and this upsets me because I'm afraid this other person will take my partner 3. My partner sleeps with someone else and this upsets me because I want to sleep with other people 4. My partner sleeps with someone else and this upsets me because I wish I was like the other person All of these scenarios are labelled jealousy, but they're for the most part built from feelings with different motivations. I've been in a long-ish poly relationship since 2015 and since then I've discovered I don't experience jealousy or possessiveness in the classical expression, I'm actually pretty excited when my partners sleep together. Scenario 1 and 2 haven't ever happened for me, I'm either very secure in my feelings around my relationship or that emotional response isn't in my nature. I do experience 3 and 4 but I'd definitely call that a split on envy/FOMO rather than jealousy.
- whatindaheck 3y agoCool to see this getting some spotlight. It’s important to remember that just because you haven’t seen it doesn’t mean it’s around you. IME you’ll rarely just stumble upon someone poly. There’s usually some community involved which helps keep out bad actors and cool people safe. Older people tend to be of the swinger variety (which technically isn’t poly iirc) and a little more hush hush. Younger people in cities are often more open about it. And I’ve seen it more in explicitly queer-friendly spaces. If you come to a certain city in the PNW it’s everywhere. I tried it for a few years. There’s pros and cons. It’s ultimately not for me. This is going to be another big fight for marriage equality. New terms will be thrown around but the fight is all the same. Legalize (consensual) love.
- cald0s 3y agoSounds like a bubble to me
- superb-owl 3y agoAella has collected some great stats on polyamory https://aella.substack.com/p/polyamory-vs-monogamy-how-relationships https://aella.substack.com/p/polyamory-vs-monogamy-how-relat...
- marojejian 3y agoInteresting! if this is to be believed, it seems to support the thesis that polyamory results in older men dating younger women vs. monogamy.
- matteoraso 3y agoPolyamory will never become popular. I'm not going to judge anybody for what they do in the privacy of their own bedroom, but I will say that very few people are going to be okay with their partner having sex with other people, and you need at least 3 such people for a polyamorous relationship. Also, maintaining a normal relationship is hard, and the number of relationships between 2 members within a polyamorous relationship increases quadratically as the number of members increase linearly. If even one of those inter-relationships go sour, I imagine that it could lead to serious consequences for the entire poly relationship. Again, good for you to any poly people reading this that happened to make it work, but the odds are stacked against poly relationships.
- voidwtf 3y agoYou're operating under the incorrect assumption that a polyamorous relationship links all partners involved directly. I believe it's more common in polyamorous relationships that each individual in the relationship has their own partner(s). For instance A has partners B and C, but B and C are aware of each other but not interested in being partners. B and C may also have their own individual partner(s), and so on. I believe it's a less common occurrence that all partners are partnered with one-another. (One example of that might be a "thruple")
- rokkitmensch 3y ago"kitchen-table" polyamory is somewhat less frequent, although difficult to negotiate away if folks have kids in the picture.
- voidwtf 3y ago"kitchen-table" polyamory does not imply that partner(s) are intimately involved with one-another. Just that they can amicably share the same space at times, whether that be a birthday party, a friendly dinner, or board game night. Personally I would hope that any partner(s) feel comfortable speaking to one another and being in the same space if the situation merits it, but it's not for everyone.
- 1attice 3y agoHot take: Google Calendar. No, really. UX rule: Facility drives frequency. The main barrier to normative polyamory, it turns out, was the sheer logistical challenge of maintaining elaborate, reliable structures of commitments. Google Calendar, and tech in general, have made it easier for people to scale in precisely the same way databases and ERP allowed corporations to achieve Amazon-scale. This tech-dependence is also the reason that poly is de-rigeur in tech culture, where in some circles (esp. queer-flavoured varietals) it can be surprising to meet someone who is mono. A good app to build would be a SaaS platform like Tailscale for maintaining polycule/solo-poly relationships and resources; incidentally, Tailscale is already used for this in nerd 'cules. But I'm thinking some sort of Bring Your Own Storage
- lordfrito 3y agoI'm not that surprised alternative relationship structures like this are becoming more attractive in our commitment phobic "I want it now" culture. Basically it allows you to believe you can have your cake and eat it too. The mindset of "I deserve intimacy/sexual fulfillment whenever I want it, and if you love me you'll accommodate that." That's not love, that's selfishness. I can speak from personal experience that most that try it fail, largely because they have other relationship problems, the kind that keep them from doing the work to actually grow and nurture a deep relationship with another human being. It's a lot easier to f*ck the pain away. Sure there are exceptions to the rule. You will always be able to find people that make it work for them. But it will never work for the masses. Myself, I eventually realized the root cause of my dissatisfaction was inside me. As I worked on myself, I found my desire for poly/open relationships went away. It's way too much work to truly "love" that many people. Commitment is hard work. It takes, well, commitment. Trends like this are just a sign of the times. People are becoming more disposable to each other, and we want to normalize social structures that embrace this idea. We'll pat ourselves on the back as we do this, telling ourselves it's so cosmopolitan. Ultimately most of these people aren't capable of maintaining a real long term relationship, just a relationship of convenience. When things get hard, the relationship is jettisoned.
- Phoenix12052023 3y agoI'm deeply cynical that polyamory is "popular" outside of select corners of the Internet. Why? I'm just going to be blunt and say it: very few men are going to tolerate a situation where their wife or girlfriend is having sex with several other guys and they aren't having sex with several other women for long. Given how supply and demand for casual sex works, that's going to be what happens, more often than not. This is the sort of situation that could turn very explosive, very fast. And that's before we to whether most people are temperamentally suited to the emotions of "sharing" something this intimate, or the child-raising angle. Just because it can work for some doesn't mean it'll work en masse for most people.
- alternative_a 3y agoBertrand Russell came to mind when I read this. I remember reading some story featuring a flustered Russell at the dinner table with his wife Dora, her baby (by another man), and the other man. Now Russell had gone preaching and practicing free love for a long time but now he was on the receiving end. https://philosophynews.com/what-can-be-learned-from-bertrand-russells-life-as-a-philanderer-part-ii/ https://philosophynews.com/what-can-be-learned-from-bertrand... A society of emasculated males will tolerate the situation. It’s possible we’re watching patriarchy molt into matriarchy or some bonobo monkey thing. TBD, but as for OP, my perception is that the media conglomerates are leading indicators and not trailing indicators. They introduce these subjects to normalize them.
- throwoutway 3y agoWorse than that, he left her for another woman over the situation (contrary to his progressive claims) > but upon Dora becoming pregnant with another man’s child, the marriage seemed to fall prey to its own progressiveness.[10] The weir of liberal thinking gave way to intense jealousy and bitter resentment, resulting in Russell’s writing of boastful letters describing his youthful conquests across the Atlantic, and his eventual leaving of Dora for their children’s governess, Patricia.[11] He abandoned the campaigns he and Dora had together founded (including their beloved boarding school) and threw himself into the next chapter of his life with bags haphazardly packed.
- Fire-Dragon-DoL 3y agoIt's an interesting discussion. The male body was made to have multiple partners, how did it end up that monogamy is the main way to have partners? Granted I know why for myself, but it seems to go strongly against biology
- pentaphobe 3y agoThis HN thread is such a mess of logical fallacies Things can increase in popularity without your bubble noticing Things can also exist in your bubble without you noticing But to contribute my own (equally meaningless) support to the validity of the question: I definitively know a lot of people who are poly now who were not 20 years ago, and excluding them - I also know a lot more poly people than I did 20 years ago (no idea if they were poly back then). And for bonus points, I also know a lot of people who have experimented with poly life in the last 10-15 years who hadn't previously. Clearly some kind of shift or at least blip in culture
- tonfreed 3y agoAnecdotally, I know a few people that have been in open relationships. Most of them are because the girl has berated and worn down their partner and really only stays there for the meal ticket. I know precisely 2 couples where it works in a functional and mature manner. I would honestly not recommend it for anyone
- dvfjsdhgfv 3y agoI know one person who tried this and in their experience it's something that's gender-unbalanced. That is, as an average male, you need to invest much more work to enjoy the same level of connectivity when compared to an average female. This might be related to the fact that still after so many decades of sexual freedom males are still expected to be the initiating side, by and large. Another difficult aspect is that apart of your "main" partner, your "secondary" ones either need to accept that you already have a partner, hence also be open to polyamory, or you have to lie to them, which is definitely not a game for everybody. Overall, seeing all this, I wouldn't recommend it unless you have your emotions like jealousy well under control.
- bradlys 3y agoRegardless of being in a poly relationship or single or not - men do have to invest much more time into dating and dating-related activities (such as exercising and diet to achieve a great physique, grooming, and dress) to get anywhere near the results that women will. Even then, 90%+ of men with great effort will never achieve the results that 50%+ of women will get with little to no effort. There’s a vast chasm between male and female experience that will never be bridged. If you’re with an even remotely attractive woman and you’re not top 1% yourself, you will feel like a cuckold in comparison when opening up a relationship to polyamory. (Assuming she has significant interest in exploring) Most men are quite clueless - especially if they’ve been off the dating market since their early 20’s and haven’t been observing closely how dating has changed in the last couple decades.
- pfisherman 3y agoBy this I think they mean “ethical non monogamy” in the US? People have been screwing around on their partners throughout history. Some cultures turn a blind eye so long as proper discretion is exercised. In others, polygamous marriages are explicitly sanctioned - usually to the detriment of women. The US tends to be a bit puritanical when it comes to sex.
- Gys 3y agoA lot of disbelieve in the comments if polyamory even exists for real. However, I know a long time married (+/- 30y) couple where the wife has a second partner. Her husband knows and approves. They are very good friends of us. At the beginning (+/- 15y ago) it was hard on the husband, the alternative basically was to divorce. But he loves her and stayed. She also loves him very much, but she missed something more spiritual in their relation. She now is mainly with her husband, only not on Fridays (although all very flexible). The couple has no children themselves but the other partner has three. The husband and the other partner know each other and occasionally meet on Birthdays and such. We also meet up with her and the other partner. As a side note, the wife is writing a book on her own life. My own wife did some proof reading and she says it is beautifully written (my wife reads many, many books). Hopefully she can get it published.
- stjuma 3y agoIt’s still the old promiscuity with shame component now removed.