What are your thoughts on Polyamory or Polygamy?

Post Reply New Topic

What are your thoughts on non-monogamous relationships? Polyamory is a more recent term that means numerous loves. Basically, a married couple can have a gf/bf or numerous gf's/bf's. Non-married couples can have numerous partners as well. Usually the relationships aren't just sexual; they're also romantic and emotional relationships. Any sexual orientation can be Polyamorous; usually the most common sexual orientations that are polyamorous are bisexual, gay male/ male homosexual, and heterosexual. Polygamy is usually one man many wives, or one woman many husbands, but I can see homosexual polygamous relationships being a thing, if it wasn't mainly a religious thing. Usually Mormons or Muslims are the groups that marry different women or men. Even though Christianity looks down upon this type of relationship, Mormonism is the only sect of Christianity that practices Polygamy. There's also different types of non-monogamous relationships like swinging, which is usually a couple having sexual relationships with other couples. Open relationships are different, which is a main couple having a relationship with another another person, which is a secondary relationship. Discuss your opinions here.

Mainstream Mormonism doesn't practice polygamy any longer. They gave it up as one of the conditions for Utah to become a U.S. state. Only various "fundamentalist" Mormon split-off sects still practice polygamy.

Anyhow, I was polyamorous in my mid-twenties through my forties.

I was also, off-and-on, active in the local NYC-area polyamory community (organized subculture).

I felt very much at home in the latter, thanks to its acceptance of general oddballness and its emphasis on clear communication rather than relying on subtle hints.

In retrospect, I would say that it was a very autistic-friendly subculture. No one ever talked about autism per se, but the leader of one group often joked about how he had "flunked mind-reading in high school," and many of the people there were self-described "nerds."

Apparently the poly community -- at least here in NYC -- continued to be de facto autistic-friendly after I left. In early 2018, a young autistic woman named Kirsten Lindsmith wrote a blog post "Autism and Consent," in which she talks about the NYC polyamory community's acceptance of weirdness and its emphasis on explicit consent, not just in the bedroom and relationships, but in everyday social interaction as well.

Apparently, though, the polyamory community in places other than NYC isn't necessarily as autistic-friendly as the NYC poly community. On an anonymous blog Aspergers and Me, I found a 2015 post titled "Polyamory and autism," in which the author talks about various ways her local polyamory community is not autistic-friendly. (The "About the Author" page mentions that one of the author's hobbies is horseback riding, so I gather that she probably lives in a rural area.)

Anyhow, the NYC poly community was de facto autistic-friendly enough, in my experience, that it has inspired my vision of how the world could become more autistic-friendly in general. I'm not saying we should all be polyamorous, but the world could be a much better place, for us, if everyone communicated as clearly and forthrightly as the people in the NYC polyamory community did, in my experience, rather than relying on subtle hints.

Alas, we're not in a position to change the world ... yet. We'll need to build our own community (organized subculture) first.

I'm definitely only into being romantic and sexual with one person at a time but have no problem with other people doing relationships in different ways. It's impressive how multiple people can all get on together and interesting because it's something I don't understand.

It's nice to hear that (at least in one area) the community is autism friendly too!

Yeah my bad. I meant to put that in my first post. Yeah the FDS Mormons are the ones that practice this.

Mormonism is a religion on its own. It is not Christianity as it does not comply to the fundamental core principles of what Christianity is.

But going to the practice of having more then one wife or more then one husband. Isn't it obvious why God chose ar a certain time for men to have just one wife? (Apart from having more then one mother in law! ) It was because marriage is a very close commitment. When one has more then one wife or husband, one simply cant spend the time with each one as one should.
I could not cope with more then one woman. One woman would be all that I could handle because marriage is a continual "Full on" experience, and it is a continual work in progress cemented together in love.
How can one do this effectively whilst being married to more then one person?

Not my thing.

People can do whatever they want.

Live and let live. Love and let love.

I like the idea of 'open relationships' but it just isn't my thang.
I am only interested in platonic relationships.

I don't see anything wrong with it, if it's consensual between all parties. But I do not think I would want that, seems like it would be quite complicated to have more than one relationship at the same time.

No problem with it, but I remember there was an experiment with couples who wanted to experiment with swinging and they said it was a good thing for their relationship but they would not try it again.It seems like if the people involved are mature enough it can work but it is hit or miss. Again none of my business and people should not be persecuted for marrying who they love, as long as they consented and are of sound mind legally.

I'm a one partner person myself.

I’m not into that sort of thing....

It's not ideal for me, but people are different. Whatever works, works.

If I could achieve getting a partner in the first place, that would be enough for me. Anything more seems over-ambitious.

In theory, polyamory sounds like a blast, but I have to wonder how people feel when they're told "not this weekend, so-and-so is coming over for a ****" for the tenth time.

Not my cup od tea. I'm very much "depth over width" kind of person in such contexts.