the funny thing is, the stuff that i was going to write about instead of rewriting the rant from yesterday, is in a way about the same stuff. in college, my suitemate was a self proclamed polygamorist. in fact, he was a very proclaiming polygamorist. this was my first real exposure to this lifestyle and left a really bad taste in my mouth. as much as i wanted to believe that it could work in the real world and no one would end up hurt, that is not how it seemed to work.
what i did end up seeing was a guy who had a girl he could have sex with at school and another he could have sex with back home. it seemed to be about the control that he felt he had over these women, not about the love that they were supposed to be sharing. i could be wrong about it, but i was around the people involved afterwards and everyone ended up hurt.
surfice to say that i recently have seen it working and i feel much beter about people in general for it. of course, thinking about it some more, i did have several poly friends while in school, and there was another one the seemed to be doing ok by it. but then again, i remember him wanting so much more out of his relationships than he was getting. i have seen happy people who share a trust and love that is amazing. i am sure i will have more on this, so until then, or some time like it.
EDIT 26.june.02: polyamorist not polygamist... -=smacks head=- thanks chuck!
Comments (10)
did you mean polyamory? i agree that it is a bad idea for the most part. the real problem is that all people involved have to be connected and in love with all other parties. its really tough to find that many open minded, loving, genuinely happy and non-jealous people. if any link in the fully-connected graph is broken the whole thing can come down like a house of cards. i think, with the right people, it could be a wonderful, wonderful thing, however. Heinlien's descriptions in "Stranger in a Strange Land" are particularly attractive (ok, ok, minus the obviously misogynistic impulses).
Posted by charles | July 26, 2002 2:20 PM
Posted on July 26, 2002 14:20
yup that is exactly what i meant. i need to get more sleep. and it does make me a bit sad that such a lifestyle doesn't work in practice. oh well, at least the people involved are really cool and i can watch and see if someone is able to pull it off.
Posted by takeru | July 26, 2002 3:14 PM
Posted on July 26, 2002 15:14
I'm still having trouble maintaining a stable graph with n=2 nodes for more than 6 or 8 months. Truth be told, I'm not always that succesful at maintaining n=1 with a high degree of stability.
I've know a couple people whose poly relationships didn't end up any worse than other people's normal relationships... At this point though, by the time I'm done dealing with my craziness and one other person's craziness I'm probably just going to be to tired to deal with a third set of quirks and insanities.
Posted by Logan | July 26, 2002 4:26 PM
Posted on July 26, 2002 16:26
Good point. That sort of lifestyle is something you have to devote a lot of time to maintaining. I'm too happy just reading good books, playing with my titanium powerbook and hanging out with my friends. I find that one girl at a time is way, way, way more than enough.
Posted by charles | July 26, 2002 6:09 PM
Posted on July 26, 2002 18:09
while i certainly agree that most people (myself included) have a hard enough time maintaining just a single relationship, the people that i have recently met seem to have it down pretty damn well. it wouldn't appear that they spend any time in the maintainance of the relationship. maybe that is due to the fact that while they are poly, they don't require that the all parties be involved in all relationships.
logan, you are such a geek to explain it that way as are you chuck. i certainly understand what you are saying though. perhaps the reason that the couple in question seem to work so well is the graph is a not fully connected. or, for you non/less geeky out there, there is nothing that necessitates that all parties in the relationship maintain connection to all other parties.
of course, introducing this just makes it all the more complicated as now the people involoved have to be more trusting, open-minded and loving (genuine plutonic loving) than if everyone was more tightly linked to everyone else. i certainly can't wait to get to know these people better. not so i can question their life into my understanding, but so that i can observe and really understand if this kind of life works in the real adult world. of course, i assume at some level it does, but i have to know if these people are as rewarded as people not in a more traditional relationship.
Posted by takeru | July 26, 2002 9:22 PM
Posted on July 26, 2002 21:22
it's suffice, no r. and hey, you coming into town for my party? yes? :)
Posted by avi | July 27, 2002 7:22 AM
Posted on July 27, 2002 07:22
oh yeah. whoo beer. and various other beverages. there's a ked of spaten oktoberfest in a kegerator here waiting for some help. bitch behemoth!
Posted by avi | July 27, 2002 7:24 AM
Posted on July 27, 2002 07:24
should have spell-checked that last one. it's a keg, not ked
Posted by avi | July 27, 2002 7:28 AM
Posted on July 27, 2002 07:28
and you talk about my spelling... i assume that you were out late doing something fun?
sorry i will be missing yet another avi party. bad planning on my part.
Posted by takeru | July 27, 2002 7:36 PM
Posted on July 27, 2002 19:36
you were missed as always. if you want to read what i think about this whole idea of poly-whatever-i-wish-i-was-having-sex-with-multiple-partners you can go and read my page. because aaron was bitching i didn't comment. and so i won't. nah nah nah.
Posted by krink | July 28, 2002 2:55 AM
Posted on July 28, 2002 02:55