Δαφνη Ευτυχια Αρθουρος

My quote-of-the-day entries are chosen because I find them funny, intriguing, insightful, well-phrased, or inspirational; or because I agree with them and want to make sure others hear them, expect them to stir up debate, am not yet sure whether I agree or not but find them interesting to contemplate, or even strongly disagree with them and want to hold them up to the light. So some quotes-of-the-day reflect my own opinions and some do not. And I don't always try to make it obvious which are which, though sometimes I include clues and some are just very easy to guess.

A week and a half ago, I posted a QotD about polyamory from one of my friends that I did agree with, at least tentatively, and thought was an interesting insight. It got a somewhat different reaction than I'd expected, including defensiveness from monogamous people (who appeared to me to be perceiving the quotation as either a slam against monogamy or an attitude of smug superiority that needed to be taken down a peg). I didn't see the original comment as either, but perhaps, being polyamourous myself, I'm not as sensitive to that and simply overlooked that aspect of it. As merde pointed out, "i make a point of trying to be sensitive to and understanding of my poly friends. it's depressing how common it is, though, for them to fail utterly to reciprocate."

The comments bothered me more than being disagreed with usually does. And I don't think it's because I identify as poly and want to think positive statements about us can go unchallenged. It's because -- whether they meant it this way or not -- it felt to me as though I was being called insensitive, smug, etc. for posting it. And whether they meant it that way or not, and whether I deserved it or not if they did, I care enough about what my friends think of me to want to try to clarify things on my end.

And I'm probably going to wind up opening a whole NEW can of worms in the process (%%wince%%) but here goes anyhow.

First, I do not believe that polyamorous people are superior (nor inferior) to monogamous people. I do believe that some folks can do poly and others are headed for disaster if they try it; and I believe the same thing about mono -- that some are wired for it and some just shouldn't make the attempt -- but it doesn't mean I think poly folk are smarter or "more evolved" or whatever. Such notions may have crossed my mind when I was in my late teens and early twenties, but I've outgrown them.

And I did not get such a feeling from the entry I quoted, either. (See second paragraph, above.)

Second, I don't feel that the practice of polyamoury is inherently superior to monogamy, nor vice-versa. Figuring out which way you're wired, then learning how to make that work is what counts. Personally, I'm able to have both monogamous and polyamourous relationships[1]; this makes me neither unique nor superiour -- it just means that by luck I've got more options.

Third -- and this is where problems with people's hot-buttons come in, on both sides -- I don't think that saying something positive about one category, even in comparison to the other, has to imply that the other group is flawed, nor that one's own group is flawless. Or that saying, "_X_ makes avoiding problem-_Y_ more likely," should be read to mean, "No _X_ person ever has a problem with _Y_."

Here's something about defensiveness: Since our culture is built on an assumption of monogamy, poly folk (as a trend, not each individual) are a bit defensive. They're used to being misunderstood and looked down upon and having to point out why polyamoury makes sense. But in any group where being poly appears[2] to be the norm, monogamists are going to get tired of hearing "how much better" poly is and get defensive themselves. Plus, in an environment where polyamoury is open and unremarkable, monogamists are going to get pretty darned fed up with the clueless subset of polyamourists who assume that being able to be openly poly without censure or disdain means that everyone else in the group can be assumed to be poly as well, and those encounters tend to be remembered a long time.[3].

So both groups get defensive, and communication between the two groups about polyamoury and monogamy becomes difficult. Each hears what they expect the other to say on top of whatever is actually being said.

And me, I get defensive on both sides (though perhaps a bit more defensive about perceived attacks on polyamoury). Looking back, I see that I reacted to what otherdeb wrote as though she'd said something stronger than she actualy did.

As for the original quote from n0ire that started this, I'm still mulling it over now that I've gone back and re-read the commentary in a more even frame of mind. The funny thing is that what she said about the "killer myth of monogamy" isn't really about monogamy itself; it's about cultural expectations regarding "what will make everything perfect". Where polyamoury comes in is her assertion that polyamoury makes it easier to see that myth. I guess I'd better go log some field observations in the data-book before I argue about it any more.

[1] I should probably clarify that there are partners I am able to be comfortably and healthily monogamous with, and partners with whom for whatever reasons I don't seem to be able to; and that there are partners with whom I feel comfortable in polyamourous relationships, and partners with whom polyamoury feels uncomfortable. So while in some important senses I've got more options than someone who is only happy and healthy in monogamous relationships or someone who cannot do be monogamous at all, I unfortunately do not have the magical ability to just "make it all work out" with every prospective lover.

[2] In general, in a group where a minority makes up a quarter of the group, the majority will feel outnumbered. So here I'm talking about groups where polyamourists have a real or imagined majority.

[3] The canonical complained-about encounter seems to be: P attempts to pick up M, M politely refuses with "I'm married", and P responds "So what?" M is accustomed to the outside culture where "I'm married" implies "and monogamous" and finds P's disrespect of hir marriage incredibly rude. P is accustomed to situations where being married does not imply unavailable. (But P really [expletive]ing ought to be able to figure out that if "I'm married" is being used as a turn-down, then either M is monogamous or M is trying to be polite about turning P down, and should be aware that in either case, "So what?" is the wrong thing to say.) Most polyamourous people, as far as I can tell, are far more clueful than that, but how many such encounters does it take for a monogamous person to be "sick and tired of poly people not respecting my marriage"?