it doesn't have to be casual sex. My point is that it is unsafe sex with another person. Any person entering a relationship is at some point a stranger. My point is that people enter into relationships and at some point begin having sex. Many polyamorous relationships allow for the flow of partners. Essentially I am suggesting that some of the downsides of single parenting as far as relationships are concerned naturally flow from polyamorous relationships. This includes people entering and leaving the children's lives. But I can hardly say that aspect is immoral as it is a natural albeit tough part of life. However, as polyamorous people are ultimately people, the tendency to disregard personal risk continues even when children are present. This risk is theoretically being accepted on behalf of the child by the parent without much forethought. In monogamous relationships that are intact this does not happen. Only when people allow for the introduction of new relationships does this happen. i.e. the parent is single or the current relationship is not monogamous.
Every polyamorous person I know with children is quite careful about how new partners are brought into their children's lives. Even the not-really-poly couple I dated was clear about keeping our relationship a friendship in the eyes of her daughter until such a point as things became more serious. Similarly my BF's son doesn't know the details of my polyamorousness at this time. When he asks we'll handle it. Are there people who handle this aspect of poly poorly - certainly - however there are far more single parents in the world than there are poly people and for the most part, parents handle this OK.
You started off about bringing "untested" people home and I'm still not sure how someone's STI status is related to a relationship.
That same poly couple did engage in sexual activity outside of just relationships, but they also never brought it home to their child - but did so at conventions they attended or other times when their child wasn't at home but staying with grandma.
Oh. And this pseudo-polyamory I keep hearing about where one couple has some elevated status. I think that is immoral based on a lack of equality in a relationship. that type of "polyamory" is nothing more than open couples and their playthings.
It can be. I've been subject to that. But it isn't necessarily so. Hierarchal polyamory is not my personal ideal, but it is the current status of my relationships. I assure you that my other boyfriend isn't my plaything.
I can't agree with this implication that polyamorous relationships are somehow incapable of being "intact". There's nothing inherently more "secure" in a monoamorous relationship than in a polyamorous relationship, especially knowing the high divorce and breakup rates these days.
Agreed. The complexity level is increased, but that doesn't necessarily make it unstable. The poly people I know have made very conscious decisions when it comes to raising children and the extra support is pretty helpful.
A healthy polyamorous doesn't involve new people coming in and out of an otherwise monoamorous relationship, any more than a healthy monoamorous relationship involves a single person going from partner to partner. Polyamorous relationships can be, and often are, lifetime dedications, just like monoamorous relationships can be, and often are.
Ok, open vs. closed poly: If I'm in an open poly relationship, that just means I'm open to adding additional relationships, that doesn't necessarily mean I'm open to no string's attached (NSA) sex. I MIGHT be, but it is still within the fidelity of the relationship if so.
Closed means that I'm not seeking any additional relationships and am also not interested in NSA sex. ( or perhaps I have 1 NSA sex partner and things are remaining the same with that person.) Basically open vs. closed is dynamic vs. static.
Just trying to clarify that.
I can't regard that argument as anything but narrow. A healthy polyamorous relationship that involves a "main" couple is no more unequal than declaring someone in your circle of friends your BFF. It doesn't necessarily mean you love your other friends any less.
It CAN be an abusive situation, but I'd argue that it's not really polyamory if so, as it isn't really a relationship. It's why I dislike unicorn hunters strongly.
sorry to not break up you quote.
To your first point, I was not suggesting that polyamorous groupings are not intact. I was suggesting that a monogamous relationship that is not intact allows for the introduction of new relationships. While a polyamorous relationship even though intact still allows for a new relationship.
Open ones do, closed ones don't.
To your second point, we will have to agree to disagree. coupling off in .gd manner is tacky, rude, inconsiderate, juvenile, and begging to hurt someone. Yeah sure your my friend still, but I am by definition less than your bff. intimate relationships need equality. There is no reason anyone should be a second class party to a relationship. Different relationships bring forth different qualities, and fulfill different needs. Each relationship should be appreciated and celebrated for that not rated on a hierarchy.
That is one form of poly but not every form of poly. Say there are two couples who form a quad. Often those two initial couples will form two "primary" partnerships." That doesn't mean that the each couple is being used by the other one, but simply that this is how they solve conflicts of priorities.
Some people want to be a "secondary" in a relationship - they don't want the responsibilities of the "primary" relationship for example, or they don't have the emotional time to be that level of support for the other person. None of this changes the fact that they're in love with each other. If monogamy were the only answer, it's likely those relationships would have broken up, with poly those relationships can remain and maintain each other.
