Three Types (& More)

[Mrmatty376]

2 for sure. :redface:

[JRiver]

I find it hard to believe anyone could love someone above all others and still want to have sex with others. I even find it hard to believe that you could love one person above all others and want to bring someone else in for sex (i.e. a threesome).

Why must love fit into a hierarchy with just one person at the top?

What's so freaking hard about understanding that some of us can fully love and be in love with two people at the same time?

There are people who doubt that gay men really love one another--or can love--right? How is this situation different? Aren't you basically saying that I'm flawed, broken, nutty, broken? That there is something terribly wrong with me, or my relationship?

Isn't this just another form of bigotry? Like calling gay men "sickos"?

[Bowyn Aerrow]

Following from my last post ...

It's just sad that some of you guys in here can't understand that some of us actually can love more than one person at a time -- and without that meaning that we don't love our original or initial partners.

And, it is worth noting, most of the guys who have suggested that doing so is unrealistic or illusory are quite young.

I do hope you twenty-something guys will take note of this and have another look at your lives when you're 40-something. Perhaps then you will better understand.

Not that I have anything at all against monogamous type relationships. I do not. I respect all genuine loving, very much. If only I could receive the same respect!

Gives us examples of that multi-love. No not stories written by fiction writers, real life examples of people that folk can relate too.

Polygamy? One man several wives, each wife delegated to tasks?

Open relationships where you already laid out the rule as being two men in love having sex (not love) out side of that relationship?

Why people disbelieve is largely do to lack of examples of this multi-love in action. And again I tell you the word Polyamorous has been slapped on a lot of different things that are not 'love of many' - but are merely sex acts.

People understand at the core that a couple (two individuals) find it hard to agree all the time. Throw in a third party and the situation becomes untenable. In any given argument you would end up with two against one the one would feel rejected and would become resentful - resent leads to loss of love.

We tell each other -Don't get involved with your friend's relationship because it is human nature to pick sides. A relationship of three or more people ends up to too many picking a side.

Love is by no means a democracy. After the hot passionate stage it settles into a long power struggle over everything from how we hang the toilet paper roll to who's turn is it to clean up the dog's mess in the yard. Get three or more people involved and the 'voting' system becomes a matter of picking sides.

Picking sides is translated into 'Who you love more'. Sure intellectually one can accept the vote as merely democratic, emotionally - it feels different.

At 46 years of age (you are only a year older than me at best) you should have had enough lovers to know that you do not love each the same, our love is different with each person. So how does that translate to a three party or more relationship emotionally? Who do you love most?

Thus we need examples of this poly-love at work.

[East]

Why must love fit into a hierarchy with just one person at the top?

What's so freaking hard about understanding that some of us can fully love and be in love with two people at the same time?

There are people who doubt that gay men really love one another--or can love--right? How is this situation different? Aren't you basically saying that I'm flawed, broken, nutty, broken? That there is something terribly wrong with me, or my relationship?

Isn't this just another form of bigotry? Like calling gay men "sickos"?

I have slept with over 500 people.....am I flawed? Do you give what you seek?

[JRiver]

Give us examples of that multi-love. No not stories written by fiction writers, real life examples of people that folk can relate too.

.... Why people disbelieve is largely do to lack of examples of this multi-love in action. And again I tell you the word Polyamorous has been slapped on a lot of different things that are not 'love of many' - but are merely sex acts.

Google the term "polyamory" along with "stories". also go to http://www.polyamory.com . Lots and lots of successful and happy poly relationships exist. The problem is that polyamory is
in the same stage of development as being gay was prior to Stonewall, when the Closet ruled. That is, most poly folk are deep in the closet, hiding -- because they are tired of the
ridicule and verbal bashing, etc.

People understand at the core that a couple (two individuals) find it hard to agree all the time. Throw in a third party and the situation becomes untenable. In any given argument you would end up with two against one the one would feel rejected and would become resentful - resent leads to loss of love.

Untenable for some, quite workable for others. Not all people are so immature as to play one of the people they love against the other one they love.

And you should know that while some poly folk have groups of three or more where all are romantically involved, and live together, this is not always the case. There are lots of ways of doing it, and not all have to live in the same house for it to be a happy and loving arrangement.

After the hot passionate stage it settles into a long power struggle over everything from how we hang the toilet paper roll to who's turn is it to clean up the dog's mess in the yard. Get three or more people involved and the 'voting' system becomes a matter of picking sides.

If friends can work things out in groups, as they obviously do, so can lovers -- when there is emotional and relational maturity.

[JRiver]

I have slept with over 500 people.....am I flawed?

I would not base such an assessment on the fact provided. I'd only hope that you are loving and being loved.

Do you give what you seek?

Well, as far as multiple simultaneous loves go, no, I just have one partner. I'd love to meet another man or woman with whom the compatibility and chemistry is there to find out if I can do this in practice. I've done it in practice for short periods. But those situations didn't work out, and not because of the poly aspect. Most folks who "date" end up ending it, or breaking up, after a relatively short while. >sigh<

Otherwise, I try to be loving generally. I suppose I'm doing it okay.

[JRiver]

At 46 years of age (you are only a year older than me at best) you should have had enough lovers to know that you do not love each the same, our love is different with each person. So how does that translate to a three party or more relationship emotionally? Who do you love most?

Yes, in my experience, each love experience is unique. But I don't believe I must love one of two or three loves "most". Why must I? Why must one person be loved more than any other, among those I love?

Some of the responders to my posts in this thread apparently think that it comes down to sex, and that if I am happy and in love with my partner I should not want to have sexual-romantic loving with anyone else. But I don't accept this premise, either. Sometimes people are happily monogamous. Sometimes they are happily involved with their partners
AND would like to have another partner (or two). It is wrong to assume that a partnered person's desire to be with others romantically/sexually is an indication of relational unhappiness, or lack of relational success.

Doubters need only read (e.g.) the book, Sex at Dawn. This book provides a very strong argument against the myth that humans are "naturally monogamous".

[VagabondKitten]

While I'm a complete monogamist myself, I've never had any problem with people who are in any of the other forms of relationship (polyamory, polygamy, open relationships, etc.). I think that just like most things relating to humans, there is never one rule that works for everyone. Everyone has a different set of morals, everyone has different needs, it takes all sorts. As long as you aren't hurting anyone I have no problem with what another person does in their personal life (and as it's their personal life, it's none of my business so I don't see why I should care about what other people do in their relationships anyhow).

[azulai]

I was trying to indicate something that no 20 yr old could possibly know from experience--which in part is what it's like to be in a fifteen year long committed and loving relationship. I was trying to sugggest that perspectives change over time, because we learn things from experience. We just do. And saying so does NOT mean I'm talking down to you. I am not.

Well, let's see I've been in a 21 year committed and loving relationship with my parents. We've overcome some significant experiences yet maintained an unconditional, loving, and respectful relationship.

I have core values (honesty, service, integrity, compassion, commitment, etc.) that govern my personal relationships, and let others know who I am. These values are not cultural norms. My values shape my behavior and character. They are deeply etched into my emotional and mental make-up, and are not going to easily be changed. They are not dictated by a religion, society or my parents, but by me and what I struggled with since I was 15 years old. Yes, my life experiences up to this point have shaped me and they haven't been insignificant, but uniquely mine.

Am I going to grow and my perspective change over time? Well, I certainly hope so but I don't foresee my core values changing. I've grown since my first year of college, I've grown since dating my bf, I've grown since coming out. I've interacted with people, made observations, made judgments and yes, mistakes of my own. When I stop growing and learning I would be better off dead.

I think you are projecting what you were like in your 20s and your limited life experiences onto all 20-somethings of today. You don't know my cultural background, educational background, or life experiences to so quickly dismiss my perspective based solely on my age. Thanks for the pat on the head though.

It's just sad that some of you guys in here can't understand that some of us actually can love more than one person at a time -- and without that meaning that we don't love our original or initial partners.

And, it is worth noting, most of the guys who have suggested that doing so is unrealistic or illusory are quite young.

I do hope you twenty-something guys will take note of this and have another look at your lives when you're 40-something. Perhaps then you will better understand.

Not that I have anything at all against monogamous type relationships. I do not. I respect all genuine loving, very much. If only I could receive the same respect!

Who is disrespecting you? I see people asking you valid questions. I see people engaging in dialog.

From your words above, it seems like you are re-evaluating things at this "mid-point" in your life and you see polyamory as the answer. I sincerely wish you all the best. But, I think you need to have a little more experience before you can be considered an expert advocate that I would consider your “word” worthy enough to take note. I do believe respect has to be earned.

Well, as far as multiple simultaneous loves go, no, I just have one partner. I'd love to meet another man or woman with whom the compatibility and chemistry is there to find out if I can do this in practice. I've done it in practice for short periods. But those situations didn't work out, and not because of the poly aspect. Most folks who "date" end up ending it, or breaking up, after a relatively short while. >sigh<

How many people? Why did they break it off if it wasn't the poly aspect? At what point in the dating did they break it off? Was sex involved? What happened? I'm curious.

It is wrong to assume that a partnered person's desire to be with others romantically/sexually is an indication of relational unhappiness, or lack of relational success.

Again I ask: do you feel more evolved as your labeled Type-3? Enlightened to a better way of love?

What is it about you or your experiences that make you desire to engage in polyamory?

What has driven you from a 15 y relationship to explore polyamory?

Doubters need only read (e.g.) the book, Sex at Dawn. This book provides a very strong argument against the myth that humans are "naturally monogamous".

This book is pop-science.

Here is an eleven page review by Ryan M. Ellsworth, Department of Anthropology, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO, USA.

The latest in a long tradition of scholarship critiquing what is seen as the persistent and pertinacious inadequacies of widely held evolutionary perspectives on human sexuality (e.g., Hrdy, 1980; Sherfey, 1972; Small 1993), Sex at Dawn, by Christopher Ryan and Cacilda Jethá, is certainly one of the most ambitious. Opting out of the formal academic style of writing, the book makes for an entertaining read, accessible to the lay reader not intimately familiar with modern evolutionary theory. Indeed, its popular appeal is revealed by its (paperback edition) front cover boast of inclusion on the New York Times bestseller list. While numerous reviews have been presented in newspapers, magazines, and websites, I have failed to find one review in an academic journal or by an evolutionary scientist (those who might be expected to give the most informed type of assessment of content). The public—in many cases unfortunately, but understandably—is largely educated in science through popular expositions such as this, and therefore it is crucial that researchers in the pertinent fields not ignore such publications or shirk from weighing in on the issues. In this review, I address what I see as biased reporting of data, theoretical and evidentiary shortcomings, and problematic assumptions misleadingly put forth as well-supported hypotheses contained in Sex at Dawn. Spatial constraints prevent comprehensive evaluation of the numerous topics touched on in the book. Thus, I limit discussion to a few issues I see as especially meriting attention.

In fact, of all the societies they offer as supporting evidence of a human nature of promiscuous sexuality, only one can truly be considered a foraging population: the Inuit, and it is unfortunate that Ryan and Jethá give only a brief anecdotal nod to the Inuit practice of spouse exchange, leaving out the fact that “Among the North Alaskan Eskimo, wife exchanges were arranged between the husbands, and the wives were not consulted”.

[East]

I would not base such an assessment on the fact provided. I'd only hope that you are loving and being loved.

26 years and counting with the same man whom I love unconditionally and whom loves me unconditionally

When I asked if you give what you seek...i was referring to respect and understanding. The thing is..I am a generation older than you and we pretty much fought for sexual freedom...same with the generation before me. What that means to me...I do not judge other CONSENTING ADULT HUMANS in their relationships....bring in children, animals or a non consenting partner and my gloves come off.

I wanted to know if you judged other people's choices.....hence...do you give what you seek? You seemed to elevate your choice by qualifying it as "OK" because you are "in love"...or at least that is how it appeared to me.