poly•amor•ous
UK: /ˌpɒl.iˈæm.ə.rəs/ US: /, pɑː.liˈæm.ɚ.əs/
The practice of having romantic relationships with two or more people at the same time
Going by the above definition, one would say that indulgence into polyamory, which perceivably is abstruse in nature and might just involve a lot of people serried in a person’s heart in order for them to feel complete, can be a consequence of an anomie. For many people, the line ‘several romantic partners’ in itself consists of an antinomy and the idea of loving more than one person at the same time seems like the person is using the tag of polyamorous in order to escape the much maligning tag of infidel.
Think how easy it will be for you to cheat on your partner, just go have sex with whoever you want and in the end just tell them that you’re a polyamorous person and they must accept you because if they don’t then they’re disregarding the person that you are. An analogy that could corroborate my point can be a straight woman accusing her bisexual boyfriend of finding a guy attractive.
As a consequence of these pre-conceived notions within the society, an eclectic set of questions that surround a polyamorous person are: would the person be there for the other person during their senescence and beyond?; What if the person meets someone else and that thwarts how the person sees their current partner?; would they just abandon their current partner for someone else?; How can one trust that person when he/she confesses his/her love for them, when they know that they are not the only ones on the receiving end of his/her encomiums?
In the Millennium trilogy by Steig Larsson, Mikael Blomkvist and Erica Berger were more than just sex partners, they were lovers. Their relationship was not just about the passionate intense sex they would indulge in while working on the next issue of the Millennium magazine. They shared this bond that was built on mutual trust, understanding and respect for one another which their spouses probably were unable to offer to them. Even if they were, there was something about Mikael’s impact on Erica (and vice versa) that made the love that he offered to her, indispensable to her. Sadly however, this extra marital affair was too much for Blomkvist’s wife to take, and thus they departed ways. Erica’s husband, Greger Beckman, a painter of sorts could however easily understand this and felt that as long as she loved Greger, her feelings from Blomkvist didn’t matter much to him. Greger had no intention in the machination of Blomkvist, rather, he hardly cared where Erica slept every night, provided he knew beforehand (like any caring husband would like to know why his wife wasn’t home for the dinner, is she safe and sound?). However, that in no way was an indication of levity in the relationship of the married couple. Succinctly put, they were like any other married couple.
However, that story ended with Mikael falling in love with a cop and Erica understanding that her relationship with Mikael exacerbates his relationships with other women, hence, she withdrew from his love life.
Few months ago, I took a survey in my university to understand what people think of relationships and love and after analysing and deconstructing those results, I decided to give polyamory a shot. The idea is simple. There exists no perfect partner and you can never expect one person to tick all the boxes. It’s impractical to expect that. Relationships demand compromise. You just can’t have it all from one person. However, you still need warmth and comfort. You still need good sex. You still need a person with similar interests so that you can indulge in debates and conversations with them. You need a lot of things, and just because you are in a relationship with a person who can’t offer you these things, it does not mean that you don’t need them anymore. It’s just, you choose to live without them. However, my question to you is, why would you want to live without toe curling orgasms for the rest of your life? You deserve them; why would you want to live without those healthy debates regarding your favourite music genre with a person you love? You deserve them; why would you want to live with a partner who is not good at expressing care and warmth and somehow doesn’t say the right things at the right times that can lift your mood up? You deserve them. You deserve love, warmth, care, happiness, great sex. You deserve them all there exist no reason why you shouldn’t have all of it.
Love coming from a polyamorous human is no different from the love coming from a monogamous human, then I don’t understand why are they (at least I am) always told that their love is a facade and not genuine. Till a few weeks, whenever I told someone that I feel this way about her, but they’re not the only ones I feel like this for, I was always told that I am confusing loving her and being in love with her (whatever the hell that is supposed to mean). Hence I write this article to clarify once and for all about what exactly I feel when I say ‘I love you’ and further nuances involved in my headspace. So if I say I love you remember a few things so as to avoid collateral damage:
- You are not the only one and there is nothing you can do about it, don’t ever be under this impression that if I offer him everything he needs, he will realise that he just needs me. What I feel for you is independent of what I feel for someone else and no one else has the power to decide what I feel for you. However, you also don’t have that power over my attachment towards anyone else.
- No, you are not just an ersatz, or the person I go to when the person I actually am in love with decides to not talk to me or be mad at me when I botch my equation with her. The idea of primary and secondary lover doesn’t exist for me. There is no primary lover and a secondary lover. Sure, every lover has a role in my life, like every human does, but that in no way means that there exists a hierarchy in my head. As mentioned in my first point, I have you where you would have anyway been, irrespective of the existence of the other person, so if I am not quite there yet with you, it’s probably because I am not quite there yet with you.
- I don’t want to want to spend my every second with you, I don’t get this rush of blood to my head when I see you because of one very simple reason; what I have for you is love, not infatuation. No matter how much you love someone, you still need your space and time, you need to spend time without your lover with other friends as well, and sometimes just alone. I do too. I am a human. If you genuinely need me and need the warmth and care of a lover, I will be there. Polyamory, for me, is not lazy love. It is not my excuse to you for not being there for you. I will be there for you.
- Lastly, and most importantly, no, I don’t fall in love with anyone and everyone I meet. I am as selective about my romantic I love yous’ as any human is.
An article by Megan E. Holstein on Are Humans ‘Naturally’ Monogamous? showed how ‘monogamy is natural for humans (for the most part), but that doesn’t make it the best.’ According to her, ‘ Yes, monogamy is ‘natural’ for humans. But in the case of humans, monogamy doesn’t mean sexual desire that is limited to one person. Humans evolved to be ‘socially monogamous,’ meaning that we choose one partner with which we pair-bond while retaining a desire for other sexual partners.’ and used the following polemic for the logical reasoning behind her statement: ‘The traits selected for an organism by evolution don’t always make the organism happy. The traits that evolve in a population are the ones that are the best at getting genes passed on to the next population, not the ones that make the body of those genes the happiest. Whatever trait gets genes into the next generation wins.’
I don’t know for a fact if it’s just a phase and is it because I haven’t met the one yet, but I know that it works. It could be, it could not be. I am more inclined in believing that it’s not, but as time progresses, I’ll have a better answer to the question I believe. The only modicum of doubt that exists in me is because my friends constantly remind me that it is a phase and I am missing something beautiful. To those friends however, let me tell you, polyamory is no ersatz and it is beautiful in it’s own way.
Polyamory has its own benefits and it makes me so much more secure as a human. There is so much more to how polyamory solves the basic problems of relationship like jealousy, cheating, etc. However, I don’t think I’ll be doing justice to it if I am to share them in this very piece. That deserves it’s own article and I will write it down soon.
It aches me to see how polyamory is seen as a disruption to the society. Just like we have accepted various sexual expressions, people should exhibit some clemency towards polyamory as a genuine romantic expression. It would be nice talking to people on Tinder who don’t completely change their perception of me when I tell them I am polyamorous.
In the end however, not everyone is Greger or Erica. There are Blomkvist and Blomkvist’s wife who can not exactly accept polyamory and are hard wired monogamists. However, there are Greger’s and Erica’s too in this world and both these breeds of humans genuinely know how to love.