Five Principles For Pleasant Polyamory (That Also Apply To A Merry Monogamy)
Relationship skills are often universally applicable! Who knew, right?
Polyamory’s a weird thing. Whenever I gave advice to poly folk back in my sordid days as an essayist, monogamous people kept saying “But that advice works for monogamous relationships as well!”
Yep. Turns out “The skill of being nice to people you love” applies whether you’re dating one person or many.
And when I restarted this newsletter to tell you about the book I have coming out, I promised I’d talk about things other than writing. A lot of you wanted me to talk about polyamory… so I figured I’d summarize the basics of what I’ve doped out over almost two decades of living in reasonably healthy polyamorous relationships.
But First…
Say, did I mention I have a book that can be described as “The Tiger King, but with cute baby dragons” coming out September 3rd? Did I mention it’s only $2.99? Did you see that amazing cover?
You did?
Christ, sorry, had to try to sell you one more time. Let’s talk about something more interesting - namely, my five principles for pleasant polyamory.
"Like" is more important than "love."
The relationship columns always ask: How do you keep the romance alive? But the real question is this:
How do you keep the friendship alive?
Let's get something straight: How much you like someone and how much you love someone are separate scales. We all know someone we love but don't like (say, that relative who's become a frothing political maniac on Facebook), and someone we like but don't love.
A positive love is kept happily afloat on a sea of like.... and like is generated by all sorts of little kindnesses and courtesies. Put the dishes away without being asked? You made a little like. Made a private joke that diffused some tension at a fraught family get-together? A little like. Encouraged them to do that hobby they wanted to try, but just didn't think they were good enough? Ten points for Likendoor!
Don't get it twisted: "Like" is frequently used as a synonym for "They're okay, I guess." But the "like" I'm discussing isn't "They don’t do anything wrong," but an active and continual thing you do that makes this person happy to be around you. You being a part of their day is like seeing a favorite actor in a film: Sure, maybe the film as a whole sucks, but it sure is fun watching Tilda Swinton, amiright?
Without a sea of positive "likes," the relationship starts tumbling into the abyss of "quiet dread." Instead of being happy that the dishwasher has been taken care of, you groan silently as you realize that crap, it's up to you again. You brace yourself for Thanksgiving because you know your partner's gonna make that stupid, thoughtless joke that sets everyone on edge. You don't want to talk about that hobby with them because Christ, don't you know how much money that will cost?
You start to wince whenever you're around your partner, waiting for that next thoughtless elbow in your ribs... And unsurprisingly, it's hard to sustain a romance in a sea-battered environment like that.
So a good poly relationship - a good relationship - consists of actively looking for ways to make their day brighter. Seek out things that you enjoy and do them together! Find something to be interested about in your partner's hobbies and listen! Clear their path by doing some of the annoying chores for them!
And thank them! Oh, Lawsy, thank them profusely for trivial things and major things alike (particularly if they're doing the annoying chores). If all you're doing is criticizing when they get it wrong, then you're piling up the dread, baby.
This is good advice for monogamy, because too many marriages die on the vine after one (or both) partners go on autopilot. But it's especially vital in polyamory, where you're not the exclusive focus of your partner's attention - if they're not actively jazzed to see you, then that's gonna bite you in the butt.
It ain't the sex that binds you, it's the little rituals.
Okay. So if you're monogamous, sex is by definition "the thing you only do with each other" - and so a lot of monogamous people just assume the sexytimes are what makes that relationship special.
But sex isn't what makes your relationship special. Not by default. It can be, but a lot of people have some pretty boring sex... or don't have sex at all. (And "not having sex" isn't necessarily a danger sign - asexuality and health can play big factors.)
But polyamorous people are often privy to a secret that a lot of monogamous people don't ever grok - simply because once you remove sex from the equation of "This is what binds us," it becomes blazingly apparent how other rituals swell to occupy sex’s place.
And those rituals are often really, really stupid to the outsider.
Sometimes it's just a restaurant that's your special place, or a silly thing you say whenever you pass each other in the hallway. Sometimes it's cuddling up on Sunday mornings, sometimes it's one partner making tea for the other, sometimes it's going on ambling drives around the city to see what businesses have closed and opened. Sometimes it's meeping someone on the nose, sometimes it's eating popcorn while you snark on Drag Race.
Regardless, these little rituals are behaviors you've stumbled upon that help define who you are together. It's not that you can't ever do them with other people, but they're the little centering habits that give you the warm fuzzies about your partner. It feels like them. And combined with those "like" behaviors I discussed earlier, you can find a lot of snuggly little places which serve to bring you closer together.
So: the more you organically stumble upon those rituals and make room for them to grow, the more opportunities you have to recognize and respect what’s special about you to each other and to reflect upon that in the moment. (Also, those shortcuts to “Here’s a behavior that represents our unique commitments to each other” can really help act as a touchstone once jealousy or insecurity enters the picture.)
Now, there's two catches there: monogamous people are prone to dismissing these little unique-to-yous because heck, ya got sex, what else do ya need? And I think being on the lookout for these mini-bonds and encouraging them helps give your relationship some grounding flavor that further distinguishes you as a couple when you’re hip-deep in friendships and kidships and workships.
To me, you will be unique in all the world. To you, I shall be unique in all the world. - Antoine de Saint-Exupéry, The Little Prince
Whereas polyamorous people, particularly insecure ones, are prone to grabbing at every activity that could be a ritual and using it to wall off competitors - "You can't sleep over with them, that's our thing." "You can't hold hands with them, that's our thing." "You can't breathe in their presence, that's our thing."
It's fine to have a few rituals, even sleeping over or holding hands... but when you're copyright-striking every romantic activity so you don't get the wibbles, you're messing things up.
And hey! Speaking of the wibbles....
Emotion is not a diagnosis.
Lemme confess something stupid: If I am walking through the house late at night and I stub my toe on a chair, I get mad at the chair. I may yell at the chair for stubbing my toe. I may even try to kick the chair if I'm aggravated enough, which I assure you is a battle you will not win in bare feet.
The chair made me angry. It happens. Now:
Is the chair at fault?
No. It's a chair. Arguably I'm at fault for walking blithely through the darkness, or my kids are at fault for moving the chair about, or maybe the poltergeist is at fault for using its aethiferous hands to slide chairs about the wooden floor.
Now, that's a silly example - but it proves a point, which is that the emotion is not the diagnosis. You being angry at a partner does not necessarily mean the partner has done anything wrong. You getting jealous of someone may not mean they're actually out to break you up. You getting sad isn't an iron-clad indicator that your partner has let you down.
Emotionally immature people are as quick to blame the outside sources as I am to yell at a chair. But the folks who have their shit halfway together will stop before bellowing at furniture to go "Okay, I'm mad. Did they do anything wrong? Or is this just some past trauma welling up inside me that I'm reacting to?"
And there's basically two types of people in this world: Folks who will do anything to blame other people, and folks who will do anything to blame themselves. Trick is, you have to compensate for whichever you are:
If you're quick to assign judgment, you gotta step back and go "Lemme rein myself in and investigate whether I'm being fair to others."
Whereas if you're the self-blamer, you have to be willing to delve introspectively and come out with a "Yeah, actually, that was a shitty thing you did, let's talk about that."
You are now part of a collective, so make decisions based on that...
For a long time, I dated people who would have been fine to date as the only romance in my life - they had mental traumas that conflicted with mine and required extensive (and fraught) negotiations, or the relationship held mountainous disagreements about approaches that we'd need months to wear down.
Dating them was a full-time job. And there’s nothing wrong with that! Dating me was a full-time job for Gini when we started out. We were deeply compatible in some ways, but had some real differences we needed to work out.
But when it came to taking on heavy-duty new partners, well, I had a full-time job. And a wife, who was another full-time job! And other partners. And with only sixteen hours in the day to ride riot, I was basically stealing time from my other partners to dump into a relationship that literally had no chance of thriving in the space I had to give it.
That was unfair to everyone.
So I had to start thinking of myself as a collective - yeah, this person would be fun to smooch in an absence of other inputs, but would they fit into the life that I currently wanted to live? I am generally not the "talk on the phone every day" kinda boyfriend, nor am I the "I'll see you every week" boyfriend, so picking partners who needed lots of face-to-face time was cruel to me and cruel to them and cruel to my polycule.
I started thinking, "Okay, these are the folks I want to prioritize, what sorts of people fit into those remaining spaces?" And it feels a bit selfish, which it is - but the world's a bit selfish, to be honest. You just don’t have the time to be best friends with everybody.
It's a running gag among thirtysomethings married couples that they get together with people and say, "Wow, how long's it been since we hung out? We should spend more time together." And then you don't! Because truth is, both of them have kids and other friends and work and other stuff, and though it'd be nice to hang out with new people, truth is they're barely able to keep up with the people they have.
You have to decide who you spend your limited time and energy with. And that involves going, "Is this smoochable person going to fit in with my existing people, or are they gonna ruffle feathers and make the life I’ve shaped around me harder?"
Ah ha, you say, Ferrett, that doesn't apply to monogamous people! But oh, my friend, does it ever. Because a lot of monogamous folks have one toxic friend who keeps sucking all the air out of your relationship, or that relative who's frickin' draining you dry and causing all sorts of arguments. But those people have been in your life for longer, right? They've earned their spot. Your friends and maybe your family are the new fish, they can cope.
Problem is, if you've got someone who's consistently causing friction for no good reason, and you're clinging to them out of misguided loyalty, you may be damaging your relationships for very similar reasons to the polyamorous "I can date them, I've got the time!"
That's not to say you should give your sickly Mom the heave-ho for convenience' sake, and I say that as someone who lived for seven months in California to help his mom through chemo. But those sorts of sacrifices have to be worth it to you. If you've got a big drag who you're keeping on because of guilt, well, may be time to let that go (or minimize contact) in the same way I have to let potentially misfitting partners walk away.
Because the end result's the same: An unhappy group of people getting less of you, all so you can spend time on someone who’s draining your energy and not giving it back.
...But you're not part of a hierarchy.
Anyone who dates me knows that Gini’s a non-negotiable in my life. You try to push her out of the relationship, you lose.
(Not that many have tried, because Gini is kind and wise and generous, but it has happened.)
But the truth is this: Gini does not get that position because she’s my wife. Gini gets that position because she has almost thirty years of giving me good advice.
The two can look similar, but they’re not.
Because in a hierarchy, Gini would win simply by dint of being The Wife. She wants me to cancel a date? She’s The Wife. There’s an dispute between her and a partner? She’s The Wife. She’s asking me to end a relationship? What can I do, She’s The Wife!
The Wife is unquestionable. And that She’s The Wife philosophy leads to folks becoming monsters.
Whereas in practice, Gini gets her way a lot of the time, but that’s because I generally find her arguments to be reasonable. But there are times I say “Whoah, that’s not fair to this partner!” - and Gini has to defend her position, and sometimes she discovers she’s wrong.
Likewise, there have been times I have been bitching to Gini, saying, “Can you believe they said that about me?” and she will give me the iron glare and say, “I sure can - because they’re right about you.”
A lot of relationships, mono or poly, seem to boil down to “My partner, ride or die.” But those “ride or die” relationships all too often slouch into “We’ll indulge each other’s psychoses until we become unbearable.”
We’re all human. Everyone slips from time to time - and more often than not, it’s only because of negative feedback that we even realize we’re messing up. As such, having a partner who rubber-stamps your every decision is not healthy.
You need to be able to go to bat for other people against your partner occasionally. Maybe that’s advocating for your kid when they say they really shouldn’t go to school today, or it’s telling your partner that yes, they probably shouldn’t have blown their friend off that way.
Now, it’s fine to have prioritized relationships, as I stated above. I’m going to weight Gini’s judgment more than someone I met online two weeks ago. If both Gini and a partner of mine are in separate ERs at the same time, I’ll be sitting by Gini’s bedside.
But the good news is that the likelihood of both Gini and this mystery partner being at that absurd “four-alarm fire” level of catastrophe simultaneously is pretty low. Generally, reasonable people can balance out the bumps and dings of an ordinary life - okay, my partner’s having a total meltdown because they’re going through a divorce, whereas Gini’s a little lonely tonight, so rather than GINI IS WIFE GINI GETS PRIORITY, instead we’ll agree that I’ll talk to this person for as long as it takes to get them through today’s troubles, then ensure Gini gets a few cuddles later.
After all, just because someone’s prioritized in general doesn’t mean they always get priority. And that would be bad news for Gini and I if that was the case, because we both prioritize our daughters’ needs above each other. (But again, the times our kids need all hands on deck are comparatively rare, and the times that directly conflicts with, say, my partner being in the ER are even fewer.)
So don’t rely on a rigid hierarchy to make decisions about who gets your time. Be flexible. Be kind. And to quote Steve Martin….
Be courteous, kind and forgiving
Be gentle and peaceful each day
Be warm and human and grateful
And have a good thing to say
Be thoughtful and trustful and childlike
Be witty and happy and wise
Be honest and love all your neighbors
Be obsequious, purple, and clairvoyant