Monogamous vs Polyamory

[LordFall]

34 minutes ago, Hayato said:

No, what I mean by the term "energetic connection" is something like a channel through which energy can flow back and forth. For example unresolved things like all kinds of problems, trauma, emotional baggage etc. could flow through it into your "field".

From what I’ve heard, you don't just connect with that one person, but you also inherit a web of connections from everyone they have been with, in that way, up to that point. It creates a lot of subconscious "noise" and fixation. That takes a part of your mental space, makes it hard to be fully present with a current partner and could bring old issues in the current relationship, which can ultimately lead to a breakup.

But again this is just second hand information.

Thank you for sharing.

I have slept with many dozens of people and I don't experience their energies negatively in my conscious awareness. I meditate a lot and introspect on my emotions as well as document it in my journal and run it through AI to ask it about psychological concepts and pitfalls that I'm not aware of.

I'm not accusing you of this personally but especially because polyamory challenges social norms and established paradigms so directly I see a lot of unfounded dogma being throw around about it. I personally think it's untrue but I could be wrong. If anything I would go the other way where the various people I have slept with have given me various life lessons and strengthened my emotions and overall psyche.

One example is I had this FWB for a few months and we had a conversation about letting go of expectations and I think of her perspective often while being stuck in anxiety or overthinking so I'm still experiencing her as an angel watching over my life even though we haven't talked in years. 

Edited 6 hours ago by LordFall

[Jirh]

1 hour ago, LordFall said:

Why not?

Because modern relationships are mostly a luxury, not a need. Women don't need a man anymore to survive.

What do women want from a relationship?

Sex, companionship, stability, status, social life, etc...

They can get all those things from various sources. No special man holds anything special. In fact, for a woman to accept polyamorous man, she will have to sacrifice many of the things that she signed up in the relationship for. She will have to share resources with other women, and she won't have as much sex or companionship or stability, and her status and social life will be diminished because her family and close circle will judge her and look down on her for settling for less when she can have more with another man.

Basically, any woman who'd accept such a dynamic is a desperate one who can't achieve better. She lacks better options, so she settles as an option.

The truth is that no man is too precious/special for the woman to make this sacrifice. And women know that. At least, those who know their worth know that.

Edited 6 hours ago by Jirh

[Hayato]

59 minutes ago, LordFall said:

One example is I had this FWB for a few months and we had a conversation about letting go of expectations and I think of her perspective often while being stuck in anxiety or overthinking so I'm still experiencing her as an angel watching over my life even though we haven't talked in years. 

Amazing!

[Adrian colby]

You could see being monogamous and non manogamous as an orientation. Polyamory is a subset of non monogamy and there are many different types within it.

being conditioned to monogamy from the get go, every decision I made regarding relationships turned out to be conditioned and forced against my authenticity. The way I had relationships was to fit a stereotype and conform like it was something I was supposed to or expected to do. 
 

after my awakenings, I’d describe it as my heart opening and becoming more unconditional towards people. A letting go of the need to be validated by a relationship, that my sense of self worth, confidence and happiness doesn’t come from a partner and above all that I do not possess or have rights over another person or what they do with their body or someone else. 

this doesn’t mean that I loose control and go out seeking casual sex or try to fulfill myself with pleasure. It takes a great deal of maturity and consideration to interact intimately with another person without taking advantage of a situation. If the other person is not complete within themselves, the interaction can end in a great deal of emotional hurt so in that sense it’s actually quite difficult to come across people who are ok with it so there are few. 

i have a small group of very close friends ( the love between us is quite profound because we have opened up to each other in vulnerable states and the level of acceptance there recognises and understands each of our struggles, problems and journeys as simply being a difference. The love is an acceptance of the persons being as they are instead of them having to be something to satisfy. We don’t have romantic relationships. It is a friendship that if in a moment where the connection deepens, intimacy is allowed.

we always use the saying “I’ll apologise for hating but I’ll never apologise for loving”. There are plenty of moments of intimacy that don’t involve sex either. The experience is never reduced to shame or embarrassment but instead taken with gratitude. It’s never regretted and that can also be doesn’t to conversations of consent and clear expectations beforehand.

our lives are all separate so none of us live in parallel like a polycule and so this is not polyamory and they are not romantic relationships. 
 

it wouldn’t have been possible if I had not first gone through my own isolation and deconstruction ( to work on myself and understanding of reality). A lot of people in new age and spiritual communities do it because it’s almost part of a new identity but hasn’t been arrived at authenyically and as someone already suggested is a way of bypassing and deflecting from personal work ( the mentality of the sovereign libertarian who just does whatever they want without acknowledging consequences or the fact that ‘spiritually’ it’s not about dissolving reality and the ego to get a glimpse of the absolute and then delude yourself into thinking you are constantly there in that state… but rather that you reintegrate everything that you dissolved, understanding it and that you hold a place as one amongst a multitude within a relational space with a shared responsibility to maintain harmony and balance within your reality. )

you don’t choose polyamory out of a sense of moral superiority but rather as an authentic extention of your own preferences derived from who you are as love at your core. What is right for you may not be right for someone else and monogamy can be a catalyst for developing better maturity through relationship.

 

i married before I realised I was non monogamous but I love my wife too so it’s been a challenge to be simultaneously in both a monogamous and non monogamous situation … or rather having a monogamous and non monogamous person in a marriage together. My wife understand but admits she is not able to deal with the emotion of it but as long as she is more important ( the fear of me finding something ‘better’ and leaving is what plagues her mind but I see people as different not better). She’s the one I’ve chosen to live in parallel with and I’m not ‘seeking’ other partners. I’m just open to my friendships deepening in a moment and my wife’s self worth shouldn’t be tied to that. Polyamory calls that hierarchy and is frowned upon but that is the life I have. If my wife were to go to an event, holiday, festival and meet someone she got on well with and the night ended in a beautiful experience… why on earth, if I claim to love her, would I be annoyed that she had a wonderful experience? It doesn’t affect me or her relationship with me. Her interaction with another person is private and between them and nothing to do with me but genuinely as a friend to her I’d love her to feel safe and open enough to be able to share her story and excitement with me. It’s called comperssion and a sign I’ve moved beyond her as another human,  being any kind of possession of mine. 
 

I think the question is whether you feel genuinely drawn to monogamy or non monogamy and whether you feel confident, mature and comfortable enough in yourself to interact and be intimate with another person without possessing them. Non monogamy expands you to more different experiences not tying you to just one but the underlying principle of maturity still stands in either situation. 
 

I feel more open, alive and accepting… more at peace with myself if I acknowledge non monogamy as my own authentic state. When I sit in monogamy I slowly but surely start to shut down, wilt and become miserable. When I accepted non monogamous as my relationship style, I never felt more alive.
 

It was a battle at first because living in a society and culture that frowned upon it and didn’t understand it ( framing it as nothing more than cheating or promiscuity) but I still come back to love/acknowledgment, acceptance, allowance as the core of my being and resisting it just to conform to a monogamous culture goes against everything I stand for. 
 

I'm not promiscuous and it doesn’t happen often at all but it is a part of who I am. 

[LordFall]

4 hours ago, Jirh said:

Because modern relationships are mostly a luxury, not a need. Women don't need a man anymore to survive.

What do women want from a relationship?

Sex, companionship, stability, status, social life, etc...

They can get all those things from various sources. No special man holds anything special. In fact, for a woman to accept polyamorous man, she will have to sacrifice many of the things that she signed up in the relationship for. She will have to share resources with other women, and she won't have as much sex or companionship or stability, and her status and social life will be diminished because her family and close circle will judge her and look down on her for settling for less when she can have more with another man.

Basically, any woman who'd accept such a dynamic is a desperate one who can't achieve better. She lacks better options, so she settles as an option.

The truth is that no man is too precious/special for the woman to make this sacrifice. And women know that. At least, those who know their worth know that.

I get where you're coming from—for standard, conventional dating dynamics, that logic holds up pretty well.

Where it gets case-dependent is assuming that every woman views another woman in the ecosystem purely as a loss of status or resources. In practice, when a relationship is built in an environment of actual abundance—where a man is creating genuine security, high lifestyle value, and strong social capital—the math changes.

For non-competitive women, having another aligned partner in the dynamic can actually increase their comfort, companionship, and flexibility rather than diminish it. Think of two paramours who genuinely get along, ordering late-night food, sharing a fun sleepover with their shared man, and enjoying the shared lifestyle together. In that setting, she isn't losing resources or "settling"—she's objectively gaining a richer, higher-baseline experience than she would in a standard setup.

It really just comes down to the specific people involved, their level of calibration, and the environment being built.

For example this Throuple on Instagram posts regular content of their polyamorous relationship and it seems fun and healthy

https://www.instagram.com/campthrouple/

 

 

Edited 2 hours ago by LordFall

[Jirh]

@LordFall

1. Seems very AI.
2. Even if true, it's super rare. Like less than 1 in a billion.
3. Even if it happens, it won't likely continue or be easy as you're imagining. It's already super hard to establish stability between two people with different survival agendas. A third person would only make it more harder and complex.
4. Social media personalities are not examples or proof of anything. They're motivated by clicks and likes and appearances, not by truth.
5. I generally don't open IG links. I hate going from here to IG.

[LordFall]

5 minutes ago, Jirh said:

@LordFall

1. Seems very AI.
2. Even if true, it's super rare. Like less than 1 in a billion.
3. Even if it happens, it won't likely continue or be easy as you're imagining. It's already super hard to establish stability between two people with different survival agendas. A third person would only make it more harder and complex.
4. Social media personalities are not examples or proof of anything. They're motivated by clicks and likes and appearances, not by truth.
5. I generally don't open IG links. I hate going from here to IG.

Listen man these conversations are not that serious but if I link actual evidence of my points and your reply is sorry I don't open IG links I don't know what to say about that, that's like catastrophic anti-intellectualism and laziness to the point that it robs your presence in the conversation of any meaning. It's clearly more than 1 in a billion there are many subreddits dedicated to polyamory with hundreds of thousands of people in them and millions of people worldwide practicing it so you're just monologuing your bias with no actual grounding in reality. 

You're not gonna believe this but social media personalities are real people like you and me. Saying they're motivated by clicks and likes is like saying jobs are not real because people are motivated by money. It's like 30% a valid point but especially because you refuse to look at it to me it looks like you are scared of people living lives that break your paradigms of life. Which is not only cowardly and against the openness principle of self-actualization but I mean we're talking about dating two girls at the same time here so you're hiding from the best part of reality idk how tf your ego managed that one lol 

[Jirh]

@LordFall This sounds less like AI and more like you 😂

People are experimenting with relationship dynamics. Doesn't mean they are finding happiness or success, let alone both. A truly happy and successful case of polyamory that doesn't end in conflict is less than 1 in a billion, if that.

Doesn't matter though. Go and prove me wrong. Go find your harem of girls and make it work. I'm here, waiting.

Edited 1 hour ago by Jirh

[LordFall]

I'm sorry bro as an INTP there is nothing I hate more than inaccurate confidently wrong blanket statements so I have to counter irrational points. 

I will prove you right I do use AI for a lot of stuff that I'm not sure on and to make sure what I say makes sense and is not easily disproved. Your 1 in a billion number has no bearing on our reality in any way whatsoever. There are documented studies on this and they found exactly 0 difference between average relationship satisfaction between monogamous and polyamorous couples. 

It's fine to have an opinion and a bias but why leave it be if it's not accurate. That's why I called you an anti-intellectual. 

Anyway, I would recommend this movie its really great and showcases a throuple so you and anyone reading can see what it looks like in practice.

It's based on a real man Doctor William Moulton Marston who is the creator of Wonder Woman and was openly polyamorous in the 40s while teaching at Harvard. His two girlfriends stayed together after he died until their own deaths after he passed away. 

I understand that it's a difficult paradigm for westerners because it's not common but in some places of the world it is comon. Sometimes it's toxic sometimes it's not, just like any romantic relationship and friendships. I'm half french Canadian and half African from Chad and heck my dad's adoptive father was polyamorous and his two wives are still living together today after he died and they're in their 80s now.

[Jirh]

1 minute ago, LordFall said:

There are documented studies on this and they found exactly 0 difference between average relationship satisfaction between monogamous and polyamorous couples. 

This proves my point actually.

I'm not saying monogamy is better. I'm saying monogamy, as it is, is hard enough and mostly failing. Polyamory only adds more hardships and complexity. So don't expect success. Go and fight feminism, and you may have a chance at your dream lifestyle, but maybe in a couple generations.

It's not like I don't want polyamory, I do. But I live in reality, not in my imagination. And in reality, it doesn't work. Monogamy hardly works anymore.

[LordFall]

2 minutes ago, Jirh said:

This proves my point actually.

I'm not saying monogamy is better. I'm saying monogamy, as it is, is hard enough and mostly failing. Polyamory only adds more hardships and complexity. So don't expect success. Go and fight feminism, and you may have a chance at your dream lifestyle, but maybe in a couple generations.

It's not like I don't want polyamory, I do. But I live in reality, not in my imagination. And in reality, it doesn't work. Monogamy hardly works anymore.

Sure if it doesn't appeal to you then you are the master of your own destiny there isn't much I can say. That's not what you're saying though you keep calling it too difficult and unrealistic. I don't think that's the case. Why do you have such limiting beliefs? It really angers me to see it in others it's literally the elephant and the rope story and you've convinced yourself that good things in life are too hard to achieve. 

Why tf would feminism make polyamory harder? Polyamory is based on deep communication skills, mutual trust and deep respect and knowledge of your partner. The more feminist you are as a man the easier it will be to pull off. I literally admitted that I wouldn't necessarily mind my girl fucking other men under a situation that still leaves me feeling safe in my life and relationship overall. That requires a lot of emotional mastery but isn't impossible. I had this talk with @integral the other day and he was also doubtful but like there are books on this. The only reason I'm arguing with you is you didn't phrase it like it's not for you but you put a blank label of it's too difficult to achieve and it's not worth trying.

Sounds to me like a homeless guy telling people getting a job is not worth it fuck you have to wake up and be someone's SLAVE, come with me to the park and have a beer and chill out why are you trying so far. 

Most FWBs I've had that I tried pitching a threesome to were super down. That's why it's a limiting belief, you read online that feminists make dating hell for men and you believe it but it's not true it's literally a shit test. 

[Jirh]

3 minutes ago, LordFall said:

It really angers me to see it in others

Doesn't sound like emotional mastery to me.

3 minutes ago, LordFall said:

Why tf would feminism make polyamory harder?

Because it teaches women their rights and gives them worth. It's a necessary evil.

3 minutes ago, LordFall said:

Polyamory is based on deep communication skills, mutual trust and deep respect and knowledge of your partner. The more feminist you are as a man the easier it will be to pull off. I literally admitted that I wouldn't necessarily mind my girl fucking other men under a situation that still leaves me feeling safe in my life and relationship overall. That requires a lot of emotional mastery but isn't impossible.

Say what you will, but unless you provide examples of people who lived this way and died this way, none of it will matter. It's all just temporary/failed experiments.

3 minutes ago, LordFall said:

I had this talk with @integral the other day and he was also doubtful but like there are books on this. The only reason I'm arguing with you is you didn't phrase it like it's not for you but you put a blank label of it's too difficult to achieve and it's not worth trying.

Don't let me stop you. Use your anger to prove me wrong as fuel and achieve your dreams.

3 minutes ago, LordFall said:

Most FWBs I've had that I tried pitching a threesome to were super down.

Experimenting is not happy ending.

[Natasha Tori Maru]

If you use AI to argue here I implore you not to do so.

Are we arguing just to win? To be correct? There is no correct in these sorts of discussions. 

Don't use AI to outsource critical thinking. Brainstorm on your own. Don't use AI to argue against each other! It is antithetical to this forum! You aren't generating your own insights. You probably won't even recall what you wrote here in two days.... We want to debate each other. Not AI.

You are one of one in all your brilliance! We want to see that, raw and true. Not through AI. 

You can disagree. But heed my words!

You need to be okay with being wrong! Sit with that as a personal development tool.

[LordFall]

1 hour ago, Jirh said:

Doesn't sound like emotional mastery to me.

Because it teaches women their rights and gives them worth. It's a necessary evil.

Say what you will, but unless you provide examples of people who lived this way and died this way, none of it will matter. It's all just temporary/failed experiments.

Don't let me stop you. Use your anger to prove me wrong as fuel and achieve your dreams.

Experimenting is not happy ending.

Well anger is a strong word. If you wanna let limiting beliefs run your life I promise you that I will not lose sleep over it.

Feminism is not a necessary evil, it's a great movement of human progress. Not that long ago I would've had to raise an army to be allowed to date multiple women and now I can just dm them on Instagram invite them out and do it. It's a win for both men and women.

Dude I named one Professor Marston. If you insist I do intellectual labor on your behalf here are a few more

Franklin D. Roosevelt & Eleanor Roosevelt - Literal US president 

Simone de Beauvoir & Jean-Paul Sartre - Famous Philosopher

H.G. Wells & Jane Eldridge - Famous Author 

Feel to look them up and the details of their polyamorous relationship. 

Also you brought up conflict multiple times, first of all that's in any relationship but also conflict resolution skills are talked about way more often in polyamorous circles than monogamous ones. Conflict can just as easily bond people closer together. Friction is a better word for it as it is indeed counter-culture but plenty of things that are valuable and realistic are. The fact that there are no recorded differences in marital satisfaction on average and on average couples polyamorous or not do not really self-develop means that if you do take self-development seriously your chances of being a massive outlier in terms of marital satisfaction are pretty high. 

17 minutes ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

If you use AI to argue here I implore you not to do so.

Are we arguing just to win? To be correct? There is no correct in these sorts of discussions. 

Don't use AI to outsource critical thinking. Brainstorm on your own. Don't use AI to argue against each other! It is antithetical to this forum! You aren't generating your own insights. You probably won't even recall what you wrote here in two days.... We want to debate each other. Not AI.

You are one of one in all your brilliance! We want to see that, raw and true. Not through AI. 

You can disagree. But heed my words!

You need to be okay with being wrong! Sit with that as a personal development tool.

I understand your concern and I understand your desire to avoid AI slop.

To clarify:  I don't copy paste what it says, when somebody says something that sounds crazy to me I ask it if its true or nonsense and do the same with my own points that I bring up. We're not really talking about insights here we're sharing goals and thoughts and when people make wild statements I feel like it enhances the quality of discussion to fact check stuff. I'm not an expert on anthropology or statistics on relationship quality so it's hard for me to argue based on my own knowledge so that's why I use my real life experience and anecdotes to back it up. When he says something wild like these things only work in 1 billion relationships it feels quite wrong to me but until I asked Gemini to give me statistics on relationship satisfaction; it's hard to debunk. 

I admit being wrong all the time but then the next step is finding a source of truth and if it's not in my own lived experience it's somewhere out there on the internet usually and that's why I look things up just like Googling instead of using an encyclopedia. My goal is to have conversations that help enhance my understanding and that of others so we can build our lives based on truth and not bias/dogma. I don't particularly care to always be correct and to win internet points. There aren't even any points on this website  

Edited 12 minutes ago by LordFall

[Natasha Tori Maru]

@LordFall your compulsion to reply and grasp at the nearest source available is susceptible to recency bias that you are complicent in. 

Just the rapidity of your AI replies illustrates this is a reasonable inference. 

Unfortunately just stating

10 minutes ago, LordFall said:

I understand your concern 

Doesn't mean you understood anything I said. And based on your reply, you didn't.

You have no idea even, how the AI you use, is programmed guardrail wise. It has its own bias built in by those people who created it.

And you reply so quickly, it is obvious you aren't deeply checking what it reports. Yes I am inferring that. But it is perfecting reasonable when the gap between posts is several minutes to an hour on rapid fire succession.