A Potpourri of Poly Partnership Possibilities

Recent conversations have had me musing on the nature of monogamy-polyamory as an ‘orientation’. Dan Savage remarked once that he didn’t think that being Poly was an orientation in the same way as homosexuality is. At the time I was a little peeved by his remark, as were many others. Emma, however, shed some light on it with an interesting perspective that made a lot of sense to me: being Poly, specifically, is choosing to pursue non-monogamy ethically. It is entirely possible to be unethical about it, and that is fairly common. Better known as ‘cheating’,  there are many ways people pursue non-monogamy in less-than-ethical manners.

So, what about monogamous as an orientation? To be more specific, your degree of monogamishness, or promiscuousness.

Ah. Yes.

In the spirit of the Kinsey Scale, I hereby present you with: The Scale of Monogamishness.

Now, photoshop wasn’t cooperating with me tonight, so I went for old-school hand-drawn diagrams. Which works, I think, since I consider this a draft of something I will build upon. Ideally, I would like this to be an interactive 3D ‘Sphere of Amory’. Orion says he might be able to help me with that. Till then, let’s use some old-fashioned pen and paper, shall we?

This is the simplest version of the scale. There are sliding degrees within which any individual feels naturally drawn towards Mono-Partnership or Poly-Partnership.

Follow so far? Great!
Ready for the next part?

Ta da!

So, in a Mono-partnership, we look to have all our relationship needs met by a single partner. The more we open to having multiple partners, the greater the possibility for a ‘division of labor’ of sorts. We discover we can have relationships that are purely sexual, relationships that are purely spiritual, and relationships that have a blend of both aspects in different measures. Between a pot-pouri of partnerships, we can have our needs met within a greater diversity.

So, what does this look like, you ask? Well, I think it looks something like this:

The Scale Of Monogamishness V1.0

Allow me to explain a little more.

I’ve talked before about the difference between polysexuality and polyamory. I’ve read, since then, that ‘polysexual’ has been used as a derogatory and critical word to put down those who seek multiple partnerships purely for sexual purposes. I think it is time to take back this word and own it, much like the word ‘slut’ has been reclaimed. There is absolutely nothing wrong with wanting many sexual partners. And to seek that out with a ‘polyamarous’ mentality, by which I mean to do so with an ethical, open disclosure, sex positive attitude- there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. And everything awesome about it, in my opinion. In fact, getting clear about whether you seek relationships to fulfill your sexual needs or your emotional spiritual needs could help avoid some of the poly-crazy-drama down the line… but that’s a whole other article. I digress.

[Note, please bear with me... I'm about to use the word 'ethics' without defining it. That, too, is another article in the works!]

So we have, on the Poly-Partnership end of the scale, the two aspects of Polyamory- seeking mutliple loving partnerships with an ethical approach- and Polysexuality, seeking multiple physical partnerships with an ethical approach. A purely polysexual individual may have lots of recreational partnerships, whilst a polyamorous individual might have multiple emotional relationships. And naturally, sex and emotions can be present in both, it’s a question of what is the dominant motivation or draw of the connection that leads to the relationship. And you can identify as being both.

Moving along the scale we have Swingers- who tend to have some form of primary relationship, and then engage in multiple sexual encounters with others- and something I am terming Amory-flexible. Like a hetero-flexible individual who may not necessarily be bi, but can swing that way if the circumstances are right, an Amory-Flexible individual could be monogamous with the right person, or poly with the right person/people.

As we get closer to Mono-Partnership there is Polyfidelty- where more than two individuals are in a relationship together and do not seek partners outside their closed group- and, then there’s Monogamish, sitting more on the sexual side of things. Monogamous couples aren’t closed to the idea of flirting or hooking up with others if the circumstances allow, but tend to have a single primary type long-term committed partnership.

This is a lot to ponder. And my hope is that people will indeed ponder this. And I know there’s lots more relationship styles that could be included- I’ve just tried to highlight some of the main ones here. It would be fantastic to see this make its way into poly vocabulary. Imagine going on a date zero and being able to chat with your date about whether they are looking for something more polysexual or polyfidelous?  I am fairly certain we all have degrees within this scale that feel the most comfortable for us, within which we feel the most satisfied. How do we find that? Trial and error, as best I can tell.

Me? I’m Poly. Polyamorous and Polysexual. The former perhaps stronger in fall and winter, the latter now coming to the forefront with spring and summer just around the corner. It feels kinda satisfying and empowering to locate myself on this scale. For the first time, I actually feel I can articulate exactly where I am at and what I look for in relationships- and differentiate between those that are more recreational, and those that flow with deeper undercurrents of emotional and spiritual connection even when sex isn’t part of the equation. It’s really refreshing. And exciting.

This is a very very rough draft of something I hope to continue to work on. I really welcome all your feedback on this. Something that I can’t yet draw out in two dimensions is how the spectrum of ethics and honesty fits into this. And, I will continue to return to this scale in some future posts. I look forward to evolving this Scale of Monogamishness with you!