Is polyamory just a feel-good euphemism for adultery?

[drew70]

In keeping with the TMF's non-hijacking policy, I thought it best to start a new thread for a discussion that originated as a tangent in one the the Tickling Discussion threads. It started like this

...If I wasn't into tickling, I also would never have explored polyamory, or BDSM anything. I think that would be a very different life, and surely not as fun....

I'm curious. What is "polyamory." It sounds like a protectorant for your car's dashboard.

It sounds like you need to work on your Greek and Latin word roots.

From Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyamory):

"Polyamory, in its broadest usage, is the practice or lifestyle of being open to having more than one loving, intimate relationship at a time, with the full knowledge and consent of all partners involved."

I know, I know. Sinner! Harlot! Get me to a nunnery!

Oh, cool! Kind of like adultry with built in amnesty!

Except the words you choose have exactly the wrong connotations. Your choice of words implies that she is guilty of some kind of immoral act, but gets away without punishiment.

There are no lies, no sneaking around, no betrayal, nor distrust. Why should love and intimacy only be shared with one other person?

A very good question to which one might find a variety of answers. Based on the given definition, taken word for word, I could say I engage in polyamory. I have female friends and even family members for whom my love is very deep and genuine. I'm intimate with them on a variety of levels...I know their personalities, their likes and dislikes, their moods. We embrace when we see each other. We have very intimate conversations. My wife is fully aware and approving of these relationships. So based on the Wikipedia definition, I would venture to say that many of us engage in polyamory.

However I suspect that what Wikipedia means by "intimacy" is actually sexual intimacy, which opens up a whole new pandora's box. If we take this implied definition, then I would answer Icycle's question this way: It's one thing to share love and intimacy. It's another thing altogether to share body fluids. From a medical point of view, it's not very hygenically wise to engage in multiple partnered sex, although like most people, I've indulged a fantasy or two in my day.

My opinion is that if you're single, there is little to no impediments that would keep one from such a lifestyle. For a married person, you've entered into a commitment and if you "fuck around" so to speak, it's adultery, whether or not your spouse approves.

 

[Cosmo_ac]

People can call it adultry if they want, but as long as it's concentual, all parties are informed and willing, then i personally see nothing wrong with it. Why must love, if it can be shared with many on an emotional level, only be shared with one person on a physical level?

Tickling is sexual for many, so one could even go so far as to accuse those who tickle or are tickled by others that are not there husband or wife of being engaged in adultry.(I know this is a slight stretch, but i'd still say it's in the same ball park)

 

[Redmage]

One difference between polyamory and adultery is obvious even from a casual glance: polyamory does not require marriage. In contrast, the concept of adultery has no meaning unless at least one of the people involved is married. So, since polyamory can exist apart from marriage, but adultery cannot, obviously polyamory and adultery are not the same thing. QED

Apart from the simple logic of their definitions, though, there are other important differences. Let's take two people, Alice and Bob, who are involved in a sexual relationship with one another.

The only reason why Alice should be offended if Bob had sex with Carol is if Alice and Bob had an understanding with one another that this was not to be done. That betrayal and the dishonesty that would presumably come along with it are the underlying causes of hurt when a monogamous relationship is violated. If Bob and Alice are honest with one another from the beginning, and do not insist that their relationship be monogamous, then Alice is going to be aware and supportive of Bob's relationship with Carol. Likewise Bob will support Alice's relationship with Ted.

So no, this is not a "feel-good euphemism." The people involved in a polyamorous relationship really do feel good about it. Those involved in an adulterous relationship generally do not. Since the two types of relationships work differently and feel different, there's not much left to identify them as the same thing. Hence it's perfectly reasonable to call them by different names.

This question actually never even arises in polyamorous circles, since to those who actually work in relationships like this the differences are obvious. The question generally comes from people who are still working from assumptions of monogamy as a normative standard - the way things "should" be done.

Certainly, there's nothing wrong with monogamy if that's the way two people want their relationship to go. And someone in a monogamous relationship has no business betraying his partner's trust by violating the terms of that relationship. That is wrong. If the relationship is not based on assumptions of monogamy though then there is no betrayal, and hence no moral problem, and nothing to feel bad about.

The only reason to suppose that the spouse's approval has no bearing on the issue is if we are treating people as property. In fact, even then we have to suppose that the property "owner" has no say in who else can "use" the "property." Essentially then marriage becomes a contract by which the state is given the final word in how the relationship is conducted, and the people involved in the relationship are no longer treated as people with the right to make their own decisions. I don't think many people actually view their marriages in those terms.

And this doesn't even address marriages in which monogamy is not assumed by the marriage vows.

 

[Mimi]

*shrugs* It works for some, it doesn't for others. As long as everyone in a relationship is on the same page, whether it be monogamy to one another, or an open relationship with several involved and all consenting, then it's all cool. Every single person does not enjoy the same flavor of ice cream. I sure as hell am not gonna judge someone else because I like chocolate chip mint and they prefer butter pecan. To each their own.

If it doesn't effect you or your marriage, why do you care? You sure seem to have an awful lot of unwelcome opinions of OTHER peoples private sex lives.

 

[MrPartickler]

I look at it like this: is it <i>stealing</i> when you take something someone tells you is yours for the taking?

 

[Redmage]

I look at it like this: is it <i>stealing</i> when you take something someone tells you is yours for the taking?

Only if they don't have the right to tell you that. That's the underlying assumption when declaring that a polyamorous marriage is adulterous.

 

[venray]

If you are going by definitions......

a·dul·ter·y (ə-dŭl'tə-rē, -trē)
n., pl. -ies.
Voluntary sexual intercourse between a married person and a partner other than the lawful spouse.


By definition if anyone within the relationship(s) mentioned is married, then yes it is adulterous....no moral judgement here....just a fact by definition of the word.....


Ray

 

[Redmage]

If you are going by definitions......

a·dul·ter·y (ə-dŭl'tə-rē, -trē)
n., pl. -ies.
Voluntary sexual intercourse between a married person and a partner other than the lawful spouse.

That is certainly the definition used in law. Legal definitions may or may not be useful for non-legal purposes. Does the dictionary you're using have a definition for polyamory?

There's also the matter of connotative vs.denotative definitions. For example, by the strict definition of the term, "sodomy" is simply another word for anal sex. However in general use the word carries much more than that meaning - nearly all of it negative. Calling someone a "sodomite" is a pretty serious insult in most contexts, despite the supposedly neutral value of the word.

Another good example is "prostitute." According to the dictionary this is simply "One who solicits and accepts payment for sex acts." Nothing else is there: no requirement that the "payment" be in the form of cash, nothing about any other aspect of the relationship. So, by the strict definition of the term Norman Rockwell's America was chock-full of prostitutes. Except they were called "housewives" back then: women who sought out husbands to support them and their children, in exchange for childcare, housekeeping, and...sex.

Of course it's "understood" that a housewife is not a prostitute, even in a "traditional" relationship. But the term applies just as well to June Cleaver as it does to the "lady" on the streetcorner, if you go stictly by the denotative meaning. It's the connotations that "prostitute" carries that make it inappropriate in that context.

Dictionaries can mislead you if you don't use them carefully. One reason why people come up with different terms for concepts that are superficially similar (for example "housewife" and "prostitute") is because on other levels the two terms aren't synonymous.

 

[Mimi]

From dictionary.com......

monogamy
n : The practice or condition of being married to only one person at a time.

polygamy
n : The condition or practice of having more than one spouse at one time.

Or more specifically here,

polyamory
n : participation in multiple and simultaneous loving or sexual relationships

adultery
n : extramarital sex that willfully and maliciously interferes with marriage relations.


Ummmm, nope. Don't appear to be nearly the same thing, as one is a loving arrangement, and the other is dishonest and malicious in intent. Monogamy is a mutual agreement to have only one partner. Polyamory is a mutual agreement to have more than one partner. Adultery is breaking the agreement of union, no matter which type of relationship you practice.

 

[jim66e]

The major problem I see is when one partner wants a monogomus relationship and the other wants a polyamorous (sp) one. Either way one partner will be unhappy and who is to say which one should cave to the other? This comes to mind because I think one of my friends is in this situation with his fiance. My friends and I are worried about him due to what we think are different feelings on the openess of relationships.

 

[Redmage]

From dictionary.com......

polyamory
n : participation in multiple and simultaneous loving or sexual relationships

adultery
n : extramarital sex that willfully and maliciously interferes with marriage relations.

Here's another noteworthy definition from dictionary.com, Mimi:

adultery: conjugal infidelity. An adulterer was a man who had illicit intercourse with a married or a betrothed woman, and such a woman was an adulteress. Intercourse between a married man and an unmarried woman was fornication. Adultery was regarded as a great social wrong, as well as a great sin. (emphasis added)

What's especially interesting about this one is, first, that it's cited froma Bible dictionary. And second it points out that in the Bible the term "adultery" applies only to an unfaithful married woman. An unfaithful married man is not adulterous, unless he's bedding a married woman.

Interesting, how things change. And how, perhaps, old terms have changed today.

 

[Mimi]

I do agree with you on that, Jim. It only works when ALL parties involved agree to it, want it, and are comfortable with it. There is definitely moral issues with trying to force someone to warp to your ideals of a proper relationship. If one partner is strictly against bringing other people into the relationship, and the other goes and does it anyway against their wishes, then that is indeed adulterous. When it is what everyone wants in the relationship, then it works fine.

 

[venray]

Again Jim...I make no moral judgements....I was merely answering Drew's question based on simple definition.....

 

[isabeau]

is adultery forgivable? and if it's one of the seven deadly's... is it still forgiveable?

isabeau

 

[Mimi]

Adultery is not one of the Seven Deadly Sins. Those are...

Greed
Lust
Envy
Pride
Sloth
Gluttony
Wrath

And I honestly feel almost anything can be forgiven if the one who committed the act is truly, sincerely, and deeply remorseful and regretful, and the one the act was committed against is willing to forgive.

 

[lk70]

is adultery forgivable? and if it's one of the seven deadly's... is it still forgiveable?

isabeau

"sin" implies the parties involved practice traditional judeo-christian religion. Not always the case, in which case, no sin, no need for "forgiveness." Furthermore, is the forgiveness you're talking about coming from a human partner, or a higher being? And is that even relevant?

 

[isabeau]

"sin" implies the parties involved practice traditional judeo-christian religion. Not always the case, in which case, no sin, no need for "forgiveness." Furthermore, is the forgiveness you're talking about coming from a human partner, or a higher being? And is that even relevant?

when i asked that... i meant a higher being.. as in God.. does He forgive it... and if lust is a deadly sin... why isn't adultery?

isabeau

 

[Mimi]

I hate to tell you sugar, but we ALL commit deadly sins, nearly every day of our lives. No one is completely sin free, and we are all guilty of at least a few, if not all, of those seven listed at some point in our existence. So if He can not forgive, then everyone who practices traditional christianity is in for a hell of a surprise when they meet whatever is waiting for them in the afterlife. Literally.

But this topic should not be based on religious factors. If it is, then it is biased to begin with because it is expecting everyone to live by the same set of rules and morals those who practice christianity subscribe to....and most of the worlds population do not follow Christianity.

 

[Icycle]

However I suspect that what Wikipedia means by "intimacy" is actually sexual intimacy, which opens up a whole new pandora's box. If we take this implied definition, then I would answer Icycle's question this way: It's one thing to share love and intimacy. It's another thing altogether to share body fluids. From a medical point of view, it's not very hygenically wise to engage in multiple partnered sex, although like most people, I've indulged a fantasy or two in my day.

I'd also like to point out that not all sexual intimacy has to involve the exchange of body fluids. For many people on this forum, tickling is a very sexually intimate act that is pretty much fluidless (except for sweat!). And you can do a lot of other stuff with your hands too!

 

[kis123]

is adultery forgivable? and if it's one of the seven deadly's... is it still forgiveable?

isabeau

It wasn't forgiveable for me-that's why I eventually left his sorry behind!! When you marry, you promise monogomy. I don't feel the need to forgive if he breaks the contract and vice versa.

What I don't understand is if a person wants multiple lovers, why even marry in the first place? That just makes things messy to me.

What about STDs? Condoms don't fix everything-I worked on an AIDS floor for years and many of them wore condoms.

My bottom line is this-I don't see the point in traditional marriage because people cheat, plain and simple. Why get married when fifty percent of the time, people are going to divorce and even higher percentages cheat on their spouses? Maybe there's something to the concept of polyamory after all.

 

[drew70]

*shrugs* It works for some, it doesn't for others. As long as everyone in a relationship is on the same page, whether it be monogamy to one another, or an open relationship with several involved and all consenting, then it's all cool. Every single person does not enjoy the same flavor of ice cream. I sure as hell am not gonna judge someone else because I like chocolate chip mint and they prefer butter pecan. To each their own.

If it doesn't effect you or your marriage, why do you care? You sure seem to have an awful lot of unwelcome opinions of OTHER peoples private sex lives.

Exactly what do you mean by "unwelcome opinions"? Are you saying I shouldn't have started this thread? Hell, if my opinions are unwelcome then by all means, do what you do best and hack away. But to insinuate that I'm prying into peoples "private" sex lives is a little over the top, even for you. We're discussing sexual and social lifestyles, not peering into anybody's bedroom window.

 

[Mimi]

No, I won't "hack" your post up. You are entitled to your opinion, and as long as you express it in a way that does not specifically flame anyone then I'm not going to trample on what you've posted in any way. But that does not mean that I will not personally take issue with your views. Just as you are entitled to your opinion, I am entitled to mine, and it's been a disturbing trend of yours lately to sit on your high arrogant moral horse and judge others on the forum simply because you do not agree with the lifestyle decisions they've made. It's really none of your business, and your closed-mindedness has pretty much completely destroyed any respect I once had for you.

So as long as you continue to judge members of this forum for decisions they make with their own lives, and express your distaste for our own personal lifestyle practices, I will continue to express my distaste over you doing so.

You sure as hell wouldn't like it if someone was breathing down your back telling you everything you chose to do in your private life was immoral and shameful, stop doing it to others. Christ, we're all at a FETISH forum. NONE of us are friggin saints here, and the fact we all share our sexual fetish openly with one another on this public platform is reason enough we all should be morally condemned according to those in the outside world. No one here has the right to question the morality of anything else anyone else does on this forum. And you can try to blanket this thread with an innocent query about whether polyamory would fall in the catagory of adultery or not, but it's a thin veil to hide the fact you only wanted a chance to declare your moral superiority over others and here was a chance to get others together to share in your belittling of their personal lives.

 

[Bagelfather]

Is Polyamory adultry, yes/no/maybe/what?

In biblical reference polyamory is adultry. Under the law is it considered adultry? As marriage is defined on a state by state basis you will have to check your own state laws to make that determination.

Please do not take this statement as "I think polyamory is evil and all those who do it are damned to Bakersfield" or anything like that.

The initial question by Drew is a fair question at the core level.

There are two areas to look at, is it adultry from a religious perspective, and is it adultry from a legal perspective. From a religious perspective it depends on your faith, and from a legal it depends on what state. There are many things that are wrong depending on the religion. As there are many different ones and I really try to avoid saying what is right and wrong about them (just what is right and wrong about them for ME) in respect to religion it is therefore difficult to define.

Under your own faith and state laws, yes it could be adultry. Whether or not it is moral is an other matter. Also if you are defining it by sexual contact what is sexual contact, what is intimate? I find kissing an intimate thing, more so than tickling, but it isn't sex. To define adultry further you have to define what is sexual contact or intimacy. Based on previous threads of "is tickling cheating" that point varies widly so intimacy and sexual intimacy may also go just as wide. If you let someone watch you masterbate, is that adultry? Is oral sex cheating? Is it cheating if you dry hump someone?

There are far too many variables. So you have to decide for yourself if it is adultry or not. I don't think you are going to convince those involved in it otherwise. Also the people in polyamory are open and honest with their partners. I do not see any less love in these relationship than in others.

Would I consider a poly relationship, I don't know. I think I want to worry about being with one person and getting that right first. However, that is me, that isn't everyone else. Is it immoral, depends on your morals. For me I think it is immoral when someone is getting hurt and there is a breakdown of communication and someone cares more about their own sexual needs than the needs of their partner.

 

[Mastertank1]

To answer the original question;

NO!!!!!

Adultery is an unfairly prejudicial word for refusing to accept a lifetime of enslavement in order to avoid offending religious bigots and hypocrites.

If you believe in the Christian version of Jesus, He saved the life of the woman taken in adultery, so He obviously forgave her.

If you believe in the historical human being Jesus of Nazereth, he was a rabbi in a Jewish religion which not only condoned polygamy, but under certain circumstances required it!

Mastertank1

We who play and dance are thought mad by they who hear no music.

 

[Redmage]

is adultery forgivable? and if it's one of the seven deadly's... is it still forgiveable?

According to the gospels, the only unforgiveable sin is "blaspheming the Holy Spirit." Exactly what this is, however, is never defined.

Bagel, there are three levels (at least) of concern: religious, legal, and moral. Few states have laws criminalizing sex outside marriage any more (and with the Supreme Court having struck down all sodomy laws, I doubt that any such laws will be held to be constitutional). Religiously, that's a matter of personal concern (it's not an issue in my faith). Morally likewise (no one is harmed, no commitment is broken, so I see no moral problem).