What about polyamory

Post Reply New Topic

From what I've observed, someone is always the third wheel, the one who doesn't really get their fair share of trust, affection, etc.

I would never want to be in a relationship knowing that someone would end up getting hurt, yet that seems to be the inevitable conclusion of poly-amorous relationships, no matter how many people say that at this point in time it isn't that way, that everyone is happy ... that point in time doesn't last, someone gets hurt.

i am wondering, how does asperger syndrome manifest in hyper-social people? one cannot be polyamorous without being hypersocial.

yea.. i would never do this. cant say i understand why anyone would want to, either, unless they are just really sexual and dont feel like giving their all to 1 person in favor of giving part of themselves to multiple people.

i'm wondering if the aspies who have no troubles attracting mates and getting on with them, if they are equally talented in all other areas of their lives as well, IOW are they generally wealthy and successful all over? i gotta know, and they don't seem to want to talk to people who aren't their equals or peers, who are not up at their high-functioning levels.

People can absolutely be poly without being hyper-social. I've found a majority of poly people I've interacted with are in fact socially awkward, socially anxious, and autistic. (Not that a majority of poly people overall are, but the ones I've interacted with this is definitely true). There is however a statistically significant correlation between being autistic and non-monogamous.


I identify as poly. I doubt I'd ever be involved with more than one person ever, but that doesn't change me being poly.

And socially awkward meetups of multiple autistic people can work really well, even when these people have no idea how to interact normally with people.

To comment on other things in this thread:
I've seen times where people are third wheels, and times when people aren't. The issues here are usually in people expecting different types of poly relationships. They aren't all the same, and people having different expectations and not discussing them is a problem.

The person talking about not wanting to be a secondary:
This is one of the places where people vary widely. Some people only have one primary and can have secondaries. Some have multiple primaries and multiple secondaries. Some actively refuse to be involved in primary/secondary relationships and only are in relationships where all partners are equal.

Beyond that, the definitions people use for primary and secondary vary widely too. The best I've heard is primary is 'someone I'm building my life around' and secondary is 'someone who I act on a relationship with when its convenient for both of us, but I don't actively build my life around'. This assumes that almost every relationship will be primary.

On the stabilizing aspect:
I've definitely found this to be true. I'm more stable when my boyfriend has another girlfriend, because I have her to turn to as well as him. However, we function in a particular style of poly that not everyone does that requires their to be a sort of friendship (even if its awkward and autistic) between multiple partners of his.

On the whether its a choice or sexual orientation:
This is a huge argument in the poly community. I'd say without question there are people who have the orientation of poly. These people if given the choice might even have not made this decision.
There is also the poly lifestyle, which people can make the choice whether or not to participate in. This does involve a choice.

I've found that if people don't have the orientation the relationships more often fail. However orientation is not a simple binary thing. If you think of orientation as binary it fails to be an orientation.

The discussion of open relationships/sex:
Poly is not about sex. Period.

if one lacks the social graces [what i meant by saying "hypersocial"] then HOW does one attract mates in the first place? THAT is what i'm trying to find out, whether or not that some aspies who are socially successful have some kind of savant-like skill at reading extremely subtle body language signals/have some kind of supercharged TOM that most other aspies seem to lack. not that i've had any experience in being the recipient of other people's amorous interest, but unless somebody looked me in the eye and told me with specifically explicit language that they were interested in getting to know me better, i would never have a clue. concerning the gifted aspies who have all the mates and are having all the fun, how are they successful unless they have quasi-NT levels of body language fluency and TOM? nobody seems able/willing to answer this question- this makes me wonder if it is indeed a quasi-savant phenomenon i'm dealing with here. these lucky folk with the right stuff would seem to be the highest of the high-functioning types. i frankly envy them.

TILT!

I lack any real world applicable social graces, but I attract loads of people. The two aren't really connected, which seems odd but

Poly is about the same thing as monogamy. It's just some people crave (or have the capacity) to have more than one partner at a time.

you have the advantage of being physically attractive. that counts for an awful lot in this world. as long as one is both physically attractive and not totally wacko, one would have a leg up on the less fortunate, IMHO. plus most men are more likely to be open in their interest in you and not shy/ambiguous about it.

I still have a hard time wrapping my head around that one. I was always the unattractive freak sitting in a quiet corner.

Am I the only one that would get a bit ticked if a significant other wanted to see someone else at the same time?

No.

well, IMHO you could not have been much of an "unattractive freak" if you reproduced.

Alright. I was beginning to feel a little odd

not at all. i would feel like i had been demoted to day-old chopped liver and fed to the dog. am i the only one here who feels that, compared with the lucky in lust/love, the rest of us are as children of a lesser god?

hey, it partially rhymes, at least

Nope. That's me too!