Long-lasting Poly Series: Andrew
Long-lasting Poly is an interview series with individuals and sets of partners who have been non-monogamous for years and have found ways of making it work for them.
First up ... Andrew
PYP: How long have you identified as polyamorous?
ANDREW: I don't necessarily identify as polyamorous, even if what I do would be recognized as such. My conception of my non-monogamy shifts regularly, but I think I most identify with relationship anarchy. I don't see the benefit for rigid distinctions between platonic and non-platonic relationships. I love all my friends and find the line between friend and lover and partner hazy or non-existent. Polyamory, at least as I perceive it, prioritizes romantic relationships over others in a way I find demeaning. When I first encountered the "polyamory community," I found people quick to distance themselves from swingers. "They have sex with lots of people; that's not what polyamory is—we love each other." As if purely sexual relationships are inferior or shameful. As if casual dating is just “not doing it right.”
PYP: Tell us how you came to non-monogamy and what your relationships with your partners look like? How long have you been with them?
ANDREW: On some level, I had been drawn to non-monogamy for much of my dating life, even though I didn't have the words for it. I struggled with fidelity and didn't understand the distinctions people made between friends and “boy/girlfriends.” I came out as bi in high school. I always felt comfortable cuddling friends and being physically affectionate, and didn't see why sex would be somehow separate from that. After struggling through years of serial monogamy in college, I found myself in love with two people, one of whom introduced me to the concept of polyamory on a blog online. It ultimately did not work that time, but now I felt my feelings were valid. Another few years of serial monogamy brought me into a painful relationship. When it ended, I found myself interested in someone but also wanting to protect myself from the abuse of the prior relationship. Luckily, my partner was similarly out of a long and painful relationship and also wanted to keep things fairly casual and open. She was due to leave the country at the end of a few months and we decided to explore an open relationship, as we wanted to maintain our connection but couldn't neglect our physical and emotional needs. Things were bumpy initially but we made it through.
I try not to think in terms of hierarchy, but I am married to one partner. She and I have been together for 12 years and open more or less that whole time. We both found partners a year or so after coming to Chicago. Both of our eight-ish-year-long relationships recently ended for unrelated reasons. My wife hates dating as a process and enjoys having one or two other partners who she shares adventures with. She and I are no longer physically intimate, or even romantically. But we have a tight bond which makes us great friends and cohabitants. I'm more interested in exploring relationships however they come to me. I am dating a few people and excited to see how those relationships develop.
PYP: On your Facebook profile you have this Lacan quote, "What does it matter how many lovers you have if none of them gives you the universe?" Can you tell me what that means to you?
ANDREW: I think the quote appeals to me on multiple levels, which is why I like it so much. One of my concerns with non-monogamy is that some people are happy collecting lovers without creating meaningful engagement; other times, it feels like people have one foot out the door in the search for something “better.” What is the point of collecting so many lovers around you if they aren't giving you much, or if you aren't engaged?
On a more philosophical level, Lacan talked about love being "to give what one does not have.” This is much of what Lacan’s psychoanalysis is all about, and it's pretty far over my head, but I think it gets at fulfilling each other in a mutually satisfactory way. “All the king's horses and all the king's men” … it doesn't matter how many people you have in your life if the fulfilling quality isn't there. Adding more people to the equation doesn't fix things.
PYP: Can you give an example of when you feel that mutual fulfillment? What does it look like?
ANDREW: I try to avoid escalator relationships. I don't need a relationship to tick off all the typical relationship milestones to feel valued, and I try to approach each relationship as it’s own. So that mutual fulfillment may look different in each relationship. It depends on what we seek from each other and being able to provide that. For example, I have a person in my life who I share love with deeply and passionately, but neither of us seeks to be physical with each other. To outsiders, I think there would be confusing over whether we were "friends" or "partners" because we are so close. But this relationship fulfills both of us and we are happy with how things stand between us. My spouse is another example. To others, a sexless marriage may be unfulfilling and cause for divorce. For us, what we have between us is enough to satisfy the things we need from each other: companionship, emotional support, the comfort of knowing someone so well and feeling known in return.
PYP: Would you describe your ideal non-monogamy as kitchen table or parallel or something else? Are you able to get close to your ideal?
ANDREW: I think, ideally, I would like something similar to kitchen table polyamory. Maybe "dinner party" polyamory. I'd love to be comfortable with my partners' others, and have my partners comfortable with my others, but i don't imagine (or desire) us all a family. I don't think I need to be friendly toward—or even like—someone for my partner to enjoy their company. Each relationship is independent from the others, and each is a relationship between autonomous individuals. I won't impose structure; I'm happy to let each relationship find its own rhythm. I want to let my loved ones choose paths that allow them to maintain their integrity while still receiving what I need. I think this is the only way to be sure that the relationship is truly mutual.
