From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


Perhaps include this quote:

If spouses did not live together, good marriages would be more frequent -Friedrich Nietzsche

[Quote 1]

  1. ^ F. Nietzsche quotes]

Satisfaction vs. Success[edit]

The cited studies and the studies they cite are concerned with satisfaction, not success. Where does the source say "Research often suggests that emotional and sexual exclusivity is critical to relationship success."? (talk) 13:55, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

In the secondary source: "Empirical literature repeatedly assumes, and affirms primarily through research with white American college students, that emotional and sexual exclusivity is the guarantee of relationship success, and by extension personal health and happiness."[1] We will not be including the primary sources that say nothing about polyamory. We should not even be including Finn, and if you revert again I will restore the non-compromise version instead. KateWishing (talk) 14:06, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
Yes but "health and happiness" in the relationship is what relationship satisfaction refers to. Plus the source says: "The happiness and
satisfaction of romantically relating to another thus came to depend on containing (passionate) love and ‘quality’ sex as the exclusive properties of the private and monogamous couple". TheLogician112 (talk) ::02:57, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
I do not care about the word "satisfaction" or "success", although my wording is obviously the most faithful. The issue is that you are including primary sources that say nothing about polyamory, which is not synonymous with sexual non-exclusivity. KateWishing (talk) 03:05, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
I agree with Kate's observation. If something doesn't specifically refer to polyamory, it shouldn't be used as a source about polyamory. Polyamory refers to a specific relationship style, that of being in a long-term relationship with multiple people, openly and consensually, while sexual non-exclusivity can refer to just about anything, including cheating, polygamy, looser styles of open relationships, or just plain sleeping around. Robin Hood  (talk) 14:55, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Criticisms section[edit]

The criticisms section feels slight, and very pro-poly, like it's primarily concerned to list weak strawmen and knock them down. I edited out one particularly egregious sentence. Can someone add to or edit it? I would I'm not at all familiar with poly myself; I've never explored it or known any poly people. (And so I have no particular opinion on it - but I can spot lack of NPOV when I see it. I see this article's had various controversies around this, though I don't know how they were resolved: ) Nkn7391 (talk) 07:15, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

In particular I found "Division of love" most unsatisfying. There is no source proving that there is an anti-poly individual or faction promoting this idea of "division of love" as a problem with polyamory. The sources quoted are pro-poly, which technically makes it a "hollow man argument," a variant of a straw man where there is no proof the opponent exists. I further found the counter-arguments and sources lacking, in that they don't offer any supporting evidence either, but rather rely on a very unscientific metaphor and a quotation from a science fiction author.Legitimus (talk) 15:09, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Polyamory. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

N Archived sources still need to be checked

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 10:56, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

"Non-consensual" Polyamory[edit]

This also is missing the criticism of the religious basis of marriage validity, it is a marriage is religious belief. That impacts the civil rights and religious freedom of groups like Atheists; therebing no god, there is no religion, there is no truth in religious described reltionships.

The disclosure and transparency is not required for a the belief and practice of Polyamory. All that is required is consent of sexual encounters.

Since many sexually based behaviors begin with the same behavior - seeking a partner, it is premature to judge consent. Especially where a member may form the belief of Polyamore after being inside a marriage, before the new belief was expressed. People have the right to change and grow personally, even if it's not encouraged by a portion of society. As the LGBT+ community shows that the negative aspects of disclosure provide justification to not disclose the belief (severe objections and critical response), especially to a marriage partner who does not share that belief; or where the importance of the domestic situation is more important than disclosure, like protecting tranquility for the sake of dependents. The luxury of a simple divorce may not be in the best interest of the child in a marriage. And the choice of a closet polyamore to sacrifice happiness is a choice that is valid. Further a marriage my be an economic survival method and there for prejudicial, and economically discriminatory. So describing Polyamory as serial non-monogamy is just inaccurate. Removing the religious underpinnings of Pollyamore is required or else there needs to be a new term for this.

"Protected Polyamory" or "Reserved Polyamory" or "Private Polyamory" or "Select Poly" are terms which can make a distinction between consent and disclosed vs no consent. Disclosure and consent with all partners is not a basis of a being a Polyamory. 35 million members of the recent data dump are proof that there is a great segment of society that does not believe disclosure or consent of all partners is required. The reasons include, that sexless marriages carry little if any risk, re response to a non-monogamous partner to equalize a double standard for equalization of rights, as a freedom of speach issue that people are not property and in defiance of a religious precept of marriage among many others.

But no matter how it's described there are many subcategories of Polyamore that is defined on its face by sex. This includes the fact a married member may only be having sex with one partner - even if it's not their spouse. In that regard, there is not Polyamore, but Polyrelational with or without consent, with or without sex, with or without love per-se.

The discussion of this in generally is objectionable to romantic concepts of marriage, but because the law allows what is essentially a contract of terms, it can not override the basic civil rights of an individual. a group contract may have terms, but they are sub to the primary individual rights. Laws reflecting this are updating in modern society. Sourcing Special status by the Supreme Court regarding LGBT+ status.

Wikipedia which does not include this separation in distinction, discriminates against this protected class and violates religious freedom and civil rights. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:38, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

You seem to be confusing polyamory with polygamy and with cheating. Polyamory has no specific religious basis, nor does it necessarily have anything to do with marriage. Also, what you term "polyamory", and the situations you're applying it to, is generally referred to only as "cheating", not polyamory. It's a common misunderstanding. Polyamory, as commonly defined, requires that all parties be aware of the openness of the relationship and that they consent to it (though not all partners in a polyamorous relationship are necessarily polyamorous themselves). It's not just anybody who sleeps with multiple partners, which is what you're referring to with the Ashley Madison case. That, again, is just cheating. For that matter, polyamory doesn't even require that there be sexual relationships between all partners, there can be intimacy without sex for some people.
If you have evidence to the contrary which backs up your assertions, please provide that evidence and we can incorporate it into the article. Please remember that such evidence must not be original research (such as your assertion that Ashley Madison users represent some kind of polyamory) and that they must be from reliable sources. Robin Hood  (talk) 21:10, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
There are cheaters out there that claim they are polyamorus and cite being polyamorus as there reason for cheating. I've talked to these people face to face. Their logic was that they consider it their sexual orientation and drew an analogy to a "closeted" homosexual person being in an opposite-sex marriage for sake of appearances, and then having same-sex affairs without the spouse's knowledge or consent. But thinking that all cheating is polyamory is obviously incorrect and not supported by any reliable source. At best the individuals I met represent a teeny tiny portion of the cheating population. Cheating is complex and happens for many reasons.Legitimus (talk) 15:24, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
Good point, and I've met a couple of people like that as well. But I think the common view by practising polyamorists is that cheaters sometimes throw the word "polyamory" around as a way to try to excuse their cheating, but wouldn't actually have any interest in an open, consensual, multi-partner relationship—their kick comes from the cheating itself. There probably are a few genuinely polyamorous people who, as you say, are cheating because they aren't happy with only a single partner but can't/won't make it an openly poly relationship, just as there are in the LGBT community and the BDSM community as well. But these are the minority and don't generally merit any mention, since the cheating isn't part of the core identity. Robin Hood  (talk) 18:38, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
Another note, more for the OP, I was just looking at the article on infidelity and it has cited notes in several places that the distinction between cheating and polyamory or open relationships is, indeed, the knowledge and consent of those involved. Robin Hood  (talk) 18:50, 4 September 2015 (UTC)