• KelvarCherry@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    9 hours ago

    It seems you’re correlating “polyamory” (non-monogamous relationships) with “polycules” (relationships with more than two people). Not all polyamory is a polycule and not all polycules are necessarily permanent; nor have their members exclusive with each other.

    Sometimes polyamory looks like a marriage where both members have okayed having sex with other people. Sometimes it’s groups of “swinger” marriages where they “swap” members. Sometimes it’s just a person who regularly casually hooks up with others. I’d argue that what people consider monogamous relationships have a bit of wiggle room. Life is complicated; people are complicated.

    • chronicledmonocle@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 hours ago

      I think you mean “conflating”, not correlating. I’m not comparing two disparate data points.

      Both of the things you described are the same sides of a coin, but with the commitment slider moved around a bit. Much of what I said applies to both.

      Polycules, in your description, might be more “successful”, but that’s only because there isn’t any real commitment. If the relationship falls apart, oh well move on. That’s barely a tick on the slider from a fuck buddy and two ticks away from one night stands.

      Again, everybody should be allowed to do whatever they want. Freedom in sexuality is important. I just don’t think these relationships are successful in the majority of cases and I prefer a stable relationship with someone I know will be there throughout my whole life. I have no doubt that I’ll die before I ever considered leaving my SO because I’m in it for the long haul.