Hello Polyam Comrades 
Hopefully your week is starting off well. To help foster a safe and inclusive space for polaymory discussion, we wanted to provide weekly discussion topics! The goal is that we share our stories and our experiences, listen to each other, provide safe space for each other, and learn from each other. Please ask questions and provide answers in good faith only, let's be the wonderful communicators I know we all are.
This week's discussion topic is: What Does Polyamory Mean To You?
This is a pretty broad topic and should provide a great baseline for future discussion. I'm excited to hear what you have to share!
Please feel free to use this thread to suggest future discussion topics as well, ideas you have to foster a better community, or feedback you have about the community.
What does polyamory mean to me? I probably should have thought about my own answer before posing the question
For me personally though I think polyamory is a fairly all encompassing term for any non monogamous relationship style that focuses on geninue emotional connection. There are lots of ways to construct or define non monogamy, but for me polyamory is constructed around that emotional connection. Many of us (monogamous or not) already define love in many ways, and I think polyamory expands the definition of love out infinitely in any and all directions. It allows us to love anyone in whatever way we agree to love each other. It allows us to define love for ourselves without accepting societal expectations of what love is "supposed" to look like or feel like. It allows us to explore ourselves, our world, and our community through love and connection. For me polyamory is freeing myself from the societal restrictions and expectations placed on love, exploring the discomfort that can come from that liberation, and allowing myself to accept the outcome of that exploration. I think a lot of the limits people place on their own expressions or experience of love comes from white western capitalist expectations and definitions of what love is, and for me at least freeing myself from those expectations has been a really important part of my anti imperialist journey.
So basically if you love multiple people in multiple ways, defined however you and those people define it...congrats you're polyamorous. It doesn't have to be complicated or clearly defined or fit into some rigid box, it just has to be liberative and ethical expression of many kinds of love to be polyamory.
That's just me though!
That's pretty much the definition that resonates most with me as well.
To me is mostly the rejection of white supremacy. I think for alot of poly people their time being poly doesn't look very poly. You see people talking about poly single, that kind of thing. However even for folks that are polysingle they are still rejecting the ideas the worst people in history created to prop up patriarchy and social hierarchy. Which, is pretty cool. Some liberals call it revolutionary. I don't think it is as far as all that. It is one of the steps a fully alienated imperial subject can take on their way to a true consciousness about solidarity and all those other good comunist feelings. So maybe I am no better than the liberals in thinking that that poly represents unleashing the power of love to help combat neoliberalism. I know that is at least in part wishful thinking cause I have seen some poly spaces that were deeply middleclass and just PMC coded swingers. Which is fun, but not important
Swingers calling themselves polyamorous is one of the things that makes me extraordinarily angry. Stop bringing capitalist ideas of relationships into my anti capitalist relationship space
Not that most polyamorous people are communist because they definitely sadly aren't, but at the very minimum anyone practicing healthy polyamory (or pretty much any form of ethical non monogamy) would agree that we're removing the concept of ownership from romantic relationships, whereas swingers just reinforce the concept of ownership in relationships in one of the worst ways possible. They make my blood boil.
At least in the polyamory spaces I'm part of and foster offline, swingers are not typically welcome.
Can you please go more in detail about your thoughts on swinging reinforcing ownership in one of the worst ways possible??
I don't know a lot about Polyamory (or swinging for that matter) beyond the basics. Even with my basic understanding, I can't believe there are many swingers who would consider themselves part of polyamory community
CW: Descriptions of sexual violence
spoiler
Definitely. The modern white concept of "swinging" has its roots in man owns woman kind of relationships, and there's nothing more demonstrating of that ownership than giving your wife to another man to fuck. Sure, maybe sometimes it was consensual, but what consent can a woman really give when under the duress caused by societal pressures forced on her by patriarchial monogamy? Her powerful and influential husband wants to trade wives with some other powerful and influentual husband, what are the wives supposed to do in that situation? Say no? Could they even say no? What would happen if they DID say no? Swinging in that way is just sexual violence, period. Two men trading their wives like property for their own sexual gratification? That's just sexual slavery with extra steps. It's horrible and it's why I'm so strongly against swinging being related to polyamory in any capacity; our community shouldn't be anywhere near that if we want to claim we're acting ethically.
These days I would say many swingers are doing it more consensually, at least in the kind of communities I tend to encounter swingers. But even assuming the best case scenario of "everyone involved with this is fully consenting to it" it has its roots in ownership, of treating a spouse as property. The concept of "trading" partners still assumes you have something to trade, and you can really only trade something you own or possess. Swingers are looking for that trade, thinking of their partners as if they are property to be freely exchanged with others. It's gross even in the absolute best case scenario. And even then, I've encountered PLENTY of swingers where the husband does all the talking, does all the arranging of things, tries to get between you and his wife (and it's always HIS WIFE), even though they say they're ethical and everything is above board and everyone is fully consenting and actually it was her idea etc etc. If she's so into me why doesn't she tell me herself? It gives me the big ick at its best and at its worst I think it's still just men treating women like property.
I have met a few queer folks who say they're swingers, but then I talk to them and they're really just more like "open" relationships who like group stuff when you get into what they mean by that. It would be great if there was better language to help us separate "people who like doing one on one group stuff with other people in the same room" and "man who is owning a woman and giving her to another man" but... I'm not aware of any yet. And even then most of the queer folks I know who like that sort of arrangement have learned not to use the word swingers because it attracts all the absolutely worst people to them while shoving away all the people they actually want to spend time with.
Sorry for the late reply.
spoiler
Regarding your first paragraph, in a just world, none of those events should be happening to anyone.
Second paragraph: if everyone is "fully consenting", that would mean every person involved is excited to move forward, which negates the idea of ownership somewhat. You cannot consent on behalf of your spouse. The terminology of "swapping" partners is problematic, but that terminology doesn't undo the full consent you are presenting as a "best case scenario".
Finally, if the term "swingers" attracts the worst people, what term do these queer folks use to attract the right people? During play, what are the right people doing differently to the swingers?
I think polyamory is a pretty important rejection of the western family unit. The idea that you can only ever love one person, and you must never love two people at once, is very patriarchal, and mostly serves men - ensure that your wife can not leave you or find someone who treats her better. People accept that divorce happens because two people shouldn't necessarily get married, but polyamory is still way less accepted. I don't own my partner, and I don't own their love, and likewise them for me.
