We have quite a few bloggers here who are into being poly and I salute them for being able to step out of the monogamous mold. I was reading this article yesterday – http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/07/single-moms-marriage_n_4557202.html – and it kinda bothered me to read that the ‘solution’ to getting married to avoid poverty and failing was to try to do better. The article goes on to say a lot of other stuff… but I kinda stopped reading after a while because I got the impression that while it kinda says that single moms may not do well if they marry to keep from being poor, it still promotes marriage just the same.
It got me thinking about another side of being poly that has nothing to do with sex, like being able to pool resources and in a way that benefits everyone and because those involved are, in fact, in a relationship with each other – usually a closed version – everyone (in theory) has a vested interest because their continued well-being depends on the others in the relationship just as much as their depends on everyone else.
Think of the hippy communes back in the 70s where you had groups of people working together for a common goal – whether this had a sexual component or not isn’t important at this time. An even more modern version is one I see almost every day: We have a lot of Chinese college students where we live and it’s not unusual to see them moving in with each other and sharing the costs associated with living here and just taking care of business because it’s easier to handle this with more than one or two people. Again, none of what they’re doing has anything to do with sex and, if it does, I’m not aware of it so I wouldn’t assume that any hanky-panky is going on.
Monogamy might be good for a lot of things but, as that article I mentioned points out, it’s not always good for heading off poverty or reversing that state, not like it used to be. It made me wonder – rhetorically – why impoverished women don’t or won’t surround themselves with others, bind them to a relationship so that everyone has that vested interest, and perhaps improve their survivability? You get the right people into the mix and not only can a bad financial situation be turned around but it can also provide stability and security as well as all of the love and affection one could possibly stand.
Granted, it’s not the easiest thing to do; one would have to overcome a lot of ingrained beliefs where being monogamous is concerned as well as being able to select partners in this who are compatible with their needs – and I’m not just talking about the lack of financial solvency. I’ve read a few things where some folks have said that they couldn’t deal with having multiple “wives” or “husbands” and, yeah, if you’ve ever been married, then you know how… interesting that can get. But which would one rather do: Deal with multiple partners or keep being poor and struggling to survive?
You’d think this wouldn’t be a difficult choice to make… but some people would rather continue to struggle than to look into an option that our society tends to frown upon and that’s anything that has to do with poly-anything. Yes, it calls for one to be able to step out of the monogamous box and having to change the way they look and think about relationships and, at the risk of repeating myself, it’s not an easy thing to do… but if you could do it and make your life better, why not give it some thought?
We tend to think of poly in terms of love and sex… but there’s another side of being poly that a lot of people don’t know about or, if they do know about it, they don’t say much about it.
Okay, now to find something else to write about…