From monogamy to polyamory: How to find the right relationship format
To our usual romance scheme more and more questions are being asked: even the massive Russian TV shows, like Change or Double Solid, declare that their texture and specificity are diverse, variable and not necessarily limited to a couple. Moreover, many come to understand that the degree of importance and necessity of the relations themselves is offered to us by culture and society and is far from necessary for everyone.
In conversations about romantic or partnership it is customary to use the tags “naturally”, “laid by nature” and “normal”. But it is worth remembering that in their most widespread and generally accepted understanding this is a human-made construct. Personal, intimate, romantic, any kind of communication from those in which the sacred meaning of the word "relationship" is embedded may vary considerably depending on the country, mentality or religiosity. As the traditional discourse weakens, this framework expands, the boundaries become blurred, and the palette of possible options for relationships becomes much more diverse.
At the same time, monogamous heterosexual relations still maintain a significant separation from other forms of love unions. Their “normativity”, as a rule, accompanies the opinion that the once formed form of the relations of the nuclear family (which Engels wrote about in detail) is the only possible and correct variant of relations between people who decide to link their lives. Yes, it may indeed seem "right" - but primarily from the point of view of power, birth control and reproduction of the population.
The reality is that there are much more options in the area that is commonly called "relations", and each of them is just a form. Any one of them can come up, the main thing is to try to be more sensitive to the space of options and choose the right one for them, but not to the detriment of the feelings and comfort of the partner. Any relationship of the romantic spectrum - is the work on contact, communication, support for each other. But the number of participants in these relations and the degree of their involvement should be determined by the level of comfort of all those involved, whether they are two or more - and only you can decide how much and why you will be.
Singles
SINGLE ALONGS NOT INTERESTED TO BECOME A FAMILY, RELATIONS, ROMANTIC TIES.
If once it was not customary to talk about sex out loud, now the situation is rather the opposite - the absence of sex is marked as “inferiority”, and few people believe in a conscious rejection of it. About the same happens with romantic feelings, only the need for them is even more enshrined in us culture: it is believed that the need for romantic relationships is sewn into each person by default. In fact, it happens that the race of relations may simply not be interesting to someone. To some extent, this is a form of secular celibacy - sex is not interesting, that special form of intimacy, which is called relationship, is not interesting. At the same time, life without them is not at all a heavy burden that someone, for whatever reason, is forced to drag, but a personal choice.
The moral norms that have developed around sexual and love practices do not seem to ostracize completely ignoring relationships. But nevertheless, the status of a loner in the post-Soviet culture is taken, if not marginalized, then at least to diminish its value with respect to the anxiously preserved myth of “meeting with your soul mate” (this expression itself implies that without a partner a person is half empty).
Klinenberg said a lot about modern singles, in addition, there is a wonderful book by the Belarusian researcher Anna Shadrina “Not Married. Sex, Love and Family Outside Marriage”, in which she analyzes the positions and statuses of “new single”, clarifying the point that “marriage ceased to be "automatic" and a mandatory event necessary for the appearance of children ", which significantly changes the structure and status of relations, including official ones. A common feature of supporters of this approach to life is the desire to build their lives outside the paradigm of relationships. It is easier to do this with the understanding that amorotcentrism is a relatively recent invention of mankind, and family and marriage are first and foremost a social institution.
Monogamy
ROMANTIC UNION OF TWO PEOPLE, the main CHARACTERISTICS of which will become faithful to a partner, it is also the main condition of relations.
Monogamy, by virtue of tradition, is considered to be a universal pattern of ideal relations, but it is worth understanding that heterosexual monogamous relations have occupied a niche of the only possible variant of the norm as a result of certain processes. As it happened, you can read, for example, in Michel Foucault in his analysis of the practice of love and sexuality through the prism of the concept of power. No matter how much one would like to blame love and other high concepts in everything, the state’s desire to regulate relations between people and subordinate pleasures to the logic of reproduction played an important role in shaping the love norm. The contexts of our reality are such that monogamous relations at the level of common sense have been attributed to some time sacredness, uniqueness, and no alternative. In fact, on the scale of relationships, monogamy is just a notch.
A monogamous view of relationships considers as such a union of two people, a couple for whom the whole sets of norms and rules are spoken for and by default assumed. On the one hand, it is simpler to be in monogamous relations - they are familiar and verified by the state. On the other hand, the presence of two people in a relationship does not make the union stable by definition: there can be too many problems in the interpersonal relations of the couple. Separate psychological branches of research, all sorts of variations in family therapy, a significant body of religious practice and, in fact, government support are directed towards their solution. But it is important to understand that even within this framework there are a lot of additional variables that affect the status of a couple: with and without children, homo and hetero, in cohabitation and marriage. The position of such unions in the public and state matrix may differ significantly and receive varying degrees of social approval or censure.
Polygamy
A form of relationship, mostly marriage, in which a man or woman is in a relationship with several partners
Polygamy should not be confused with promiscuity, although such an error occurs: in contrast to multiple and ad hoc sexual relations, polygamy exists in an almost inseparable combination with institutional marital norms. As a rule, within a certain cultural context, either the male variant or the female polygamy variant is recognized. It is a fairly conservative practice in which relations are built on the principle of one or one plus several legitimate partners, have their own boundaries and clearly predetermined norms, and are also governed by a set of ideas about the distribution of roles, both male and female.
The positioning of polygamy as an alternative to monogamous marriage leads to the fact that their affirmation or tacit approval in a community, government, becomes a characteristic marker of relations. Polyandry and polygamy successfully grow on the prepared soil, that is, on those territories where these traditions have been for many years, and they are based on a powerful fusion of the rules and regulations that go back to antiquity, usually enshrined culturally and (or) religiously. And in this tradition, it describes in some detail how and under what conditions polygamous relations can function. Polygamy is more intuitively clear to the representative of any culture with a patriarchal history, but polyandry is also possible to imagine: this practice is called polyandry and is common, for example, in Nepal and Tibet.
Guest marriage
A form of relationship in which partners do not have a common living space and meet periodically. The frequency and duration of meetings are regulated only by the couple itself.
This form of relationship has two localization points, because the partners do not unite in the common space of the dwelling - for everyone it remains its own. The opportunity to have a romantic relationship, along with the daily routine divided by space, adjoins in a guest marriage with overnight stays alternately in one place or another, with periodic meetings in a neutral territory. What is important in such a relationship is not so much the status - official registration or not, but the absence of a common living space as a necessity for partners. Attitudes of this kind, while seemingly “open,” remain monogamous. Partners simply do not live together, but either in different apartments, or cities, or even countries — so-called distance relations, due to modern cosmopolitanism, fit in here.
Guest marriage formats may vary depending on the distance between the participants. If the apartment partners are on the same staircase, the relationship develops differently than the transatlantic. Fortunately, in the service of sexual relations of people who are far away from each other, there are all sorts of sexting and high-tech sex toys for couples at a distance. In the end, no one cancels Skype with its audio and video broadcasting and even the old-fashioned and therefore even more impressive epistolary genre.
Open marriage / Free relationships
Characterized by a contract between partners that allow close relationships with other people. Often we are talking about sexual relationships, but not always and not only.
Reflection on relationships, their capabilities and limitations gradually began to generate an increasing number of questions about the status of monogamous relationships and their insufficiency. There was an alternative to free relationships or open marriage. An illustration of such a union can make a rich relationship Simone de Beauvoir and Jean-Paul Sartre. Their formula: "To be together, but to remain free." It is much more difficult to sort everything out in this kind of relationship: for example, a “pact” was concluded with Sartre and Simone. This detail says a lot about relationships that are more complexly tailored than monogamous, and compels them to approach with a certain thoughtfulness.
The settings here are also different, but not the same as in polygamy. In contrast, a form that presupposes freedom for one partner, in an open marriage relationship, freedom is given to each of the participants. Free relations are to some extent a prototype of polyamory, and a number of features in these forms are similar. They provide an opportunity to build relationships - sexual, emotional and not only - with anyone other than the main partner. Free relations imply agreement and pronouncement among participants of exemplary or clear rules for action.
The main and most important principle of free relations is the agreement of what is happening among partners. However, there is a lack of openness of polyamory. As a result, only two contact participants can be notified, the other people who are connected are not necessarily in the same positions. The layout is such that there are major members of the union and additional.
Polyamory
These relationships allow for the possibility of love as a practice aimed at interacting with several people.
The word “polyamory” is not so often heard around niche groups and communities, and due to its novelty and mystery it can cause strong protest reactions. This form of relations is perceived as the complete opposite of monogamy (and undermining its foundations) also because private life in such relations is not controlled and is not regulated by the state framework. In one way or another, polyamorous relations can also be found in Bertolucci's Dreamers, or in Gaspar Noe, who did not get to the wide Russian hire of the “Love”. But the picture of Noe is necessarily about sex, but polyamorous relationships are not only and not so much about him, as about people and their ability to build romantic relationships not only in pairs, but also in other, not so familiar formats.
In the case of polyamory, it is important to talk about equality among the participants. Everyone has the right to choose several partners, regardless of gender. It is clear that this form of relationship has completely different connotations than polygamy. More than two participants are one of the hallmarks of polyamory. But it essentially represents a whole fan of diverse practices and opportunities for contacts, which are romantic and go beyond the union of only two people.
An important point: polyamory cannot be called treason. If at least one person is not informed about what is happening, one of the basic principles of polyamoric relations is violated. They practice checking their own borders. Being in touch with yourself and not fearing the condemnation of society is the first guarantee of a comfortable relationship. Mandatory conditions of the approach, called polyamorous: honesty, openness and awareness. Being an alternative approach to interpersonal relationships, he still turns to their important principles. Intimacy, emotionality - these are the pivotal moments of the current pattern of romantic love, regardless, with one partner or several.
