Poly can be tough, folks. With multiple people connected to other multiple people, and the exponential aspects that are indeed possible… things can get complex real quick. Monogamy has its benefits, for sure… one being simplicity.
Time, energy, emotional connections, metas, and the like add so many layers. Then you get the “I’m not a fan of so-and-so” that will pop up once in a while, along with jealousy, insecurities, 3rd wheeling, feeling left outisms… There’s a lot.
When it comes to polycules, be it small or potentially large… where does the degrees of separation matter?
Let’s take a place that can be a contentious one… unprotected sexual engagement.
I’m using sex as an illustration we ALL can relate to, for simplicity and illustration, but understand that the point here is not exclusively related to sex.
Within the polycules, there are going to be some one on ones where they have decided for themselves to go without a barrier. They’ve become fluid bonded. Now, this naturally can have an impact beyond themselves, because well… exponential realities in poly and all.
If John and Sally both have another partner, and those two partners also have another partner, you’re now talking 6 people in the mix. If each of those other partners have two other partners, you’ve gone to 10 people, now at least 3 degrees of separation from John and Sally.
If John and Sally decide to go without protection… who gets a say in this? Is it just John and Sally, or do the rest of them get a say? What if John’s partner Tina wants to see STI testing every year, but Tina’s partner Joe wants to see them every 6 months? How far back does this go? Does Sally’s partner Tim now have to demand STI results from his partner Julie every 6 months? What if Julie’s partner Brandon also wants to go without protection his partner Gretchen, but Gretchen demands testing every month as a result? Does Joe become beholden to Gretchen’s demands, even though there is now 7 degrees of separation between Gretchen and Joe – and they don’t even know each other?
See how quickly things can get way overly complicated?
Each and every one of us knows and understands that there are risks involved with sexual activity. We further know that non-monogamous relationships can amplify the potential for the risks.
That said, we all each still have our own personal agency. If Gretchen and Brandon want to become fluid bonded, then it’s up to Brandon’s partner Julie to decide what risk profile she is willing to take. Julie can either be willing to take on a little more risk, continue with condoms or no longer engage with Brandon sexually. Either way… Julie doesn’t have the right to dictate what the other relationships do. Conversely, Gretchen can demand that Brandon get tested monthly, but she doesn’t have the right to demand that of anyone else along the way. If that falls outside her comfort zone, then she has decisions to make as well.
The point is, regardless of what it is – the only degree of separation that should have influence is 1. The partner you have a direct relationship with. If you are in a poly type of set up, or any sort of non-monogamy where multiple people can be connected from one to another indirectly… you have to be able to TRUST the partner you are with.
You have to trust that they are doing the best they can to keep themselves and you safe (again, sticking with the sexual example), and trust that they are choosing partners that they can trust will do the same.
Otherwise, you end up with relationships that are no longer decided by the direct parties involved, but ruled by the general committee. While that may work for some… personally, no thank you.
One of the best parts of being non-monogamous is the personal freedom you have in the relationships you choose. For me, I will not be beholden to any partner of a partner, or their partner’s partner. I will do what works best for my own personal agency, and the direct relationship(s) I am engaged in. Other have their own agency to operate in, and if that becomes an issue for them… they have the same choices I do…
Be comfortable taking on a little more risk, minimize the risk directly, or step away altogether… No matter what the “issue” may be.
No responses yet