Who’s Been Sleeping in Your Head? The Secret World of Sexual Fantasies

As is often the case on road trips and long flights I was able to get some good reading and writing done… maybe I need to find a way to do this more. Anyway, I finished reading “Who’s Been Sleeping in Your Head?” by Brett Kahr. This 400-page book is the culmination of a multi-year study conducted primarily in the UK (though there are some US participants) about people’s sexual fantasies. These fantasies are what goes through a person’s head during masturbation and sex with a partner. The research was conducted through online surveys completed by over 23,000 people and 122 intensive face-to-face interviews with volunteers. It appears to be the most comprehensive attempt to catalog and interpret human sexual fantasies that anyone has ever done.

While I found the intentions of the study and premise of the book fascinating my feelings towards the book are bitter-sweet. As a Freudian psychotherapist Kahr spent much of his time focusing, analyzing, and, in my opinion, unjustifiably fishing or hoping for childhood trauma to explain sexual fantasies that people had. He mentions alternative approaches like evolutionary psychology only twice and only in passing. I understand that he is a Freudian but if his attempt was to objectively or comprehensively attempt to look into sexual fantasies and their foundation (if one exists) he should have brought in some alternative view points. To him humans seem to be born as a blank slate with no genetic predispositions or tendencies in place from evolution.

Kahr often at times come off as a bit judgemental and sex-negative, and even a bit LGBTphobic. He focuses several times on homosexuality possibly being linked to childhood trauma and child rearing but little acknowledgement of a biological aspect. He also seems to see all cross-dressers as “transvestites”. It also seemed like a negative judgement when he penned the term “intra-marital affair” to describe thinking about someone other than your spouse, as if thinking of another is a form of cheating. Some may agree that fantasies are cheating (but if they really are based in trauma or evolution it is cheating we have little to no control over) not everyone does and I think it weakens the betrayal of true affairs if we attach that phrase to a passing thought during masturbation.

Clearly, I have some problems with Kahr’s approach, but I want to give him some benefit of the doubt, it is possible that there is a generational gap and cultural one between he and I. He is British and a bit older than I, while Americans and our friends across the pond are similar in many ways I can’t help but wonder if the stereotypes about prudish non-sexual Brits might have some truth to it. It has also been almost a decade since this project started and a lot has changed in sexual research and views on fantasies in the last 10 years, particularly with the exponential growth of internet access and the pornography that comes with it.

There were also some wonderful things within the book though, and I actually very highly recommend it. Kahr’s analysis later in the book provides a lot of great information and provides some support to his hypothesis in some of the cases. There clearly can be a trauma at the foundation of sexual fantasies, and many of these trauma fantasies are causing great distress and harm to the individuals. In cases where people can’t live the lives they want or have the relationships they desire it is a problem, such as the case of “Julius” who has only been able to masturbate to mental images of a girl who tormented him in his adolescence and he has not had a long-term relationship in nearly 50 years.

I would have loved to see more research and questions about the ramifications of opening up about your fantasies to your significant others. Kahr mentions a few in one chapter but for the most part glosses over any potential benefits and instead focuses on trauma and harm. In my experience being open and honest with your partner about desires and what goes on in your head can have a bonding effect and open the door for new real life experiences. If we decide to enter into a partnership something as intimate and important as sex should not be a taboo subject. Much of the negative aspects seem to come from our social stigmas against sexuality as much as childhood events. As a culture if we can admit that sex is a healthy and enjoyable part of the human experience we can reduce the pain, suffering, and shame that seems to accompany so many fantasies.

Kahr does admit that this is just a beginning, and like a good scientist he hopes others will dive into the data, conduct their own studies, and come up with alternative hypothesis. I would love to see a larger sample size of humans from more diverse backgrounds. What is true for Brits (and in this case a few Americans) may not be true for Australians, Italians, Russians, Kenyans, Colombians, Thai, Egyptians, etc. The more information the better and it looks like this is a field ripe for research and exploration.

I definitely recommend this book for many different people. If you just have an interest in sexuality there is a lot to love about this book, as well if you are interested in seeing how a Freudian interprets things, though I would recommend skipping or skimming Section II if you get bored with it. You can only read poorly written erotica for pages and pages for so long before it becomes a blur. It is also a good resource for people who have anxiety about what goes on in their own heads. It will become quickly clear that “normal” fantasies don’t exist, and because of that there is really nothing that is “weird” or “abnormal”. Some people don’t fantasize at all, some think only about their spouse, some focus more on feelings while others have elaborate situations they play in their head, some people think of college professors, siblings, strangers, movie stars, and inanimate objects. Some people like to be raped, piss on people while they are shitting, or change genders. Some like to be whipped while others like to be bought a nice romantic dinner followed by a massage and some cunnilingus. The limits to human sexual fantasies are only restricted by the combined imagination of billions of people.

Relationship Types

I have always found one-word relationship definitions to be very restricting and unrealistic. I know that labels serve some purpose in simplifying things in life but with complex interactions like intimate relationships I find the simplicity to be harmful. As the below chart highlights, there are a shit-ton of ways to be intimate. I’m not sure of the source of this image but it appears to leave out by-the-books monogamy where two people are only intimate, have sex, and are in love with each other with no cheating by either partner. I guess that would be a bubble outside the graph but in reality many cheat and many have monogamish relationships where certain levels of intimacy and sexual exploration exist.

What I really find unfortunate about the quick definitions we put on relationships is it prevents (and even makes taboo) discussions that get deeper into the details of relationships. It is inappropriate for me to talk to one of my couple crushes (of which I have several) and ask them if they are more open sexually, if they swing or are into BDSM. If I ask these things it is assumed I am hitting on them or looking for a play partner when in reality I may just be interested in the relationship dynamics between two (or more) complex people. I find people and sex fascinating, I would love to know how my friends and acquaintances approach these issues and relationships.

Anyway, I found the image interesting even if it isn’t complete (can anything like this be complete without reducing it down to each individual relationship in the world?).

Original Source of Map: http://tacit.livejournal.com/333842.html

“Marriage Isn’t For You”

On Friday my partner brought my attention to an article that has been floating around the internet titled “Marriage Isn’t For You”… I realize this was a week ago (which is an eternity in today’s world) but because love and relationships are something I have strong opinions on I wanted to share my thoughts. When I first read this article it made me really uncomfortable but I couldn’t really put my finger on it. After reading this response, posting it on my wall (where as of now every “like” is by a female), and talking it over with my partner and roommate I think I found the source of some of my discomfort.

I am not against love, monogamy, or marriage. I have performed two weddings, been best man in four weddings, groomsman in another half dozen, and an usher in two. I support my friends in love and I am always honored to be a part of the celebration of that love and their desire to love eternally. I recognize that all relationships require compromise, understanding, and often some form of sacrifice. I think Smith has moved beyond what is reasonable though, he is not suggesting reasonable sacrifice but is instead recommending people give up core parts of their beliefs to fall in line with social norms. If one part of a relationship isn’t comfortable with marriage there is something wrong with them in Smith’s mind and they need to just suck it up and do it because it will make another person happy.

We live in a modern era where love is free to express itself in many forms. Research continues to show that humans are not as naturally monogamous as earlier preached, and lifelong pair-bonding may not be for everybody. I am firm believer that there are a few certain things that partners need to have in common in order for their relationship to be fair, balanced, and healthy… marriage, kids, and lifestyle are those few certain things. For one partner to just get married to make the other person happy or to have kids or to change their lifestyle seems like it can only result in future resentment and probably a broken relationship.

Marriage is not necessary for financial security or even stability for children. Marriage is a beautiful thing, but it isn’t for everyone and to pressure people to commit their lives to something they don’t want to make a spouse happy cannot lead to happiness for either person. If one person wants to get married and the other doesn’t the one pushing for marriage is being more selfish, more stubborn, and will eventually cause more harm to the relationship. There is no honor in sacrificing your future in an attempt to make another person happy and there is no honor in accepting someone’s entire future as a sacrifice in hopes it will make you happy. Happiness can only be determined by the individual and a healthy relationship requires two people who can be healthy alone.

I love my married friends, I love those who have decided that they are on the same page with regards to their future and want to be partners for life, but there is nothing to love if the build-up to marriage causes “my heart had been hardening with a mixture of fear and resentment. Then, after the pressure had built up to where neither of us could stand it, emotions erupted. I was callous. I was selfish.” That is a sign that one party is not ready for marriage (and may never be) and to just cave in, put a ring on it, and hope for the best is a recipe for disaster.

For generations we have been fed fairytales where the end of the movie is a wedding between a hopeless romantic and a reluctant partner, but we never see what happens after the wedding. The most important part of married couples relationship is after the churchbells have faded and they are with their partner for life, if they don’t go into that on equal ground I can’t imagine it can end well. True lifetime love deserves the honesty and respect that comes from two equals who get married for both of their happiness, not to please another person or society.

The Lifestyle: A Review

Yesterday I finally finished “The Lifestyle: A Look at the Erotic Rights of Swingers” and I really enjoyed the analysis of what was going on with Swingers in the mid-late 90’s. The book is a bit dated but many of the lessons stand true today and books like this help destroy the unfair discrimination and naive views some people have towards those who don’t fit neatly into the “traditional marriage” paradigm. In fact, I found it surprising how many people were actually involved in The Lifestyle, the odds are someone in every neighborhood across western civilization there are play-couples who don’t see a problem with introducing third party eroticism into their relationships.

There are several different types of swingers discussed throughout the book but each type shared some common themes. It is very woman-centric, the ladies tend to control the action and explicit consent is absolutely mandatory. It mentioned many times throughout the book that come down to men tend to initiate the idea of entering the lifestyle but it is the women that really dominate. Due to the potential for coercion the official lifestyle clubs work very hard to self-regulate. Some clubs require interviews, psychological evaluations, and an application process to make sure both members of the couple are healthy and interested. Swinging cannot save a couple with a bad or weak relationship, but it can strengthen a strong and healthy one. Swingers don’t consider their actions cheating because everyone consents, especially their partner. The relationship comes first at all times, which is more than I can say for the people who cheat on their partners. The lifestyle at this time (and possibly now) does have a male homophobia though, men showing intimacy for other men is more than just frowned upon. That may have changed over the last 15 years as pansexuality and bisexuality become more normalized though.

The majority of swingers I would call “soft swingers” and they make up roughly 3/4 of people in the lifestyle. Soft swingers don’t necessarily have sex with other people, instead the enjoy the carefree and sensual atmosphere of being around adults where everything is out in the open. Because people are so open there are much fewer cases of unwanted touching, grinding, sexual assault, or harassment… everyone knows the boundaries, there are no games, it is all in the open. This is much like the Orgy Dome that my partner and I went to at Burning Man, it is a sexual place where trusting couples can be surrounded by sensuality without a worry of anyone being hurt. When some sort of sex outside of the primary relationship happens it is usually with another couple they know, trust, and it is a beautifully intimate affair.

Within the lifestyle there are also “hard swingers” who are more orgiastic. These are the vast minority though. Not that there is anything wrong with indulging in group sex with strangers, but it is relatively uncommon. Of course this is the type of swingers that comes to mind thanks to the media, you say swinger and people imagine “key parties” or groups of writhing oiled up bodies, when the reality is most swingers don’t engage in group sex behavior at all.

One chapter of the book was also dedicated to polyamorous people, though whether they are part of the lifestyle is up for debate. Where “swingers” brings up the idea first of sex (and many swingers would agree with that), the polys discussed in the book view things very differently. In their view they are very explicitly trying to remake society along the boundaries of love. Their relationships tend to be sexually closed and intimacy is shared within multi-person families and marriages. They wanted to bring Robert Heinlein’s views from “Stranger in a Strange Land” to life and even adopted the terminology of “grok” and “sharing water” in common conversations. To be honest, this chapter of the book kind of surprised me because that has not been my experience with polyamorous people. My experience, which I admit is minimal, seems to be closer to a middle ground between these polys and swingers. This may be due to the 15+ years separating now and this book or it may be that my experience is not the norm.

One of the most common criticisms of any lifestyle that is not monogamous is that it isn’t “natural”. The standard model of human sexuality pushed for monogamy, but that is being challenged pretty heavily by sperm competition. Under sperm competition a male will have more powerful and pleasurable orgasms if they think (or know) that their partner has had sex with another person. It is a pretty common fantasy for a man to want to see his partner be with another and sperm competition leads some credibility to that. This theory also shows why women can have multiple orgasms, take longer to orgasm, and become very vocal during sex… because they were built for many partners to help guarantee they get the strongest genes. More info on this can be found in “What Do Women Want?” and “Sex At Dawn”

The media in the past has seen people in the lifestyle as perverse and open to all sorts of unfair criticism. They reinforced a form of classism where when rich and beautiful people embrace their sexuality it is to be celebrated but the common folk must do no such thing. Articles were written focused on how unattractive swingers were compared to their hollywood counterparts and how disgusting it was that they would wear scantily clothes, show intimacy in public, or openly flirt. I can’t help but be disgusted with the idea that sexual fulfillment and relationship experimentation is only a good thing if people fit into a certain physical mold. If all humans are equal we should all be free to pursue happiness with other consenting adults.

As disgusting as the media’s actions were for a time their tune eventually changed when the government decided to enforce morality. The major turning point was when the California ABC (which is responsible for giving out liquor licenses) started targetting venues who allowed swinging conventions and using nude art as their justification. Once there was a clear attack on free speech the media got in line and started at least supporting the swingers rights to practice what they wish. The ABC, as a bureaucracy, has virtually no check on their power. They are charged with defending public morality in any place where alcohol is served and used this power with virtually no oversight. They couldn’t be sued and any complaints went internally to ABC. They even claimed the authority to revoke the liquor license of any hotel that allowed nudity or sexual activity behind the closed doors of a hotel room. They used their power to primarily go after those who couldn’t fight back but the swingers had resources, they are primarily middle and upper-middle class suburbanites who weren’t going to go down without a fight. After the attempted censorship of nude art a judge finally reigned in ABC by putting a restraining order on them. To this day the ABC is charged with protecting the safety, welfare, health, peace, and morals (emphasis mine) of the people of California. As the author says, “When a government – any government – feels itself standing as a righteous bulwark against sexual immorality, the public becomes the enemy”

All in all this was a fascinating book that I really enjoyed. It did a great job of showing how “normal” most swingers are. They are mostly married, have good jobs, raise kids, and are many times religious. They just reject the current view of sexual morality, as the author said “Morals are without exception dictated by the dominant figures in a group, who ruthlessly attempt to constrain the sexual expression of others.” Swingers are telling the establishment to fuck off, they are living life their way. I would love to attend the national convention in 2014 but it is unlikely I will be able to due to my bike ride. Hopefully my partner and I can at least check out one of the local clubs or something though. There is a wide world of sexual and relationship acceptance out there for those that will open their minds and think for themselves.

On Marriage And Longterm Commitment

For the last 8 years or so I have been pretty vocally against marriage for myself. I didn’t see the point and I found it to be an archaic ceremony with disgusting historical roots in the idea that one person can (and should) own another person. Many times when I vocalize my opposition to marriage people assume that I am also against commitment, particularly lifelong commitment. While that may have been true throughout most of my adult life my views on both are evolving a bit, as I think they shoud with new experiences.

Maybe it is some fault of my own that I didn’t just accept social norms when it came to relationships, I am starting to think I have a problem when it comes to falling in line. There is a pattern in my life where I see what society offers, experiment on the extreme other end, and then find myself more in a middle ground. I rejected monogamy for hardcore polyamory and now find myself in a monogamish relationship (but still available for Ke$ha 100%). I rejected religion for absolute atheism and now find myself interested and open to spiritual ideas. I rejected neo-con big government policies for complete anarchy and find myself… well, I still find myself being a complete anarchist…. maybe not everything becomes more moderate with time.

Anyway, my evolution on marriage comes from social and political realities. The political reality is that there are financial incentives in place to encourage signing a stupid piece of paper and giving it to some bureaucratic leech. I need to decide if my desire to remove all government controls outweigh the benefits of marriage through reduced coercive taxation. It is a conundrum, less taxes is better for me and helps starve Leviathan (and save the lives of people the government often murders in jails and with bombs). There is also the social pressure, which I am admittedly embarrassed that I feel strongly from time-to-time. Unfortunately, people treat married couples with a greater legitimacy. Two people can be in a 40-year relationship but if they haven’t had a wedding and all that other bullshit they are seen by society as less legitimate than two people who met on craigslist, drove to Vegas, and got hitched all in a 24 hour period. Part of me very much wants people to recognize my love as legitimate and some people require a title to do that. To be honest, I also like the little bit of the fanfare that comes from an engagement and a wedding… not a lot of fanfare, I’m still a minimalist, but I can see the joy and celebration that would occur if I proposed at Burning Man or something.

I have also reevaluated my views on long-term (even lifelong) commitments. This change comes from my increasingly healthy personal romantic life and the examples I’ve seen in others. When I was growing up I interpreted the relationships around me as filled with sacrifice. Sacrificing new experiences, sacrificing individuality, sacrificing life for others. While that may seem noble on paper, in reality that sacrifice came off as controlling and frightening. It certainly didn’t help to have a very unhealthy engagement in my early 20’s. I am now in a very healthy (hopefully long-term) relationship with a partner who doesn’t ask for sacrifice. Instead we grow, learn, have adventures, and plan our future together. That is why I call her my partner, because that is how I see her… as my life-partner. Phrases like girlfriend, boyfriend, etc. come off as possessive to me. In the past those phrases have also represented myself defining my own existence and personality by my relationship status, something I don’t want to do again. In addition, I also have several examples of healthy relationships in my life where adventures and creativity happen, and ideas like “you shouldn’t lust, love, care about, or be attracted to other people” are seen as unrealistic and instead new intimacy is shared together.

Of course, this is just how I feel at this time. My life is an everchanging perception of reality depending on time, place, and experience. Regardless, I am very happy now and happy with the way my views are evolving. I know there may be some people out there who are tempted to say “I told you so”. These are people who said “you just have to meet the right girl”, “give it time”, “you’ll change your mind”, or “It’s just a phase”. If you are one of those people please don’t throw this in my face… seriously, there are only three or so people whose friendship I would keep if they did that. Doing so would tell me you discourage personal journeys, exploration, and investigation. If someone is heading down a path that is different than yours, especially when your path is “normal”, you are an asshole if you tell them that they will eventually come around. It comes off pretentious and degrading. If you want people to live life the way you do then live your life the best you can and show them why and how you are happy. I am happy now, but I don’t think I  would be if I blindly embraced any of my views without winding my way down a relatively unpaved road to get there.

American Savage

Yesterday I finished Dan Savage’s most recent book “American Savage” and as a fan of Dan’s I really enjoyed it. If you aren’t familiar with Dan Savage he is a sex and relationship advice columnist based out of Seattle. His column and podcast are absolutely fantastic and I have found them incredibly helpful in my personal life as well as inspiring me to look into sex therapy as a professional field. For all intents and purposes he is not your average advice columnist, he is much more realistic about relationships and is willing to tackle things like kinks, bdsm, LGBT issues (he is a happily married gay man with a 15-year old son), and infidelity with an open mind.

His book is really a summary and expansion on things that have been discussed in the other mediums and a regular like me did not find a lot of new material advice material, but I did learn a lot about his personal life and the moments that effected him most. His mother’s death, raising a straight son, bigot politicians, and marriage equality passing in Washington State are all addressed with his perfect blend of humor and logic. While I find his personal life fascinating (I gain a lot of inspiration from the biographies of amazing people) it is his relationship and sex advice that I really enjoy.

The majority of the book is about his life, but ome of the common themes that run through his podcast and column are being GGG and “it’s never okay to cheat, except when it is” are also addressed. The former is something that I strive to live by…. being “good in bed”, “giving pleasure without expectation of immediate reciprocation”, and “game for anything – within reason”. I think a sexual openness is absolutely necessary to maintaining a happy relationship and the science agrees (one of the best things about this book is allows Dan to give research examples to back his views).

While I think this is a great book I don’t agree with several of the chapters. When Dan dives into politics the libertarian in my shudders. I think he is partially wrong on his views of health care reform and really wrong on his gun ownership views, but that’s okay. His “It Gets Better” campaign has helped saved countless lives and he helped save this country from a political disaster by giving Santorum a “google problem”. Dan also admits throughout the book that he was wrong about certain things like bisexuality among men, which should be commended.

Overall Dan is helping move the country forward towards greater equality and freedom for more people, and that should be celebrated. Thanks to Dan the battle for equality in the minds of Americans is almost over, there are certainly still battles ahead but men like Dan Savage have brought us a long way towards a society that embraces, celebrates, and encourages love.

Poly/Mono Relationships

Yesterday I had planned on writing a post about the role patience has played in my poly life but that has changed. In preparation for that post I did my normal half-ass Google search of relevant topics and came upon an article called “I’m monogamous, and I’ve fallen for someone who’s polyamorous!”… and man, it is fantastic. If you have even the remotest interest in poly relationships I highly recommend you check it out. I wish I would have read it months ago. My partner wishes she had access to it months ago. Many of my dear friends loved it as well. Seriously… read it now.

 

 

Well, now that you may or may not have read that article I want to tell you about the early stages of my current relationship. I identify as polyamorous but my partner does not. She is much more monogamous than me and that caused a lot of tension in the early part of our relationship and that is mostly my fault.

When I first “discovered” polyamory I was thrilled. For years I had been operating under three rules of what I called “responsible non-monogamy”. I’d tried monogamy and it felt wrong. I felt like something was seriously wrong with me so instead of dating anyone I just built friendships and had sex with those who knew my three rules. It wasn’t completely satisfying but it felt closer to natural than closed monogamy did. So, when I stumbled across the word and concept of polyamory I was like a kid in a candy shop… and in many ways I made myself sick by diving in too quickly.

I had found a rational justification for how I felt and instead of recognizing that some people are actually geared towards monogamy I tried to lay out arguments convincing my two partners that they shouldn’t ever feel jealousy, anger, or frustration and that their concerns about limited time and resources were unfounded. I thought I could have it all and I saw everyone else as being wrong for not seeing things my way (as a libertarian I’ve made similar mistakes when trying to share that philosophy). I was wrong though… and quite frankly, I was a jackass and I almost lost my amazing partner.

After several rough months filled with arguments, disagreement, frustrations, and a break up I learned my lesson and came to many of the same conclusions as the author of the article. Communication is absolutely necessary for any relationship, especially polyamory, but so is patience and compromise. As Cathy from “Sex and the State” said on my Facebook wall, “If you want absolute freedom be single. If you are willing to do some compromising then be in a relationship.” Voluntarily giving up some of your freedom and allowing another human some control over your life is hard for anyone, particularly libertarian anarchists. That level of vulnerability is necessary though for all relationships to be healthy. I still don’t believe in sacrificing yourself for another or pretending to be something you aren’t, but compromise is necessary and in the end satisfying because as trust and love is built more opportunities present itself. As Pervertically Virtuous put it:

“I have agreed to let him slowly grow into my level of openness because he’s the closest to my ideal partner I’ve ever met, and he’s shown willingness to venture out beyond his comfort zone. So I thought he deserves that chance.

Although my freedom is somewhat curtailed, I have plenty of maneuvering space. Enough so, that the other benefits of being in this relationship outweigh the costs of not having complete, absolute freedom.”

And now, that is what I have in my amazing partner. I’m glad she isn’t 100% in line with me because that forces me to challenge myself and understand others. She is a constant support of challenge, support, friendship, love, and openness…. and she is flexible, open to new things, curious, and trusts me. We have established boundaries, we discuss our desires, and we have found a way to make things work. I’m sure I will make mistakes again and our relationship differences will continue to be the subject of much discussion, debate, and compromise, but we are moving forward with baby-steps and patience on all sides. I truly couldn’t have dreamed of a better outcome.

“Adulthood”

I’m 31 years old, unmarried, no kids, and live in a warehouse condo thing with four other humans, three dogs, and a cat. Many people would say that I am not an adult yet. They would say that my trips to bars, music festival, and general spontaneous life that borders on nomadic proves I am still a teenager trapped in an adult body. I think these people are full of crap.

As this recent article plays fun with, most of “adulthood” has little to do with the person and much to do with appearances. Somehow adulthood has become defined as how effective we are at putting up a mask or subduing our life until it fits a social mold. What made a person an adult has changed significantly over the last several thousands of years and it is ridiculous to assume that it won’t change again. With more people delaying child-bearing, exploring non-traditional relationships, and relatively easy access to adventures and travel I would think the trend would continue where traditional signals of “adulthood” are not present in adults.

Regardless of the signals I put out there that don’t measure up to what previous generations call “adulthood”, I am a responsible adult. I pay my bills, I take care of myself and my community, and I am not a drain on anyone. To me, adulthood is means being independent and free to make your own decisions without harming others. It has little to do with age and nothing to do with the decisions you make as long as you don’t expect others to take care of you.

I am an adult and I refuse to let that title force me into a 3-bedroom house in the suburbs with a white picket fence, manicured lawn, wine collection, books that exist for show, a closet full of uncomfortable clothes, and a perverse view that adventures are for teenagers and retirement.

PS: It was pointed out by a respected friend of mine that this could be construed as a criticism of people who do have homes, lawns, kids, or whatever. I have no criticism of their life at all, they have chosen what makes them happiest and that is freaking awesome. I just would prefer not to be judged when my decisions do not mirror theirs. I love my friends regardless of their adulthood perception just like I (as a polyamorist) love my monogamous friends. I enjoy understanding how they tick, debating the pros and cons of different lifestyles, and having a diverse group of people in my life.

Poly Facebook

A recent news article on Facebook has me thinking about it’s value for me at this time and how it is effecting my poly life. The news article argued that many people are less happy because they are often bombarded with an endless news feed of other people on vacations, in love, partying, celebrating, and basically having a good time. It isn’t that other people are really having more fun but it seems that way when you have hundreds (or thousands of friends). With 1900 “friends” every day is bound to be awesome for many of them and this distorts our perceptions of our own life, we start to compare it to every person combined and not just one person. Comparison is always dangerous but this feels like a particularly harmful version.

So, how does this relate to my polyamorous relationships? First, basic information is necessary. I have two partners; one local and one long distance. One is on Facebook and the other is not. I am also open and honest with both of them about everything but communication varies for each because communication between two individuals will always vary. Even with open communication though tension can arise in the relationship when photos and statuses often appear that one partner is not part of. These updates are not an accurate representation of the love or quality of any relationship but they do put into stark light the differences that exist.

Now I have to decide what I want my Facebook presence to really be. I am torn, for the longest time my FB presence was almost purely liberty-based. My posts were news articles and updates about the fight for freedom, peace, and equality. It had very little to do with me as a person, but all that is changing now that I have left DC and am much more focused on my personal development and happiness. With that shift comes a focus on my relationships, and the tension social networking creates. I don’t really know what I’m going to do, giving up Facebook seems very difficult given it is my prime news source, the way I connect with friends, keep in touch with family, and really just feel a part of a community of lovely people who I don’t see as often as I’d like. I don’t think I will do anything as drastic as cancel my account but I think I will start to take a tighter control over what is posted by me and what others are allowed to post on my behalf.

Relations I Seek

It is no big secret that I see little value in small talk or networking. I find the whole practice of meeting people to be tiresome, and the games we play as humans are ridiculous. When it comes to meeting other people I am usually hoping for one of three things: friendship, partnerships, or sex. This may sound a little harsh but it is true for me, I just don’t care about meeting people that will help my “career” or just to pass the time on the bus. I want something deeper than that in my human reactions but because time and resources are finite the entire population can’t fit into one of these three categories for me.

Friends: I have a good core network of friends right now but this is in transition. As I have left the beltway liberty movement many of my friends from the east coast are not as prominent in my life. They are still important to me and I love them dearly but email and g-chatting is not the same as having these friends in my life. So, there is room for more friends right now but I tend to get along with women better than men. I’d like to believe I am a true individualist and post-gender but the reality is I generally feel more comfortable around women than men and am able to open up more to them. I don’t know if this is because I view men as competition or what but the friendships just seem harder to forge with guys for me. I actually think it is because women are most likely to fall into the next two categories which means investing in a new relationship with women opens up a lot of potential where men will only be in the friends category.

Partners: This is the ideal for me. To find romantic partners that will be part of an intimate family of love. This is tough to find though, especially when part of a poly relationship that is long distance. It is hard searching for a partner on your own when many people are not familiar with the concept of polyamory and it isn’t something easily broached early on in an encounter. In my experience the one exception is OKCupid where the poly lifestyle is not that unheard of and their matching algorithms do a good job of linking people who are at least open to open/poly relationships.

Sex: Lastly, sometimes other people are a strong sexual connection but not really a potential partner or friend. This is what I probably have the most room for in my life but is also very difficult to find. As an introvert poly it is not easy to approach someone or to explain my relationship as it is so I rely on others to be more aggressive who are familiar with my views. I guess my views are becoming more well known due to my blog and open acceptance of my own lifestyle. I realize I might be rationalizing my own aversion to approaching women now by basically saying, “they know me and what I want, it’s out there, they will approach if interested”.

Hmm, I need to give all of this more thought.