Polyamory refers to multiple, committed, love-based relationships with the consent of all the partners.
Modern History of Polyamory in Western Culture
It is worth exploring the history of Polyamory and popularization of polyamory. In this it’s possible to see that the recent growth and popularity of non-monogamy is a reflection of late capitalist values, marking declines in intimacy, weakening of solid bonds and the commercialization of feelings. While confluent love is possible and can be successful, it takes exceptional emotional labor, regulation and concerted effort on the parts of agreed parties. Like all relational arrangements, there are “codes”, scripts, agreements and cultural factors that influence such dynamics. These are worth exploring and not being taken at face value.
Compersion
The word ‘Compersion’ and ‘Polyfidelity’ comes from the Kerista community, a utopian community started in New York following a mystic vision in 1956 by John Peltz “Bro Jud” Presmont. Throughout much of its history, Kerista was centered on the ideals of polyfidelity. The commune developed an entire vocabulary around alternative lifestyles. Kerista accumulated a codified social contract over its history with which all members were expected to agree and comply, at all times.
- Total rationality at all times
- Search for truth through the elimination of contradictions
- No jealousy, no anger, no rivalry, no profanity, no flippancy, no masturbation
- Renounce “Negative Intrigue”
Kerista.commune – The Historical Record
Artwork & conversations of Kerista Commune members
Jealousy is managed, supressed or channelled into compersion in polyamorous relationships: “The most striking aspect of polyamory’s ‘hard work ‘ concerns the management of jealousy. In academic and self-help literature on polyamory, jealousy has received ample attention. The literature assumes that jealousy is a heteronormative emotional socialization which is based on ideas of possession and betrayal. People experiencing these emotions are encouraged to instead learn to experience joy for the partner’s love of another (compersion). ” (Deri, 2015; Mint, P, 2010; Veaux et al., 2014).
Social movements around gender and sexuality (actions, discourse and cultural imaginaries) do not unfold independently from economic processes, market forces, state or class politics). With regard to the study of polyamory, economic questions are virtually unexplored territory (Klesse, 2014).
A majority of those practicing polyamory are composed of predominantly white subjects and occupy advanced socio economic position: “Research into polyamory has mostly drawn a rather homogeneous picture of polyamory networks or communities (Klesse 2007; Ritchie and Barker 2007; Wosik-Correa 2010).
Sheff and Hammers’ (2011) review of 36 research studies into polyamory and BDSM shows that most of them present research samples composed of predominantly white subjects holding above-average educational qualifications and occupying advanced socio economic position. Weber also points out that poly households have higher income levels than the general population.
(Klesse, 2014).
Why racial homogonity?
People in polyamorous relations have trouble defining their relationships: “As was the case for their definitions of love, the way people in consensual nonmonogamies define their relationships is somewhat blurred. For example, many respondents clearly stated that they found it hard to draw a clear line between love and friendship. (Roodsaz, 2022)
- “I think of love and friendship more as a continuum than a dichotomy”
- “I think I’ve always been… involved in relationships that I call friendships but that look very much like those that I call loves, right?… “
Deri, J. (2015). Love’s refraction: Jealousy and compersion in queer women’s polyamorous relationships. Toronto: University
of Toronto Press.
Mint, P. (2010). The power mechanisms of jealousy. In M. Barker & D. Langdridge (Eds.), Understanding non-monogamies
(pp. 201–206). New York: Routledge.
Veaux, F., Hardy, J., & Gill, T. (2014). More than two: A practical guide to ethical polyamory. Portland: Thorntree Press.)
Bibliography
Klesse, C. (2014). Poly Economics—Capitalism, Class, and Polyamory. International Journal of Politics, Culture, and Society, 27(2), 203–220. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10767-013-9157-4
Braida, N., Matta, E., & Paccagnella, L. (2023). Loving in Consensual Non-Monogamies: Challenging the Validity of Sternberg’s Triangular Love Scale. Sexuality & Culture, 27(5), 1828–1847. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12119-023-10092-0
Roodsaz, R. (2022). The “hard work” of polyamory: ethnographic accounts of intimacy and difference in the Netherlands. Journal of Gender Studies, 31(7), 874–887. https://doi.org/10.1080/09589236.2022.2098094