The Downside of Polyamory: A Case Against It

Angelina25

I've been reading a lot of questions on polyamorous relationships. I'm gonna start off by saying I strongly disapprove of it. I've read what people who are in favour of polyamory had to say. And wait. Before you jump on me, I DISAPPROVE OF IT BUT IT'S NOT LIKE I JUDGE PEOPLE WHO INDULGE IN POLYAMORY. AS LONG AS HONESTY IS INVOLVED, AND I AM NOT INVOLVED, GO AHEAD AND ENJOY. And I think, I'd address some of the arguments put forth by people who are in favour of polyamory.

The Downside of Polyamory: A Case Against It

Monogamy Isn’t Natural?

One argument in favor of polyamory is that monogamy is unnatural for human beings.

This argument fails due to the naturalistic fallacy. Cyanide, war, and polio virus are all natural, but not good. Just because something is natural, doesn’t mean it is good.

Because it Feels Good.

One ethical case for polyamory lies in Hedonism.

By Hedonism I don’t mean orgies and drugs and rock and roll, I mean the ethical philosophy that “what’s good is what feels good.”

Most polyamorists are not gross hedonists. This is why practitioners of non-monogamy frequently talk about how it’s not about sex.

But yet it is also definitely about sex, otherwise it would just be about monogamy + friendships, which monogamists already engage in.

Hey, I'll give you this.

Importantly, polyamory isn’t only about sex because polyamory requires much more time and energy investment than monogamy, or even monogamy with cheating.

Is polyamory actually a net benefit in terms of pleasure? I really don't think so.

Because it’s Right.(It isn't.)

A different case for polyamory lies in moral duties. In this case the argument is conditional: if you are going to have emotional and sexual intimate relationships with multiple people at once, you ought to do so in a way that is consensual and open.

This is absolutely correct, except it bypasses the question as to whether one should engage in multiple intimate relationships simultaneously.

One Person Can’t Meet All Your Needs?(They Can)

One argument for polyamory is that “one person can’t be expected to meet all your needs.”

No doubt the standard for marriage now is unreasonably high for most people precisely because they are unable to fulfill it. But this again is an argument against an unreasonably high standard rather than an argument for polyamory as a solution.

For some but not all marriages, one partner is definitely enough. Whereas for others, the marriage lacks something and that something is traditionally filled by friendships, hobbies, community involvement, family, and so on.

If that something missing is sex, then polyamory becomes more appealing, despite polyamory ostensibly not being about sex.

.

It’s Not Wrong, It Just Takes Too Much Time.

There’s a reason why most people who’ve been able to pull off polyamory for more than 6 months consistently have been underemployed or unemployed. I've seen it. It simply takes too much time.

The Downside of Polyamory: A Case Against It

As a matter of personal values and ideologies, Some people strongly prefer it and make it work, but ultimately there are too many drawbacks, too many complexities, and ultimately not enough value there to make multiple sexual relationships central in general to all human lives.

NO HATE GUYS.

The Downside of Polyamory: A Case Against It

The case against polyamory is too strong to recommend it as a general solution to the problems of monogamy. So, I don't think I'd like to get into that whole thing. But all I'd say is, I think, having fewer partners would mean more depth of intimacy. That's me though. I respect your ideologies, irrespective of whether or not you believe in polyamory.

[I didn't intend to offend anyone with this take. It was solely written because I felt like I should share my views on the topic. ]

All love,

Angelina25 <3

The Downside of Polyamory: A Case Against It
80 Opinion