This isn’t strictly related, but I was thinking about polyamory today and I was wondering something.
I’ve never experienced polyamory in real life, and while aspects of it seem cool, there’s a major concern I would have with it. I feel like I would deplore a situation in which I have only one partner who in turn has multiple partners. I wouldn’t be able to shake the feeling that I was getting the raw end of the deal, like I had been duped into becoming a willing participant in a sort of public systematic cuckoldry.
Given that fact, I feel like any polyamorous relationship with a “primary” would be a constant battle of sorts to ensure that I have a greater than or equal to number of dating prospects as my partner. But as a man (the username is a dumb joke), I feel like this battle would be stacked against me, as women tend to have an easier time finding dates. I imagine that this is doubly true in a rationalist community where the men probably outnumber the women by a significant amount.
I’m not sure if feeling this way says more about polyamory, or my own selfishness and insecurities. Anyway, I would be interested in hearing from polyamorous people if this is an issue that ever comes up, and if so, how it’s dealt with.
If your partner having multiple partners while you don’t is an unacceptable outcome for you then you definitely ought to get clear with your partner on what you’ll do about it (collectively) if that happens before you start inviting other partners.
From what I’ve seen (monogamous man in a very poly-friendly social environment) yes, this is an issue that comes up, and yes, it’s an expression of partners’ insecurities. (This isn’t intended as a dismissal; people have insecurities and relationships need to deal with those insecurities somehow.) It strikes me as similar to the issues some people have with partners who are significantly more romatically/sexually experienced than they are. In some ways it’s also similar to the issues some people have with spouses who out-earn them financially.
One poly married couple I know deals with this by the wife, who is far more socially adept, helping her husband find other partners.
One approach you might consider is asking whether there’s anything extra your primary partner could provide during the periods when she’s more connected than you are that would make you feel less “raw end.”
I infer from your assumptions that you’re straight, but if not you might find it easier to find male poly-compatible partners than female ones. (In my experience it’s less that women have an easier time finding dates, and more that it’s easier to find male dates.)
There was definitely something Eliezer said about bisexuality being strictly superior because then you would just be attracted to more people. I was 16 and straight when I read that, and I wanted to be bi since then. Then, about 3 years ago, I became* bi.
*It’s weird, but there was a definite point where I started being attracted to more than one gender.
Yeah, this is possible. I did it a while ago because local status systems, then reversed it once I got out of those status systems and it was no longer useful.
In my experience a lot of people who identify (or are identified) as straight or gay are actually some flavor of bi and just “round themselves off” (or are rounded off by observers) for convenience or out of habit, but a lot aren’t.
The former can choose to change how they identify and behave, and are sometimes happier for it; the latter not so much.
I’m a guy in a polyamorous relationship with one girlfriend, who is in several relationships simultaneously. It’s not a problem—the only occasional issue is that of limited time, and that’s not unique to polyamory, it would be necessary to make those tradeoffs for friendships as well. On the plus side, compersion is a great feeling, and another benefit that I get in particular is that my girlfriend dating other people expands my social circle and introduces me to cool people, whom I would have greater difficulty meeting otherwise, because I’m normally not very social with people I don’t know.
I am female with two male partners. Before my first partner had other relationships, he sometimes asked for more time with me, but actually seemed less concerned about partner balance than I was. I strongly prefer for us to be in relationships that take up approximately equal amounts of time, so that I don’t feel like anyone is sitting around waiting for me to pay attention to them.
This is merely an anecdote and obviously doesn’t mean your concerns are not valid. :) But, also a single data point, there does exist at least one female partner who does not see it as a competition, and whose sense of justice is offended if everyone isn’t having at least as much fun as they would like. :)
I’m a little confused by what this implies. Are you observing that it’s easier for women to initiate dating activities (plausible), or that women go on more dates than men (but while some women date each other, most don’t)?
Of course, women (and men) dating each other aside, women as a whole go on the same number of dates as men; however, this does not imply that the same number of women go on a nonzero (or non-low) number of dates as men. This would imply that a small fraction of men are dating a large fraction of women.
If it’s because the “small fraction of men” is just really talented at getting dates, the effect would diminish, because they just don’t have the time to be in ten times as many long-term committed relationships as anyone else.
But the same effect occurs, as an earlier post points out, in any subgroup in which there is a majority of men and a minority of women. Then, if all the women are out on a date, only a fraction of the men are, by virtue of the pigeonhole principle. In this case, I don’t think anything changes if we look at longer-term relationships.
Empirically, it is generally easier for women to find potential partners willing to date them than it is for men; this isn’t necessarily useful to them unless their standards are low-ish, but if they’re willing to sacrifice date quality, it’s a tradeoff that’s much easier for them to make.
This is massively exacerbated by the gender imbalance present in most fields that have a significant rationalist following, obviously.
I’m curious about the extent to which rationalists have a strong enough preference for dating within the rationality community that they exclude non-rationalist potential dates.
Or, in another framing, to what extent the preference for a rationalist date outweighs other considerations, to the extent that not dating a non-rationalist is preferable to dating a non-rationalist.
That wasn’t central to my point; I mean that in the fields where most rationalists spend their time, there’s a significant gender imbalance. Even if you’re totally willing to date non-rationalists, by default the people you meet will be heavily imbalanced unless you’re specifically cultivating social circles not related to rationality or your profession.
polyamorous relationship with a “primary” would be a constant battle of sorts to ensure that I have a greater than or equal to number of dating prospects as my partner
Why would you want to do that? Don’t you have anything more useful to do with your life?
I look at this hypothetical situation like this:
Situation: I have only one partner who in turn has multiple partners.
Pros:
I get to spend time with my partner while not needing to fulfill all of their needs.
Cons:
I don’t get enough attention from my partner? But his can be discussed and negotiated. I may or may not pursue other partner(s) if I want to; no pressure on me here. Anyway, I’m better off having some of their attention rather than none or full attention of a grumpy partner and no possibility to pursue other partner(s) (the latter because my partner has other needs that I have trouble fulfilling; that’s what I would get in case of monogamy)
People tend to see relationships as more than contractual exchanges of favors. In this case it seems like gothgirl defines some of his self-worth from his ability to gain/keep partners, or at least draws some utility from having as many as his primary partner does.
People are complicated and get a lot of different things out of their relationships.
This isn’t strictly related, but I was thinking about polyamory today and I was wondering something.
I’ve never experienced polyamory in real life, and while aspects of it seem cool, there’s a major concern I would have with it. I feel like I would deplore a situation in which I have only one partner who in turn has multiple partners. I wouldn’t be able to shake the feeling that I was getting the raw end of the deal, like I had been duped into becoming a willing participant in a sort of public systematic cuckoldry.
Given that fact, I feel like any polyamorous relationship with a “primary” would be a constant battle of sorts to ensure that I have a greater than or equal to number of dating prospects as my partner. But as a man (the username is a dumb joke), I feel like this battle would be stacked against me, as women tend to have an easier time finding dates. I imagine that this is doubly true in a rationalist community where the men probably outnumber the women by a significant amount.
I’m not sure if feeling this way says more about polyamory, or my own selfishness and insecurities. Anyway, I would be interested in hearing from polyamorous people if this is an issue that ever comes up, and if so, how it’s dealt with.
If your partner having multiple partners while you don’t is an unacceptable outcome for you then you definitely ought to get clear with your partner on what you’ll do about it (collectively) if that happens before you start inviting other partners.
From what I’ve seen (monogamous man in a very poly-friendly social environment) yes, this is an issue that comes up, and yes, it’s an expression of partners’ insecurities. (This isn’t intended as a dismissal; people have insecurities and relationships need to deal with those insecurities somehow.) It strikes me as similar to the issues some people have with partners who are significantly more romatically/sexually experienced than they are. In some ways it’s also similar to the issues some people have with spouses who out-earn them financially.
One poly married couple I know deals with this by the wife, who is far more socially adept, helping her husband find other partners.
One approach you might consider is asking whether there’s anything extra your primary partner could provide during the periods when she’s more connected than you are that would make you feel less “raw end.”
I infer from your assumptions that you’re straight, but if not you might find it easier to find male poly-compatible partners than female ones. (In my experience it’s less that women have an easier time finding dates, and more that it’s easier to find male dates.)
Man, imagine if Eliezer or some other big name wrote “Bi-hacking” and LessWrong became known for all the deliberate bisexuals.
As opposed to just being an obscure post in the procedural knowledge thread?
I wonder if that would work. Also, where is the compelling internal dialogue about the value of being bisexual?
There was definitely something Eliezer said about bisexuality being strictly superior because then you would just be attracted to more people. I was 16 and straight when I read that, and I wanted to be bi since then. Then, about 3 years ago, I became* bi.
*It’s weird, but there was a definite point where I started being attracted to more than one gender.
Yeah, this is possible. I did it a while ago because local status systems, then reversed it once I got out of those status systems and it was no longer useful.
I’d be entertained. But I’d also be surprised.
In my experience a lot of people who identify (or are identified) as straight or gay are actually some flavor of bi and just “round themselves off” (or are rounded off by observers) for convenience or out of habit, but a lot aren’t.
The former can choose to change how they identify and behave, and are sometimes happier for it; the latter not so much.
I’m a guy in a polyamorous relationship with one girlfriend, who is in several relationships simultaneously. It’s not a problem—the only occasional issue is that of limited time, and that’s not unique to polyamory, it would be necessary to make those tradeoffs for friendships as well. On the plus side, compersion is a great feeling, and another benefit that I get in particular is that my girlfriend dating other people expands my social circle and introduces me to cool people, whom I would have greater difficulty meeting otherwise, because I’m normally not very social with people I don’t know.
I am female with two male partners. Before my first partner had other relationships, he sometimes asked for more time with me, but actually seemed less concerned about partner balance than I was. I strongly prefer for us to be in relationships that take up approximately equal amounts of time, so that I don’t feel like anyone is sitting around waiting for me to pay attention to them.
This is merely an anecdote and obviously doesn’t mean your concerns are not valid. :) But, also a single data point, there does exist at least one female partner who does not see it as a competition, and whose sense of justice is offended if everyone isn’t having at least as much fun as they would like. :)
I’m a little confused by what this implies. Are you observing that it’s easier for women to initiate dating activities (plausible), or that women go on more dates than men (but while some women date each other, most don’t)?
Of course, women (and men) dating each other aside, women as a whole go on the same number of dates as men; however, this does not imply that the same number of women go on a nonzero (or non-low) number of dates as men. This would imply that a small fraction of men are dating a large fraction of women.
Hmm. It’d be my guess that this effect diminishes as the number of dates/length of relationship increases; what do you think?
Depends on the cause.
If it’s because the “small fraction of men” is just really talented at getting dates, the effect would diminish, because they just don’t have the time to be in ten times as many long-term committed relationships as anyone else.
But the same effect occurs, as an earlier post points out, in any subgroup in which there is a majority of men and a minority of women. Then, if all the women are out on a date, only a fraction of the men are, by virtue of the pigeonhole principle. In this case, I don’t think anything changes if we look at longer-term relationships.
Empirically, it is generally easier for women to find potential partners willing to date them than it is for men; this isn’t necessarily useful to them unless their standards are low-ish, but if they’re willing to sacrifice date quality, it’s a tradeoff that’s much easier for them to make.
This is massively exacerbated by the gender imbalance present in most fields that have a significant rationalist following, obviously.
I’m curious about the extent to which rationalists have a strong enough preference for dating within the rationality community that they exclude non-rationalist potential dates.
Or, in another framing, to what extent the preference for a rationalist date outweighs other considerations, to the extent that not dating a non-rationalist is preferable to dating a non-rationalist.
That wasn’t central to my point; I mean that in the fields where most rationalists spend their time, there’s a significant gender imbalance. Even if you’re totally willing to date non-rationalists, by default the people you meet will be heavily imbalanced unless you’re specifically cultivating social circles not related to rationality or your profession.
That may depend heavily on what one means by “rationalist” in this context.
Why would you want to do that? Don’t you have anything more useful to do with your life?
I look at this hypothetical situation like this:
Situation: I have only one partner who in turn has multiple partners.
Pros:
I get to spend time with my partner while not needing to fulfill all of their needs.
Cons:
I don’t get enough attention from my partner? But his can be discussed and negotiated. I may or may not pursue other partner(s) if I want to; no pressure on me here. Anyway, I’m better off having some of their attention rather than none or full attention of a grumpy partner and no possibility to pursue other partner(s) (the latter because my partner has other needs that I have trouble fulfilling; that’s what I would get in case of monogamy)
I don’t see any other problems here. Do you?
I think you’re oversimplifying feelings a bit.
I think the onus is on you to explain where do you think I oversimplify.
People tend to see relationships as more than contractual exchanges of favors. In this case it seems like gothgirl defines some of his self-worth from his ability to gain/keep partners, or at least draws some utility from having as many as his primary partner does.
People are complicated and get a lot of different things out of their relationships.