Poly as a Relationship [semi-filter:nerd]
Jul. 7th, 2010 11:48 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
xmakinaSo I've just had a Formspring question about whether I'm truly happy in my relationship (in b4 "why do you need more people then?" (link NSFW)), so I'm guessing a mono has gotten themselves all in a tither about poly, which got me thinking why it is that many mono's just don't get it.
(This was originally nerd-filtered, but that's because of how I go on to explain things, which I think would still be appreciated by people not on the Nerd list)
And then it hit me. I find, being a nerd, the best way to describe it is to use Database language. Much like when I made PolyApp, it's how the relationship is stored against a person that is important.
In the monogamous world, it seems that a persons partner is a field in their person row:
Polyamory is seen as trying to "hack" the system, to produce multiple results for a single entry. There must clearly be something wrong with the existing value if you're trying so hard to crowbar an alteration in here!
However, in polyamory, peoples relationships are actually defined in a many-to-many relationship:
And suddenly everything stops being about hacking and modifying and more about growing and developing. The relationships are disparate and separate. Yes, there is always cross-over, but one does not depend on the other. We're not altering anything and we're not unhappy with what's provided already. The whole structure of our relationship data is different!
(This was originally nerd-filtered, but that's because of how I go on to explain things, which I think would still be appreciated by people not on the Nerd list)
And then it hit me. I find, being a nerd, the best way to describe it is to use Database language. Much like when I made PolyApp, it's how the relationship is stored against a person that is important.
In the monogamous world, it seems that a persons partner is a field in their person row:
UPDATE Person SET relationship = 753232 WHERE id = 5548475;
SELECT relationship FROM Person WHERE id = 5548475;
SELECT relationship FROM Person WHERE id = 5548475;
Polyamory is seen as trying to "hack" the system, to produce multiple results for a single entry. There must clearly be something wrong with the existing value if you're trying so hard to crowbar an alteration in here!
However, in polyamory, peoples relationships are actually defined in a many-to-many relationship:
INSERT INTO Relationship(lover, loved) VALUES(5548475, 753232);
SELECT Relationships.loved
FROM Person AS p
INNER JOIN Relationship AS r ON p.ID = r.lover
WHERE p.ID = 5548475
SELECT Relationships.loved
FROM Person AS p
INNER JOIN Relationship AS r ON p.ID = r.lover
WHERE p.ID = 5548475
And suddenly everything stops being about hacking and modifying and more about growing and developing. The relationships are disparate and separate. Yes, there is always cross-over, but one does not depend on the other. We're not altering anything and we're not unhappy with what's provided already. The whole structure of our relationship data is different!
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2010-07-07 11:09 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-07-07 03:46 pm (UTC)Incidentally, although I didn't ask the question in (err) question, it could have just as likely come from a poly person who was curious as to whether it's working for you. A poly lifestyle/attitude is not any better than a mono one, after all, but it is important to match the two up. So to speak.
no subject
Date: 2010-07-07 04:56 pm (UTC)A poly lifestyle/attitude is not any better than a mono one
True, but I know plenty of mono's who'd disagree, passionately.
no subject
Date: 2010-07-07 04:48 pm (UTC)Also - did you link to your Formspring on Facebook? Cause I bet the question was posed by my mother.
Love you xxx
no subject
Date: 2010-07-07 04:58 pm (UTC)I did, but only once. TBH: I'd be more worried about her going from the Formspring to this LJ! *grin*
no subject
Date: 2010-07-07 07:17 pm (UTC)Sadly, people do label themselves as poly for a wide variety of reasons, many of which don't necessarily gel with the cultural expectations of the larger (healthier) group. I suspect there's aren't enough *visible* healthy polies either, in the mainstream view. So perhaps the 'badly behaving ones' are the 'polys' that the monos see most? This reaffirms the following inaccurate viewpoints:
1. Poly b/c current mono sucks but are too lame to break up.
2. Poly b/c can't commit.
3. Poly b/c it's ONLY about wild, kinky sex.
4. Poly b/c one partner has bullied/cajoled the other into it, but it's not really consensual. (Danger, Will Robinson!)
5. Poly b/c it's the latest postmodern fad to embrace (and all the cool kids are doing it).
I always go back to the question of wiring. For some, the wiring is a flip of a switch, for others it's hardwired and non-negotiable. Deciding what's 'better' requires more than simple snap judgment. Although it seems that some groups are quicker to snap than others. ;D
no subject
Date: 2010-07-07 08:42 pm (UTC)Exactly! - well, data structure in this example. It's not a case of "poly by choice (or excuse)", that's how I view my relationships. It's not an attribute, it's a list.
dur!
Date: 2010-07-07 07:31 pm (UTC)Re: dur!
Date: 2010-07-08 08:02 am (UTC)Some people just dont want , or maybe need, more than 1 partner, for others it seems to be the natural way to live.
Why is it necessary to worry about "better" etc? We are all different. An it harm no-one as they say , so mote it be.
no subject
Date: 2010-07-08 08:15 am (UTC)This post is about (at least my own) realisation of why monogamous people struggle so much with the idea of Polyamory.