422 - Are You Polyamorous or Just Pretending? Listener Q&A with Jessica Esfandiary
Welcome, Jessica!
Our guest this week is Jessica Esfandiary, a dynamic writer, speaker, and podcast host whose expertise lies in the realm of open relationships and how the principles of these types of connections can be applied to everyday life. She is also the host of the Open Late podcast. Jessica helps us answer some listener questions, using her insight and experience.
Some of the questions we tackle today include:
“Do you have any advice for not feeling bad about enjoying something without your partner? Especially when they're feeling bad and you feel partially responsible for their happiness.”
“What advice or cautions would you give for established and practicing poly people about dating newbie poly people?”
“Is it possible for a monogamous person to somehow fool themselves into believing they are open to polyamory? Is it possible to fool oneself for a really long time or is that just imposter syndrome?”
“I am no longer feeling comfortable calling myself ENM. Don’t get me wrong, I love the “Ethical” bit, but I just don’t feel non-monogamous is the right term. It started about a year ago when I read, of all things, the Wikipedia page on Monogamy. It was then I realized how little I understood all the types of monogamy there is and how confusing it has been for me when someone expects, say social monogamy but still are dating non-monogamous. Or, in my case, I am sexually monogamous but not socially monogamous (I have my own house and finances). What term do any of you use when you are only partially non-monogamous?”
Do you want your question addressed in one of our future Q&A episodes? Become a Patreon supporter!
Transcript
This document may contain small transcription errors. If you find one please let us know at info@multiamory.com and we will fix it ASAP.
Jase: On this episode of the Multiamory Podcast, we are diving into some listener questions on topics like feeling guilty enjoying activities without your partner, common advice given to polyamorous newbies that might not be as helpful as people think, and being partially monogamous. Joining us to tackle these questions is our very special guest, Jessica Esfandiary. Jessica is a writer, speaker, and the host of the Open Late Podcast, a show about open relationships and how the principles of non-monogamy can be applied to everyday life. Jessica, thank you so much for joining us today.
Jessica: Thank you for having me. Great job on the last name. No one can do it right, and you did it perfectly.
Emily: What's funny to me is you are also someone who ended up on the non-monogamous relationship to podcast hosting track. You want to give us just the story beats of that journey, of that transformation?
Jessica: Yes. Five years fully closeted and then slowly tiptoeing to open up about being open. It took about three years of gently letting people that I know and love in on my life. Then the questions came, and the questions came, and the questions came, and eventually, I was exhausted. I'm like, "You know what? I need to put this in a much more shareable and sustainable format." That's how the podcast was born.
Emily: That's so funny because we often tell people some half-joking version of the same thing. They were so sick of having to explain our relationships and what they mean and how we practice it that we may as well record it. I know when we were creating our show, we definitely had this decision point around do we use our real names or not or do we use pseudonyms? I think at the time that we were launching our show, the only other podcast out there, the host used pseudonyms for very, very good reasons. What was that decision like for you? You mentioned coming out slowly but surely to all these people around you, but then doing something like creating a very public resource like a podcast is different.
Jessica: Yes, that's such a great question. No one's ever asked me. I never considered going with a pseudonym or an alter ego. I'm always the person like, "Jump and I'll figure it out later." I think I ignored the thought of any sort of consequence or backlash to my full life being online. It felt like the only option for me to just put myself out there, authentically me.
I feel like I have a privilege and I have a voice where I'm not in danger, my safety, my security, my lifestyle for doing that. I felt that that was also important because not everyone has that luxury. Many people choose to stay very closed about their open relationship and for good reason a lot of the time. I felt like if I have that platform and I'm able to, I wanted to do it that way.
Jase: Yes, that's very similar to our decision process as well, was that realization that maybe there's some risks but they're small enough and we're willing to take that and to be out there because not everybody can. Whatever we can do to normalize that and make it-- by not using a pseudonym, trying to really drive home that idea that this is just a normal other way of doing relationships.
That this isn't some thing that we are embarrassed about and so we need to hide behind that pseudonym. I know that's not why people do it, but I feel like it can give that impression sometimes of that, "Oh, I'm hiding this because I think it's naughty or deviant," rather than we're like, "No, no, no, this is fine. This is normal."
Jessica: Yes, this is wholesome.
Jase: Right.
Emily: When you started the podcast or made that decision, were any of your partners a little worried about that prospect and the fact that maybe you might be talking about them in some way or divulging the things that were going on in your life?
Jessica: It's so interesting. They were both so supportive. I had two full-time partners at the time, my husband and my partner, Lauren, who is now still a life partner, but very platonic. We call it, I love platonic polyamory. It's my favorite polyamory. At the time, we were still very romantic and they were both like, "Do it." Obviously, if there were specific instances that I was going to speak about our relationship, we would go over anything that was going to be in the interview.
My husband's always really encouraged me to come out and share this. We were closeted because of me for the first five years. The one interesting thing though is they've both had a harder time coming onto the podcast, whereas I'm like, "Come on the podcast. Come on the podcast." They're like, "This is your podcast." I've managed to get Pasha on just twice and he just doesn't love the camera and he also doesn't love talking about his personal life. We have that boundary and that barrier.
Lauren, over time, has gotten much more comfortable sharing her story and now loves it. She just asked me the other day, she's like, "I think I need to come back on," because we have so many updates in her life. It's been interesting. I think it's been a growth journey for all of us and they've certainly grown when they've come on as guests and they love that, but they also love their privacy. They're like, "This is your show."
Dedeker: Well, let's go back to the platonic polyamory thing. I know that this is something that maybe we've covered, maybe our audience could get into, but I just want to maybe play the devil's advocate and just be like, "What do you mean platonic polyamory? Isn't that just normal garden variety friendship?"
Jessica: It can be. I don't kiss all of my friends on the mouth or sleep in bed with them and cuddle them and share a calendar with them. That's where I bleed it into the actual polyamory. I feel very much in love where it's not just like a friendship love, it's like a deep love of that person. I think I would love to explore the topic more and it's something that I want to actually research and I just started to scratch the surface of it. I'm curious if any of you have gone down this road of platonic polyamory and thinking about what it means and the relationship that the three of you even have beyond being in a romantic relationship as three.
Jase: Yes, it's definitely something that we've talked about on the show a little bit and with each other. We did an episode a while back about queer platonic relationships and other things on that platonic spectrum. I think there's a lot that's related there, but it gets into that funny territory of how much is this trying to find a label to describe the thing I'm doing versus just, I've got one that's good enough, I'll just go with that, or using a different one in different contexts.
That if you're speaking to people who get it, saying platonic polyamory maybe carries that connotation of, "Okay, so there's something maybe more intentional, more intertwined here than we would normally associate with a friend," but that if you're in another group, you might just say friend because it's not worth trying to explain it all.
Jessica: To go that in-depth with the exact type of relationship.
Dedeker: Yes, but I love you highlighting there's something beyond because the three of us haven't been in a romantic or sexual relationship together in eight years, nine years at this point. I always make the joke to people again, half-joking, that it's like we're still this really emotionally entangled triad co-parenting a little podcast baby and also being business partners at the same time.
Because he has this thing where I'm in a romantic relationship with Jase and I'm not in a "romantic relationship" with Emily, but Emily's a beneficiary on all of my retirement accounts and is in my will and stuff like that. That goes beyond what we normally call "just friends" or platonic.
Dedeker: It's like getting into that life partnership chosen family where again, it goes beyond just is it monogamous? Is it non-monogamous? Is it romantic? Is it platonic? Yes, I think maybe some more nuanced, interesting ways of looking at human connection, but doesn't really fit all the boxes that most of us have been raised with.
Jessica: Totally, yes. That's exactly how I feel. It's like, "Oh, it goes beyond," because there's so much entanglement. You know it's funny, Lauren is living in our home at the moment. That was my dream while we were actually dating, and never happened. I've been making the half-joke that it took us not being in a romantic relationship to get her to live with us.
Jase: Realistically, yes.
Emily: I wanted to pivot a little bit and discuss a talk that you teased to us, and it's titled, Your Partner is not your Superhero. That's a really interesting title. Initially, it puts just so many different thoughts in my head about what that means and people who put their partners up on a pedestal. Can you talk about what you mean by that, and what that talk looks like?
Jessica: Yes, I love that talk. It was the first thing I ever wrote to give a public talk about relationships. I was coaching for a while. I was just starting to come out about being in an open relationship, but not everyone knew. I wrote this talk very heavy in the perspective of, I think, principles of non-monogamy, but without ever mentioning non-monogamy, and gave it to a group of regular folks in regular traditional relationships.
It's really about how our society sells us on the idea of the one from the day that you're born and you're watching Disney movies. You're looking for this person to complete you, or especially if you're a little girl, identifying human someone to save you even. We grow up with this ideal of that's what we're looking for, and we're not whole and complete until we find that person. Then what happens is, so many people find that person, then there's the goal of getting married, or having children, and whatever the mono normativity is, but without using words like mono normativity, because this was for everyone. You have some benchmarkers and usually complete them, and then it's like, "Then what?"
It was all about looking at relationships. I'm an Aquarius too, so community is the most important thing in my life. Looking at relationships with the idea of this should be a vehicle for growth, not something to check the box, and I made it, I can rest, but like, "Where are we going together?" The thing to think about instead of focusing on the one is being the one. How can I be the best partner and show up in the way that I can, not only for my partner, but for my community as a whole and complete person on my own? Then I can add in every space that I'm in. It's been such a long time since I've actually given this talk, so I'm going a bit out of order.
The three principles that I brought up were to make sure that you have individual goals and couple goals so that even if you are paired or partnered, you are moving towards something together always to keep that discovery mode alive and to have something together, so you're constantly having newness in that relationship. Individual goals and couple goals, being the one, then letting yourself fall in love with community. Whether that be family members, chosen family, friends, hobbies. Not to reserve your love for one person. That was the final piece.
It's when we reserve our love for one, we're doomed to put a ton of pressure on our partner and a ton of pressure on ourselves. How can we find loving connected reciprocal relationships with many people so that you can ultimately use all the sides of your personality? Because if you're only engaging deeply and lovingly with one, you're only accessing the parts of you that that person can bring out, which is actually limited.
After all that hopefully, you're a well-rounded, whole-ass person. Your partner can relax because there's not all this pressure obviously, to fulfill all of your needs, which is I think what the four of us probably spend all day talking about all the time. One person just really can't fulfill all of our needs, nor should they.
Jase: I love that. It's so cool to hear you describing that because it echoes a lot of things that we've talked about on this show, that we talk to guests about, but you have a slightly different way of explaining it and approaching it. I love that there are becoming more and more resources out there for however someone thinks, whatever they relate to, whatever type of language works for them, that there's more of these resources teaching that kind of thing. That traditional idea of someone completing you is actually really limiting if you're thinking of that that's the only place I can express myself anymore, is with this one person.
Jessica: Yes, thank you. I know it's a 35-minute talk. I think I turned it into an episode. If anyone's curious, they can go check it out. I go on a whole rant about how Sex and the City ruined me.
Dedeker: Oh, yes. No, I love it.
Emily: I watched all of it too many times.
Jessica: I still love the show. I still watch the show any day of the week fed like.
Dedeker: Yes, I think to piggyback off what Jase was saying, we always appreciate new ways of repackaging some of these concepts to be even more palatable and more palatable and more understandable and more accessible to someone who's not super deep down the relationship anarchy rabbit hole. Just help move the needle against the tide of so many years of just really not great relationship advice, and really not great relationship role models.
It's interesting you bring up Sex and the City because it feels maybe consciously, we've abandoned the whole oh, women aren't princesses that need saving. We're not locked in a tower that need a man to come along and just fix everything. We're independent, we have our own careers, and we have sex, and we enjoy sex and things like that, but what I've seen that still produce, is less of this very traditional, "Oh, I definitely need a man to come save me."
When I talk to my girlfriends, especially my more monogamously dating girlfriends, there's still this sense of, "Sure. No, I don't need a man to completely save me, but I do need someone who's going to come along and at least save me from all these little dissatisfactions and frustrations that I have. I still have this sense that if I just find that person, all these little inconveniences of life and the doldrums and the border more the frustrations with irritations, those will get whisked away by this person." Which is the same message but just packaged a little bit differently.
Jessica: Yes, I completely agree. That's actually why I think the point about being the one is so important for people to really understand because when you allow yourself to have all those little points of frustration and contention in your life that's lowering your-- the way I think about it, lowers your vibration and you're not mastering your emotions in your life. Then you're actually going to attract someone at that level.
You're not actually going to attract the person that you're looking for that's going to elevate you out of that, you're just going to attract the same kind of person who's also annoyed with little things in life, who is looking for someone else to smooth all that over. If you just focus on how can I best prepare myself to be radiating and finding joy and bliss and ease or whatever, flow happiness in my own life, then without even searching for it, you start to just attract and collect those people. It doesn't have to just be one person. I love that point because I see it all the time still with friends and even family. It doesn't have to be that way, so people are focused on an outside fix rather than inside fix.
Dedeker: You're also on this journey of soon-to-be polyamorous parenting, which is a topic that many people are interested in. I'm so glad we're starting to see more people being open about their journeys as parents, or raising kids with multiple partners, or even just being in an open marriage while they still have kids. You're here on the cusp of that, and I just want to know where you're at. What are you doing to prepare for that? I don't know how I would prepare for that. What are you anticipating?
Jessica: Oh my gosh, I feel so unprepared. For people who are only listening, not watching, I have a perma smile that I cannot erase because we are expecting twins and it's the craziest thing ever. People ask us all the time, "Oh, you're going to not be open anymore, right?" As if it's just a--
Emily: Wow, they go there immediately. That's incredible.
Jessica: Yes, especially people with kids because they're like, "You're not going to have the time or the energy." It's like, "Absolutely, that's probably true." I doubt that when our kids are babies we'll take very much time away from parenting, especially because there's two. For us, especially for me, I can't really speak for my husband, I think he is a bit less polyamorous than I am, which I think is cool to note because people think you have to match up equally and you really don't. I think he also doesn't fully want to let himself because his priorities are different and I'm like, "I could love easily." It's just so easy for me. He's like, "That's a lot of responsibility."
For me, polyamory isn't something I can turn off. It's who I am. It's who I am at my core. The answer is, "No, we're not going to stop being who we are." We might have less interactions with new people but we have people in our community that we've known or that we might engage with or date or just have a great meetup with every once in a while. I think when we have time we'll still continue that. That's our preparation, our understanding.
Then the other thing that we're doing, and we just actually did this last week and I was sharing with you guys before we started, we joined a social club, which I can't talk too much about. I was chatting with them and probably chat a bit more about them eventually and share the name of this group, but they're only focused on socializing and not dating so that people who are open at whatever stage of open or type of relationship, however you identify, can just come together and create community face-to-face at these dinner meetups.
We were like, "You know what, let's do this now. We have six months." Because we've never really done that. We've not made community in polyamory a really big focus or a priority in our lives. We've done a lot more vacation and staying at this resort and maybe going to a party every now and then, and then more long-term relationship with this one woman for three to four years, and then a guy for five years. We really didn't focus on creating a big community of people to tap into as friends. Maybe as lovers or just something in between, so now we're like, "Let's meet other poly people who have kids."
That's been the journey and we're just at the beginning of that. This dinner was really sweet and great. We hosted it at our house. There were five other couples and some singles. I think if we can lay a solid foundation now, maybe we'll have some fun date nights in our future, but also not putting a ton of pressure on it. That's where we are with the whole idea of it.
Dedeker: Yes, and that seems like a good practice regardless of whether you're non-monogamous or monogamous. If you're thinking about creating your little biological family, it's also good to be thinking about chosen family and community that holds you within that, which is not something we're always encouraged to do necessarily. I think it's time for us to switch gears and to start diving into some of our listener questions for this week.
Emily: We do have our disclaimer, is always that we've spent a lot of time, as you all know, studying healthy relationship communication, but we're not mind readers. Our advice is based solely on the limited information that we have. Please take everything that we say with a grain of salt. Every situation is unique and we encourage you to use your own judgment and seek professional help if needed. Ultimately, you are the only true expert on your own life and feelings and your decisions are your own. With all of that said, let's get started and dive into these questions for this week.
Dedeker: The first question we have, do you have any advice for not feeling bad about enjoying something without your partner, especially when they are feeling bad and you feel partially responsible for their happiness? I'm going to pile on to this question with my own experience, which is I think that I've struggled with this a ton, particularly in having a long history of being in long-distance relationships. There were so many years where I was traveling between two different countries and spending long clips of time with different partners throughout the year.
Again, even if a partner wasn't feeling upset directly because of the fun time that I'm having elsewhere, I still had a lot of feelings of guilt that would still come up. That I'm going out on this great date or to this music festival or just having generally a good time without my other partner. That's all to say I don't have an answer for this. I'm hoping the rest of y'all can answer it for my sake and the sake of the question asker.
Jessica: I can tackle this one first. I have some thoughts, and also I really identify with you too, Dedeker. In my relationship, I have also been the one to be like, "Oh man, this is really tough." I find that I can meet people a bit more easily. People want to date me even after they find out that I'm married. It's not always the same for my husband, and so over the years I've had a little fair share of that. I think it's stopped me at times from going out as much as maybe I could have because I was like, "I don't want to leave him at home." Even though he was like, "No, go. I'm fine. This is my stuff and I'm going to work through it," and I'm like, "I'm just going to stay home and watch Netflix with you."
One of the things that helped me shift out of this is when I would go out, remembering that I'm already choosing to do it, so it's going to do both of us as a disservice if I can't be present and enjoy it. Ultimately, even if Pasha misses me or is having some discomfort, he still at the end of the day wants me to enjoy it. I have to not project that I'm sad, that he's sad onto it and make it worse. I think that workaround helped me really still be able to enjoy the experiences that I was in.
Then the other thing that helps too is just always addressing that. I'm a huge fan of let's always address the elephant in the room and overcommunicate, and your book on communication is key. Creating important touchpoints where we can talk about, whether it's his feelings or my feelings before and after the date in a contained way. Like, "Okay, let's chat about if you are uncomfortable, how you're supporting yourself while I'm away. Do you want me to be a part of that in any way? Is there anything I can do?"
We can have a clean understanding of what each other's roles are in that process, and then I can be like, "Okay, I've done my part and now I can go out and relax knowing that he's supported and taken care of or when I come back from a date or a trip or something like that."
Emily: Yes, I love that. I think having that level of aftercare as a word is really, really important with a partner. Especially if you know maybe they have a history of feeling conflict or conflicting emotions when you go out because they're sad about missing out on something or missing out on that time with you, and so both of you having the opportunity to really get curious about what it is that they feel and what it is that maybe both of you can do to help each other feel better about the situation.
I think guilt is completely understandable and that's something that we all feel and embrace the knowledge that you're not alone in that. All of us have had that a variety of times in our relationships. I love that. Just be overabundant in your communication I think is a huge priority.
Jase: Yes, this one's interesting too because it's not exclusive to non-monogamy either.
Emily: Absolutely.
Jase: This is one that there was actually something just this last week or so that Dedeker and I talked about that was something about my job that was a good thing but I was worried that she would be jealous of it.
Dedeker: That's not what you said. You said, "I didn't tell you because I thought you'd be mad at me," is the phrase that you said.
Jase: Well, mad because you were jealous of it. That was the idea. Just little things like that can come up. This wasn't a huge deal and we did talk about it, but I did find myself avoiding that because of that feeling of guilt. It had nothing to do with dating anyone else because I'm not dating anyone else at the moment, but it was just that thing can come up in a lot of different ways. It can come up with our friends as well, our family members.
Emily: Yes, I'm jealous of you two going on vacation, same.
Dedeker: Yes, I'd be jealous of me too. I'm sorry. That's one I don't have anything to-- Okay, but actually, this is a good object lesson. This is a great object lesson because when you were speaking Jase, I was putting myself, trying to recall times when I've been on the other side of this. Where a partner of mine is going off to do something fun, whether it's with another partner or not, and I'm in a bad mood or I'm going through a rough time or whatever.
I know something that has really helped me has of course been communicating about it with my partner, but if I have a sense that there's a level of choice about how I interact with the good time they're having. For instance, being asked, "Okay, I'm about to go on this fun weekend trip with another partner, do you want pictures and updates or do you want me to just leave all that out and then we can talk about it when I get back?"
For me, I appreciate having the choice because even if I'm 100% okay with my partner taking this weekend trip, if I'm going through a rough time or tackling something stressful, maybe I don't want pictures of how beautiful the beach looks at that moment. Maybe you can tell me afterwards how beautiful the beach was or maybe I want to feel included. Maybe it's something about not wanting to feel lonely and the idea that I can get those updates and have a commentary about, "Oh, wow, the beach. Oh, wow, that drink you're having." Maybe that helps me feel more included. For you Emily, what do you think would be helpful while Jase and I are on vacation next week?
Emily: No, I want to see and I want to live vicariously through you while I'm editing our podcast or sending off some books to people or working at some café. I would like to wish that I were there and feel just a tad bit like I was there sitting next to you on the beach drinking a piña colada.
Dedeker: Then can we also be affirming just how hard you're working during that time? Would that help?
Emily: Yes. How hard I do always.
Dedeker: That you do always.
Emily: Yes. Thank you. I appreciate that.
Jase: I think one last thing I wanted to throw in here is something that comes up especially when you're dating someone new and there's that excitement and new relationship energy from going on those dates, that there can be this giddiness and excitement afterward. That depending on how your partner's feeling and how much the two of you like to talk about all those details might be something that they don't want to hear about. All that twitterpated feeling. I've heard all sorts of different suggestions for how to handle this, whether it's setting some time to debrief with your partner, but the one that I actually like the most is build into your schedule some decompression time for yourself.
Whether that's just sitting in the car for an hour before you come back home or if you don't live together with your partner, this is easier, but if you do live together then it's maybe getting home and taking a walk first or having someone else that you can call like a best friend or your mom or somebody to get some of that jitteriness out so that then you can show up a little more when you come home if that's what your relationship needs. For some people, they're like, "No, give me all the juicy details I want to hear about it." Just to throw that out there as an option, I think it doesn't occur to a lot of people.
Jessica: That's such a good option.
Jase: We've got three more really exciting questions that I want to get to but first, we're going to take a quick break to talk about how you can support this show. If this is content that you appreciate and you like the fact that we're able to put this out there into the world for everybody for free, the best way that you can support that is by taking a moment to check out our sponsors.
If any are interesting, to you go check them out. Just listening to it even does a lot to help our show and helps us get the support we need so that we can give you the support you need. We're back. The next question, what advice or cautions would you give for established and practicing poly people about dating newbie poly people? What advice or cautions to people who are more experienced polyamorous people if they're going to date someone who's new?
Dedeker: This question comes with actually quite a lot of extra information attached to it. This spawned maybe even a tiny little tangential thread in our Discord server. That this is attached to the fact that some people felt frustrated by this really common advice given to more established non-monogamous folks basically just about not dating newbies at all. Really warning them away or if someone's posting asking for advice, and then if the community finds out, "Oh, this person you're dating is brand new to non-monogamy, it's not going to work. Just run now, just get away now."
I really loved that one of our patrons in the Discord was really insightful and they said that there can be this catch-22 of advice, especially that's directed to non-monogamous folks and to newbies about hey, you shouldn't be trying to date experienced poly people until you have more experience dating poly people. This catch-22. I think we've run into this before where some people have expressed frustration around, I don't want to make someone into my guinea pig, but also how do you get experience and get more comfortable relating in this way without having someone to relate to? That's the background and the context around this question. Do y'all have any thoughts about that?
Emily: We've all been newbie polyamorous people before, every single one of us, and we all had to start somewhere. To me, I think there is the potential for a limiting ideal that I have to only date people who are super established or I've even heard I have to only date people who are already in a primary relationship, for instance. That's fine, whatever it is that you want, but in terms of this, I've definitely dated people who don't know very much about polyamory and they end up being really interested in it and really excited about it and curious and want to know more and want to read things and want to learn.
We have talked in recent episodes about the potential power dynamic at play there, and that you have to be really cautious and careful of that. I think that that is something we all should be aware of what kind of power dynamics are at play in all of our relationships but I wouldn't want to limit myself if I were in a position to date non-monogamously again, which I'm currently not. I would think that there are potential great relationships out there with people who are just starting out in this.
Jase: Yes. I feel like there's two parts I want to answer about it. One is that advice about if you're an established poly person dating someone who's new to it. I think first is it's worth thinking about, can I do that? Do I have the energy for that? One, dating people that are new to polyamory opens up a lot more people to date, which is often a great thing. That's often like, "You know what? I would love some new people and not just the same 10 poly people in my community I already know." It opens up those options.
It's great, but it does sometimes take a little bit more energy or sometimes can be a little bit more challenging when you run into some of those newbie challenges. I feel like there's a little bit of this-- what? I don't know, there's a term for it. It's like when you're just starting out, you're the one who's likely to run into that conditioning that you have. All the social conditioning about being jealous or possessive, or are these things that's hard to unlearn. Then you get to this point where you're a little bit past that and I think that's where people go, "I don't want to date any newbies because I don't want to deal with that shit."
Then I feel like once you get more experienced again to where you're more solidly comfortable, then you can date those newbies again because you're able to weather a little bit of the storm if they have some of those struggles because you're far enough past it. I almost wonder if some of this advice comes from the people that are just barely past that themselves and so they're like, "No, get away, I can't go back there."
Jessica: So much of what you both shared, Emily and Jase, I agree with. It reminds me there's no right way to do relationships. There's your way at the point in time that you are at, the space you're at on your journey, because I've been all of those places. I've been the newbie dating other newbies, dating really experienced people, and then moving into a dynamic of a full-time triad with someone who had never experienced non-monogamy. As I was about five years in, had my footing, and then I got to a place where I was after dating a few more newbies, this is just way too much. I'm teaching, I don't want to be teaching. This is exhausting.
I've run the gamut as well and I've been guilty of saying I'm staying away from new people because I just don't have the time or energy. I think in my relationship right now because of what I'm looking for and protecting my energy a lot, about to become a new mama, that's the lane that I'm in. Unless I want to have a fun one-night stand and then it doesn't matter.
Communicating that's all I'm looking for and I'm not going to be your poly trainer. I think that both everything you shared is so correct and I think it comes down to checking in with where you are at that stage in your evolution, in your relationship, in your sexuality, and seeing what you have capacity for, and what are your intentions. That will help guide where you land on all of that.
Dedeker: Yes, very well said. It seems like there's a balance between protecting your energy and your capacity, as you put it. That's on one end of the spectrum, and then on the other end of the spectrum is maybe the gatekeeping or being more closed-minded or closed off. It is figuring that out. I've had wonderful relationships in the past where I think if I was more closed off to them having questions, not being sure, having some jealousy right out the gate, dealing with that social conditioning that if I was more closed off I would've completely abandoned that relationship and not had a really wonderful relationship. Then also there have been other times where I'm just like, no, I don't have time for this shit. I want someone who already knows all the lingo and the shorthand, doesn't mean that they're going to be perfect at it or we're not going to run into any conflict or drama, but I just want to be able to jump past that point. Yes, I think it's that balance.
Jase: I think that it's definitely worth remembering the fact that just because someone's done it a long time doesn't necessarily mean they're any good at it or that they're any good with you. They could be perfectly fine with somebody else, but with you, you just bring up all of each other's insecurities or baggage or whatever. That's also possible.
Something I did want to acknowledge about this question is, they gave an example about the way this is discussed in online communities and probably in in-person communities as well, but the idea that when someone's coming for advice in a community and in this situation they said it was someone who was an established poly person who was dating someone who was new to polyamory, and there was a little bit of friction or drama with their metamour, so with that new person's other partner, and basically everybody said, "Get out, it'll never work. It's a disaster. Get out."
When I see that, I'm like, I totally get where everybody's coming from, and maybe I would have a voice shouting that in my head because I think if you've been doing it for a while, you've been in some kind of situation where that has been bad, and it sucked, and it hasn't gotten better. I do think it's worth all of us reminding ourselves that, yes, but we also had times where we did get through it because that's how we ended up here. To give people the benefit of the doubt to work through their own stuff and to figure out their own stuff while at the same time not trying to do it all for them.
Like letting them have that journey on their own and be there to support them but also knowing that you don't have to make that change for them, and if they just can't get there, that's also okay to let that one go and give them some time because I've dated people where it didn't work out for us, and then I find out years later that now they're happily polyamorous with other people. I'm like, okay, I guess I introduced them to it even though they weren't there yet. They weren't ready to think about that yet.
Emily: I think having that maybe personal boundary of I am so excited to date you, but I'm not really going to choose to go out and be the person who teaches you everything or tells you exactly what it is that you need to do, that that's a personal boundary that I'm putting in place for myself. That if you want to learn more that's on you. The onus is on you, and you've got to go be the one to look up all the things and listen to all the podcasts and read all the books and stuff like that. Should we move on to the next-
Dedeker: Yes.
Emily: -question? Number three, is it possible for a monogamous person to somehow fool themselves into believing they are open to polyamory? Is it possible to fool oneself for a really long time or is that just imposter syndrome?
Dedeker: I love the idea of really long time fooling oneself, I've probably been there.
Emily: Like cognitive dissonance, sure, you can fool yourself into believing a lot of things.
Dedeker: I'm going to assume, again, this is kind of filling in some backstory. We don't have a ton of backstory on this question, but I'm going to assume based on stuff I've heard from clients or from friends that this may come from, oof, I seem to keep feeling jealousy or keep running into frustrations with dating or frustrations with finding partners. Like there's some piece of non-monogamy or non-traditional relationship that feels like it's not working for me. Am I actually just a monogamous person, and I'm in denial? Is this actually not the right fit for me? I'm going to assume that this based on some sort of friction in their actual life as opposed to this being just a philosophical question.
Emily: Initially when I look at this, I think about the times in my life where I've had really a lot more jealousy or a lot more worry about the state of my relationship, and it tended to happen when there was a lot of friction or a lot of time of like unrest or unease. That was when I didn't feel maybe at my best or felt like the relationship was at its best, and therefore I was like, well, maybe I just can't do polyamory or maybe I'm just not cut out for this or my partner may have said something similar. I do wonder especially if you're in more of a primary relationship where perhaps you're nesting or something along those lines or you opened up with a partner.
If the relationship is on the rocks in any way, I feel like there is that potential more for someone being like, maybe I just can't handle this because your nervous system is constantly under attack or constantly feeling as though I just simply can't handle this. I do think if there is a way to help get yourself in the relationship in a place that's much more at ease or much less under duress, then maybe the feelings might be different for you over time.
Dedeker: It's funny because the moments when I've had non-monogamy imposter syndrome, for me it rarely shows up as, oh shoot, what if I'm actually secretly monogamous this whole time? It's more of, oh shoot, what if I'm just not very good at this, or oh shoot, what if there's a lot more personal work to do-
Emily: Sure.
Dedeker: -than I realized, oh shoot, maybe I've been neglecting something about my relationship or something about my needs, which doesn't feel good. It doesn't feel any better than if I was like, oh, maybe I'm monogamous or whatever. I often think about, and I think that this was in Rachel Krantz's book when she was interviewing a Buddhist monk about non-monogamy and his take on non-monogamy and different relationship practices and things like that.
I think that what he said was something along the lines of just asking yourself is the intention and the effort matching the results? If my intention in being open to non-monogamy is, let's say it's more sexual variety or it's to explore more parts of myself or it's to have a fuller life or whatever. Maybe sometimes it's hard, maybe I have areas where I experience jealousy or insecurity or things like that, but I'm still getting that result of the thing that I wanted with my intention.
I think that's different than, okay, I'm open to non-monogamy, and I have all these intentions, but I'm not getting any of that, and it's all just a drag 100% of the time, that might be a little bit of a different answer. I don't know if that automatically means you're not cut out for this, or you're a secret imposter monogamous person or things like that. I do think it's just a different data to make a different decision based on.
Jase: I'd love to jump in on the second part of this, that is it possible to fool oneself for a really long time or is that just imposter syndrome? It reminds me a little bit about what we've talked about pretty much any time we've done an episode about jealousy, where we talk about all these ways of handling jealousy, thinking about it differently, breaking it apart into what are you really feeling that you're calling jealousy, all of that.
Then we usually at some point take a little pause and a step back and say, but also it's worth realizing that jealousy is potentially trying to tell you something that maybe you're feeling a lot of jealousy because something's not right. There might actually be a reason for you having these feelings. As much as a bummer as this might be, I do think there's something to think about there in terms of that like, "Am I fooling myself for a long time? Has this been in the same relationship the whole time and is there something in that relationship that doesn't feel secure or safe? Because maybe there is something there that's off."
That doesn't necessarily mean like, oh, this is a bad person, they're being shady, but maybe it means something about the way you're doing this or the way that they're communicating about it or the way that you're communicating about it, that something there isn't right, and just powering through is another one of those problematic types of advice that we see online a lot when someone's new, and they're having some kind of jealousy or some sort of struggle that everyone's like, oh yes, just figure out how to spiritually bypass it and ignore it, and eventually it'll go away.
While sometimes that's true, a lot of times it is unlearning, there are times where, no, actually there's something valid here that should get addressed. I just want to bring that up too to this question that all the things that have been said valid but also take a look at that and maybe there is something that needs to be fixed here.
Dedeker: Speaking of being monogamous or being secretly monogamous, this last question I think is really interesting. This is a little bit long because I also had to attach a Wikipedia article to it. Just bear with me. This is the question, I'm no longer feeling comfortable calling myself ethically non-monogamous. Don't get me wrong, I love the ethical bit, but I just don't feel non-monogamous is the right term. It started about a year ago when I read of all things the Wikipedia page on monogamy. It was then I realized how little I understood all the types of monogamy there is and how confusing it's been for me when someone expects, say, social monogamy, but still are dating non-monogamously, or in my case, I am sexually monogamous, but not socially monogamous. What term do any of you use when you're only partially non-monogamous? Here's where I attach the whole Wikipedia article on monogamy. I'm just going to give you the highlights. Just the highlights real, but it actually is a really interesting Wikipedia article.
Would highly suggest that you go and read this, but essentially it boils down into four different types of monogamy that can be a little bit different depending on context. They refer to marital monogamy, which is just referring to marriage between only two people. They refer to social monogamy, which is specifically about two people choosing to live together and cooperate. This is the way they put it. Cooperating and acquiring basic resources such as shelter, food, and money.
Sexual monogamy, which again refers to two partners who are choosing to remain sexually exclusive with each other, not having any outside sex partners. Then genetic monogamy, which refers to sexually monogamous relationships with genetic evidence of paternity. This feels like something we would only see in lab rats or something like that. That one threw me off a little bit.
Jase: Yes, I think that one's less relevant for any normal human discussion. I think that or something. I got the impression it's more like we see this animal being sexually monogamous, and we've also done the DNA test assert. Yes, they actually are. I think that's where this comes from. Maybe we can leave that one out. You've just got marital monogamy, social monogamy, and sexual monogamy are the three there. I do think it's worth that a little bit later in the article. It then breaks marital monogamy into two subsections.
One that they call classical monogamy, which is a single relationship between two people who marry each other as virgins, remain sexually exclusive their entire lives, and then when one of them dies, the other is celibate for the rest of their life. It's like the true mono gamete, that's it, just the one. Then serial monogamy, which is marriage with only one person at a time, but potentially several of those over their lifetime. I guess you could probably break down social monogamy or sexual monogamy into the same category.
Dedeker: Serial over time. I guess I would toss onto this pile as well the way that I've heard some people in the swinging community or the lifestyle community describe their relationship as being emotionally monogamous but not sexually monogamous. Maybe that would fall under social monogamy in that case, perhaps.
Jase: Yes, that'd be social monogamy here, I think. Okay, wait, so what was the question?
Emily: It was like what term do any of you use when you were only partially non-monogamous? Like the classic Dan Savage? I think monogamish is what I thought of immediately.
Jase: Which in his case would be marital monogamy, but not sexual monogamy. Would be how his situation works.
Jessica: Yes. That's what I use.
Emily: Oh, okay.
Jessica: That's what I would use to describe that. Actually, that's not what I use because in a way, I have marital monogamy in this home that I bought with my husband. We were having children together, acquiring money shelter.
Emily: Food.
Jessica: Yes. For the most part in our relationship, in some ways, we present very we're like this- well, not hetero couple. He's hetero. In our community, people might see us and still think we're monogamous if they don't know us well. For myself, I still say that we're polly. If I were answering this question, I would say monogamous is the only term I would think of to use.
Dedeker: I don't know. Up until quite recently, I had for a long time two partners who were living in different countries. They were both long-term relationships. Then one of my partners and I broke up at the beginning of last year. Then what followed was this year I was going to say a weird year, but it was a great year, honestly. It was a beautiful year where Jase and I were like, "de facto monogamous," in the sense that just through circumstances, because Jase had also gone through a breakup, like right at the beginning or right before the pandemic.
Then obviously right when I had gone through the breakup, I wasn't interested in diving into dating anyone new or anything like that. We had this weird time of like, we're technically monogamous that we don't feel that way, but that's not right. I wouldn't tell someone that we're monogamous necessarily. I don't know. That's what it makes me think of, where there was like the year of the fairly social and technical technically monogamous time in our lives, but it still doesn't quite feel like it matches up with what was going on in our hearts, I would say.
Emily: A lot of people have disliked the ethical non-monogamous label, and a lot of people prefer the consensual non-monogamous label. Can we talk about that for a minute? Because that's not exactly what this person is saying either. It is interesting to discuss the use of language here and what somebody feels more or less comfortable using because I know some people don't even want to use the word polyamorous anymore because there are potential negative connotations that go with that and how they are perceived by other people. What do you all think about those different words?
Jase: These are the kinds of things I lay in bed for hours thinking about-- actually probably not laying in bed, but like, if I'm out on a walk or if I'm just sitting and spacing out, I often think about these sorts of questions. Yes, it's interesting that this question Asker says specifically, I love the ethical bit, almost clarifying. That's not my issue here, but some people that is weird, and I get it because to label it as ethical is putting a whole lot of stuff onto it.
It's like, yes, some people can do non-monogamy where everyone agrees to it, and maybe it's still not ethical all the time, but that's still a very different thing from cheating. I actually do prefer the term consensual non-monogamy because it's at least sticking to the facts. It's like, you know and I know and we agree to it, and then this other person knows and they agree to it, and it emphasizes more that we know, and we've agreed to this. Whether we do a shitty job or not or treat each other well is a separate thing.
Just like monogamy isn't inherently ethical either. I do get that issue. I think the other one worth noting is that the bummer about non-monogamy as a term, even though we use it all the time, is that it's just defining a thing by what it's not. That as far as definitions go. Your teacher in high school or whatever probably would have given you some bad marks for just defining a thing by what it's not, but it's a hard one to define any other way.
Dedeker: Jessica, do you have any evolution of which terms you adopted for yourself?
Emily: Because I've heard you say open a few times too, which is, again, something else entirely, maybe, or just within the same sphere.
Jessica: Yes, it's so interesting. A little bit of my nature is like, "Oh, I don't like labels." Rather than stick to one, I just use a bunch of different ones.
Emily: There you go.
Jessica: Not probably helpful. Similar to you, Jase. I think I saw Dr. Jeanna at one point talk about the difference between ENM and CNM, and it struck me because I think she was making the point that using ethical non-monogamy implies that non-monogamy is unethical, so we need to put that around it. I switched to consensual. I use CNM a lot if I am giving somebody a lesson in the overview.
No, I think labels and terms are helpful if they help you feel like you can identify yourself further and help you feel seen and understood, but then they can also really box you in. I think it's only helpful as long as it's serving you. That if you find that something else is going to feel better or fit better, to always be open to changing it and exploring what these words mean for you. Another thing that I like about that is when you're meeting new people, like asking-- I feel like I heard you guys talk about this, actually.
If someone's like, "Okay, I'm open, but I'm not polyamorous." Great. What does versus polyamorous exactly mean to you? Because, yes, it can be different for everybody. I've gotten into the habit of asking people that or even sharing that for myself. I think that's very helpful because, yes, I can be saying I'm in an open relationship, and you could be saying you're in an open relationship, and we have very different relationship dynamics. I think it's always important to just be present to the person that you're speaking to also, or with.
Jase: This question, talking about the Wikipedia article on monogamy is such a good example of that, where someone says, "I'm monogamous," and someone else says, "I'm monogamous." What does that mean? That's not even the same thing either. There's a lot of variation within that. Even if you took these subcategories like, I'm socially monogamous. It's like, well, what does that really mean though? Does that just mean you go on dates with this person, but you still sleep with other people, or does this just mean that you live together but you're not--
All of this, there's still a lot of questions and negotiation to be had to really understand it. This whole conversation keeps making me think about Martha Kelpie in our Episode 414 just recently, where she said, "I think of a label as something that you choose for yourself to give other people a shorthand to make assumptions about you that you can tolerate."
I'm just like, I love that because it does get to the heart of why we have multiple words for the same things in most languages, that we get to add some nuance to it, some context. Depending who we're talking to, we might use different ones because the whole point of it is just to help you understand me a little bit faster. If I'm using a label that I'm like, it's not totally accurate, but it gets you 90% of the way there. Sure. I'll give you that one and then we can clarify from there.
Dedeker: I think these days I've been defaulting more and more and more to just saying non-monogamous, even though I think my practice is probably polyamorous, but I don't add the consensual, I don't add the ethical. I think for a couple of reasons, one of them, I'm tired of saying words. The fewer words, I can say-
Jase: I dare I have to speak.
Dedeker: -the better. The second one. I don't mind speaking of what you can tolerate, the assumptions that you can tolerate. I don't mind there being maybe a little bit of mystery there. It's like if I say non-monogamous and someone thinks, "Oh, she goes to swingers’ clubs all the time," or maybe, "She's in a live-in triad," or maybe, "She's cheating and for some reason very proudly identifying that way." I can tolerate that ambiguity, I think.
As much as being misunderstood as a non-monogamous person can be so draining and so frustrating. I've also gotten very experienced at being misunderstood and tolerating misunderstandings, and so I'm like, people really want to know and really want me to clarify, I will. If they don't really want to know, they can have their story about me and then I get to say a fewer words. This was fantastic. Thank you to all of you who submitted questions. We'll be doing another listener Q&A episode probably in a few weeks' time or a month's time or so. In the meantime, Jessica, thank you so much for joining us, for helping us answer these questions. Where can people find more of you and your work?
Jessica: Well, thank you so much for having me. This was a blast. I've been wanting to come on your show for a long time, long-time listener.
Dedeker: First-time guest, first-time guest.
Jessica: Thank you. People can find more at openlatepodcast.com, and I hang out on Instagram at Open Late, the podcast.
Jase: You have a very nice Instagram. I'm jealous of it.
Jessica: Thank you. I have a really great designer.
Jase: Oh, lovely. Yes, well done.
Jessica: Viewed my best friend. Yes.