237 - What Monogamous People Can Learn From Polyamory
Let's explore seven things and lessons that can be learned from polyamory and ethical non-monogamy, from how to put yourself first to retaining your own identity within your relationships.
Our theme music is Forms I Know I Did by Josh and Anand.
Please send us your feedback and questions to info@multiamory.com, find us on Instagram @Multiamory_Podcast, tweet at us @Multiamory, check out our Facebook Page, visit our website Multiamory.com, or you can leave us a voicemail at 678-MULTI-05. We love to hear from our listeners and we read every message.
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're talking about what monogamous people and those in monogamous relationships can learn from polyamory. On this podcast, we strive to talk about and represent many different relationship types and how each of them can take best practices from the other. Today, we will be discussing seven ways in which monogamy can learn from polyamory.
Dedeker: Seven brides.
Emily: For seven brothers. Yes.
Jase: Each monogamous to its own.
Dedeker: Each more monogamous than the last.
Emily: You have to be a really good dancer to be on that show, is all that I'm saying.
Dedeker: Is that true? Sitting inside the show?
Emily: Yes.
Dedeker: You want to be a really good dancer to be monogamous. Everyone knows that.
Emily: I guess so, yes. Absolutely. That's one of the many misconceptions. When we were putting together this episode, I thought it would be interesting to talk about this stuff just because I've heard from listeners and from some people talking to me about this, they're like, well, we know now that you're in a monogamous relationship, Emily, do you ever feel a fraud for being on this polyamory centric podcast, even though you are monogamous? To that I say no, I do not.
Dedeker: How rude?
Emily: No, it's more just that I was polyamorous for a number of years. I think that I still implement a lot of things, that I learned from being polyamorous, into my current dating life, or my current relationship. I'm not dating, but I'm in a relationship. I think those things that I learned are incredibly important for any relationship, and something to be aware of and think about. I definitely viewed this episode is more of a one on one, taking it back to people who might be listening to our podcast that maybe are in more traditional relationships, that they can see things from the polyamorous community in this episode, and maybe take that to heart and maybe help them think about I can be thinking about my relationship in a slightly different way than I previously had thought.
Dedeker: I want to jump in with my own caveat. Always my hangup with this, the two of you know this already.
Emily: We talked about it before.
Dedeker: We did. I hate any posturing that attempts to imply the message that people in non-traditional relationships just know more about relationships than monogamous folk. We're up here on high on our Mount Olympus graciously giving this knowledge to all you poor unknowing monogamous folk. I hate that shit.
Emily: Yes, that's not at all what's happening.
Dedeker: Yes. I think that over the course of doing this show, at least where I have landed now, is I'm honestly, I don't care what kind of relationship you're in. I don't care if it's monogamous, polyamorous, this format, that format, just do it in a way that's ethical and healthy and bringing joy and not bringing suffering to yourself and to the people that you're with. I think it's more about that, for me, or at least that's the take that I would want to bring to this, is that what the three of us and many people have learned by dabbling in a wide variety of non-traditional relationships and how that--
Emily: And traditional relationships.
Dedeker: Yes, and traditional relationships, and how that collected experience and wisdom might help, for maybe some people who haven't and just want to have a better monogamous relationship.
Emily: Totally.
Jase: Yes. I think though that part of what similar to shows out there that are like, this is what straight people can learn from gay people. Something that comes along with those and also with non-monogamy or something like that, is that the thing that is simultaneously makes those relationships challenging, is also a strength, and it is a little bit unique. What I mean by that is that, in non-monogamy or in homosexual relationships, there's a lack of as many role models. There's a lack of people assuming that that's what you do. They are going to assume your relationship is different than it is. There's not as much commonplace wisdom out there, and that's often very challenging, for people in those relationships to feel not supported or like who do I look to for role models, or am I alone, am I the only one going through this.
On the other hand, I think it is an advantage because it does then require you to figure things out and question things and really seek out information, which I think, at least for myself as a monogamous person, I didn't do as much, because it's just like well, we all have this conventional wisdom and everyone--
Emily: It's like an inherent intrinsic thing that's just deep within you that you've learned from a very young age.
Jase: We think there's nothing to learn. I think that's why something like this is really useful, and that's why people like Dan Savage have as bigger following as they do, is because the thing he's always pointing out is look, we've had to figure out different stuff as gay people that straight people, you just don't even think about. Maybe this is useful for you. Maybe this'll give you some perspective. The same thing here.
Dedeker: Yes, most definitely. Let's just dive in by talking about the general challenges posed by a monogamous centric culture. These are challenges that I think are felt by potentially everyone, regardless of whether their relationship is traditional or non-traditional. There's research out there that shows that people believe that those who are in monogamous relationships or monogamous marriages are inherently more reliable, more happy, and just generally better people than people who are in non-monogamous relationships or who are single. It's like we have this weird thing of putting marriage on a pedestal where we just assume that it's like, well, if you're married, then there must be some intrinsically stable or reliable or compassionate part of you, versus someone who's single. We can call BS on that. There's plenty of people who are stable, reliable, and happy in non-monogamous relationships, and also plenty of single people who are stable, reliable, and happy. However, there is still these weird assumptions that are socially ingrained.
Jase: I think also on the other side, for people who are married or who are in a long-term monogamous relationship, that it's like people might think like you don't have problems then because you've got this figured out. There's also a lack of sympathy for that.
Emily: Well, and on the relationship escalator too, which we've talked about in previous episodes, that marriage is one of the higher steps on that escalator. To get there, you have to go through the other things and get to this final place of being married and then having children and then doing other things with that person within the marriage.
Jase: Just to clarify for people who might not know about the relationship escalator, is basically this idea that you have to follow these linear steps, and that if you're not going up those steps, then you should just break up. Which for a lot of people who maybe want to be together forever, but maybe don't want to get married, or maybe don't want to have kids, or maybe--
Emily: Or don't want to live together.
Jase: Do you want to get married but don't want to live together, and stuff like that. That those things are not presented as options.
Dedeker: Yes, definitely. There's just a lot of inherent benefits given to marriage, and we talk about this when we do our relationship anarchy talk. The weird way to think about it is that it's like literally monogamous marriage is the state sanctioned relationship. It is. It's like how we have like there's a state flower and there's a state animal, and there's state motto and there is a state, Stacy-- I was going to say theme song. What's it actually, it's not a theme song. It's an Anthem.
Emily: There'a state anthem too?
Dedeker: I think States have anthems. There's individual States, and then there's also the country, and the government as the state. We know we have a national Anthem and a national flag and a national bird, a national bald eagle and stuff like that. It's like our national state sanctioned relationship, is monogamous marriage. That's what we've chosen. That's weird when you actually sit there and think about it. There's just all these protections and tax benefits and benefits that you just don't even think about.
Emily: It feels very biblical.
Dedeker: Yes, a little bit. It's very much wrapped up in property rights and things like that. I do believe that as the state rewarding the appearance of monogamy, is a very motivating factor for people feeling they don't have a choice outside of that. Even if you wanted to choose to be just long-term monogamous, but not getting married, it's like there's still this incredible pressure placed on people to still get married because it's a state-sanctioned relationship. I was just thinking the other day randomly about the Game of Life.
Emily: You mean the actual game, not just like the--
Dedeker: I probably haven't played it since I was 12 years old. I was just thinking back, and I was like it's so funny that there's been multiple generations of kids now where this board game has been very clear these are the stages of a successful life and you have to-- Getting married, you get rewarded for buying a much more expensive nicer house, you get rewarded for having a job with a six-figure income, you get rewarded for being able to retire at a nice place as opposed to a small and cozy place. That's how you win, is that it's very much attached to these very specific things. The more I thought about it, I was like, "Damn, that's such a weird, messed up message to be sending to people."
Jase: Yes. There's only one path to success.
Emily: Yes, especially in this day and age. I do feel as though children now tend to grow up with a lot more opportunity in terms of what they're viewing and the kinds of people that they're more exposed to and stuff. It just is a little bit different than a one size fits all box that we grew up in or people in past generations grew up in.
Jase: Is it because of the internet, you mean, more access?
Emily: Yes, sure. Absolutely.
Dedeker: I was just checking if the Game of Life has been updated. It has been updated several times.
Emily: Okay, in what way?
Dedeker: 1960s version was the first one. The '70s and '80s had some versions, then '91, 2005, 2013, and 2018. The latest update in the 2018 version is that it includes pegs and squares for acquiring pets also.
Emily: Oh, great.
Jase: That's all you get?
Dedeker: I do appreciate that you could choose to acquire pets instead of children.
Emily: I like that, yes.
Jase: I do love it. I want to see, could I win the Game of Life being a single person with a ton of pets.
Dedeker: With all the cats and all the dogs.
Emily: Oh my gosh, yes. It sounds amazing.
Jase: Again, before actually getting into the seven things, we're just exploring these challenges that our current culture presents to all of us, regardless of what type of relationship you have, that these are pressures it puts on us. One of those is this pressure on finding the one, and even this belief in the one, and that a lot of what goes into that includes some actually quite toxic things that we don't even notice because we're told this is romantic, we're told this is magic, or we're told that God intended this for us, or whatever it is that makes us not question it, is really problematic.
Just to point out a couple of those, one is that this pressure for finding the one will often lead us to stay in relationships that are not working, or both of us are very unhappy, or even abusive because it's like, "Well, we were meant to be together," or, "Well, we got married. If I believe in the one, if I made that choice, I can't go back on that because of religious reasons or just cultural reasons. I can't get out of this. It must be something wrong with me." People will keep themselves in very harmful situations because of that belief.
Another one is this idea that we're taught that if you feel these strong fairytale feelings for someone, it must be because it's destiny, and that must mean that they'll fall in love with you too, and that if you have that belief-- I see this one a lot. Actually can lead people, men or women-- I find this especially with men to be--
Emily: To become obsessive?
Jase: To become obsessive, to become stalkers, to become really pushy. If you look at our movies, a lot of times behavior that you put a different soundtrack to it, is a creepy stalker movie, and you put a different soundtrack to it, and it's a romantic comedy. The only difference is that, eventually, she falls in love with him at the end in the one, and in the other, she gets killed or gets a restraining order or something. People are doing this because they've been taught to believe in this thing, and have been told it's beautiful and wonderful and romantic, when it's actually like, "Whoa, that's a pretty messed up thing to think. That just because I feel something strongly, if I believe in this fairy tale, then they have to. No matter how pushy I am, it's okay because it's really for the best. It's romantic."
Another one that we talk about sometimes in the relationship anarchy stuff, is this idea of our culture really isolates married people. It's like once you're married, that should be your only thing. You're pushed toward moving away from a support group with your friends and your family, you shouldn't be as close with your family anymore. This is something that is a pretty uniquely American culture thing, that most other cultures don't feel that way about when you get married, you still have that support group.
Then the last one that we have on this list is basically disregarding any type of relationship that's not monogamous, or even that's not on a track toward marriage and kids as not being real, and that if you're in anything that doesn't fit that, you must be unhappy. There's this pressure and these assumptions made.
Dedeker: I don't know how much in detail you want to talk about this, Jase, but I feel like you've had some issues with that as far as our relationship being seen by some family members of yours is not quite as real because we're not married, even though we've been together longer than many of the married people in your family.
Emily: Yes, that's true.
Jase: Yes, that is true, and it's not even specific to any one person necessarily, but, yes, there is--
Emily: It's probably just like an internal belief that they have that they just don't even question it and it must not be actually that big of a deal. It must be not that close because they were married or they're not moving in that direction.
Jase: Or that they're not monogamous. It's like they have other partners, so it can't be serious, right?
Emily: Yes.
Jase: My brother is married, and my mom just got remarried recently. I've been with Dedeker now in a serious but polyamorous relationship for longer than my mom and her now-husband have been dating. They knew each other from high school, but for many, many years, we're out of touch. We've known each other longer than that, and that we've been together longer than my brother and his wife have been together, and yet, there's always the assumption that those relationships are very real, that they should be treated like family, that their spouse is like family and should be treated like family, and should be included in family photos, things like that, whereas there's not that assumption about Dedeker.
Emily: I can imagine. That's really difficult.
Jase: Yes, even though it has been a longer relationship.
Dedeker: I'll be honest. In defense of your family, it's not like your family has ever made me feel unwelcome or not a real person or anything like that. I do think it is more of these weird default things that they probably don't even realize.
Jase: Exactly, yes. It's not something they're doing to be hurtful. It's just that's all they think about.
Emily: Where they go. Yes, totally.
Dedeker: It was funny when we went to see Paul McCartney, because he bought me tickets to see Paul McCartney as an early anniversary present, you were texting your family being like, "Hey, we're at Paul McCartney's celebrating our six-year anniversary."
Dedeker: Like, "Hey, by the way, it's how long we've been together, just so you know."
Emily: Yes, I love that.
Jase: Let's get into these.
Emily: Now, we want to introduce and go into the seven takeaways from polyamory that monogamous people or people in traditional relationships can learn from. The first one is going to be that relationships even flow, and that change in relationships is inevitable. I think that sometimes in monogamous relationships, we feel, especially at the beginning, and this happens in all relationships when you have that new relationship energy, that excitement, you're like, "This feels amazing. It's going so well. I'm constantly happy. My partner is constantly happy. I have to figure out a way in which to put this feeling and this relationship into a box, keep it there, lock it tight and make sure that it never changes from that, because I don't want to not feel this way."
Jase: Right. Or like if I ever stop feeling this way, it means something's wrong.
Emily: Yes, it means the magic is gone and this person must not be the one for me, maybe. Reality, life, lots of things happen. Also, just your hormones and your serotonin and dopamine and all of those things shift when relationships occur, and when the longer that a relationship is involved, I think then things will just change, it's inevitable.
Jase: Yes, it's chemical too.
Emily: Absolutely. I do know that a lot of us out there feel like the potential for change means that maybe there is this potential for something like a loss or like there's a loss of something really important feeling in the relationship, and that can cause us to experience a great amount of fear. That fear can cause us to do things like coerce our partner or control our partner, rather than just allowing them to be the person that they are.
Jase: Can you give any examples?
Emily: Yes, what comes to mind here is that, for example, in the beginning of a relationship, often, you will have sex with that person over and over again many, many times, and you're super into it and super DTF all the time.
Jase:
Dedeker: It's true though.
Jase: Absolutely, yes.
Emily: Yes, but then six months in or year in or whatever-
Jase: Or 10 years in.
Emily: -yes, or anything, that may just not be the case as much anymore. That can cause feelings of like, "I must not be attractive to my partner anymore." Fuck, I'm going to do things really passive-aggressive when they're like, actually I'm not really interested in having sex right now, or if they shoot me down, I'm just going to stop going to them for sex at all because clearly I'm just going to be shot down here, or things like that, like controlling behaviors or coercive behaviors, stuff along those lines, or passive-aggressive behaviors.
Dedeker: That makes sense.
Emily: I think also there's this idea that if a relationship ends, it means that it's somehow failed.
Dedeker: Yes, we've talked about that a lot on this show.
Emily: Yes, absolutely, but that is not necessarily the case. Polyamorous culture teaches us that relationships can change over time, and they can transition from one thing into another. I've had partners who have been upset over the fact that like, "I am friends with some of my exes." I know, especially in my relationship with you, Jase, I was at one point in a romantic relationship with you and now I'm not. That transitioned out of that romance into something really deepened friendship, and that is also very important to me. It doesn't mean that that's a threatening thing to a partner, but some partners may find that to be a scary thing.
Jase: This concept is something that I first learned about from monogamous people, actually, from some older, wiser monogamous people. Before, I was polyamorous of that idea of a relationship ending, doesn't mean it's a failure necessarily, that there is a lot of different reasons that relationship could end. To go back to what you were saying about our relationship, the transitioning essentially from being in a romantic relationship to not, and that like our friends and families felt this need to be like, "Well,--
Emily: Yes. "I'm not going to be-- Let's shun her."
Jase: And on both sides, and we had to be like, "No, no, no, that's not what it's about." They are like, "But it is though. You will get there."
Emily: "Yes, but you hate her, right? We hate him."
Jase: "We're pissed at her."
Emily: Yes, exactly.
Jase: I think that can be really challenging for monogamous people, for anyone. For monogamous people who want to do the same thing. It's like I guess we at least had the advantage of we were already doing something different, so maybe people already know to be like, "Can I be angry? What should I be feeling about this?" If you're in a more traditional relationship, you might just assume, "Yes, that means we hate this person. Let's go egg their house", or whatever it is.
Dedeker: Yes, my goodness. Let's move on to the next one.
Emily: Sure.
Jase: Number two.
Dedeker: Yes, number two, autonomy is key. You and your significant other are not entitled to each other's time. This is such a big one. My goodness. When we get into relationships, honestly regardless of the format, there's all these unspoken rules about how much time is supposed to be spent together, but especially when it comes to traditional monogamous relationships, there is often this assumption that we need to spend most, if not all of our time together. If we're romantic, then we're automatically going to take priority over everything and everyone else. Things like a significant other needs to be available to me. Whenever I want it, they need to be available to me for any kind of couply activity. They need to be available to me for sex whenever I wanted. There is often a tendency to use the royal we talk instead of individual talk.
Jase: I don't think that one is always bad necessarily, but if you start to lose your identity, I think it can be. There's a balance there.
Emily: I did read in an article that talked about how that can bring couples closer together to have "we talk" rather than just "I talk," but it does get into this thing of like, "Well, we thought that the movie was so great." It's like, but do you actually know that your partner thought that, or do you just assume simply because we're one unit? We think and talk and do the same things all the time.
Jase: That's a really great example. I've also read some studies from the Gottmans saying that people who use "we" to talk about themself and their partner are more likely to be happier and stay together than people who tend to use just "I" all the time. I think that makes sense if it's like, I'm always saying I because I really want to associate with this person or I don't want to be associated with them, even it's more subtle than that, but the thing about talking about thoughts or feelings or like, "Well, we feel this" or, "We think this," is a little different from saying like, "We do this thing together" or, "we enjoy this activity" is a little different from, "We thought this about movie. We believe this." Maybe, here's a proposal for a slight change. It's something like, say we did go watch a movie together, and I'm talking now to someone else to say like, "Yes, we went and saw that movie, and we liked it. We talked about it afterward, and I thought this thing, and she mentioned this thing." It's like maintaining a little bit of a sense of like, "We still have our own thoughts, and we still have our own feelings, but we're still a we because talk about it, because we communicated and we did stuff together, and it's important to us to communicate." Does that make sense? It's a subtle difference.
Emily: Yes. I guess I would also argue that one could say, "Yes, we went and saw this movie together. I really liked it. I can't speak for her about this, but I loved it. What did you think about it" kind of thing, and then allow that person to talk as well.
Dedeker: Yes. I do feel that engaging in some kind of non-traditional relationship, it can teach us that our partner's stuff is their own stuff-
Dedeker: Essentially that their emotions, their thoughts, their feelings, they don't have to equal our own. They usually don't equal our own, and just having that allows for there to be greater communication and greater listening skills and greater motivation for understanding, I think reaching mutual understanding. Also that we can't necessarily dictate our partner's actions, and also that we're not entitled to our partner's time or their body, which is a-- That's a doozy.
Emily: It really is.
Dedeker: It's a doozy.
Emily: Yes, I think it's something to be aware of, and something that polyamory can teach us and definitely taught me that I probably had a lot of ideas about the time in which, it means I'm special if my partner is spending this time with me. It means I'm special if they want to do everything with me, but that also potentially means that they're not doing things for themselves, and that they're automatically going to watch a movie me rather than like, "Hey, I'd really like to watch this TV show that I know you don't like" or "play this video game that I know you're not into. I understand you're home and maybe want to spend time with me, but I want to make time for myself, and moments as well. Just advocate for that. It's coming up, but yes."
Jase: Yes, it actually opens up the ability to make your time together more intentional and more special, instead of it just always being a default and we just watch a TV show together and that's it. It's like, "No, let's plan the time that we're really going to be intentionally together versus when we have our free time to do things, and maybe some of that is together and maybe some of it separate." It actually makes that time more special rather than I think people are afraid like, "That's going to take away, and we won't be as close."
Emily: Absolutely.
Jase: I also heard once just related to this, the idea that getting to watch your partner do the things that they do that don't involve you, is probably the stuff that they did when you fell in love with them in the first place.
Emily: I like that a lot.
Jase: Getting to watch them do that thing is really cool.
Emily: Yes, I really like that.
Jase: Number three. Number three is that rules don't protect relationships. This is a big one. This is one that a lot of people question about polyamory, being like, "Well, okay, as long as we understand the rules" or when people first open up their relationship, they think--
Emily: They implement a lot of rules.
Jase: We just need to figure out what the right rules are. Tell us what the right rules are that we need to put in place. That's something that comes up-- There's a couple of things about this in monogamy. One is that we assume that we all play by the same rules, but in truth, you ask a hundred people what exactly cheating is, for example, you're going to get a hundred slightly different answers of exactly where that line is, what sorts of things are okay or not. With monogamy, there's this extra problem that we assume we all know the same rules. Then the second thing is, people question like, "Well, if your partner is allowed to be with other people, why would they stay with you?" This interesting question of like, "Are you saying that the only reason why your husband stays with you is because they can't do anything else because they don't have a choice?" Usually, people are right away like, "No, no, no. That's not what I'm talking about."
Emily: Then what are you talking about?
Jase: Well, I think that that definitely was part of my thinking.
Dedeker: 100% part of my thinking. It was actually something that caused a lot of fear in my monogamous relationships, was that, where I'm like, "I'm afraid if my partner really wants to be with someone else, or is really attracted to someone else, but feels obligated to uphold our relationship, because that's the commitment that they made." While on the one hand, I'm like, "Well, I guess I'm glad that he's honoring his commitment." On the other hand, I'm like, "It doesn't sound exciting.
Jase: It doesn't feel great.
Dedeker: It doesn't feel great on my side.
Jase: I think also putting a lot of rules in place. This is also something that it's like, "I have rules about how much time you can spend doing other things, not with me." This can get very extreme, very controlling. It's like two things like having rules for your partner, or even for yourself, I guess, implies that if your partner could do whatever they wanted, they would not care about you, they would do things to hurt you intentionally, and that they would be dishonest and all this stuff. It's weird when you think about it that way, where it's like,"Okay." We think, "There are rules are to protect us." It's like, "Protect you from who? Protect you from what? Is your partner the thing you need protection from?" In that case, maybe we should rethink this whole being in a relationship with this person.
Emily: It is that mentality of an us versus them thing.
Dedeker: Almost an “us versus each other.”
Emily: Well, exactly. Like us, meaning us, meaning myself versus my partner, rather. Just that they don't have this idea that your partner has your best interests at heart, that they're not automatically going to be an enemy to you in some way.
Dedeker: Definitely.
Emily: We make our partners out to be enemies in our heads sometimes.
Jase: I definitely have, or at least someone who needs to be reined in or needs to be controlled.
Emily: Totally. That they're this wild thing, and that they would do whatever they wanted, if we don't implement these very rigid rules into our life.
Jase: I think that, that we make these rules out of fear, but that they don't actually solve the problem that made us fear that. They just create this other boundary. Not even a boundary, I shouldn't say that, because that word means a different thing. They put up this wall, or some restraint, or maybe give us a thing so that we can be more clearly angry about a thing if it gets broken, rather than addressing like, this fear comes from the fact that I don't trust my partner, is a big thing to deal with but is an important thing to address rather than, "I'm just going to put rules in place to try to rein in this deeper fact that I don't trust my partner, or that I don't think my partner cares about my feelings, or that I don't think my partner would be nice to me if they didn't have to be." I think that's definitely an opportunity to look at that and examine that.
Sonia stone, who is a leader in the polyamorous community, has a great quote about this, and that's that, "Monogamy cannot be a substitute for actually knowing what your own personal boundaries are and the negotiations that have to happen to define rules that are fair to each partner, and are also realistic and relevant."
Emily: I like that a lot.
Dedeker: I feel like anytime a relationship format is the coping mechanism, that seems to be a red flag for me. I feel like people can do in any number of formats. People can choose monogamy as a coping mechanism for jealousy or for insecurity. People can choose hierarchy as the coping mechanism for also insecurity and jealousy. People can choose non-monogamy or relationship anarchy as a coping mechanism for whatever other stuff that they want to avoid. I think that this quote, there's basically no excuse for not knowing your own personal boundaries and values in relationships.
Emily: Yes, absolutely. Let's move on to the next one, something that we talk about a lot on this podcast, and that is that real communication is necessary for healthy relationships. With that, we need to not assume that our partners just always will know everything about us, that they automatically know what we enjoy, what we don't enjoy, because our partners are not mind readers. They can't just always infer, if they're going to be anchoring you or triggering you, they can't just deduce that from the air, as it were. I do think that a lot of us out there, just think like, "Well, if they love me, then they know who I am. They know what I like, and they know what I don't like, and they know what's going to piss me off and what's not." A healthy communication is something that polyamorous people have to get really good at, because they're navigating so many different relationships, and so many different types of people and different types of emotional, contextual, and biases and all of those things. I think that they get really good at learning how to navigate many different potential things that are hard in relationships.
Jase: Doing that through actual direct communication-
Emily: Real communication, yes.
Jase: -rather than just expecting some magical fairytale world where your partner just can guess everything you're feeling.
Dedeker: I think on the show, before we've talked about this idea of relationship as culture, maybe I've gone off about this before. I don't remember.
Emily: Tell us again.
Dedeker: When you're in a relationship, you be create like a little microculture. A culture around, how do we communicate? How do we repair after a fight? How do we appreciate each other? How do we handle chores? How do we handle sex? Stuff like that. Over time, these become things that need maybe less explicit communication after they've been negotiated, and maybe they need to be revisited occasionally. Then once you start dating someone else, it's like, "A new culture."
Emily: I need to do this again.
Dedeker: I need to do this again. I can't just assume that this person comes from the same culture as I do.
Emily: Or as our past partner did.
Dedeker: Yes. That's the thing is that also-- Like this applies on a macro level with actual cultures, not just like, micro-relationship cultures, is that cultures and countries that have historically been much more homogenized, as in there's not been a lot of multiculturalism, there's not been a lot of clashes of culture, typically tend to communicate in ways that are much less direct, because they can get away with it.
Emily: Like Japan.
Dedeker: Like Japan, like many places.
Emily: They move as one Amoeba.
Dedeker: I don't know about that.
Emily: It's just I had never seen anything like it before. I went to Japan, just like the people everyone know, to like, if you're going down the escalator, and you're standing, you go on one side versus the other, if you're walking. It's just the level of polite understanding for everyone was so impressive there.
Dedeker: Of course, there's always going to be individual differences, but it's the thing where countries that have been much more homogenized have not necessarily had to be super direct in communication, because we're all in the same group. We all get the gist versus countries that historically had a lot more influx of different cultures tend to communicate much more explicitly and directly because of that of like, "We're not necessarily on the same page about who goes where, what's the order of things, how we deal with X, Y, Z. We need to be much more explicit in that." I think it's the same thing that happens with people who are non-traditional relationships are dating welcome partners, is that we can't assume that everyone functions the same exact way. We have to make these negotiations over and over again.
Emily: We also have to ask for what we want in relationships. We have to tell our partners, if something is triggering or challenging to us. I think there is this idea that it's way more romantic, to just have your partner do things for you, without you having to ask for them. I would argue that it's actually romantic to be able to have the vulnerability to tell your partner what you need and want. I know in relationships, I tend to often think about the negatives, or remember the negatives, and those are the automatic triggers that may come up rather than celebrating the positives. We want to encourage you in your communication to not only relay the times that are challenging, but also to talk about the amazing things that you're happy about in your relationship, and celebrate the positive. Celebrate when you're both moving forward within the relationship and when you're getting over a trigger that has-- Not necessarily a trigger, but a thing that keeps happening and you're like, "Hey, we did that better this time. We didn't fight in a way that was really challenging for the two of us."
Jase: Celebrate those victories.
Emily: Correct?
Jase: We won't go into it in this episode, but we do really recommend checking out our relationship radar, which is specifically away for doing a regular check-in in your relationship that allows you to share those exciting good things that happened, as well as address things that you want to change, or issues that have come up over the past month, or just making plans for the exciting stuff that you're going to do coming up, or just figuring out logistics. It's been super helpful for a lot of people in their relationship, so just have a structure for doing that communicating.
Emily: Definitely as for all of us.
Jase: It's changed my life for sure. I definitely recommend checking out relationship radar.
Dedeker: Let's move on to number five, which is, it's okay to advocate for yourself and to set boundaries. I think it's easy for many of us to become people pleasers within the context of a relationship. I know for me, particularly in the context of a new relationship, I tend to get really scared that somehow I'm going to scare this person off.
Emily: I do think that that's so interesting to be when you're in the beginning of a relationship. You tend to try to put your best foot forward, but then that also you shave off parts of yourself that might be more unflattering to that person and don't put the entire thing forward.
Dedeker: Well, I like to think that I've gotten better at this, but I have a long history of when getting into a new relationship really putting this pressure on myself to really fit the mold of what this person wants.
Jase: What you think they want.
Dedeker: What I think they want or what I think that they're attracted to.
Emily: Those are two separate things.
Dedeker: Exactly or what I think they're impressed by. That's something that could happen at the beginning of a relationship. For some of us, that's also something that happens throughout the relationship. Sometimes we sacrifice something that we really want or need, or would really make us happy for the good of the relationship. Sometimes those sacrifices are okay, sometimes it is okay to make sacrifices for our relationship, but then sometimes, they're really not okay. I think that we've been socially trained to favor a little bit too much on the side of self-sacrificing for a relationship, and a little bit less on the side of advocating for yourself and your wants and your boundaries affected personally.
Jase: I think it's connected to that kind of mythology of the one. That it's like, well, if, for whatever reason, I've decided this is the one then well, I have to sacrifice those things, rather than continuing to question and look at like, "Will I actually be happy with this rather than just assuming well, I have to end up happy with this because they're the one?"
Dedeker: Definitely. I think that's related to boundaries also. That it is still important to have boundaries to protect ourselves from possible infractions. It's like, at the end of the day, you are the person who's going to defend yourself the best.
Emily: Yes.
Dedeker: I think sometimes in the context of a relationship, we can think like, "Well, it's my partner's responsibility to defend me or take care of my feelings or stuff like that." Yes, your partner, I think should be considerate and should be aware and there should be an open channel of communication about that. Still, at the end of the day, boundaries are the things that you apply to yourself, to protect yourself.
Related to that is, also advocating for the type of relationship you want to have and exactly what kind of relationship you want to look like. I think that's hard because we have all these narratives around selfishness when it comes to advocating for your needs. I think disproportionately women tend to feel selfish and guilty for upholding boundaries. They're more likely to have that boundary hangover and I think that makes things a little bit difficult.
Emily: I definitely was called selfish when I became polyamorous initially.
Jase: Just for reference, we have a whole episode about the basics of boundaries. I would say would be another fundamental one. I would recommend if this is a little bit like, "Wait, what do you mean exactly by that?" That one is Episode 178. It's called the basics of boundaries.
Emily: One of our more popular ones.
Jase: Yes, definitely.
Dedeker: I think related to the stuff we're talking about as far as being entitled to a person's time or a person's body, it's also up to you to advocate to make sure that you're getting adequate time for yourself, not only to take care of yourself, but also to achieve your goals as well. It can be really easy to get caught up in just wanting to make other people happy instead of also asking what actually makes me happy.
There is a study that was done in 2017, that found that monogamous couples are more likely to sacrifice their own needs for the sake of their relationship, while polyamorous couples tend to put their own personal fulfillment first. That's so interesting because I could definitely see this being the headline of polyamorous people are selfish bitches-
Jase: For sure.
Dedeker: -and monogamous people are self-sacrificing saints.
Emily: You can put a different spin on that.
Dedeker: I see the different spin on it being that's like -- I think that's not a bad thing to be advocating for what makes you happy first. It's like put your own mask on first before assisting others is the way that I think about it personally.
Jase: I would also throw out there that there's-- Imagine on the other side of it too. That you're with a partner who's been self-sacrificing for the sake of your relationship and maybe on the one hand, you could think from a selfish standpoint, ironically, "Oh, that's great. They're self sacrificing so I get more of what I want." If this is someone that you love, and someone you do care about, how awful will it be 20, 30 years from now, to learn that they've been unhappy because they haven't been getting something they wanted because they felt like they needed to sacrifice for you?
Not only them potentially being unhappy, but I know for me personally, even on a shorter time scale learning as a relationship is ending that there was this thing that my partner really didn't like about our house, or about the way things were decorated or about something they didn't get to do that they never told me. Then I was like, "Well, shit. I wish we could have done that thing.
I wish you hadn't just self sacrificed to there and pushed back and been like, no, this is what I want." Being on the other side of that sucks too. I would actually argue that for both parties self-sacrificing for the sake of the relationship is not helpful and not ultimately good unless your partner doesn't really love you and they are selfish and then maybe we have a different problem.
Emily: That's a whole other can of worms.
Dedeker: Definitely.
Jase: Then number six, jealousy is often a sign that internal work needs to take place. This is the number one question if someone's polyamorous but what about jealousy? How do you deal with jealousy? This is something that basically if you're going to be non-monogamous if you're going to be polyamorous, you have to examine that. That's why everyone asks you that question.
They asked you about jealousy. It's something that right from the start we're confronted with, how do you handle this? How do you deal with this? I found that jealousy can be a very powerful thing for your own self-growth and can also be a great indicator of things that are going on in your relationship but there's a subtle difference here.
It's basically this idea that we're taught that jealousy equals love. That if you really love someone, you also have to be really jealous. By jealous, we really mean possessive. You have to be very possessive that no one else can have this thing or look at this thing or even want this thing. That there's a controllingness that comes with it. It gets tied to a fear in ourselves so then if I do feel jealousy because we associate it with love, any negative action I take because of my jealousy is justified. It's okay. Maybe it's even romantic. I think that non-monogamy and polyamory immediately challenges that for people.
I think that there's-- I was actually having a really good conversation with my partner Caitlin about this the other day. She put it basically that she's being polyamorous, she's like, "I still experienced jealousy sometimes about my partner's time or about other people in their life. Maybe I'm jealous of this thing or I'm jealous of that amount of time they have or I'm jealous they got to do this thing or I'm jealous of how attractive I think they are." Whatever it is. I can be jealous of things, but that jealousy isn't tied to feeling like I own my partner. It's that distinction between -- Because I get jealous sometimes. Dedeker gets jealous sometimes. Emily gets jealous sometimes. She's like, "Man, maybe not."
Emily: The difference is that the jealousy is often about you and not about them.
Jase: Right.
Emily: I think 9 times out of 10 it's really just about you. Because I saw a girl, a woman rather that I go do Comic-Con and stuff with for Nintendo. She wrote something regarding her partner and said, "I really feel like if I see women talking to my partner, then automatically I'm going to think something bad about them or I'm going to-- They need to really show that they're not going after my partner." She got a lot of backlash about that and I think rightfully so because it's like, "Wait a minute, what's happening with you that you just automatically see a woman talking to your partner and think that means that my partner is going to go off with them or that the woman wants to do something with them, or what?"
Dedeker: How is this other woman supposed to signal that she's not doing?
Emily: Exactly?
Dedeker: What's the clear signal?
Emily: That's a great question. I have no idea.
Jase: I don't think there could be.
Emily: Yes, exactly. Is it a stance? Is it a look? I have no idea.
Dedeker: Is it how we're going to keep six feet in between us?
Emily: Exactly. Like I'm not going to ride in an elevator because I'm Mike Pence and I don't want anyone to think that I'm doing anything with this lady, stuff like that.
Jase: This idea that if loving someone means that them being happy and having a fulfilled life is important to you, like you do care about them and want them to be happy, a controlling type of jealousy is actually the opposite of that. I would challenge that idea and say that that type of very controlling jealousy where you want to limit another person's freedom is the opposite of love actually. That that's not love.
Dedeker: What is it then?
Jase: That it's fear, it's control, it's coercion. Can even become abuse. But that it's not love that it's in no way related to love. I think emotion is a valid, or I'm sorry that jealousy is a valid emotion that like we said, we all feel it sometimes, but it's just an emotion you feel. It's not a justification for controlling another person or wanting to limit them from something that might make them happy. Even if you're in a monogamous relationship, you're in it because your partner also wants to be in that monogamous relationship, not because you're not letting them do it not because you're controlling them.
Emily: They're stuck in, they're constantly like out there looking for other people or maybe interested in other people.
Jase: There was a study done that was published in Time Magazine and it says, "If you think that having multiple romantic partners would elicit more jealousy than being in a monogamous relationship, you're wrong." According to a 2017 study published in perspectives on psychological science, that's not necessarily the case. The study which surveyed over 1,500 people in monogamous relationships and over 600 people in consensually non-monogamous relationships found that the people in the consensually non-monogamous relationships, including polyamory, swinging various types, scored lower on jealousy and higher on trust than those in monogamous relationships. It like reminds me of that whole like if you love someone, let them go. That idea of like, I trust you because I know you're with me because you choose to be and not because I've got you held so tight you don't have a choice. Then lastly, also on the other side, don't weaponize this.
Dedeker: Yes, because I think that's one of the primary criticisms of a lot of the non-monogamy advice is that someone can then turn around and if their partner has legitimate concerns or has insecurities or jealousy that come up, it can generate this kind of very careless take on it of like, well that's just your own problem. Or that's just your own personal work to work on.
Or like you got to go to therapy or whatever. Maybe there's maybe part of that's true, but part of it is also like maybe they're just seeking comfort from you or there's something that needs to be talked about or is that there is something that needs to be fixed or repaired or something like that. With the whole jealousy being assigned, the internal work that needs to take place, that's probably true. But don't throw that in your partner's face when they're jealous because I 100% guarantee it's not going to go over well.
Emily: I was reading this awesome article called the science of soulmates and there is a Marist poll that said that 73% of Americans believe in soulmates.
Dedeker: That's a huge number. That's a lot of people.
Emily: I don't know if that's really like in all of America, but according to this poll, 73% so, okay. More men than women believe that they are destined to find the one. Not surprised by that at all.
Dedeker: Well, okay, I really want to question that and not as in to question that it's accurate.
Emily: I can send you the article. It's right here.
Dedeker: Let me finish. Just not that I want a question that is accurate more than I want a question why is that?
Emily: Because it's romantic.
Jase: In every movie and every book-
Dedeker: Exactly, because we've beaten over the head with it since day one.
Dedeker: Well do you think it's related to, I mean, I've heard this theory come up in talking about media and how heterosexual relationships are portrayed in the media, but that there's maybe a little bit more of this messaging toward men from our movies and TV shows that it's like you have a right to end up with the woman at the end?
Emily: Totally.
Jase: Well, it's like I was saying, I think that's-
Dedeker: Like you're entitled to find that soulmate at the end of the day.
Jase: I think that's the byproduct of this, this romantic idea of the one.
Emily: Isn't that like in cell culture and stuff like that?
Dedeker: Soulmates but-
Emily: Well that, but just like I'm entitled to X, Y, and Z. More men than women believe they're destined to find their one-
Jase: Just slightly though. 74% to 71% so still super high.
Emily: Super high. Yes. 79% of people younger than 45 believe in soulmates. Well, only 69% of those are 45 do. But that's still a ton. That's still insane.
Dedeker: If you want to know more of the breakdown on that because the Marist poll actually has like a more specific breakdown that people in the West are less likely to believe that their soulmate-
Jase: In the West meaning Western States of United States?
Emily: Yes. College graduates are less likely, only a little bit like it drops down to for instance, like in the Western United States it's like 63% of people said yes, they believe in soulmates as opposed to the 78% or whatever in the South. Stuff like that.
Jase: Interesting.
Emily: A lot. Well, fascinating stuff. All right. Science shows that people who believe in soulmates or the one are more likely to break up, give up or have more difficult relationships.
Jase: That's interesting.
Emily: That's very interesting.
Jase: I also was hearing a little while ago, and I'm sorry I didn't look this up before this episode, but also similarly a study about Christians who wait till marriage to have sex are also more likely to get divorced or break up or like have marital problems or things like that. That's also tied to that idea of the one. It's like, well you have to save yourself because-
Emily: There's only one out there. .
Dedeker: That was literally how it was pitched to me, it's like you need to wait until God sends you the man that's going to be your husband because he has a plan.
Jase: Regardless of whether it's based in Christianity or not like this mythology, the one though is related. It also seems to cause more problems than it solves.
Dedeker: I will say this is anecdotal, that's my caveat. What I've noticed among friends of mine, because for a period of time I was working with these people in this particular dance company where a lot of the people who worked at this dance company, watched a lot of TV shows and watched a lot of the OSI and watched a lot of modern soap operas like Romeo-
Emily: I was like, what?
Dedeker: Romance focus TV shows.
Emily: Gossip girl.
Dedeker: A lot of their ideas around how relationships should be were based in those things. Or she'd be like, well, I want to be like this TV couple. Some of them would be like, I want to have a boyfriend like this TV couple. Pretty consistently, all their relationships were very, very dramatic. A lot of lot, a lot, a lot of issues, a lot of tumultuous relationships.
Again, it's anecdotal, but I could totally see the problem there of if you're looking to these very heightened and hyper traumatized versions of relationships and versions of people being so passionate and connected to each other, that doesn't necessarily translate to real life. It puts these very, very high stakes pressure on particular people in relationships.
Emily: Regarding this soulmate thing. I just wanted to say one other thing. That researcher Raymond Knee and his colleagues, they were interested in trying to figure out if there were people who believed that there is one person meant for just you or not. Obviously, it looks like 79% of people do, which is a lot. But there are people who have things that are either a destiny belief or a growth belief. A destiny belief is that soulmate type belief that I'm destined to be with one specific person. I have a soulmate, I have one person who's meant for me. Then a growth belief, our relationships progress slowly and we grow to fit together. Relationships take effort. You can build love.
Going back to this whole thing of challenging your beliefs about the one, I think consensual non-monogamy does go more along those like growth beliefs in addition to feeling like I can have many different ones. I can have many different soulmates in my life and it doesn't necessarily just have to mean that person is out there always. That said and I have to go looking for them for the rest of my life.
Dedeker: Well, so I'm looking also at this science of soulmate article and I want to piggyback off of what you were explaining the destiny beliefs versus the growth beliefs. I think this is really interesting that they point out that the questions that people who believe in soulmates ask themselves are things like, is this the person? Can I do better than that person? Is this the best that I can do or is this the one? Is this it?
Emily: Somebody, the one person who's ever proposed to me in my life was like, I think you're the best that I can get. That was in their proposal. I was like, wow. No.
Dedeker: This is in counterpoint to people with growth beliefs who asked themselves different questions like, Are we a good fit? How can I be a better partner? How can we get closer? Or what can I do to make this better? I know. It's so fascinating, and I think even if you're applying that to a monogamous relationship that seems like such a better team. It's agreeing to it.
Jase: I think it's ironic that this belief in the one can, on the one hand, lead people to stay in a bad relationship that's making both of you unhappy for a long time or can lead--
Emily: Constantly bounce around.
Jase: Yes, can lead people to constantly bail on relationships because it's like, "As soon as I'm interested in someone else, that must mean they weren't the one." Or as soon as things aren't fairytale-perfect all the time, that must mean they're not the one. I better keep looking.
Emily: That's like in the adultery culture, the mentality of, "Well, I was in love with my wife for a number of years, we had kids, however, I am so incredibly passionate about this new person. I'm going to leave my wife and be with them because they must actually be the one that I'm interested in or that I am allowed to be with or should be with."
Jase: That's our list of these seven things. This was a fun episode getting to go across--
Emily: It's a big watch of many things.
Jase: -All these different things. Just delve a little into all of them. We also recommended a few specific episodes if you want to dive deeper into some of these. I definitely recommend checking that out.