Polyamory Observations #10

In the last couple of weeks, there have been a couple of pieces that I've stumbled across that have, in one form or another, asked about the combination of "power exchange dynamics" and polyamory in relationships. Specifically, there has been some delineation of a perceived variance in philosophy between what I would call "vanilla" polyamory and polyamory that is linked to a power exchange relational dynamic.

I think it is a conversation that creates discomfort and, potentially, disagreement between people who practice polyamory. I believe that there is a distinct difference in perspective between those whose "alternative lifestyle" IS polyamory, and those who are into the multi-leveled alternative living choices of D/s or M/s power exchange linked to polyamorous relationship formation.

It is a variance that is deeply rooted in how one sees the world.

"Vanilla" poly people place huge emphasis on equality and fairness. The ground level understanding between polyamorous partners in these relationships is that everyone has the same rights, the same opportunities, the same freedoms. Polyamory, as it is practiced in the absence of "kink," is about making sure that all parties feel listened to, heard, honored, and empowered to make the choices, with regard to their relationships, that will make them happy. It is my understanding that most people who practice polyamory, in this form, are focused on the polyamory itself -- polyamory is a philosophy and a relational style that people embrace, and then that way of thinking defines the relationships that they create.

Within the BDSM community, polyamory works differently. To begin with, there is an understanding, in power exchange relationships, that things are NOT equal. People who enter into D/s or M/s relationships negotiate and deliberately define unequal opportunities and power structures. That things might not be fair or balanced in a variety of life arenas, is simply the foundational assumption in these relationships. Polyamory, as a lifestyle choice, sometimes becomes a structural add on to power exchange relationships. People involved in D/s and M/s often experience the multiplicity of partners in response to shifts and currents within the defined power structure. Often, polyamorous relating is driven by or limited by the needs and demands of the "controlling" partner. That changes the fundamental nature of the practice.

So, while in "vanilla" poly groupings, it may be that everyone links up in any number of combinations, all driven by individual preference and volition, that does not generally occur on the power exchange side of things.

I would point to our household because it serves as an example of the power exchange/polyamory dynamic with which I am most familiar. In our family, He is the Master. I am the slave. That means something very specific. It means that He defines the way our family will operate -- at every level, and in every respect. He, within that framework, has significantly more leeway to choose His own path, and to make His own choices and decisions. Forming other relationships is, in theory at least, going to be easier and more straightforward for Him. If He comes to believe that there is another relationship that He wants to enter into, He can do that and expect that "we" will facilitate that in whatever ways that are required. That doesn't mean that there is no potential for creating "other" attachments for either T or I. It simply is more complex, requiring the negotiation of the power dynamic along with the other logistics of beginning a new relationship.

It seems to me that there is a tendency to distrust and judge each other when we come to this conversation. Perhaps it is a perspective issue for me. I just find that (with the exception of a very few good friends) many "vanilla" poly people do not approve of what it is we do. It is not uncommon to find discussion fora and chat settings where the introduction of power exchange issues into the poly conversation brings on some level of negative feedback. I find that unfortunate. If we cannot reach across this small divide to see one another as companions rather than foes, I don't see much hope for us ever moving the "outside" world to a point of including our choices in the larger social order.

swan