Introduction

My friend, Tacitus, when I was describing him as a friend said “I don’t understand the taxonomy of friendship”. I took this to mean that he found making friends and understanding friendship difficult.

I was miles off.

Tacitus is polyamorous! For him, platonic friendship and sexual connection are no different from one another – indeed, one can slide into the other (and out again).

During a conversation, he said “polyamorous folks look at monogamous people with horror. Seeking all your wants and needs be met by one person is a huge burden to place on them”. This is something that I could relate to.

That led me to ask questions like “Is polyamory actually more natural than monogamy?”

---

A history of polyamory

Monogamy developed on humans distinct from other primates, which all use harem systems, because it’s impossible for the human male to know whether a particular female is in oestrus. He therefore cannot know that offspring are his own unless he guards all his females all of the time, hence the development of monogamy as an arrangement unique amongst primates. Eunuchs enabled humans to reintroduce the harem system by creating non-breeding males.

“Castration”, Gary Taylor, Routledge London 2002

Ancient Greece and other ancient civilizations around the Mediterranean and Asia Minor indeed offer fascinating insights into diverse relationship structures, including elements that could be seen as polyamorous. Here are some examples and contexts where polyamorous practices or attitudes might be inferred:

Ancient Greece

1. Symposia: In ancient Greece, symposia (drinking parties) were social gatherings where men engaged in intellectual discussions, entertainment, and various forms of sexual activity. These gatherings sometimes involved multiple partners and could be seen as a space where polyamorous interactions occurred.
2. Mythology: Greek mythology is replete with stories of gods and goddesses having multiple lovers. Zeus, for instance, had numerous consorts and offspring with various goddesses and mortals. While mythological practices don’t always reflect everyday life, they do suggest a cultural acceptance of multiple relationships.
3. Pederasty: The practice of pederasty, where older men formed educational and often sexual relationships with younger boys, was prevalent in ancient Greece. These relationships existed alongside marital bonds, indicating a form of polyamorous acceptance in specific social contexts.

Ancient Rome

1. Emperors and Elites: Many Roman emperors and elites had multiple partners and engaged in extramarital affairs. For example, Emperor Augustus was known to have several lovers. Roman society, particularly among the upper classes, was relatively tolerant of such relationships.
2. Domestic Arrangements: Wealthy Romans often had complex domestic arrangements, including wives, concubines, and slaves, with whom they had sexual relationships. This created a form of polyamorous household structure, though often rooted in power dynamics rather than mutual consent.

Near East and Asia Minor

1. Mesopotamia: In ancient Mesopotamia, there is evidence of polygamy, particularly among kings and nobles. The Code of Hammurabi, for instance, includes laws regulating relationships with multiple wives and concubines.
2. Hittite Civilization: The Hittites, based in modern-day Turkey, also practiced polygamy, especially among the ruling class. Kings and nobles often had multiple wives and concubines, reflecting a societal acceptance of polyamorous relationships within certain contexts.
3. Egypt: In ancient Egypt, while monogamy was the norm for common people, pharaohs and high-ranking officials often had multiple wives and concubines. This practice was partly for political alliances and ensuring a large royal lineage.

Cultural and Social Contexts

1. Religious and Ritual Practices: Many ancient societies had religious and ritual practices that involved sexual rites, sometimes with multiple participants. These practices were often linked to fertility cults and agricultural cycles, suggesting a form of communal polyamory.
2. Matrilineal Societies: Some ancient societies, particularly in the Mediterranean and Near East, had matrilineal structures where lineage and inheritance were traced through the mother. These societies sometimes had more flexible attitudes toward relationships and sexuality, allowing for multiple partners.

While these examples indicate the presence of polyamorous practices or attitudes in ancient civilizations, it’s important to note that the concept of polyamory as we understand it today—based on mutual consent, respect, and equality—may not have been the norm. Many of these relationships were influenced by social status, power dynamics, and cultural norms specific to their time.

---

Mythological polyamory

Chthonic societies, often associated with the underworld or subterranean aspects of mythology, aren’t typically known for their social structures or cultural practices in the way that ancient or historical civilizations are. However, if we dive into the realm of mythology and folklore, there are some intriguing parallels we can draw.

In various mythologies, chthonic deities and beings are often depicted with complex relationships and interactions that could be seen as polyamorous. For instance, in Greek mythology, Hades, the god of the underworld, and his relationship with Persephone is quite famous. While their relationship is traditionally monogamous, the mythological world around them is teeming with gods, nymphs, and other beings engaging in multiple relationships and intricate liaisons.

Looking at historical societies that revered chthonic deities, like the ancient Greeks and Romans, we find that their mythologies and religious practices sometimes involved communal and open celebrations, such as the Bacchanalia, which could be interpreted as having polyamorous elements. These festivals often celebrated life, death, and fertility, with participants engaging in various forms of social and sexual expressions that might align with modern ideas of polyamory.

In contemporary times, some neo-pagan or modern polytheistic groups might draw inspiration from chthonic mythologies and incorporate polyamorous principles into their social structures. These modern adaptations often blend ancient beliefs with contemporary values, creating a unique tapestry of relationships and spiritual practices.

---

From polyamory to monogamy

If polyamory were the norm in prehistoric societies, a shift to monogamous societies would likely be influenced by a combination of the reasons outlined above. Here’s a hypothetical sequence of how some of those factors might account for this shift:

1. Religious Influence – As organized religions emerged, many of them codified monogamous marriage into their doctrines. The spread of these religions would have promoted monogamy over polyamory, with religious leaders advocating for monogamous relationships as moral and righteous.
2. Legal and Political Structures – The development of more complex legal and political systems would have necessitated clearer definitions of family and inheritance. Monogamous marriage simplifies legal matters related to inheritance, property rights, and lineage, making it a more convenient structure for emerging states and empires.
3. Patriarchal Systems – Patriarchal systems that emphasized male control over women’s reproductive rights would favour monogamous marriage. Monogamy ensures clearer lines of paternity and inheritance, which are crucial for maintaining patriarchal lineage and property control.
4. Economic Considerations – As societies became more settled and agricultural, the accumulation and transfer of property became more important. Monogamous marriage helps to ensure that property and wealth are transferred in a predictable manner, reducing disputes and ensuring economic stability.
5. Social Stability – Monogamous marriage is often seen as a stabilising force within societies. As communities grew larger and more complex, social stability would have become a priority. Monogamous relationships provide a clear and predictable structure for raising children and maintaining social order.
6. Cultural Norms and Traditions – With the establishment of settled communities and the development of cultural traditions, monogamy could become embedded as a cultural norm. These norms would be reinforced over generations, making monogamy the expected and accepted practice.
7. Jealousy and Emotional Challenges – Human emotions like jealousy and the complexities of managing multiple partners could lead societies to favour monogamy. A single, stable partnership may be seen as easier to manage emotionally and practically.
8. Public Perception and Stigma – As monogamy became more prevalent and promoted by religious, legal, and cultural institutions, polyamorous relationships might be stigmatized. This stigma would further encourage a shift toward monogamous norms.
9. Influence of Colonialism – Colonial powers often imposed their own social structures, including monogamous marriage, on the societies they controlled. This imposition would contribute to a global shift towards monogamy, particularly in colonised regions.
10. Media Representation – While not applicable to prehistoric times, as societies developed writing and other forms of media, these platforms would reflect and reinforce the norm of monogamous marriage. Myths, stories, and later, literature and other media would portray monogamy as the ideal.

Hypothetical Path of Transition

1. Initial Complexity: Prehistoric societies, if polyamorous, would have flexible and fluid relationship structures, likely suited to small, close-knit groups where kinship and communal child-rearing were prevalent.
2. Emergence of Agriculture: With the advent of agriculture, property ownership and inheritance became important, necessitating clearer family structures.
3. Rise of States and Empires: As societies grew and centralized authority emerged, the need for social stability and clear legal structures would favour monogamous relationships.
4. Religious Codification: Organized religions codified and spread monogamous norms, often integrating them into legal and social systems.
5. Cultural Reinforcement: Over time, monogamous marriage became a deeply ingrained cultural norm, reinforced by legal, religious, and social institutions.

In summary, if polyamory were the norm in prehistoric societies, the shift to monogamous societies would likely be driven by a combination of religious, legal, economic, and social factors, each reinforcing the others to establish monogamy as the dominant relationship structure.

---

Modern polyamorous societies

There are a number of historical and contemporary examples where polyamorous relationships were or are practiced:

1. The Mosuo of China: The Mosuo people, living around Lugu Lake in Yunnan and Sichuan provinces, practice a form of walking marriage called “tisese.” In this matrilineal society, women can have multiple partners, and children are raised within the mother’s household. This system allows for polyamorous relationships and emphasizes the independence of women in choosing their partners.
2. The Kaingang of Brazil: Among the Kaingang people, polyamorous relationships are part of their traditional social structure. Both men and women can have multiple partners, and these relationships are often fluid and based on mutual consent and respect.
3. The Trobriand Islanders: Located in Papua New Guinea, the Trobriand Islanders have a culture that embraces sexual freedom, especially among young people. Relationships can be polyamorous, and there is a strong emphasis on sexual expression and autonomy.
4. Certain Native American Tribes: Some Native American tribes, such as the Cheyenne, practiced forms of polyamory through communal marriage systems. These arrangements allowed for multiple partners and communal child-rearing practices, reflecting a flexible approach to relationships and family structures.
5. Modern Polyamorous Communities: In contemporary times, there are numerous polyamorous communities around the world. These communities often draw on historical practices and adapt them to modern values of consent, communication, and mutual respect. They provide support and structure for individuals and families engaging in polyamorous relationships.

These societies highlight the human capacity for diverse and flexible relationship structures.

---

Is polyamory a sexuality or a choice?

Whether polyamory is a sexuality or a choice sparks a lot of debate. I am not going to resolve it here!

Polyamory could be seen both as a choice and, for some people, as something that feels like an inherent part of their identity.

Polyamory as a Choice

For many people, polyamory is a relationship style they choose. They may decide to pursue it based on their beliefs, values, or preferences about love, commitment, and connection. These individuals might feel equally capable of being monogamous or polyamorous but choose polyamory because it aligns better with their needs or life goals at a particular time.

Polyamory as an Orientation

For others, polyamory feels more like a core part of their identity – something intrinsic, like a sexual orientation. These people might feel that they naturally have the capacity for loving multiple people, and attempting to remain monogamous could feel limiting or uncomfortable. In this case, polyamory can feel like something they are, rather than something they do.

Intersection of Choice and Identity

Some people experience polyamory as a blend of both. They might naturally be inclined to love multiple people but feel it’s up to them how, when, or whether to act on that. Even though polyamory feels “right” for them, it might still require conscious choices about boundaries, relationship structures, and communication.

Comparison to Sexuality

Just as sexual orientation isn’t always a straightforward choice (you don’t choose whom you’re attracted to), some people experience polyamory as something beyond their control. However, unlike orientation, polyamory often involves a deliberate choice about relationship structure, even if the underlying feelings are naturally polyamorous.

Except there’s another term for polyamory by choice

The umbrella term “consensual non-monogamy” describes a variety of relationship models that are not monogamous. From “open” relationships between two people where each member is permitted to have external sexual adventure, to true polyamorous relationships where individuals experience romantic love towards multiple partners.

Polyamorous relationships do not have to be sexual is a key distinguisher from open relationships, which by their definition are sexually open.

---

Polyamory in modern western culture

Whilst Western society is so heavily biased towards monogamy that any suggestion of an alternative way to arrange one’s life and relationships is met with horror, there a few instances in modern culture where a film or book’s protagonist is in love with more than one person … however, there is almost always a forced resolution that requires a selection of a single partner before the film or book can end.

If we consider “The Hunger Games” or “Twilight” the female protagonist is forced to choose whom she loves more from two males pursuant of her affections. How much more interesting and challenging would these films/books have been had she ultimately settled down with both her beaus?

Jealously, though not an entirely unknown feeling, is nevertheless foreign to me. I’m not possessive, figuring that no one should have exclusive rights to somebody else, as if a lover were a piece of property.

Lie With Me, Phillipe Besson (trans Molly Ringwald), page 78

This is a key feeling of polyamorists towards monogamists; polyamorists are essentially less subject to jealousy, celebrating their respective partners as free agents rather than possessions to be guarded. It can seem to a polyamorous person, for whom polyamory is a sexual identity rather than a choice, that monogamy sets us and our partners up for failing, since no one can truly fulfil every need for of their partner – such a demand is a terrible burden to place on another human being.

I believe that you can’t control or choose your sexuality
I brought that trust is more important than monogamy
I believe that your most attractive features are you heart and soul

Affirmation – Savage Garden

Is this a declaration for polyamory? It’s never explicitly mentioned in the song yet the song is a wonderful exploration of acceptance and love.

---

So what does that mean for Jay?

About a year ago I came out to my husband as non-binary, needing castration to fully express my eunuch identity, and as having several Dark Fantasies. Several months ago, when talking to my husband I casually threw in that perhaps I needed to find a Dom that I could have a regular relationship with.

My husband immediately saw that for what it was – a secondary intimate relationship.

I think that since I didn’t see it as anything wrong or unusual and that I believe that I can give my love freely to multiple people, that perhaps I could have a polyamorous element to my personality.

My husband would never accept that.

The choice is polyamory or him.

After twenty-seven years, I owe him: I choose him.

---

Finally