219. Interchangeable
Is it just me? It might just be me, and I might just be completely misinterpreting the situation. Maybe when they say polyamory makes long-distance relationships easier, maybe they mean in some other way. Tell me if I’m wrong!
I fully admit that not everyone is like me, and in fact this might just be me. But in my relationships, if I have needs, they are needs that need to be met per person. So if I want sex with a person, I might not want sex with another person. If I want cuddles with a person, I might not want cuddles with another. So the idea of a basic intimacy quota is to me quite bizarre. But certainly in the first 10 or so years of being poly, I got this impression from a lot of nonmonogamous people that they have a sex quota or an intimacy quota that they can conveniently meet by being nonmonogamous. Your partner doesn’t like certain activities? No problem, be poly!
So if you have different ways of seeing or doing this, tell me in the comments. I definitely don’t think other ways than mine are bad and I’m not going to argue, though I might be bluntly mystified.
Thank you, my kind Patreon contributors, including Lyrania and Alex. 🙂 I hope you’re into this!
(If you’re a Patreon supporter you get behind the scenes photos, a photo of my cat at the time of the upload, a bit of warning when I’m going to start drawing on Twitch, etc.)
And finally, if you don’t get the reference in the last panel, this handy 30-second clip from Romy and Michele’s High School Reunion should help:
I get both, personally. There’s specific desires for intimacy (be it emotional, sexual, social, etc.), which are towards specific people and it is distinctly offputting to try and “meet” them by having that intimacy with another partner (though having that kind of intimacy with another partner for its own sake is totally cool!). But sometimes I need intimacy for me, that’s not specific to another person, which does get addressed by any of my partners with which I am intimate in the way I would like to be intimate.
I’d consider that kind of thing a red flag, but not a dealbreaker.
Interesting! Thank you for sharing how it is for you. 🙂
Without interchangeable needs for intimacy with different partners, I find it « easier » in the way that my « local » partner can be a support and a presence of some sort. They don’t feel the need for intimacy with another partner, but they do prevent the loneliness I’d feel in a mono long-distance relationship. If that makes sense (sorry, I’m not always too good at explaining myself…)
That makes total sense! 🙂 So yeah, maybe I feel loneliness in a different way or for different reasons? *ponders all the things*
Agree with both those above – my partners aren’t interchangeable, but they can fill some needs interchangeably.
That’s an interesting way to put it! Cool. 🙂
Hi, i agree with sienf a lot. it is not WHY i am poly. And i sometimes miss intimacy with one person if they are away, especially if we are usually more often locally close and therefore have more physical intimacy. if it’s about this person, or about showing affection for this person, then it’s not interchangeable.
if i am just horny, on the other hand… or if i just need someone to listen to me…
And, being poly, i do find it practical to have different activities (and different ways / levels of closeness and time spend together) with different people. Especially because my dynamics benefit from me letting them be the way that fits for all.
Again, the “practical“ isn’t WHY i am poly.
I am poly / relationship anarchist because it enables me to express myself and my different feelings for different people and let others be what works for them and find where it overlaps.
Yes, now that you mention it I see that there could be a world of difference between “this is a nice side effect of being poly” and “I’m poly so that I don’t have to be celibate while my partner is far away”. HmmmmmMMMMmmmmm.
I definitely feel what a lot of people are saying. Here’s how I’d put it: As a human I have a bunch of needs and included in those are social needs. If I don’t see or interact with any people all day, I get lonely. So interacting with people who I am connected to meets a general need for interaction and connection. However, I do also have a desire for continued connection to the people who are important in my life and that is not interchangeable.
I’d say that the exact comment that the person says in this comic is a red flag because it is very minimizing of the emotional difficulties of long distance relationships and does kind of carry with it the idea that most of what you get out of a relationship is interchangeable.
I’d also add that the difficulty involved in long distance relationships depends on the nature of the relationship. The same person can have long distance relationships that are really connected when people are in the same city but then have minimal connection or stress in between and also have ongoing romantic relationships that are very challenging to have as long distance relationships.
Huh. This would explain why my boyfriend still wants sex with me in particular even when his sexual needs are filled elsewhere.
Like the commenters at the top, my partners fulfill my needs in their own ways, and while they aren’t themselves interchangeable, they can often fulfill my emotional needs interchangeably. Again, this is a benefit of being poly, not the reason for being poly. If it were the reason, I’d do just as well to have open relationships and not bother with the effort of having relationships with multiple people.
Also relevant: when I’m really missing a long-distance partner, a local partner can comfort me about it, or distract me for a bit. I mean, so can friends, but most friends don’t provide the level of physical intimacy that I often find most comforting.
For me, in addition to the previous reasoning that others mention, there is also the benefit of being poly in a long distance relationship that if my partner is dating someone else, it’s less stressful for me. If there is some immediate need, or they are having some kind of crisis, it’s less stressful for me if I know that they happen to have a partner nearby, that will be there to support them even if I’m 8000 miles away and therefore unable to be there in half an hour. So there is also less pressure on the relationship in general, and I feel less guilty if I can’t be there straight away to be with them. We’re not interchangeable, but we can still support each other. And also, if our mutual partner is having difficulties but struggling to talk about it, my metamour can give me a heads up that they need a little extra time, which they might be able to indicate in a way that can be understood non-verbally, but not able to be conveyed via anything short of being in physical contact.
This I can 100% understand! But it doesn’t feel like a romantic relationship thing. I always feel better if I know that a loved one far away and in a difficult situation has someone supportive and loving close by who can be there for them, and that person doesn’t have to be a romantic or sexual partner. I guess what I mean is, this would be true if I were monogamous too – and polyamory means that the person who’s closer to them and there for them might be a sexual or romantic partner, which to me doesn’t change much in the grand scheme, you know?
I don’t think that the comment by the person on the left is a warning sign necessarily, though it can be combined with other things you know about them.
I’ve never actually found myself dating more than one person at a time, but I do consider myself poly, and I always thought that one of the advantages of being poly is that it can free your partners from having to fulfill all your needs. People don’t typically expect that of their friends, for a comparison. They would be fine if they had one friend who wants to go to conventions with them and a different one who wants to play cards, for example, though they want to do each activity with a friend. So if you’re someone who wants a romantic partner who can help you process your emotions, go dancing, cuddle, talk every day, and go on road trips with, if you happen to be poly that doesn’t have to be just one person. If you meet someone you really like who only wants to do some of those things, you could date them without worrying about if they would be okay with doing everything you need.
And yes, I think to some extent people do want to be intimate with each of their partners, but since there’s so many kinds of intimacy someone might not need every kind with each partner.
I’m currently on the other side of it–I’m in an ldr, and my boyfriend has a girlfriend, and they live together. I find it easier than the ldrs I’ve had where I was the only person my partners were dating! True, it would be similarly easier if my boyfriend had a best friend who lived with him, though.