I can be single, polyamorous,
monogamous and something in-between all at the same time. I’m tempted to call it the polyamory –
monogamy continuum or the monogamy – polyamory continuum. Yet, the concept of a continuum seems way too
linear to me.
If I look at all the ways that one
can be intimate: sexual, physical, spiritual, emotional, recreational, and
playful (to name just a few), I can see how intimacy and sexuality can be so
incredibly complex. Each of these categories
or forms of intimacy can be broken down much much more and potentially have
their own continuums, degrees and complexities associated with each of
them. Take sex or sexual intimacy for example. Sex could be physical or non-physical,
genital or non-genital. It could include
emotional intimacy or not, or include different types of emotional caring. What I am describing cannot be easily defined
in one word or with one label. Yet, many
of us describe and categorize ourselves based on all of these intimacy
components and more.
A major tenet in all of my work is
that we all have the right to self-identify.
In addition, we all have the right to define what our self-identity
means. What is most interesting to me is
that in most cases, I believe, none of us fit other people’s assumptions about
any label we choose. The beauty of what
happens in relationships, love and intimacy is what happens beyond the words, the
intellect and, certainly, beyond the category or identity. How can we describe the emotional, caring,
heartfelt, erotic, aroused, sensual, sexual connection we can have with a
particular person? How can we describe
what it means to feel many of these things in many different combinations for
many people? The possibilities are
endless. Even basic concepts aren’t
easily definable. What is sex? Can I have sex not even touching someone? Can I be in a sexual relationship with
someone I have not had sex with? Would
that relationship help define me as monogamous or polyamorous?
Often, I see people shifting their polyamorous
or monogamous definitions of self based on what is visible in their sexuality
and relationships. I want to decry the
need to change what we call ourselves based on what is only visible from the
outside when so much is going on inside and the complexity is so vast. In her book Polyamory: the New Love without
Limits, Deborah Anapol writes, “…polyamory has more to do with an internal
attitude of letting love evolve without expectations and demands than it does
with the number of partners involved” (p.4).
I, too, have started talking about
polyamory as a mindset and not necessarily something only to do with whom we
have sex with or whom we have as a partner.
For example, I have a friend who is a playwright and in one of her
plays, she shares experiences of going camping with one person, but remarks
that often they both saw the benefit of opening up their camp circle and
welcoming other people around their camp fire.
I told her that her play (or at least that part) was polyamorous in
nature. This is all said with the
awareness that there may be times they only want to camp by themselves and not
forgetting that sometimes we may only want to do something by ourselves, which
is probably our most important relationship of all.
Longer is not better than
shorter. Shorter is not better than
longer. Sexual is not better than
emotional. Emotional is not better than
sexual. The intellect and spirit is not
better than the body. The body is not better
than the intellect. Living is not more
intimate than dying. One moment with a stranger
can be as important as that with the love of my life. My mind and self-definition is not more
important than the fullness of my heart and body.
I believe we live in a society that
does not teach intimacy skills, relationship skills or how to live and die. As opposed to what we often get taught about
relationships in this society, I think relationships are to be lived creatively. Life is to be lived creatively. Our dying should be a creative process. It is always important to remember that if we
truly want to know how someone identifies, we have to ask what they mean when
they use a particular label or word to describe themselves. It is in that spirit that I identify as
single, monogamous and polyamorous and something in-between and all of them
alone and combined.
Copyright 2007 by
Susan Miranda. All
rights reserved. No part of this writing may be reproduced or
transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including
photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system,
without permission in writing from the copyright holder. For reprint
permission, email miranda_susan@yahoo.com.
