One of the things I'm often asked to stress when I give a talk on
bisexuality, or indeed write an article, is our diversity. Time after time,
bisexuals are presented as promiscuous, and incapable of 'settling down'
with one partner. This of course is nonsense. Being attracted to people on
a basis other than gender identity doesn't mean that you can't fall in love
with and share a monogamous life with one person. A fair bit of my time,
therefore is spent presenting that side of our community, and saying that it
be should be recognised, that it's as much a part of us as any other
life-style choice.
It's just as valid. But then, so is the stereotype.
I'm the stereotype. Well, I'm not really, in many ways I'd say I'm not at
all. But when people hear details of my lifestyle, they think I am.
I suppose that's their call - it's all relative. I'm not monogamous. It's not
a dogmatic thing, and I have considered it seriously in a couple of cases,
but by and large I have problems with it. Not just the practice, but the
theory. The idea that loving one person should reduce your capacity to love
another is, to me, a very odd notion. Loving one person has always
increased my romantic feelings towards other people. Once you enter a
mutually loving relationship, you're more likely to trust those romantic
yearnings you feel towards others. You trust love more.
It's sad when you hear a few of the counter-arguments that people come out
with. One friend said they couldn't do it, because they couldn't bear the
idea of someone else making the person they love happy. But the whole idea
of love is that you want the other person to always be happy, even when
you're not around.
Others say, that I can't really love the other person, as I'm not
'committed'. Well, if they're prepared to leave their lover for loving
someone else, whereas I'd support them in that, who is the more committed?
I believed all this before I heard the word 'polyamorous'. It's the
politically-correct name for what I am. In the UK bi community, you often
hear it called poly, but I can't identify as that - too many parrot jokes to
dodge! But it's good that there's a word that defines what I am in terms
of what I believe in (i.e. 'many loves'), rather than what I don't.
Will I always be polyamorous? I dunno. Life is fluid, and so is
sexuality. I've been in a situation where, while being involved with more
than one person, one in particular was my primary love. Had she been
monogamous (she's not), I'm sure I'd have accommodated that. But there is a
mutual respect involved in polyamory that I find deeply honest and
affirming, two qualities I look for in any relationship. I might visit
monogamy from time to time, I may enjoy the visit. But I believe it'll only
ever be a holiday - polyamory will always be home.
(I did mention this to Darragh but last time I looked, he hadn't got around to fixing it yet...)