Polyamorous Parenting: it's OK because "Pride"

[Neithan]

This is nothing new of course, but it’s gaining cultural and political traction by allying itself with the sexual diversity movement. Now it’s presented as an acceptable (don’t be a bigot) alternative with practical child-rearing advantages over the the traditional family.

https://www.todaysparent.com/family/parenting/polyamorous-parenting-the-surprising-benefits-of-the-ultimate-modern-family/

‘"Parallels can be drawn to children raised in gay and lesbian families, where the stress comes mainly from negative comments from friends or schoolmates and the stigma many people hold’.”

 

[Theo520]

It boils down to the below paragraph stating the obvious, kids do better when they are raised under the influence of an extended family and interested community members.
So don’t get divorced and move away from all your family and friends. Join a Church of your choosing, put your kids in Scouts, sports or other programs that connect them with other responsible adults.

“[They] can benefit from having multiple loving parents who can offer not only more quality time, but a greater range of interests and energy levels to match the child’s own unique and growing personality,” says a 2013 study, Children of Polyamorous Families: A First Empirical Look . And parents benefit, too. For example, the report points out that whereas a single adult or even two adults with little or no time to themselves can burn out, multiple adults can meet children’s endless needs without becoming frustrated or insensitive.

 

[TheLittleLady]

In our modern world, it is rare for a child to grow up with only two parents. Most people are serial monogamists, but, that still means step parents, step grand parents, making a many branched family tree.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

I’ll be honest, most of the polys I know aren’t signing on to the arrangement so they can help look after their lover’s kids.

 

[twf]

It’s true that a child does benefit from multiple “parent figures”. The “traditional family” as they call it has only become an isolated unit in the past century (or less?) in the west. A true “traditional family” in many cultures would have lots of daily interactions with grandparents, aunts, and uncles.
My mother-in-law lives with us part-time. My 3 year old calls her “mommy” and his mom “mama”. When strangers hear him talking about mommy and mama they might assume I’m polyamorous!

 

[dvdjs]

So don’t get divorced and move away from all your family and friends.

The “moving away” part can be difficult. I am originally from the rustiest part of the rust belt. While we enjoyed a tight extended family growing up, as we entered the workforce, we dispersed across the US.

 

[Neithan]

This is definitely motivated by lust though, because communities based on close friendship can work together, and have worked together, to benefit families. Married couples build social networks together. There is no need to sexualize these relationships (other than temptation and appetite) — that actually weakens the community by limiting and complicating it (as I understand it, jealousy is a serious issue for many supposed “polys”). Maybe it will take a century of sociology and psychology to figure out what we already know based on demonstrated moral principle.

 

[0Scarlett_nidiyilii]

All this stuff look great at first glance, and they even make a case for it, but these social experiments tend to crash and burn (or at least not play out the way originally intended) and then you have a bunch of broken hurting people walking around.

Seriously, how’s about just marry one person and build up a community for emotional support without complicating it all.

 

[edwest211]

“demonstrated moral principles” worked, for the most part. No one needs a century to figure that out. On the other hand, lust does drive this sort of arrangement. It was predicted.

Robert George: Beyond Gay Marriage | Robert P. George | First Things

 

[GiftofMercy]

I am having a little trouble in not seeing anything but a monogomous correct marriage as adultery. I know in Biblical times a man with wives and concubines was ok but not the most common arrangement. The installment of Christianity and His Church by Jesus also saw the installment of a monogomous and correct marriage. And no sexual sin.

 

[Economist]

Join a Church of your choosing, put your kids in Scouts, sports or other programs that connect them with other responsible adults.

Not a bad solution. It is not perfect, since the usual church-get-together happens once a week, and the poly-amorous relationship is continuous, extending to every day. Of course having a loving and caring environment is highly beneficial, not just for the children involved, but everyone else.

In the ancient times there were no “formalized” families. The matriarchical arrangement was based upon the concept of “mater semper certa, pater semper incertus est”.

Seriously, how’s about just marry one person and build up a community for emotional support without complicating it all.

Sure, but don’t forget that that is good for the goose is not necessarily good for the gander. As long as the family (extended or not) likes the arrangement, it is their business.

 

[0Scarlett_nidiyilii]

As long as the family (extended or not) likes the arrangement, it is their business.

How do you measure this?
How many people wind up in weird situations because they don’t think they can do any better or think they deserve better?
What about jealousy? And favoritism?
Are the kids really better off growing up watching the adults around them jockeying for position in the most basic of human relationships?
I’m extrapolating here from polygamous relationships, but there’s probably one person who want to be poly more than the other, who gets dragged into it for fear of losing their beloved.
It all sounds wretched to me.

 

[Economist]

How do you measure this?
How many people wind up in weird situations because they don’t think they can do any better or think they deserve better?
What about jealousy? And favoritism?
Are the kids really better off growing up watching the adults around them jockeying for position in the most basic of human relationships?
I’m extrapolating here from polygamous relationships, but there’s probably one person who want to be poly more than the other, who gets dragged into it for fear of losing their beloved.

Do you really think that those negatives are unavoidable in each and every relationship? That those are the norm? That every non-monogamous relationship ends in a disaster? People choose to go into these relationships with open eyes. And they are adults, who are responsible for their actions. If they get disappointed, they are free to leave.

It all sounds wretched to me.

Obviously this is your subjective assessment. Lots of things “sound” wretched to me… so I don’t practice them. If you don’t like it, don’t do it. Some people think that they are the only ones who are right, and everyone else is wrong. As long as that is their opinion, that is fine. The problem comes when they wish to run other people’s life for them. There is a good proverb: “The road to hell is paved with good intentions.”

 

[Theo520]

Not a bad solution. It is not perfect, since the usual church-get-together happens once a week, and the poly-amorous relationship is continuous, extending to every day. Of course having a loving and caring environment is highly beneficial, not just for the children involved, but everyone else.

In the ancient times there were no “formalized” families. The matriarchical arrangement was based upon the concept of “mater semper certa, pater semper incertus est”.

Any good church has more activities than just Sunday Mass for the kids, may even have daycare with additional parents volunteering support.

In the ancient times there were no “formalized” families

I completely disagree, in ancient times kinship was very formalized, normally with a patriarch at the head.

 

[Economist]

Any good church has more activities than just Sunday Mass for the kids, may even have daycare with additional parents volunteering support.

Yes, there are such churches. And that is excellent. But that is not the norm, is it? In a poly-amorous relationship the extended family is there, and everyone benefits. Even if one biological parent dies, or leaves the extended family, there is a ready-made substitute for the children. If you say that a steady, loving arrangement (call it a family) is superior - which it is! - then there is no rational reason to limit it to a monogamous couple and their blood relatives.

I completely disagree, in ancient times kinship was very formalized, normally with a patriarch at the head.

There were such arrangements. And zillions of others. Matriarchs, patriarchs, the tribe leaders, etc… The monogamous relationships are still inferior as regards to stability. The concept of “it takes a village” is still good, even though Hillary embraced it. (And we all know that whatever she embraced MUST automatically be considered despicable and inferior… or does it? After all how can a “democ-rat” have a good, worthy idea? )

 

[Theo520]

Did you read the OP article? It makes a logical argument, and I showed it to be non special to poly parenting.

The article did not share any supporting details from the research, I find that suspicious they hide the data and switch to logical argument.

 

[Economist]

Did you read the OP article? It makes a logical argument, and I showed it to be non special to poly parenting.

I read it, and also your thoughts… and I agreed with both of them. There are many ways to build successful relationships, which also create a good environment for raising children. The kibbutzes can be one example, and the hippy colonies another one. There are several ways to skin a cat.

The article did not share any supporting details from the research, I find that suspicious they hide the data and switch to logical argument.

I am sure that the supporting data can be found if someone wishes to read it. How many research examples do you need to realize that your offered alternate solution also works? None, because it is also logical.

The counter argument against poly parenting can only be based upon the incorrect notion that “love” is in limited supply, and it can be practiced fully in a monogamous relationship, and that argument is clearly false. This kind of arrangement may not be for everyone, but when it works, it works quite well.

 

[Theo520]

What surprised me was the % of such relationships. I wonder how this compares

four to five percent of Canadians identify as poly—and half of them are parents

.Edit: Below article looks far more informative than the OP, which spent most of it’s copy on a couple emotional stories

Is Polyamory Bad for the Children? | Psychology Today

 

[Regular_Atheist]

I completely disagree, in ancient times kinship was very formalized, normally with a patriarch at the head.

I think they were alluding to pre-historic societies, maybe? Lots of modern day hunter-gatherers practice forms of “free union”, and this probably applies historically to similar societies.

 

[Theo520]

I think they were alluding to pre-historic societies, maybe? Lots of modern day hunter-gatherers practice forms of “free union”, and this probably applies historically to similar societies.

History has a bit of everything, an anecdote can always be found. However, kinship was an important factor in most if not all ‘civilized’ societies that had moved beyond hunter/gatherer and started farming. Whether patriarch or matriarch, they had “formalized” families.