Gradually increasing disdain

Wendy forwarded me this link today to an article written by a Relationship Anarchist.  The author seems to be an anarchist in many ways, not just in relationships.  While usually I find anarchistic arguments interesting they almost always fail in the details; before destroying the economic system that keeps us all fed I would like to know how exactly the new system will distribute food!  However, RA is a completely different thing because implementing it, while it would change things a great deal, does not actually threaten our lives, merely big chunks of the current social order.

The article got me thinking on RA again, and its hard stance that monogamy is wrong and bad resonated with me.  I find myself with a great deal of ambivalence about this topic, because I can see compelling arguments for both sides.

First, a key definition:  Monogamy here refers to people forcing things on others.  If you want one partner, many or none, sexual or not, romantic or not, that is all good.  The thing that troubles me is people coercing others into specific numbers, not what they freely choose to do themselves.

If a friend told me that I could have no other friends but them I would laugh at them and never talk to them again.  If a lover told me that I was not allowed to have a relationship with my family anymore I would give them the heave ho.  If my uncle told me that I was not allowed to have sex with anyone I would tell him to fuck right off.  All of these people would be roundly condemned as being somewhere between insecure jerks and evil abusers.  In fact, those demands are so ridiculous that most people receiving such a demand would assume it was a joke at first.

And yet if a lover told me that I was not allowed to have sex with another person, or love another person, this is normal and expected.

That is messed right up.  A lover trying to isolate someone from their friends or family is a classic sign of abuse and one that people react immediately to.  You shouldn't cut people off from their support networks!  But demand that you be their sole partner for sex and romantic love and suddenly it is all good.  The more times I run this script in my head the more it settles into the conclusion that monogamy is an evil institution that needs to go.

But there are arguments the other way.  If people choose monogamy freely, who am I to criticize their choice?  So long as everyone is on board, informed, and able to leave, shouldn't I back off and let everyone do their own thing?  That is a strong argument for the stance I have taken about relationships so far, which is that I am doing the RA / polyamory thing and that other people are welcome to do what they please.

However, I ask myself if I would say the same thing if a friend of mine was getting into a serious relationship and told me "Yeah, so, my partner says I can't have friends anymore, so I can't see you again."  Would I happily answer "Oh yes, you are making an informed choice and this is fine."?  Fuck no.  I would tell them that this is a disaster, that their partner is a controlling asshole, and they need to get out.  I can't stop them from making the choice, but I will be damned if I am going to sit back and tell them it is a good thing to do.  So if I back off and say that monogamy is all fine and well, how is it that I justify this position when I so clearly see the problems with it?  If I just sign off on monogamy as a totally fine choice I end up making a special case for it and defining it as fine without any justification aside from "Well, that is just the way things are, and rocking the boat is likely to be messy."  and I DO NOT like that justification.

It is all complicated because I live in a system that glorifies and supports monogamy.  Most of the people I know are monogamous, and the prospect of telling them all that their relationships are borderline abusive by definition is ... daunting, to say the least.  I don't relish the idea of getting into that particular fight, and the fights would be nearly endless since I know so many people who are monogamous.  It would be especially difficult with people I care deeply about, people who do work hard to make the world a better place.  Is telling them that they are wrong, that they are being bad in placing rules limiting their partner's affection, that they must change, going to smash my relationships with them?  How much would it cost me to take the public stance that most of the people I know are doing it all wrong?

In addition to the personal cost I have to consider the activism cost.  Telling people "I want to do my relationships this way." is far easier, and far more likely to have them accept it.  Telling them that they are wrong for doing what they do will encounter much more pushback and possibly set back acceptance of my way of living.  This sort of dilemma is present in nearly all activism, and figuring out how extreme a position to take is not a simple thing.

On the flip side, actively deciding to not talk about a serious problem I see because it would be too inconvenient to deal with the pushback feels like cowardice.  What kind of world do I want?  One where people like me, loaded with privilege, refuse to be honest and push for change because they are worried that it might be too much work?  Or do I want a world where I pursue my convictions and upset some apple carts in an attempt to build a better society?

The longer I think about it the more I think that telling your partner that you are to be their sole outlet for all sexual and romantic feelings and actions is wrong.  Not wrong like murder is wrong, obviously, because they can walk away if they want to.  But still wrong, in the same way that criticizing someone about something they are sensitive about in front of people they want to impress is wrong.  Not the thing you should do, and certainly a thing you should look askance at if you see anyone else doing it, to find out if there are other signs of bad behaviour.

I know how I feel.  I know what I want.  Figuring out how to act, given that knowledge, is a much thornier problem.