I am leading a read-through of The Ethical Slut, 2nd edition. If you’d like to catch up on past installments, check the list at the bottom of the series introduction. Comments on the topics in this discussion are welcome anytime, even from people who aren’t following along in the book.
This week, the read-along continues with a discussion based on CHAPTER 19, “The Single Slut”
For some, polyamory or non-monogamy is a choice made in the context of a specific relationship — such as when a married couple, after communication and negotiation, choose to open up their relationship to new people. For others, polyamory is a lifestyle-choice; these people stay polyamorous even when they are single because they do not ever want monogamy. Poly singles will often date exclusively with other polyamorous or similarly open-minded people. Some will take it a step further and remain single even when they are with others.
The Ethical Slut, Second Edition by Dossie Easton and Janet W. Hardy
The idea that the individual, rather than the couple, are the core unit in polyamory — a concept sometimes called “Network Polyamory” — is the focus of this chapter of The Ethical Slut. Once again, it comes down to conscious choice — for such people, being single is not just a matter of happening to be between relationships, but a conscious choice to keep a certain level of independence regardless of how many sexual or romantic involvements may occur. This choice might last for years — Dossie Easton says she has spent half her adult life single — or it could be more temporary.
“To live single and in love with many is a voyage of self-discovery, an opportunity to get to know yourself intimately and to work on any changes you want to make in your life.” –from The Ethical Slut
At the core of being consciously single is putting yourself first. This is a notion that is often unpopular. True selfishness is rampant — making choices which result in personal gain and reckless loss in others. On the other hand, I believe that when we prioritize ourselves we are then better able to help others. There are times — like when a child or partner is in desperate need — that we must dig deep and give even if it hurts but in general we have to give only as much as we can and know our limits! Putting self first is especially important when we need to focus on personal growth or have a history of martyring ourselves for our lovers.
Taking this route has its risks. You have to be comfortable with the idea of being alone — and of not dating or committing to serious relationships just because you fear loneliness. This is a danger for the monogamous too — Dossie Easton relates how her grandmother’s husband died in their sixties, leaving her with almost three decades of life alone. It also opens up freedoms — from privacy, more available alone time to recharge for introverts or to work for artists, to increased freedom to live in your own way.
Alone time is important for artists, leading many creative sluts to stay single. Photo by Miss Vichan.
I once asked my friend Tea where to find the “cockles of the heart,” and she cleverly retorted, “Just above where the strings attach.” An important point that this chapter makes is that love can come without attachment — you can still share that warm, fuzzy feeling of intimacy with a person without requiring them to move in, get married, have kids, or form other entanglements. Over time, the single poly often creates more serious and involved relationships and might become part of a couple or larger committed group, but that need not be the assumption or the goal.
There are still considerations for others. Every relationship is meaningful, and single polys need to respect the other relationships that intersect just as the coupled or committed need to respect the love that a single poly shares; in this chapter, The Ethical Slut lays out a list of responsibilities for each. In particular, I am sometimes suspicious of “unicorn hunters” — bisexual couples looking to add a third person to a closed, polyfidelitous relationship. Is it disrespectful or unethical for such couples to date a person who has existing connections? Of course, the subject of their attentions has free will too, and in the end must follow his heart and best judgment about whether to join their relationship and leave others.
In my life I have spent many years living this way and, even as I grow closer to Pet and my other relationships, I make sure to meet my needs first — with the hope that they will do the same. Were you single and polyamorous for a while? Maybe circumstance made you single, but pleasure kept you that way? Share your experiences in the comments.
In our next installment, we’ll look at breakups and other endings in Chapter 20, ”The Ebb and Flow of Relationships.”
Comments (8)
I recently read a book called Singled Out: How Singles are Stereotyped, Stigmatized, and Ignored, and Still Live Happily Ever After. Good stuff.
There seems to be a lot of variation in the definition of “single.” For some people “single” means “not married,” or at least “not in a marriage-like relationship,” so if you’re not cohabiting and sharing finances with a long-term partner, you’re single. In Singled Out, “single” means “not in an ongoing romantic relationship.”
I tend to lean more toward that latter definition; I have a hard time thinking of myself as single. I’m dating four people. But I live alone, and plan to continue doing so, and I don’t have an automatic “plus one” for formal events. I think about it more in terms of not having a primary than actually being single.
@burgundy: There’s definitely a terminology gap here — I understand Tristan Taormino’s Opening Up has some good terminology for different poly relationship styles and I’m looking forward to taking a crack at it in my next read-along. At times, I have even resisted even listing myself as ‘Available’ rather than ‘Single’ on OKCupid — but often I use a term like ‘network poly’ or just talk about how much I dislike terminology like primary/secondary.
I tend to have a +1 because I like to do things with my lovers, but its not always the same one and sometimes it’s a +2…
Thanks for commenting. That book sounds interesting and I’ll have to add it to my wishlist. It’s too bad they don’t have it on Kindle yet…
After I posted, I started thinking about *why* my first response is “nuh-uh, I’m not actually single!” And it’s probably because it’s a very culturally-loaded word. At the same time, I’m not crazy about the categorical differences implied by calling me single. Just because I’m not living with someone doesn’t mean it’s not a “real” relationship, doesn’t mean we’re not committed to each other, and doesn’t mean it’s transitory.
@burgundy: People make a whole host of assumptions about us based on our choices, and in some ways we’re damned if we do, damned if we don’t — using a term like single may cause misconceptions, but not using a label will make people assume all kinds of things too. Labels can be a cage or be freeing and its largely a matter of how we handle them. Thanks for commenting.
The true benefit of conscious singlehood for me was learning how to meet my needs and wants in a myriad of non-standard ways. This meant that when I was ready for a relationship (a big reason I was single was regrouping after the dissolution of a marriage.) I carried those habits with me … no one person is ever responsible for my emotional needs and wants, anymore.
The (perhaps) interesting thing that I learned from the experience, is that I realized that though I am emotionally poly (multiple people for different needs/wants) I’m romantically monogamous. I’ve met people (some poly) for whom that situation wouldn’t be sustainable, the emotional bond is what needs to be primary and sexual contact is acceptable as long as that primary emotional state stays intact.
I really like burgundy’s comments on the definitions of “single” (define our terms, yo.) I feel like I’m partnered but in many ways live a single-like existence because independence is so important to me now.
Really loved this read through, thanks, Kit!
@Gyesika: Glad you enjoyed this so much, Gyes an thanks for commenting. You make an important point that even as we move from being ‘single’ into more coupled or bonded styles of relationships, we can carry forward what we’ve learned and make that continue to be meaningful. Just because we choose to stop being single doesn’t mean we become dependent on others to meet our emotional needs, or have suddenly decided ‘no I’m not complete after all.’
And yes, even monogamous people need multiple sources for emotional support in their lives — friends and loved ones of all kinds. Great point!
I think that I am emotionally poly. At this point, romantically, I am probably poly too. I still hate the word “poly” though.
@Stacey: Thanks for commenting. What would you rather use?