Polyamorous Relationship Q&A (Blog)

[Selene]

You could replace the words, the Courage to Live Consciously with the Courage to Live Selfishly and not lose an iota of the meaning.

I understand it's a valid choice to live wholly for your own needs, whatever makes you an authentic person.

It's all about My Will Be Done. People such as Aleister Crowley were into this philosophy deeply.

It's a very low vibration and I sense Steve shares it. This is how people who choose such a philosophy do often experience relationships and sex, multiple relationships are the rule rather than the exception. They are against the self-sacrifice needed to take another person in consideration over their own desires or to maintain a family.

No judgment. To each his own.

[Savage]

Originally Posted by dendennz

I can't believe how many people read Steve's posts, yet don't "get" his underlying principles.

In his most recent blog entry, he suggested we read one of his earlier posts - the Courage to Live Consciously.

Living consciously to me is about living the life of the person you were really meant to be. It's about developing and empowering and growing the person you know in your deepest heart and desires that you should be. It's not about living consciously BUT with the exception of when you're married or that you have kids or that you live in a world of religion dogma or are fearful of the next 9/11 attack.

Think about what the world would be like without religious rules, without war, without marriage. Think about what the world would be like where people lived their authentic lives, being all and everything they could be. If you read Steve's posts fully, you will understand that marriage and religion and war are human-imposed constraints on life. Marriage can make a person fearful e.g. too afraid to do something spontaneous in case the spouse objects. Religion prevents you from fully experiencing life: e.g., you know in your heart of hearts you're gay but the Bible says it's a sin. War results in a whole pile of fearful people - from the people on the ground being bombed, to the soldier in the field not knowing if they'll be ambushed.

If you think living life consciously is fanciful, then in the context of current society you're right. This is especially true if you only life within societal constraints - including marriage or religion. Imagine a life without those societal constraints where people lived a life where they could do what their heart desires and as a result be more fulfilled. I'm not saying a life where they commit assault or pain on others. That they live a happy life with love and have love to share.

Steve has said he has a lot of love to share. He wishes to share it in more ways than he does now. Not less. He's giving all his love that he can to his wife, to his children and to us his readers. But there are other ways of sharing his love. He loves the intimate relationship he has with Erin. He doesn't see why, as a consciously living being, that he can't have intimate relationships with others. For him, marriage is a societal invention that goes against his beliefs of living a conscious life. If Steve continued to live within the marriage constraints that are currently imposed on him, he would not be living his fully conscious life. He would be selling out.

So: whether you like it or not, Steve has chosen to live what he believes is a fully authentic life for him. Is he saying we should do it too? Probably But as conscious living people we have a choice to decide for ourselves whether we believe it to be authentic for us. If you don't, then you won't become polyamorous.

Steve, I hope I have it right. I had read your Courage to live Consciously so many times in the past when I'm looking for answers. I've finally now, I think, "got it". Life has just become extraordinary for me. I look forward to following your extraordinary life in the months and years to come.

This all makes me think of this (thanks John Lennon...):

Imagine there's no countries
It isn't hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too
Imagine all the people
Living life in peace...

You may say I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
I hope someday you'll join us
And the world will be as one...

Cheers,

Jenny.

You got it. It's about learning to make your own choices.

Living consciously requires dealing with rejection and judgment from others. If you're making your choices in a principle-centered way, that's all you need. It's perfectly okay that others may not agree with you. Generally their objections have nothing to do with you anyway.

[DerekH]

Originally Posted by Steve Pavlina

You got it. It's about learning to make your own choices.

Living consciously requires dealing with rejection and judgment from others. If you're making your choices in a principle-centered way, that's all you need. It's perfectly okay that others may not agree with you. Generally their objections have nothing to do with you anyway.

I am still in a state of astonishment and praise Steve. I am astonished that you are so brave to publicly express your views and intentions.

To have a partner like Erin who is so courageous in her own is just magical. I think we all have so much to learn with this new direction you two have taken. I wish you all the best!

[Silent Lucidity]

Originally Posted by carenkh

I do have two wonderful boys, 16 and almost-10. Do you know any polyamorous people?

I was raised by a happily married monogomous couple who occasionally hugged and kissed in front of us. Us three kids -loved- it, though we'd get shy and smile and go away, or when I was very young, I'd ask if I could have a hug too'. It meant they loved each other. I remember it meant so much. My dear folks never changed their habits and are happily married to this day.

[Trezker]

Originally Posted by Silent Lucidity

I was raised by a happily married monogomous couple who occasionally hugged and kissed in front of us. Us three kids -loved- it, though we'd get shy and smile and go away, or when I was very young, I'd ask if I could have a hug too'. It meant they loved each other. I remember it meant so much. My dear folks never changed their habits and are happily married to this day.

I think that's normal around here too. Me and my sisters never had a problem with it, in my case I probably ignored it, I was busy playing with LEGO or something...

I just realized today that my neighborhood is a quite special place when it comes to marriage issues. I'm a child of a generation that still keeps marriage sacred, though they don't make a fuss about it if their children don't want to marry their partners. Sure they think it's weird but they allow their children to be themselves. I have no idea how they'd react to polyamory, but I think they'd mostly accept homosexuality. Even though you'd never hear he end of it, they wouldn't be aggressively against it.

My grandmother on the other hand is very concerned about grandchildren not going through with all the religious traditions. She's been a bit more brainwashed by the church than my parents were. Luckily, she's careful and don't want to alienate people, at least in her case I think that's a good thing considering the values she holds.

[Silent Lucidity]

Originally Posted by Selene

Human relationships aren't berries and cake.

Anybody can think back to their last infatuation and they know, they know they weren't about other love interests at the time. The feeling is like a drug. The focus is keen and on the desired other if it's truly infatuation. If a person can walk away into the arms of another--it's not that crushing feeling of romantic love, believe me.

You can maintain respect and esteem for others, yes, but the beloved romance object overwhelms every drop of lust, passion and desire.

There even a word for it, limerence. Limerence - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia The sad thing...scientific studies has been done, is that it doesn't last.

Chasing this limerence, Steve writes about, is like chasing after orgasms or a drug high, the vibration is lower and nothing like love...

Hello Everyone, for once i have something to say that no-one's said yet!!!

Firstly, I support whatever direction Steve and Erin choose to take. I can't presume to judge since I'm not in Steve's mind, or Erin's. IF this choice makes you both happier and more capable of love than you were before, than congratulations... However, some things to consider....

#1 New ideas about sex and bonding...

You must understand the neurochemistry of what you're proposing here. Before you call it higher love. I found this website last week:

Why Does A Lover Pull Away after Sex? | Reuniting

this is the one with the diagram.. ha!!

The first deep connection a man and woman experience, infatuation, romantic love etc is indeed like a drug high, in fact it's dopamine. I'm sorry to those of you to whom this is old hat. The same chemical that drives drug addiction, shopping, achievement, art, sex, everything, is dopamine. We are all addicts. We are -programmed- by mother nature to become tired of a partner and seek new partners to experience the dopamine rush, which taps directly into the reward center of the brain. This increases the diversity of our offspring. With everything else, well it probably is the cause of all evolution and achievement within the species. The problem is the higher the highs you experience, the lower the lows....

Studies show that happily married people do in fact live longer, are more stable, more successful, more healthy. How do they get around the dopamine thing, that causes restlessness? The ones that make it work have tapped into the second hormone - oxytocin. It's the long-term-bonding-cuddle hormone. You receive a rush of this when you give, when you do charity work, hug a child, help someone, or exchange love-cues with a long-term partner. Sacred sex, like in that website, is entirely constructed to stimulate oxytocin....

This website teaches you to free yourself from dopamine addiction and side-step mother-nature's programming, and become more oxytocin dependent.

So maybe Steve -and- Erin are experiencing a sever dopamine low, and just need to bond more in an emotional way....

They can choose to explore both realities (neruotransmiters) or choose one or the other.

#2 men and women are hardwired differently. There are exceptions, but mostly,

Women have a desire for 'one-ness' closeness, deep ritual (marriage anyone?) symbols, objects with meaning (wedding rings???) We are taught these desires are wrong... (materialism)... needy-ness... if we women were less 'needy' we likely wouldn't 'need' to have a child to fill some ache inside.. to have another that 'needs' one-ness with us so badly. We are hard-wired for need, in order to continue the species.

Men have more of a desire for freedom, the chase, many different partners as they have more 'resources' per sae. They also love the chase, to feel like they have 'won' something of value in their life... they need to try... Steve, being a super-growth-oriented individual may have this urge extra-strong... so this is actually a natural step for him....

once achievemnt (oneness) is reached, woman will be happy with the oneness, feel safe, close, etc, men will think, ah, I want freedom, what great thing can I achieve next??? This is in -every- good psych book....

In marriage, two types of entities with dissimilar needs come together for mutual companionship, long term goals, and good health.. the idea that you'd have a best friend to share memories with when you are old is an appealing one...

3. Time:
Polyamory is an excellent idea in theory, except for the idea that when Steve and Erin are out pursuing their relationships, their children are alone in the house... or Steve's out and Erin's at home. Or Erin's out and Steve is at home... Yes, you have enough love for Erin and everyone else, but do you have the time for Erin, kids, career, and everyone else?

4. Female sexual neurochemistry:
What happens when the first woman you really connect with and have sex with starts dealing with the orgasm-hormone that says -I want you and only you forever- and then you say, we're all growth-oreinted individuals....

Maybe you should research this just a bit... look at the psycholgoy, look at the neruochemistry of female sex and bonding...

Conclusion:
Now okay, this is Steve's growth experiment, and if he chooses to put his needs first, well it's his life. I'll be happily entertained by the whole thing, worried, curious how it all turns out... but secure knowing the kind of life-experiences I want are far far different.

Steve:
You've said you don't want discussions with anyone who doesn't support your viewpoint, and that's fine but isn't that what growth is all about? Part of deciding to begin this journey is -being- that polyamarous person, dealing with anything that might come up, including alternate points of view.... so at least consider this.... it is well meant, not meant to threaten or challenge... only to question, to inspire contemplation.

Can you do this without hurting Erin, since you have unlimited love? Fear is a form of pain. If Erin is in fear, is it possible that you've already hurt her? Do you want to show a more evolved form of love?

Love is also about putting the needs of others before your own, to some degree.... in this case, Erin will teach you about love, if the both of you can hold together through this new experience.

[jawillie]

Originally Posted by Silent Lucidity

Hello Everyone, for once i have something to say that no-one's said yet!!!

.

^^^ I loved your post, thank you for sharing that with us!!! ^^^

Disclaimer, again, I don't care what Steve and Erin do, it's just the discussions I am interested in... and something has been weighing on my mind. It goes along with what Silent Lucidity has just said. Thanks, SL!!!!

That is great info, and I see it as true from my own experiences.

Take care, all!

[hunt0715]

My intuition tells me that Steve is wanting out of this relationship, but not going deep enough to really admit it to himself. Leaving is very hard to do and scary.

My intuition tells me that Erin has known this for awhile.

While I hope this works out for them, these types of relationships usually aren't equal. One person goes along so as not to lose the other. Resentment sneaks in... But one can hope this will be different.

[munish]

The seduction community has what you might call a dark side and a light side. The dark side teaches techniques rooted in deception to get women into bed.-Steve Pavlina.
-------------

Most of the web sites i found on the net are the dark side only.Is there any light side- site also?

For example.

David DeAngelo <ddeangelo@doubleyourdating.com> says

The deadly mistake too many men make when trying to sleep with a woman .

The 9 words that make a woman feel totally comfortable coming back to your place

The 4 things you absolutely MUST do before having a woman over to your house

How to get a woman incredibly turned on in the first 15 minutes she spends at your place… without ever touching her!

Why women turn to certain men for dinners and dates and other men for sex

Testimonials on his site are like this .

I have lots more stories since I've been using
your stuff for weeks now and its un-real I am able
to get laid 3 or 4 times a week now with out even
really trying. (need to rest sometimes) lol.

----------
There is another one Di Carlo , who says

You're About To Discover
How To Make Women Do You Favors
And Buy You Gifts...
Just To Get You Into Bed"


LoL..

[munish]

I don't find any thing wrong with Steve's decision to say good bye to Monogamy.
It is just not right for him at the moment.

About Polyamoury, it is a new field so no one knows about it. Steve will enlighten us all about the same,with his experiences.

Originally Posted by Silent Lucidity

Hello Everyone, for once i have something to say that no-one's said yet!!!

Firstly, I support whatever direction Steve and Erin choose to take. I can't presume to judge since I'm not in Steve's mind, or Erin's. IF this choice makes you both happier and more capable of love than you were before, than congratulations... However, some things to consider....

#1 New ideas about sex and bonding...

You must understand the neurochemistry of what you're proposing here. Before you call it higher love. I found this website last week:

Why Does A Lover Pull Away after Sex? | Reuniting

this is the one with the diagram.. ha!!

The first deep connection a man and woman experience, infatuation, romantic love etc is indeed like a drug high, in fact it's dopamine. I'm sorry to those of you to whom this is old hat. The same chemical that drives drug addiction, shopping, achievement, art, sex, everything, is dopamine. We are all addicts. We are -programmed- by mother nature to become tired of a partner and seek new partners to experience the dopamine rush, which taps directly into the reward center of the brain. This increases the diversity of our offspring. With everything else, well it probably is the cause of all evolution and achievement within the species. The problem is the higher the highs you experience, the lower the lows....

Studies show that happily married people do in fact live longer, are more stable, more successful, more healthy. How do they get around the dopamine thing, that causes restlessness? The ones that make it work have tapped into the second hormone - oxytocin. It's the long-term-bonding-cuddle hormone. You receive a rush of this when you give, when you do charity work, hug a child, help someone, or exchange love-cues with a long-term partner. Sacred sex, like in that website, is entirely constructed to stimulate oxytocin....

This website teaches you to free yourself from dopamine addiction and side-step mother-nature's programming, and become more oxytocin dependent.

So maybe Steve -and- Erin are experiencing a sever dopamine low, and just need to bond more in an emotional way....

They can choose to explore both realities (neruotransmiters) or choose one or the other.

#2 men and women are hardwired differently. There are exceptions, but mostly,

Women have a desire for 'one-ness' closeness, deep ritual (marriage anyone?) symbols, objects with meaning (wedding rings???) We are taught these desires are wrong... (materialism)... needy-ness... if we women were less 'needy' we likely wouldn't 'need' to have a child to fill some ache inside.. to have another that 'needs' one-ness with us so badly. We are hard-wired for need, in order to continue the species.

Men have more of a desire for freedom, the chase, many different partners as they have more 'resources' per sae. They also love the chase, to feel like they have 'won' something of value in their life... they need to try... Steve, being a super-growth-oriented individual may have this urge extra-strong... so this is actually a natural step for him....

once achievemnt (oneness) is reached, woman will be happy with the oneness, feel safe, close, etc, men will think, ah, I want freedom, what great thing can I achieve next??? This is in -every- good psych book....

In marriage, two types of entities with dissimilar needs come together for mutual companionship, long term goals, and good health.. the idea that you'd have a best friend to share memories with when you are old is an appealing one...

3. Time:
Polyamory is an excellent idea in theory, except for the idea that when Steve and Erin are out pursuing their relationships, their children are alone in the house... or Steve's out and Erin's at home. Or Erin's out and Steve is at home... Yes, you have enough love for Erin and everyone else, but do you have the time for Erin, kids, career, and everyone else?

4. Female sexual neurochemistry:
What happens when the first woman you really connect with and have sex with starts dealing with the orgasm-hormone that says -I want you and only you forever- and then you say, we're all growth-oreinted individuals....

Maybe you should research this just a bit... look at the psycholgoy, look at the neruochemistry of female sex and bonding...

Conclusion:
Now okay, this is Steve's growth experiment, and if he chooses to put his needs first, well it's his life. I'll be happily entertained by the whole thing, worried, curious how it all turns out... but secure knowing the kind of life-experiences I want are far far different.

Steve:
You've said you don't want discussions with anyone who doesn't support your viewpoint, and that's fine but isn't that what growth is all about? Part of deciding to begin this journey is -being- that polyamarous person, dealing with anything that might come up, including alternate points of view.... so at least consider this.... it is well meant, not meant to threaten or challenge... only to question, to inspire contemplation.

Can you do this without hurting Erin, since you have unlimited love? Fear is a form of pain. If Erin is in fear, is it possible that you've already hurt her? Do you want to show a more evolved form of love?

Love is also about putting the needs of others before your own, to some degree.... in this case, Erin will teach you about love, if the both of you can hold together through this new experience.

[Stray]

Heyas I'm a bit late to the party; I didn't have time to read the blog over the holidays and just now got caught up again. Steve, I remember a couple of years back (right around the time I registered on this forum, in fact) I emailed you inquiring about your opinion of polyamory, because I thought you seemed like exactly the kind of person who would benefit from it and be successful at it. You replied then that it was something you were interested in trying, so kudos to you for finally starting out on the path. I've been practicing poly for about six years now, and know dozens of other poly folks, and from what I know about you and Erin (granted, not really all that much) I think you guys will handle this just fine. Sure there will be bumps along the road, but that's life. Best of luck to you both in this new journey!

[Tobes]

Whatever "flics your bic" but for me there is something about commitment (in a good marriage of course) which I find comforting. I don't know if you have ever been sick or simply "down and out," but there is something reassuring about knowing that the other partner is going to be there for you. Now my wife went through a very bad medical ordeal last year and I think it would have shattered her if I had said, "sorry but I need to go find myself in someone else's arms today."

It is also my suspicion that kids will not find the stability they need in a household where mom and dad are off trying to satisfy themselves with various partners. Now I am not talking here about religious morality and such, but I just think this is going to bring all kinds of problems and hurts that you are not expecting - and that you are in denial about. My gut tells me that Erin is not really happy at all with this arrangement - but what else is she going to say in this age where ya gotta be hip and accepting about everything?

It is also worth mentioning that many animals choose to be bound to one mate for life. Many do not, but I suspect that for us humans, we are one of those animals more programmed for monogamy - though I do not think we should remain in difficult or non loving relationships (but that is another thing?).

[PerDev]

Originally Posted by Steve Pavlina

Use this thread to discuss the following entry from Steve Pavlina's blog:

Polyamorous Relationship Q&A

Its really good that you sort out this things in your life so that more good can be done to the universe

[alan7388]

Dr. Drew Pinsky, arguably an expert on relationships and their dysfunctions, discussed polyamory and people's rationalizations of it several times on his radio show. According to him, it's invariably harmful to the relationships of all involved.

"Invariably?" Educated fool. I know loads of longterm happy counterexamples. The poly community is full of them.

Now if he'd said "often," he might have a point.

BTW, for people who'd like to learn more, the Poly Living Conference is coming up in Philadelphia at the end of February. I've been to it in past years (see my writeup of my experiences here) and recommend it highly.

--Alan M.

------------------------------------------
Keep up with Polyamory in the News!
------------------------------------------

[JSB]

I'm surprised at the number of "concerned" posts that seem to be treating Erin as some sort of victim, like she's a helpless child who's been hoodwinked into going along with this.

Have you actually read anything she's written?

You may strongly disagree with polyamory, and you may be upset with what the Pavlinas are doing, but at least have some respect for Erin's ability to make decisions for herself.

[cnwoods]

Originally Posted by Silent Lucidity

Hello Everyone, for once i have something to say that no-one's said yet!!!
...
4. Female sexual neurochemistry:
What happens when the first woman you really connect with and have sex with starts dealing with the orgasm-hormone that says -I want you and only you forever- and then you say, we're all growth-oreinted individuals....

Excuse me??? I've had orgasms, but they've never made me think "I want you and only you forever!!!" Where ARE you getting this stuff!?!

PS Steve, you want to know how to feel jealousy? Well, I don't know about in a relationship, but I have to admit to feeling a bit jealous of the fantastic, supportive and evolution-oriented relationship you've got with Erin! Of course, the fact that I'm currently trying to build up the courage to admit that my own isn't working for both of us might have something to do with that!
Aw heck. I suppose I'm still happy for you both on some level. Great to start getting to know you too Erin. If you guys are ever downunder in Australia I'd love to show you around and make you welcome...

[Savage]

Originally Posted by alan7388

BTW, for people who'd like to learn more, the Poly Living Conference is coming up in Philadelphia at the end of February. I've been to it in past years (see my writeup of my experiences here) and recommend it highly.

I busted up laughing at the part in your write-up about the muggles -- that was really funny!

The cuddle party sounds awesome.

Are you going to the conference this year?

Do you know of any poly conferences closer to Vegas?