It's not always about rampant orgies, but it's actually OK if it is, too.

So SBS did a thing about open relationships: https://www.sbs.com.au/ondemand/video/1213134403843.

It's actually not too bad. Whilst they do get a little obsessed about how it works and who sleeps where, they did manage to avoid engaging in the sort of negative and abusive commentary that people on Facebook and Twitter later failed to refrain from. Although it appears they haven’t sunk to death and rape threats that tend to follow any feminist commentary online. Congratulations to the people brave enough to expose themselves to these trolls.

The general public do get focussed about sex and jealousy in open relationships; this is all the naughty and exciting stuff in people's minds. But what was only briefly mentioned in the show that I think is crucial in changing our of perspective on relationships is how forms of polyamory, open relationships or relationship anarchy are pragmatic and political. Talking about love, communication, respect, consideration, boundaries, scheduling and practicalities does a bit to help people see it's not all rampant orgies, but they really are important to any sort of relationship. Relationships are work. They are constant negotiation and consideration of another person. Pointing out that we do the same sorts of things in open relationships is only one step in getting people to question how and why our society became so attached to monogamy and how in most cases monogamy is really a myth.

Have any of the self-righteous proponents of monogamy had a look at modern relationship statistics? What people hold up as an ideal is far from the reality. Most relationships end and most relationships involve infidelity. I remain flabbergasted at the cognitive dissonance displayed by people getting married for the 2^nd, 6^th, 8^th times, making yet another vow that they will be faithful to that person until death do they part. Given that lifelong monogamous relationships almost never happen, some form of open relationship is an honest, pragmatic way of having a relationship. If people are going to have affairs or leave someone for another, are we not better off talking about this stuff honestly and openly than hiding and lying? We have already diversified our ideas of how relationships have to look. Relationships can involve different permutations living together, childrearing, sharing finances, celebrations of commitment and being of different sexes. Why not diversify them to anything that any number of consenting adults agree them to be? What a relationship means and how it works are things that should be negotiated by the participants in it, not by society, law and religion. And before anyone carries on about animals, children or the harbour bridge, note I said "consenting adults".

Open relationships are also a political choice. Monogamy isn't "natural". How the hell are we do say what is natural, whilst writing on the Internet from the comfort of our houses, munching on processed food? We are so far removed from natural that it is impossible to say what it is anymore. However, we can observe a lot of social structures reinforcing monogamy. Religion, law, government agencies and patriarchy may have a little hand there. Normal everyday exposure to films, books, fairy tales and music lyrics continues to promote this vision of a "natural" relationship.  I get that people feel that it is natural, because it is all they have been told all their lives. Years of exposure to ideas and behaviours normalises them. But monogamy has always had exceptions for men. Polygyny, concubines, mistresses, prostitutes - these are ways in which society has accepted non monogamy for men, because men are supposedly more sexual beings. They have needs. They are unable to control them. Evolutionary psychology blethers on about how men want to sew their seeds as broadly as possible whilst women want to find one man to protect and provide for them. Blah blah blah. Monogamy is a form of control of women. It ensured ownership of women passed from father to husband, provided certainty of parentage for men to hand on their property. It perpetuated stories about women being less sexual beings whilst implementing a bunch of practices and laws to contain women's sexuality (FGM, chastity belts, treatments for ”hysteria”, burkas, witch hunts, honour killings, beheading and stoning “unfaithful” women, the list goes on … ).

And strangely enough, the rate of marriage breakdown has escalated with social and economic changes that enabled women's independence. When women are able to make choices to leave relationships they are not happy in, they do. 

The other political aspect of polyamory (in its most open guises at least) is it says that we have no right to control what our partners do with their bodies and emotions. Indeed, it's a bit hopeless pretending to do so at all. No amount of saying "you can only be attracted to me" or indeed telling yourself "I will only ever be attracted to this person from now on" is going to stop a basic physiological reaction. Controlling behaviour is unacceptable. Even though people are voluntarily entering into these unspoken agreements about relationships, they are part of spectrum of controlling behaviours that most of us will acknowledge are unacceptable. We have just chosen a place on that spectrum of what controlling behaviour is ok and what isn't. I don’t think it’s ok to tell someone who they can and can’t have sex with or what they are allowed to feel for other people. Jealousy isn’t a sign of love. It’s a sign of insecurity, entitlement, possessiveness, fear or unmet needs, all of which are issues that need to be addressed no matter what format your relationship takes.

I find people in polyamorous relationships tend talk about how it is all about love. There are parts that are about love. I'm happy to agree that we can love as any people as we damn well want, if we are lucky enough to meet those people at the right time and stages in all of our lives.   I find it challenging when we focus on the love side, however, because it tends to feed justifying lifestyle choices in the terms of the traditional morality of relationships. It makes our choices sound acceptable according to the terms of the critics. But it is also about sex. Because, let's face it, sex is fun. Dating is fun. We freely admit that we have sex for fun these days. We admit to finding other people attractive. Those of us born after 1968 grew up in a world that is much more accepting of serial relationships, premarital sex, casual sex, friends with benefits. Why do we still accept a prohibition on ever having sex with another person again? It’s not depraved to experience and act upon normal, healthy sexual desires. It’s not shameful. It’s not wrong. When we don’t talk about open relationships involving acceptance of sexuality, we continue to buy into the idea that feeling desire and attraction outside of limited contexts is wrong. Sexual practices can be anything any number of adults able to give consent freely choose to participate in. Plenty of people think those rampant orgies are fun too, and that's OK.

Our world moralises and controls sexuality, perpetuates stereotypes about men’s and women’s desires and needs, denies female sexual agency and men’s capacity for emotional expression and communication. Open relationships are a very pleasant change from the double standards of male and female sexuality we have been subjected to, where it is acknowledged that women too have desires and men have the capacity to feel emotions and communicate.