Polyamory

[Lefty's Revenge]

If there were two women who wanted to be with one man and the functions for the amount of utility (pleasure) that they get per hour with him were both ln(h) with h representing the amount of hours he spends with them and he has a total of 8 hours a day to spend with them then the formula for net utility would be ln(h)+ln(8-h) then the highest net utility would be at spending 4 hours with each woman. Therefore independent of the utility that the man gets from being with each woman the system which gives the maximum total utility for the women is for each to spend 4 hours with him each

I think you're looking at this from too much of a....mathematical perspective. Human relationships are very difficult to quantify and break down into codes and numbers.

Me, personally? I'd just say I don't think its a great idea. As a few have pointed out most of them just spend their time justifying the arrangement than actually enjoying it. And it just seems like the sort of thing thats a fucking mess.

I'm dating girl A and have feelings for girl B too. I want to bring girl B into the relationship but maybe A doesn't like B or vice versa. Girl A develops feelings for a lesbian stud C or maybe even a guy. So now we both effectively have side relationships and are probably somewhat jealous of each other and these other people we're dating and are constantly questioning if the other still likes us. Than maybe some other alphabetical bitch comes into the equation that everyone is fond of but shes only fond of a few of us.

This doesn't even sound like a relationship anymore. Just a bunch of people fucking.

I dont know, man. Everyone is free to do what they want but I dont really think its a great idea.

 

[Locksnap]

If there were two women who wanted to be with one man and the functions for the amount of utility (pleasure) that they get per hour with him were both ln(h) with h representing the amount of hours he spends with them and he has a total of 8 hours a day to spend with them then the formula for net utility would be ln(h)+ln(8-h) then the highest net utility would be at spending 4 hours with each woman. Therefore independent of the utility that the man gets from being with each woman the system which gives the maximum total utility for the women is for each to spend 4 hours with him each

Have you ever actually been in a relationship?

 

[Johnny Bravo]

Why is polygyny (one man with many wives) a bad thing

Well, it's illegal in America. It's also considered to be a sexist practice because polygamy is often a form of ownership where a man owns many wives. I'm not sure how abusive it actually is. I doubt it's impossible to have a healthy polygamous family. Either way there's so much prejudice around it that I can't see it being accepted in the near future.

I'm pretty sure their gig is that they each occasionally pick up strangers at clubs, but don't juggle multiple relationships all the time.

I think that's swingers, not polyamory. To my understanding polyamorus people have multiple sexual and romantic partners. Swingers have one romantic partner, who is their single significant other, and multiple casual sex partners.

I think the best solution to polyamory is to accept that you can be very emotionally connected to someone without needing to fuck them - they're called best friends. That or just make fuck buddies.

 

[autisticdragonkin]

Yeah, until that kid hits middle school. Rumors get around. How sensitive do you expect his peers to be when they notice that his mom seems awful friendly with a lot of different men?
I guess more people in the dynamic means they can all pitch in for therapy.
Gotta agree with @AnOminous; relationships are tough enough without an additional set of insecurities and problems to work through. I'm not opposed to the idea of poly, per se, but I've never seen any evidence of it working in practice. What I've seen is a half-dozen couples with breathtaking trust issues who all insist that their experience with poly "isn't typical". Without wanting to seem judgmental, poly seems like the kind of thing a couple resorts to because their relationship with each other can't survive on its own merits.

I am not advocating that it be done in western society currently. What I am arguing for is that in the future it will be more efficient.

I think you're looking at this from too much of a....mathematical perspective. Human relationships are very difficult to quantify and break down into codes and numbers.

Me, personally? I'd just say I don't think its a great idea. As a few have pointed out most of them just spend their time justifying the arrangement than actually enjoying it. And it just seems like the sort of thing thats a fucking mess.

I'm dating girl A and have feelings for girl B too. I want to bring girl B into the relationship but maybe A doesn't like B or vice versa. Girl A develops feelings for a lesbian stud C or maybe even a guy. So now we both effectively have side relationships and are probably somewhat jealous of each other and these other people we're dating and are constantly questioning if the other still likes us. Than maybe some other alphabetical bitch comes into the equation that everyone is fond of but shes only fond of a few of us.

This doesn't even sound like a relationship anymore. Just a bunch of people fucking.

I dont know, man. Everyone is free to do what they want but I dont really think its a great idea.

I was using a simplified mathematical model analogous to a frictionless vaccuum. We will need to use a more complex model to examine the real world taking this into account just like how physics takes friction into account.

Have you ever actually been in a relationship?

I am currently in one but I admit I have little experience. That being said personal experience is not necessary to analyze situations. I have used mathematical models to assess different manufacturing techniques without ever having worked at a factory. Personal experience may even be harmful because it leads to emotional bias in assessing a situation.

 

[Johnny Bravo]

I have used mathematical models to assess different manufacturing techniques without ever having worked at a factory. Personal experience may even be harmful because it leads to emotional bias in assessing a situation.

Emotional bias is usually what happens in a relationship.

 

[Vitriol]

From a legal perspective polygamous relationships are a fucking nightmare. Divorces are messy and unpleasant enough as it is but trying to work out a three way split plus alimony would make things so much more complicated.

From a personal perspective I don't think i've ever seen a poly relationship that wasn't either blatantly abusive or with one partner effectively being used as a bank/menial by the other two.

The efficiency arguement doesn't wash for me. People do not plan relationships based on efficiency. If we were to go by efficiency we'd all pool our children into massive state run boarding schools and nobody would know who's kids were whose. We don't do this because a) it's autistic as hell and b) people like looking after their own children. Trying to apply mathematics to human behaviour is daft.

 

[autisticdragonkin]

From a legal perspective polygamous relationship are a fucking nightmare. Divorces are messy and unpleasant enough as it is but trying to work out a three way split plus alimony would make things so much more complicated.

That's part of the point. Marriage laws are obsolete in the modern economy and using an alternative system allows people to live their lives without government interference (which is bad because of diseconomies of scale)

If we were to go by efficiency we'd all pool our children into massive state run boarding schools and nobody would know who's kids were whose.

Doing that would lead to diseconomies of scale. The massive bureaucracy associated with that would lead to massive screwups due to poor communication, office politics, and slow response time. In comparison a minor increase in a small organization can lead to an increase in efficiency due to economies of scale.

By adding one person to a family a large reduction in average cost can occur due to an increased division of labour. The point where output is most efficient is called the minimum efficient scale and once that point is reached any additional increase in organizational size will lead to a reduction in efficiency. Not enough research has been done on ideal family size and it likely varies with the mode of production with some societies having a larger minimum efficient scale such as many agricultural societies which needed large amounts of people to work in the fields and others having a smaller ones such as nomadic societies where a large family will be extremely difficult to move around

people like looking after their own children

That is an attempt to avoid the principal agent problem and is a completely different issue. People want what is best for their children and especially rich parents will likely be able to provide something better than what even a well functioning state schooling program can bring

 

[Vitriol]

That's part of the point. Marriage laws are obsolete in the modern economy and using an alternative system allows people to live their lives without government interference (which is bad because of diseconomies of scale)

Doing that would lead to diseconomies of scale. The massive bureaucracy associated with that would lead to massive screwups due to poor communication, office politics, and slow response time. In comparison a minor increase in a small organization can lead to an increase in efficiency due to economies of scale.

By adding one person to a family a large reduction in average cost can occur due to an increased division of labour. The point where output is most efficient is called the minimum efficient scale and once that point is reached any additional increase in organizational size will lead to a reduction in efficiency. Not enough research has been done on ideal family size and it likely varies with the mode of production with some societies having a larger minimum efficient scale such as many agricultural societies which needed large amounts of people to work in the fields and others having a smaller ones such as nomadic societies where a large family will be extremely difficult to move around

You completely miss the point. People like being married. They like the exclusive commitment it symbolises. This commitment is weakened if the exclusivity is weakened. People do not get married for efficiency's sake.

That is an attempt to avoid the principal agent problem and is a completely different issue. People want what is best for their children and especially rich parents will likely be able to provide something better than what even a well functioning state schooling program can bring

It is blatantly obvious you don't have kids.

 

[autisticdragonkin]

You completely miss the point. People like being married. They like the exclusive commitment it symbolises. This commitment is weakened if the exclusivity is weakened. People do not get married for efficiency's sake.

The western ideal of marriage is far from universal. Emotional attachment to it could just as easily be seen as a fixed input and thus could be said to be a short run issue which is completely different from the long run costs that I was referencing. People who are emotionally suited to polyamory should choose it over monogamy but those who are not will incur a greater cost trying to fight their socialization than will be gained from switching to the system.

It is blatantly obvious you don't have kids.

It is obvious that you grew up in a culture which emphasized the bond between child and parent. If you grew up in ancient Sparta you would think entirely differently. That being said the Spartan system was terribly inefficient due to the principal agent problem and diseconomies of scale and likely many parents realized that on some level

 

[EI 903]

It is obvious that you grew up in a culture which emphasized the bond between child and parent. If you grew up in ancient Sparta you would think entirely differently. That being said the Spartan system was terribly inefficient due to the principal agent problem and diseconomies of scale and likely many parents realized that on some level

If he grew up in ancient Sparta this whole Internet thing would be blowing his fucking mind. Also, he wouldn't speak English so he wouldn't be able to make heads or tails out of this thread.

 

[DirkBloodStormKing]

While I am willing to accept the idea of polyamory and polyamorous relationships, I don't know how one could make them completely healthy though. A lot of the times, jealousy ends up happening (and jealousy is a pretty unhealthy characteristic in a relationship to begin with) or the dynamics end up being rather unbalanced (which also ends up making the relationship unhealthy). To have a healthy polyamorous relationship, you gotta do a lot of micromanaging and have some trust, so as to prevent these two major factors (jealousy and unbalanced dynamics) being a major reason as to why your relationship is not working. Thing is, most people are not the types of people willing to do the work to have a healthy relationship, let alone a healthy polyamorous relationship.

 

[Vitriol]

The 'western ideal of marriage' is pretty much universal where men and women have roughly equal rights. It is not a coincidence that polygamy is most common where women are property.

It is obvious that you grew up in a culture which emphasized the bond between child and parent. If you grew up in ancient Sparta you would think entirely differently. That being said the Spartan system was terribly inefficient due to the principal agent problem and diseconomies of scale and likely many parents realized that on some level

I don't believe for a second that there has ever been a culture on earth without strong parental-child bonds.

 

[OtterParty]

If you wanna cuck your boyfriend just go ahead and cuck your boyfriend. Don't need to justify it to us here. We don't even know you or your boyfriend IRL anyway, there's no chance we could use this against you whatsoever I promise cross my heart

 

[Carlos Thin]

he wouldn't be able to make heads or tails out of this thread.

I'd empathize with him

 

[Magpie]

Let adults do what they want with their relationships, really. Outside of more people to have drama with should a relationship go sour there are enough shitty, exploitative, and abusive monogamous relationships to trump "well polyamorous relationships are automatically x/y/z!"

I can only imagine how much of a legal kerfuffle managing a 2+ person legalized relationship is though. A standard marriage on its own seems like enough of a pain in the ass. Yikes.

edit: Also why bother bringing mathematical equations into it? It's really not how relationships or even just people on their own work.

 

[autisticdragonkin]

edit: Also why bother bringing mathematical equations into it? It's really not how relationships or even just people on their own work.

The same reason why you should use mathematical equations while making a rocket to send into space. Sometimes the intuitive thing will not work and by using math you can think more critically about the situation and avoid a disastrous outcome

 

[Vitriol]

The same reason why you should use mathematical equations while making a rocket to send into space. Sometimes the intuitive thing will not work and by using math you can think more critically about the situation and avoid a disastrous outcome

I think the only time i ever used maths with a relationship was to integrate my natural log

 

[melty]

@autisticdragonkin If you want to discuss maths in relationships why don't you make a new thread? Its honestly just not that related to polyamory.

 

[Dr. Boe Jangles Esq.]

The same reason why you should use mathematical equations while making a rocket to send into space. Sometimes the intuitive thing will not work and by using math you can think more critically about the situation and avoid a disastrous outcome

Look, I get where you're coming from. A lot of us are analytical people by nature, and we like things to fit into models and make sense. Sad truth is, if there was ever anything that defied sense, it's romantic relationships. I think you're trying to quantify and analyze something that is, by nature, impossible to quantify.
Fact is, people don't behave rationally, and they're particularly irrational when it comes to love. We have some scattered studies and theories about what makes them do certain things, but trying to break love down to basic math is what the Sluthaters have been failing at for years.
Edit:
To move us towards the topic of the thread, I would say that this kind of thinking is also what complicates poly relationships. When you've got a bunch of people involved, someone is inevitably going to try to apply some kind of game theory to it.

 

[melty]

because it allows for people to get higher quality romantic partners

Lol have you seen the Polyamory Group thread