Time.news – Longer lasting, more suitable for raising children and happier: it is the polyamorous relationship according to Justin Clardy, professor of philosophy at Santa Clara University, one of the main Jesuit universities in the United States. His book “Why It’s OK to Not Be Monogamous” is a praise of polyamorous relationships that dismantles, with numbers and philosophical reasoning, the most common prejudices about this new form of emotional relationship which is on the rise, especially among young people. The term polyamory indicates the possibility of having more than one intimate relationship at the same time, with the explicit and conscious consent of all the people involved. It is coined and used for the first time in the United States in 1990 by Morning Glory Zell-Ravenheart (pseudonym of Diana Moore), leader of an American neo-pagan community, who publishes in the magazine “Green Egg Magazine”, founded with her husband Oberon Zell-Ravenheart , an article entitled A Bouquet of Lovers: strategies for responsible open relationships, in which he explains the mechanisms of his open marriage and exposes his ideal of a ‘multiple’ relationship, based on the sexual and sentimental involvement of several people at the same time.
From a linguistic point of view, it refers to the English word polyamory, formed by the prefix of Greek origin poly- and the Latin noun amor ‘love’ with the addition of the nominal suffix -y, on the model of polygamy. Clardy says polyamorous people face stigma and discrimination in their daily lives; however, research shows that being in a romantic relationship with more than one person at a time can provide emotional and physical benefits for all parties. “Monogamy” – argues Clardy – “is often described as the ideal form of romantic love in many modern societies. From the stories we read as children, to the movies and books we consume as adults, we are told that in order to achieve happiness, we must find our one true soul mate with whom to share the rest of our lives.” “At the same time – he continues – states and governments offer financial, legal and social incentives to married couples. Meanwhile, men and women who deviate from these monogamous norms are treated as pariahs and publicly shamed.
However, despite this, polyamorous relationships are on the rise. An estimated 4 to 5 percent of the U.S. population is currently involved in consensual non-monogamous relationships”. A 2020 study10, cited in the book, found that about one in 500 adults in the United States self-identified as polyamorous. A growing number of legal and political scholars are arguing for reforms of current family laws so that they recognize the wide variety of intimate personal relationships in which human beings can thrive. “Polyamorous people run the risk of being fired, denied housing or citizenship, or having their children taken away from them because of their polyamorous identities and lifestyles,” says Justin Clardy, professor of philosophy at Santa Clara university. “However, in many cases poly relationships are more durable than monogamous ones, because their flexibility allows them to accommodate changing needs over time in a way that monogamous relationships do not.”
Professor Clardy has dedicated his academic career to studying the ethics of non-monogamous relationship styles and the unjust political consequences faced by non-monogamists. In his first book, Clardy summarizes the main arguments commonly made in support of monogamy. He then he takes each one apart with a thorough search. For example, there is a theory that humans evolved to be monogamous because human babies require more care, as they are born at a younger gestational age than other mammals. Professor Clardy explains: “Monogamy is therefore seen as the ‘natural’ order of things.
However, many homosexual and heterosexual monogamous couples either do not want or cannot have children but this it does not exclude them from being able to marry and to enjoy the rights and privileges that derive from marriage. “Others may see monogamy as a God-given moral command, however, does this mean that atheists and agnostics are barred from romantic love, even if they are in happy, healthy, and fulfilling monogamous romantic relationships?” One of the most common arguments against polyamory is that incites painful feelings of jealousy; however, even monogamous couples experience this emotion.
In fact, Clardy argues that in many cases, another person’s vulnerability, possessiveness, and sense of entitlement to love are more at the heart of jealousy than we care to admit. Clardy argues that polyamory, on the other hand, can benefit relationships by refocusing our attention on how one’s partner fares in other intimate relationships. “When governed by mutual consent and understanding, polyamorous relationships can allow people to more fully share in each other’s happiness,” says Clardy. “This can be achieved by facing and managing one’s own vulnerability, softening our proneness to jealousy, and learning to pay attention to the prosperity of others.” Some of the harshest critics of polyamorists argue that non-monogamy is detrimental to family unity, leading to divorce and breakup of families.
However, according to Clardy, polyamorous families exist and thrive, and such an arrangement can actually benefit children. “It may not take an entire village to raise a child, but it stands to reason that, all other things being equal, having more than one ‘father’ or ‘mother’ as caregiver can be even more conducive to meeting the needs of children, as children can be loved and nurtured in unconventional families,” says Clardy. “Indeed, it may turn out that having more than two caregivers on average is the top parental agreement.” In the final chapter of her book, Clardy argues that it is morally wrong to impose monogamy on society and calls on the state to support polyamorous relationships as well as monogamous ones. “Polyamorous relationships need the support and protection that the state is uniquely able to provide and best placed to deliver,” Clardy says. “Just because a way of relating might deviate from established social norms such as monogamy, that doesn’t mean they don’t have considerable value, morally, socially or politically,” concludes the US philosopher.