Monday 6 February 2012

"You just haven't met the right one yet."

Poly Means Many: There are many aspects of polyamory. Each month six bloggers - ALBJ, An Open Book, More Than Nuclear, One Sub's Mission, Post Modern Sleaze, and Rarely Wears Lipstick - will write about their views on one of them. This month, our topic is "Explaining polyamory to the monogamous" - visit the other blogs to read the other perspectives on this topic.

When explaining polyamory to the disbelieving or curious, it's common to use the analogy of a parent's love for their children: nobody doubts that you can love more than one child , so why is it hard to believe you can love more than one partner?

Ahh, the disbelieving monogamists will say, but parental love is different. You just haven't met the right one yet. When the right person comes along, that love will be so strong that you won't want any others, and you'll want to be monogamous, too. You can't love two people the way you can love two of your children.

And of course it is different, but it's not as different as people think.

In some of the early research into the links between our relationship with our parents and our romantic relationships as adults, Hazan and Shaver noted that both lovers and parent-child pairs "play with one another's facial features and exhibit a mutual fascination and preoccupation with one another". This tender gazing into each other's eyes and stroking their hair or cheek, an act so linked to romantic love it is little more than a cliche, is something very familiar to parents. Sally Read, in her poem Latching On, describes the look on a newborn's face as 'like a lover's eyes'. The last poem I posted on my blog is a love poem, but it's there because I am often reminded of it when I look at my daughter's face. It looks right, as Muir puts it, as if hers is the perfect human face and all others lack for something. I have had that feeling when looking at a lover, but never this strongly.

Sylvia Plath's poem You're is about her unborn child, but was published in The Nation's Favourite Love Poems. Just as the polyamorous will sometimes use a parent's love for their children to explain how you can love more than one romantic partner, it would be difficult to explain how I feel about my daughter without making it sound like a grand passion, and many poets have done exactly that.

Other similarities that Hazan and Shaver noted (summarised here) are that both lovers and parent-child pairs 'feel safe when the other is nearby and responsive', 'engage in close, intimate, bodily contact', 'feel insecure when the other is inaccessible, 'share discoveries with one another' and of course 'engage in "baby talk"'. Of course there are differences (sex being the most obvious) but so many of the key features are the same, that many psychologists now think that our relationship with our parents can work as a sort of test run for our adult love affairs. We learn how to form loving relationships of all kinds from our parents, and children who are securely attached to their parents, find romantically attaching themselves to others easier as adults.

When I am separated from her, I feel her physical absence keenly, and can easily fixate on how much I want to hug her. My husband sometimes holds her hand while she is asleep. The comfort and joy we share when we hold her, kiss her, nuzzle our faces into her neck, blow raspberries on her belly and pretend to eat her toes is not at all unlike a romantic passion, and, as Kate Saunders puts it, it is definitely the stormiest love affair of my life so far.

And quite honestly, I struggle to imagine loving another baby quite this strongly. Wouldn't this powerful love stunt the growth of any love I would feel for a second child? How could I possibly love any other in quite this way?

But of course, I know that I could. I see, all around me, parents in multiple loving relationships with their children, so although I sometimes struggle to conceptualise it as possible, I know that it can be done

Perhaps the difficulty people face in comparing multiple loving relationships between parents and their children and between the polyamorous is simply this lack of good models. Conducting relationships openly this way is not the norm, so when people feel that they couldn't love another, the way that new parents often do, where do they see polyamorous relationships modelled the way I see parents loving more than one child? Our society's prevailing narrative of love comes down as strongly on the side of the "one true love" story of romance as it does on the multiple love story of parenthood.

It would be offensive in the extreme to suggest to a mother or father of multiple children that they just "hadn't had the right child yet", and when "the one" arrived, they would naturally lose interest in the children they had before. It would be unconscionably rude to doubt a parent when they say that they love all of their children, and that they have no desire to have a one child family.

And if you can imagine how it might feel if someone said that about you and your children, you can probably imagine how I feel when I'm told I just "haven't met the right one yet".

8 comments:

  1. Thanks very much for including reference links (and testimony) in this post to help fuel my "love for children and partners is not that different" argument. It's all-consuming - people know this. I guess you can love another child as much because you'll inevitably be out of the NRE phase by the time another one is born! But twins arrive at the same time... it's clearly an analogy that just works.

    I tried to avoid using the "you can love more than one child" explanation in my post on this topic - mainly because I've said it so many times before - but it is indeed the best way of getting across how it really is possible to love more than one person to someone who has been brought up to believe that it isn't.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, it's good to have ACADEMIC RESEARCH to refute the dismissive "it's just different" claims!

      I'm not sure that the NRE thing applies as easily to children, though! I think that "new relationship energy" is usually (always?) very sexual, which might explain it. But also, you build a romantic relationship slowly, increasing gradually (usually at least!) in commitment and love. With a child, you are at your most committed right at the beginning, and then you gradually grow apart. (Which is part of what I was getting at when I posted about the "Motherbaby".)

      If there is an analogy for NRE in parenting, I think it would be the intensity of your child's dependency on you. Perhaps the reason I feel strongly that I couldn't love another child is because I'm so wrapped up in this one - she takes nearly all of my mental and physical energy! And similarly, the chemical rush of a new lover often makes it impossible to find the time to start new relationships.

      Delete
    2. I see NRE as the 'blind' love, where you're so engrossed in a person that you don't see their flaws, and I don't see it as being especially sexual. Perhaps that is an odd link for me to suggest though.

      I love your suggestion that lovers grow together whereas parents and children grow apart (an important distinction). It's useful for me to be reminded of such things, as I only have experience from the child side :-)

      Delete
    3. I think we need to discuss NRE in more detail somewhere, then, because I don't think I've ever had the "blind to their flaws" bit of love that I hear so much about! NRE, for me, is mostly characterised by lust.

      Delete
  2. Every time I read your blog post I end up smiling and getting goosebumps. Oh, to have your power of the written word!

    I digress. I've noted that when I start to fall in love, I instinctively act motherly to the object of my affections and desire. I stroke cheeks, soften my facial features, go gooey-eyed and smile a lot more, play with their hands and feet and generally have a strong desire to take care of that person. I'm also careful to set boundaries and not allow any nonsense. I can't really distinguish between the actions which demonstrate my love for my son and my love for anyone else. I cannot see any reason why the analogy shouldn't hold true nor shouldn't be used to explain the concept of non-monogamy to others. I don't see it as a reductionist thing at all.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, Maestromiddy, it's so demonstrably similar, I'm baffled by how people don't get it. Glad you get it, as you're obviously coming from a similar place!

      Delete
  3. This is an excellent post, thank you. I understood much less about parental love than I did romantic, but your thoughts have clarified it for me.

    One part that rang especially true for me was: "We learn how to form loving relationships of all kinds from our parents". I don't feel I did learn much from my parents in this regard, and what I learnt seemed broken to me, so I set out to discover for myself what relationships are, how they work, what the rules are. How to retain autonomy while depending on each other. Polyamory is the current end point of this 20-year exploration into romantic love. Who knows whether I will come to add parental love to my experiences?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There is some interesting research into this, too: children who don't learn about healthy attachments from their parents do have more difficulty forming romantic attachments in adulthood, but can learn to do so (often from others) and quickly "catch up". I wonder if having to learn it from scratch, as you feel you did, gave you more freedom to reject traditional models? Although I was referring to attachment to parents transposed onto adult relationships, I do think that the very happy marriage my parents (and others in my family) modelled for me made it more difficult for me to accept polyamory and other open relationship models.

      P.S. Don't ever ask me about whether it's a good idea to be a parent or not unless you want to be evangelised to about the joys of babies.

      Delete