:: Edgeliving: Master Jim and slave marsha ::

:: Wednesday, June 30, 2004 ::

I Am Poly…But I Am Not Polyamorous

The recent discussion by the readers of this website about polyamorous or poly relationships seems to be missing one important consideration: what do we mean when we say we are polyamorous? As I read the various posts, I came to realize that I might not understand what people mean when they call themselves “polyamorous.” So I did a quick Google search and found a site with the following definitions of polyamory:

“A long-term, romantically committed, multiple partner relationship.”

“The practice, state or ability of having more than one sexual loving relationship at the same time, with the full knowledge and consent of all partners involved.”

“Means ‘many loves,’ and refers to relationship styles of responsible non-monogamy.”

There were many more definitions, but these examples give a flavor of what people may mean when they say they are polyamorous. These selected definitions and most others, while they vary, do have common components: the idea of multiple relationships (poly), coupled with love (amor) and usually sex.

Now I say enough extreme things already, so I will not use this post to stake out a position against love and sex, especially sex. Trust me – I am strongly in favor of sex and I really do not have anything against love, either. I will, however, challenge the common practice of applying the term polyamorous to Master/slave relationships when what is being described may be, I think, something quite different.

I currently have two people in service to me – slave marsha as my slave and ryan as my man in service. I also am negotiating with a third person, a boy. Recently, I was asked if I considered myself to be polyamorous. I responded that I do not. Why not? After all, I certainly am not involved in a traditional monogamous relationship. But my response was based on defining the term polyamorous in a way consistent with the common definition of the word – multiple relationships based on romantic love.

If you have been following the writings on this website, or if you have heard me and slave marsha speak, you will know that I do not consider romantic love to be the foundation of my Master/slave relationship. While some kind of love may very well be a part of a Master/slave relationship, as it is in my relationship with slave marsha, it is in no way a romantic love. So as long as there is a common assumption that being polyamorous means having multiple romantic relationships, I will not call myself polyamorous.

But what if we take the romantic love idea (amor) out of the definition of polyamorous, leaving us simply with the term “poly?” Using just the term “poly” (many) to describe my relationships certainly is more accurate.

But calling myself simply “poly” really is not enough. It seems necessary to replace the “amorous” with something to describe the kind of multiple relationships in which I live. And after thinking about what might accurately describe them, the answer came to me – and was quite simple. I have a “polyservice” relationship with slave marsha as my slave and ryan as my man in service. Service is the foundation of these multiple relationships, not love.

And so, for those of us in multiple Master/slave or other service based relationships, I offer the alternative concept of “polyservice” to describe what we do. In my case, it simply fits where polyamorous does not.

In leather,
Master Jim

:: 9:43 AM [+] ::
...