It seems to me from reading the answers to these questions that most people writing have better vocabulary then you will find in most of America. Is this because more intelligent people are more likely to disregard irrational social conceptions like monogamy (and find this sight)? Is it just that most people who read this sight just aren't answering the questions? Or am I just wrong entirely?

-- Matt (fourteetwo@usa.net), April 13, 2000

Answers

Polygamy is more associated with patriarchy and religious dogma so I dont tend to think of polygamy and polyamory as that closely akin. When approached by polygamists I tend to ask them if they are OK with their wives having other lovers. All of the ones that I have asked did not think that was right. As far as intelligence, I know some pretty dumb polyamorous people and many who use the term polyamory to rationalize some significant character flaws, questionable behaviors and personal problems. Intelligence of the posters may have more to do with the type of people who have computers and know how to navigate and find a journal like Anns.

AND

I dont think many who are posting are necessarily polyamorous.

-- Lee (leet@megsinet.net), April 13, 2000.

okay, first of all i'm going to say that i wouldn't besmirch the intelligence of anyone who's reading my, er, "collected works" online... obviously, there's a certain level of discernment at work there! :)

i also want to back up the distinction between polygamy and polyamory. polygamy means "many wives," and polyamory means "many loves," so i prefer the latter term. it's too bad that the usual term for loving a single person incorporates the assumption of not only "one partner," but of "one wife," which implies that monogamy is the choice of the husband. monoamory, people? or, at least, monoandry when applied to the wife? although, that still implies marriage, which may or may not be what the people concerned actually want. monoamory. i hereby inaugurate a new term.

to get to the question: in my opinion, there may be a correlation between high emotional intelligence and successful polyamory, but that's not to say that monogamous people don't have high emotional intelligence. i've seen enough poly and mono people with low emotional intelligence to know that there's a wide range of abilities in either set of people.

i have a fairly large proportion of poly readers, but non-polys are posting, for sure.

-- ann monroe (nayad@inorbit.com), April 13, 2000.

oops! actually, "monogamy" means "the condition or practice of having a single mate during a period of time," and is also used to indicate being married to only one person at a time. "polygyny" is the real term for "many wives." so. i consider my previous post clarified.

-- ann monroe (nayad@inorbit.com), April 13, 2000.

I'm with Ann and Lee. There's a world of difference between polyamory and polygamy, at least how I define the terms and have seen them practiced, and there are critically important distinctions between them. As a man in a blissfully successful polyamory-enhanced marriage, I find the notion of polygamy rather Neanderthal and repugnant if by "polygamy" one means that the man has the option of multiple relationships but the woman does not and has no choice about it. Polygamy connotes unpleasant inequities in the relationship and is likely to be symptomatic of other deficiencies as well. So to directly answer the stated question, my response is "No, of course not." I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that that's not what you meant.

If you meant "Is polyAMORY related to higher intelligence?" -- then my response is, "Maybe, but not any more than being a liberal is a sign of higher intelligence." Now, by my personal/political biases, I desire to believe that in all cases progressive, liberal social/political leanings are indeed such a sign. But as I've gotten older I've witnessed too many instances of that happy myth being shattered by individuals who demonstrate sharp deficits in intelligence despite such leanings. Of course, I've also encountered many affirmations of that belief in still other people, so there's naturally a continuum.

Likewise, I've encountered actively polyamorous folks who are stunningly bright, intelligent, centered, focused people -- way above the norm in all good categories and the world is a more better, intelligence place because of them They are among my role models. Elsewhere are those who practice polyamory but who appear to be no more intelligent (etc.) than any other typical person who has never even heard the word before. On the other side of the continuum are those who use polyamory (or drop the terminology and buzzwords like breadcrumbs) for self-aggrandizing or sanctimonious or even venal ends and whose intelligence may be anywhere from genius to Common Joe Schmo. In those cases, it's not their intelligence that is their predominant characteristic. And then there are the obvious questions: "What do you mean by 'intelligence?", "How do you measure it?", and "What kind(s) of intelligence are you referring to?"

So, no. Where one happens to be within the monogamy-polyamory spectrum is not an adequate indicator of intelligence, nor is one's intelligence any indicator of position within the spectrum. For some of us it may be pretty and self-congratulatory to think so, but as the Gershwins said, it ain't necessarily so. As for strictly textbook- defined, non-inclusive, partner-inequitable poolygamy, my progressive, liberal kneejerk response is to consider that a sign of low intelligence and probably other unpleasant traits.

So Ill asuume you really meant polyamory.

-- Mark (mbourne@sff.net), April 13, 2000.

And the phrase "a more better, intelligence place" plus the word "poolygamy" in the post above tells you something about either the intelligence or the careful typing abilities of the poster. :{)

-- Mmmmmark (mbourne@sff.net), April 13, 2000.