(Repost; first published July 15, 2009; now appears with minor revisions.)

1. Define monogamy in your own words.
I define monogamy as a synonym to "exclusivity".  You can be monogamous in friendship, as in best friendship; you can be monogamous in a marriage (as is the typical marriage arrangement); you can be monogamous sexually, only sleeping with one person at a time; you can be emotionally or romantically monogamous... there are many ways to be monogamous.  Many people associate monogamy with loyalty and commitment; I associate monogamy more with... jealousy and possessiveness.  I do believe that there are monogamous models which are far more loyal and committed than jealous and possessive, but I think, in general, American culture really fosters a sense of ownership in monogamous relationships, and from my observation it's extraordinarily prevalent. 

1a. What is your general attitude toward this relationship model?
You know, I have nothing wrong with monogamy; it works for some people -- it works for a lot of people (though, fewer than we'd imagine, I think).  I just don't think it would work for me.  I don't like exclusivity, and less do I like possessiveness or jealousy.  People aren't property; they aren't to be owned, bought, won or conquered.  I don't like the expectations that seem to come along with monogamy, and I don't like the long patriarchal history of marriage, and I don't like the "Biblical reasons" behind monogamy, and I don't much like any of it.  But I'm not against it for other people or anything.

1b. Can you share an experience you've had with this relationship type--personal or otherwise--that represents most of your attitude? Whatever comes to mind...
Well, the last time I was in a monogamous relationship was when I was seventeen and I was dating this boy, and we were very exclusive.  I remember being very jealous when he talked to girls, and very insecure, and very needy.  We talked all the time, but I wasn't always available to him because school kept me so busy, so he sought connections elsewhere... and it always hurt me.  I wasn't understanding of his other relationships.  This might be in part due to the ages we were at the time of our relationship, but I also think it has to do with the relationship structure itself and how I came to perceive it based on how society makes it look.  I remember feeling like jealousy was both normal and expected and if you didn't feel jealous than you likely didn't even really like the person you were dating... it was all very backwards and I'm sorry I lived so much of my adolescence believing that.  Jealousy is based more on fear and insecurity than anything else; I would never identify jealousy as a characteristic of love.

2. Define polyamory in your own words.
Polyamory is freedom.  Technically it's the practice, desire or acceptance of having more than one intimate relationship at a time, with the full knowledge and consent of everyone involved.  I feel that the second half of the definition is the most important part, because it implies so much honesty and discussion of feelings and boundaries.  Polyamory is the "free love" that the 60s and 70s never got right.  It's a philosophy, first and foremost.  To me it represents freedom, and choice, and honesty... freedom to explore, freedom to be honest about attractions to multiple people, freedom to pursue your feelings, freedom to grow in understanding of yourself and what you want.... Polyamory gives an individual the freedom to feel fluctuations in need, desire and passion and for that to be okay. I mean, for me, I believe love is everywhere, that any single person has the potential to fall in love with a million different people and compatibility is vast.  I think these are very "poly" beliefs.  I also believe that, although it's easy to think you couldn't love someone any more then you love a person now, there is someone out there you haven't loved yet, and they haven't loved you.  I also believe that there are some relationships that are meant to be only for a season, and others that are meant to endure (even, perhaps, with gaps). I define polyamory as the model that is most open to exploring these different kinds of love and love arrangements.

2a. What is your general attitude toward this relationship model?
Polyamory is wonderful.  I love everything about it.  I don't know if I can really say any more than this because I'm really really biased.  I know it doesn't always work for people, and it certainly has its flaws... but I really think that's because people are flawed; failure isn't the fault of the relationship model.  (But I guess the same could be said for monogamy, so I don't know where I was going with that...)  I just really like it for its freedom.  It means a lot to me to be able to take love from every source offering it to me -- and not because I'm greedy, but because I believe that is how life should be lived -- by all of us.

2b. Can you share an experience you've had with this relationship type--personal or otherwise--that represents most of your attitude? Whatever comes to mind here works too.
I've been poly my entire life, and I know that because I've never had a best friend.  I wanted one, because society told me that I was supposed to have one and I was "missing out" for not having one... but that just wasn't the way my relationships ever unfolded.  Any time I did have a "best friend" I wound up more or less resenting the person for being too... "clingy".  Then when I got into the age where I started to have crushes on people, I always liked more than one person, and I liked them for very different reasons.  I also never really dated traditionally.  The people I've gotten the closest to (slept with, opened up to completely in an emotionally transparent sense, gave all my time to, etc) are people who I had no established "more than friends" connection with-- no "title" if you will.  And that was okay.  Most of the time I had to "share" these people, because they were involved with someone else at the time, and it was always so okay with me, because I'd rather have the part of them they were giving me and I loved them for than not have them at all.  I was involved with a lot of people who were in relationships (with their partner's knowledge and consent, of course), and it was so wonderful and happy.  At this point, I guess you could say I've been in two "primary" relationships -- I was in one this time last year, and I'm entering into one now.  The one I was in last year was really wonderful -- there was so much honesty and transparency and vulnerability and freedom... and almost zero jealousy (and forget possessiveness); and it didn't end due to any failure of the relationship model.  The ability to be committed to a person, and feel those feelings of being in love, and at the same time take happiness from situations where they are experiencing happiness through someone other than you... that's beautiful.  And I feel that I have that now, too.  I feel like the more time I spend admiring and loving and swooning over other people, the more love I have to give my partner -- really, the more love I have in general -- and it feels really calming.

3. Is either of the two relationship models I've asked you about more comfortable for you?
Haha, you're kidding, right?  I think the answer to this question is pretty well established. 

4. If one is more prevalent in your life, could you see yourself ever pursuing the other model? If so, why?
Yes, I think I could be monogamous, but not in the traditional sense, just... in my own sense.  I guess I am kind of doing that now, with my current partner.  I am committed to her, and she to me, but I am still very much poly in philosophy.  There hasn't been any desire to be poly in practice so far while I've been with her -- but she knows and understands that I give and receive love as freely as I exchange oxygen and CO2.  I'm not sure I could be in a relationship where I was expected to belong only to that other person.  Lots of people have my heart -- I'm willing to give it to anyone who wants it.  I'm just short on time and energy.  I'm not sure I really answered the question.... I could probably do monogamy, yes, but really it depends on how it's defined and what the expectations are.  Fair?

5. How do you see the concept of honesty playing its role in either/both relationship models?
Oh boyyy.  Loaded question.   Honesty is vital to all relationships.  I don't think you can have a relationship without honesty-- and I mean just a close friendship, let alone a romantic relationship or two.  All people should speak truth and create trust in the minds of others (aka, be honest).  Hm.   Answering this question reminds me of these concepts I heard once, "passive honesty" and "active truthfulness".  Passive honesty allows us to lie by omission, by glossing over the truth and withholding information from our loved ones (sometimes we don’t even know we’re doing it); active truthfulness requires courage... it's offering truths without having to be asked, sharing freely with those who show interest.  I think that active truthfulness is vital in poly relationships and, perhaps more importantly, employed in them; I think that passive honesty occurs fairly often in monogamous pairings, and it makes me very sad.  I think that the passively honest are missing out big time.

6. If you can recall the last time you felt jealous, for ANY reason, can you describe it?
I think the last time I was jealous was when my partner last year spent three or four days in a row with the same boy and I hadn't seen her for the majority of the week.  I wasn't jealous of the boy; I was jealous that he had the freedom to be with her consistently that I didn't have.  I had categorized my relationship with her as the most important of all my relationships (she was the one I wanted to give of myself the most to- my time and my soul and my energy and my body and my mind) and it just made me sad that I couldn't see her as often as I would have liked.  I was jealous of people who had her parents' permission to be with her.  (And considering that lack of permission/acceptance is what came between us, I'd say a part of me is still sad about this to date.)  The good thing, is knowing and recognizing that a part of me can miss her while loving others and letting love in from others.

7. Define "intimate relationship."
An intimate relationship is a really close personal association accompanied by a sense of belonging.... it's familiar and affectionate and there are established connections between the people involved.  Intimate relationships are wonderful.  I believe that genuine intimacy in a relationship requires open dialogue/communication, honesty, transparency, vulnerability and reciprocity and cannot be missing any of those components.  As a verb, "intimate" means "to make known" and, as an adjective, "intimate" indicates detailed knowledge of a person; so an intimate relationship denotes individuals entering deeply into relationship through knowledge and experience of the other; it is a relationship in which the participants know or trust one another very well or are confidants of one another.  To quote Wikipedia:  "Intimate relationships consist of the people that we are attracted to, whom we like and love, romantic and sexual relationships, and those who we marry and provide emotional and personal support.  Intimate relationships provide people with a social network of people that provide strong emotional attachments and fulfill our universal needs of belongingness and the need to be cared for."

7a. Does your definition include physical intimacy?
It can.  Physical intimacy is important, and can come in many forms, from passionate love and attachment to kissing to holding hands to sexual activity.  Everyone defines physical activity differently and everyone views different types of intimacy on a sliding scale.  Holding hands can be incredibly significant to one person and meaningless to another -- even sex can be viewed that way.  Physical intimacy can definitely be a component of an intimate relationship, but isn't necessary for one.

7b. Are there any defining characteristics to an "intimate relationship?"
Yes.  Open dialogue/communication, honesty, transparency, vulnerability and reciprocity.  (In any or all forms.)

8. (As if these questions weren't philosophical enough) Describe what "love" is for you.
You know, I think that love is only a concept and not something that can be defined.  Love is different for everyone who experiences it and in every connection established between the "lovers" (if I had to use a term).  And I think, for that reason, all people and all connections should be respected and cherished.  Because everyone only wants to be loved.  And if I really *had* to try and define love, I would point out that it is different than "liking" and that it's more than sex and physicality and commitment.  It's about reciprocity and authenticity.  It's about "bonding" with someone, about establishing a connection, about feeling alive.  I know I feel the most "in love" when I share perspective with someone and when that person and myself get excited over or feel passionate about the same things, but that's just me.  Lastly, I find that love is a verb before it's a noun, and you're lying if you claim to love someone you lie to, compare to others, are rude to, are jealous of, are possessive of, or hold things against.  Love is an action; it's a commitment to put that other person (or other people) before yourself, even if it hurts. 

8a. Have you ever loved more than one person at a time, according to the definition you have provided?
Yes, I have.  I really love everyone in my life, and I know you're asking in the "in love" sense, but I kind of mean that, too.  I respect the connections I have with nearly all my friends; I try not to keep people in my life whom it's hard for me to respect or connect to.  And so then I find myself in love with a good handful of the people I consider my friends.  I mean, right now I'm "with" one person -- with some things we're monogamous, and she gets the majority of my time and energy -- but she knows that I love other people (because of the special--and different--connections I have with them), and I love her, and we're good.  I really can't see myself living life any other way.

9. What comfort do you gain from sitting down and defining the nature of the relationship you have with a significant other(s)?
Wow, good question.  I gain *immense* comfort from sitting down and defining the nature of the relationship I have with someone.  I can't express how important it is to sit down and have this discussion -- even monogamous people should have these discussions.  Making sure that boundaries are respected is one of the most important things in pretty much any relationship, and it's difficult to respect boundaries that are never talked about.  More people should discuss what they feel to be permissible in a given relationship (emotionally, spiritually, sexually) -- and not just when they first enter the relationship; people should constantly be reevaluating things and communicating about their revelations or feelings.  I just think it's very important.  You should always know where your partners(s) is (are) coming from, because it's not fair to you or anyone else to be left guessing.  Your partner(s) should be the first to know if/when anything changes in your life, even if only in thought and not action. 

10.  How have religion/spirituality and polyamory interacted in your life, and what general thoughts on their relationship can you offer?
This question is pretty loaded.  First of all, I was raised in a fundamentalist version of Christianity and I found (heterosexual) monogamy and Christianity to be very closely related.  I was taught from a very early age that God had a very specific relationship model for relationships (the "servant-leader model" if you're curious), and this model only made room for man, wife, and God.  Anyway, I left Christianity almost four years ago now in search of a more open, spiritual and communal lifestyle... and I've been identifying as polyamorous for about two of those four years.... I just think that polyamory is spiritual.  I feel strongly that we were all put on this earth to live in communion with others and give and share and reciprocate.  And I feel that polyamory is the relationship model that best recognizes this purpose, which makes the practice of polyamory something almost spiritual for me.  In being poly, I never have to deny myself a connection with someone.  I can love freely.  I can love in a way I feel I was "commanded" to love in.  (2 John 1:6.  "Love means living the way God commanded us to live. As you have heard from the beginning, his command is this: Live a life of love.")

Another of my posts on polyamory:
A reasoned response to the monogamous

Do you still believe in God? What do you think of Christianity now? And if you don't believe any longer, what do you believe in? What do you identify as?

i could spend a lifetime answering this set of questions.  (i think part of me already has, and the rest of me plans to.)  to answer the question of identity... i identify as nothing in particular -- just a spirit on a human journey, a philosopher, a wandering soul, a truth-seeker, a part of the divine. some of my beliefs have labels. i could be said to have humanist, agnostic, and pantheistic beliefs. i could also be called a practitioner of generic religion, "post-denominational", and moderately skeptical.  but i think what defines me the most is my identity as an ex-fundamentalist. i am also defined by the fact that i am well read in scripture, have had decent exposure to other religions (and have found truths in all of them), and am now studying philosophy.  i have a very holistic approach to almost every detail of life, religion being no different.  i believe that you cannot know your own beliefs without understanding those that you do not believe; i believe in the reconciliation of science and religion; i believe that there is a major truth that all religions are a part of.  i get upset by what i see as unnecessary division, disconnect, and brokenness. 

but the word "god" carries a lot of connotations and misconceptions, i think.  while i believe that there is a benevolent force at work in the universe, i don't feel compelled to give it a name.  (the language paradox: you need to give something a name in order to reference it, but naming something almost automatically gives it a definition... one which no one can seem to agree on, when it comes to god.  so i opt out of the naming system, as many great believers before me have.)  i won't go so far as to say that i don't believe in the biblical god, but i will say that i don't believe in the god that most christians interpret the scriptures to speak of.  there is a part of me, when i read kabbalistic literature or "revamped" christian works (like velvet elvis or the transcended christian) where i do have some faith in god ("their" god).  i do not consider myself a "believer", nor do i consider myself any sort of christian (i don't see christ the way most christians do), but a great deal of my beliefs have been formed through christian tradition and christian language.  i'm finally okay with that.  (i'm going to assume that you're asking me what i think of christianity now that i no longer go to church or identify with christianity, and not what i think of what christianity has become.)

i think religion is great for those whose quality of life it directly improves, and those who can see it through a child's eyes as this wonderful magical thing and not law and dogma. but i think that it can really hurt a great deal of people, souls, and relationships.  which brings me to perhaps the most paramount of all my beliefs:  i believe that our relationships (especially those with the people to whom we are closest) are the real opportunities we are given to emulate the tolerance, sharing, and love that are said to be the creator’s essence; that these are the qualities that our relationships can teach us and the qualities we most need to learn if we are to fulfill the true purpose of our lives.  i firmly believe there is a reason that all research points to us being social creatures and why all our thoughts revolve around our relationships, identities, conversations, and all things interpersonal.  and i think that when religion starts to get in the way of relationships--when religious belief is what leads to pain, destruction, heartache, family problems, etc--then that's really hell.  the wages of sin is death, not eternal torment. and until someone defines death for me and can prove to me that the bible is also speaking in accordance with their definition, i will  forever and always consider loveless situations hell and the killing of a soul (however metaphorical or metaphysical) as death. 

i'd consider myself a writer except words fail me too often. language can't keep up with the mind, the soul, the heart, culture, experience... we have words like "androgyny" to describe gender ambiguity, a word limited by its very definition, putting the androgyne in a binary, on a line, trapped in a false dichotomy. the androgyne becomes a mime, playing with the walls of the box- the box may not exist but it is very real. words. ideas. there's this word- "like"- this one word to describe the complex affectionate feelings between friendship and love. i like you. what does that mean? what's the soul trying to say? the body? is it different from what is leaving the mouth and reaching another's ears? you like me? what does that mean? if i had a creative mind i would string together complex words and phrases that would jump off a page like a schoolboy going to recess. i am that eager about language. but language, you frustrate me. language, you're so paradoxical. because without you we have nothing. you communicate our thoughts and ideas, you forge our friendships, you strengthen our relationships, you hold our entire perception of reality in your hands. communication establishes connections, and connections are what we live for. using another's language is a primary way of conveying respect and openness. but language can be meaningless. a word on a page, a term, a definition- it tells us none of what we need to know to have respectful, meaningful discussions; the definition alone communicates nothing. i hear what you're saying, but i cannot hear you. i don't speak that language. gender what? i'm sorry. what? no, no that's not my experience. no, no i'm sorry i don't understand. of course we're drawn to people who are like us. shared experiences. shared language. "the need for a recognizable identity, the need to belong to a group of people with a similar identity -- these are driving forces in our culture" - yes, yes kate. and with this, with this is the need to find others who speak our language. speak with me, i like you. i like you because you speak with me. you speak my language. i speak and you hear me. of course we like people who make us feel good- we all need affirmation; we all need human mirrors. we like people who speak our language, and language is shaped by culture and experience and knowledge. there is so much room for misunderstanding -- "well i learned to think this way, i learned this word meant that." you have to work to communicate. when communication happens without effort, there is a loss there. colors fade, vibrancy is lost, connections are broken. you lose out, you miss out. "when something is understood, when something is fully understood -- it was communicated with a deliberate effort, it was done so with care." is there a more beautiful, wonderful gift to someone? i am working right now to get you to understand me. i am making a deliberate, concentrated effort *to you* -- i am taking care and weaving my words in a more beautiful, intricate way. hello, i like you, i wove you this tapestry.