Thursday, October 6, 2011

Poly Myers-Briggs.

It seems like there are several different approaches to poly that work well for people as individuals. There can be challenges involved when those of differing styles attempt relationship connections, but even those issues can be workable if there is conscious awareness.

This project came up as I was considering discussion topics for the group we host monthly. It's just a conversation starter, to see what types of things are most important, and where there might be unnoticed disconnects.

Without further ado!

Myers Briggs of Poly Styles

"Speed" axis: How quickly do you form connections/relationships in general?
 Fluid- more rapid in forming emotional and/or sexual connections.
 Growth- deliberate in forming emotional and/or sexual connections.
 Static- slow moving in forming emotional and/or sexual connections.
"Structure" axis: How would you describe your ideal poly relationship structure?
 Open- People come and go at will forming "polycules" which consist of individual dyadic relationships.
 Network- People often connect socially with metamours. Some sort of "get to know you" is usually requested or offered early on in becoming part of the extended group.
 Closed- Approval of existing members needed before new member is allowed to join.
“Attitude” axis: What level of entanglement is desired with partners and/or metamours?
 Independent- Prefers to do their own thing with their own partner .
 Community- Enjoys being part of socially connected groups some of the time.
 Family- Actively prioritizes shared time and/or space with partners and metamours.
“Intimacy Style” axis: How is romantic closeness with others achieved? More than one may apply.
 Sexual – Connects with others via sharing physical intimacy.
 Emotional - Connects with others via sharing feelings.
 Activities and Shared Experience- Connects with others via sharing experience and spending time together.
Prioritization Axis:
 Hierarchical- priority is given to preservation of existing primary relationship/s.
 Weighted- some relationships are prioritized over others, but open to changes, adding an additional primary, etc.
 Egalitarian-committed to not prioritizing some relationships over others.
Relationship Saturation Axis: What would your ideal relationship concentration look like?
 Full-boat- completely satisfied with current relationship(s). Prefer relationships to dating.
 Open to opportunities to connect-neither closed off to forming new relationships, nor actively looking, but being closed to possibilities would feel restrictive.
 Actively seeking new partner(s)? Looking for new connections regardless of current partner status. Consistently open to dating and exploration.
Nature or Nurture Axis:
 Born Poly- Came out of the womb hardwired for multiple relationships. Being monogamous would feel unnatural.
 Poly by Choice- Poly makes sense, and is a desired style of relationship for a myriad of reasons. Unlikely to get into a monogamous relationship.
 Mono or Poly- Happy being open to either poly or mono, depending on circumstances in life, if current partner is open to poly, etcetera.
Flow of Information Axis:
 Confidential- No desire to hear about other partners/activities with and/or have information about the relationship they are involved in shared with metamours, unless explicitly approved in advance.
 Pertinent- Don’t need to have all the details, but want to have personally relevant information shared.
 Transparency- Desire the free flow of information about all relationships partners are involved in, and are comfortable with partner sharing that with metamours.
Formality Axis:
 Detailed- extensive agreements/contracts covering every eventuality.
 General- conscious agreements about a few major subjects.
 Short-term- temporary agreements only.
In addition, there were suggestions for the addition of a-
Poly and Kinky Axis:
-Poly, then kinky in relationship style.
-Kinky, then poly in relationship style.
-Poly, and not kinky in relationship style.
Voting Rights Axis:
-Veto is part of my relationships.
-Veto is part of my relationships, but only in early stages where emotional investment is low.
-Veto isn't part of my relationships. Ever.
General response at the discussion group was positive. One of the main things people liked was that the form was of a manageable length to be a quick activity, without being overly serious or intimidating.

If you're curious to take a look at the discussion thread on FL that this developed on, here's the link: This got contentious, and long, so be advised. ;)
Post a Comment