jay | Is jealousy rational?

Current Mood: contemplative

Is jealousy rational?

dawnd and

akienm are holding a local workshop on jealousy issues, tonight, so I thought I'd toss out a few contemplations...

Jealousy, particularly in polyamorous settings and groups, seems to me to be an attribute that no one wants to admit... the closest thing to labelling a "bad" emotion. But it is commonplace, IMO... and possibly rational.

Suppose A has an existing long-term relationship with B, and then B begins developing a new interest in C. Assume that A,B, and C are all reasonably busy people with other career and relationship commitments filling out their respective schedules, so there isn't lots of slack available. Love may be infinite, but time and energy are finite resources. Reasonably, A can expect that B's new energy and time going into developing a relationship (or friendship) with C will come from somewhere -- probably drawn from several places, including the relationship between A--B. Unless A is secretly looking to withdraw from or dump B, A will see this reduced time and energy from B as a loss, with a concomitant gain for C.

At the same time, A loses in other ways. Any emotional instability or drama or other fallout between B and C will ripple outward, and some of it find its way from B--A, increasing A's emotional support burden to B. And if there is sexual contact involved between B and C, then there's additional overheads -- tracking C's sexual history, current test results, risks posed by other partners. And A's net STD risk goes up overall, without A having any additional benefit or fun themselves.

And if A and B are together in a household with merged finances, B's pursuit of C may actually cost A something... plus there are second-order effects like B's vacation time being used with C and then not available for the annual holiday with A, etc.

So, in a new relationship of friendship between B and C... they each gain a new experience with each other, a new connection, shared likes and activities, NRE, perhaps ongoing love and support from each other.

But, rationally, what's in it for A? A would seem to be a identifiable loser from the new connection between B--C, therefore jealousy would be a rational response on A's part. And A would be justified in not supporting the B--C connection.

A's network would see one of its linkages (between A--B) reduced in energy and strength, especially for the first year or so during NRE, if that happens. The only gains that I can see are if C brings something positive to A's network... making B happier or relieving A of the burden of going clothes-shopping with B, say. Or if adding C adds resources (season tickets? social connections? different viewpoints?) to the local area network. Or perhaps, given a poly network, if C develops some connection to A as well.

So... I'm open to being convinced otherwise, but I could see jealousy as a frequent-but-rational response. For poly people, I view it as a kind of dues-paying... gritting one's teeth and letting one's partners go, in exchange for the right to do likewise if one so chose. A given net loss, balanced by one's own possible future net gains in new relationships and friendships.

Someone's willingness to try poly might then balance on the magnitude of the loss(es) vs. that person's probability of finding other connections themselves. Not that there isn't lots of cause for jealousy in the mainstream -- looks at daytime TV -- but with more-frequent, ongoing connections, I think that poly is particularly jealousy-provoking, potentially. Hence the socialized "jealousy is bad" response in poly circles...

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

In the 20-plus years that I was involved in poly relationships, the one factor that came through loud and clear, despite all the good aspects (otherloves spending time to share interests that the primaries don't share, etc.), is that once A and B (one or the other) agree to add C to the equation, there is (obviously) less time for the primaries, and as a result of the NRE of B and C less in all other aspects of relationship that was previously held as "special" to the primary bond. The end result of which is your wife or husband primary (in my example) may feel reduced to "just another partner"...and the sense of "special-ness" that you had when you agreed to be life-partners is simply not there anymore.

Speaking from personal experience, having been A, the NRE of B and C, can cause both compersion and jealousy at the same time.

I don't want to sound too egotistical in this, but the simple fact that I've chosen to be partnered with someone makes them exceedingly special, in the same way that I am in that I have been chosen by them.

That makes them special when they're selected... but guarantees nothing later, when one's attentions turn to someone new.

Except that their specialness is still affirmed as you continue to choose to remain partnered with them.

What she said. Squared and cubed.

"New" does not mean "more special." It just means "new."

I think you're conflating these two concepts, Brian.

Not "out with the old, in with the new"? Besides, if old was covering all of the bases, there'd be little reason to look for new.

This is part of the reason I get fed up a bit with the idea that any one partner, or any particular combination of partners, is going to "meet all [my] needs". It's not a matter of "needs", in my mind, so much as it is a matter of "these people bring joy into my life". I don't have a checklist of "one who likes sushi, one who likes sailing, one who likes pop culture, one who likes road trips", etc. The people I get involved with are people whose presence in my life makes me happy because of who they are, not because they fit into some checklist.

And no, not "out with the old, in with the new". How often have your partners dumped you because they started seeing someone new? Honestly?

All needs? No. Agreed. And I don't have a checklist, either.

Dumped: Y - freaked over poly issues, B - no LDRs, D, L1 - not attractive enough, L2 - wrong friends. None of those coincided with those people adding new partners (well, one did, but probably incidentally). So I'll concede that one (nods).

All needs? No. Agreed.

Well, that was me responding to your "Besides, if old was covering all of the bases, there'd be little reason to look for new." which sounded to me like "if I was getting all my needs met, I wouldn't need to seek out or get involved in any further relationships".

Not everyone operates by the paradigm "out with the old, in with the new." To some of us, old is always as special as new (to me, for example).

Now, if you're the sort who thinks new is *always* better, then you may need to adjust your thinking. To my mind, that's the attitude of a serial monogamist, not a polyamorist.

No, it just means that I'm always sensitive to being replaced by new arrivals, and can take no one's affection for granted, ever.

Re: Jealousy...

griffen.livejournal.com - 2004-10-25 17:16 (UTC) - Expand

Re: Jealousy...

mhw.livejournal.com - 2004-10-25 18:25 (UTC) - Expand

Re: Jealousy...

patgreene.livejournal.com - 2004-10-25 19:30 (UTC) - Expand

Re: Jealousy...

griffen.livejournal.com - 2004-10-25 23:02 (UTC) - Expand

Re: Jealousy...

patgreene.livejournal.com - 2004-10-25 19:34 (UTC) - Expand

Re: Jealousy...

griffen.livejournal.com - 2004-10-25 22:34 (UTC) - Expand

Absolutely not; and no.

"Covering all of the bases"? Are we talking about partners, or polymathic, utltra-capable superheroes here?

Exactly!

That's a good point. Although it may take awhile (months? post-NRE?), until things have stabilized and the old partner has become convinced that the new partner isn't replacing them in whole or in part...

*snuga* Yes, you are very special... and it makes me all glowy to hear you say I am, too. :) *smooch*

Heh, you know it, and I love saying it!

*hugs merrily*

I'm not sure that it sounds egotistical, but I know that if a partner responded to my discomforts with that answer, I would feel that they were being flip and not taking my feelings seriously.

Huh, I wouldn't parse it that way myself. What sort of response would make you feel that your concerns were being taken seriously?

A lot would depend on how it was phrased. As it was phrased above, I would feel like s/he was saying "of course you're special -- I'm stll here, right?" An enumeration of the ways in which I was special or unique iwould help a lot.

That makes sense, thanks for elaborating.

(nod). And I can see where this fits in with some of what Jay does and doesn't say. I can think of a number of times that I've started a sentence with "Because you love Pat..." or "Pat's happiness is incredibly important to you, so..." or "Working to make your marriage as healthy and joy-giving as possible is a high priority..." He hardly uses those phrases with me at all, and I wouldn't be surprised if he doesn't use them with you that much. Jay's heart is utterly in the right place, verbal reassurance of his partners is something he could expand on to his benefit (note: I am talking here about what I've seen or heard him do with others, not talking about what he does with me, so I'm working on a limited data set.)

Oh, right - no, that wasn't what I would say to someone, just how I think of it in my head. We don't choose people at random, after all - the people we choose are the ones who are special to us, whatever the specialnesses may be. I'm constantly bowled over by how much people love me, because I don't think of myself as anyone particularly wonderful, and yet the fact that they do assures me that - no matter how invisible it is to me - I am.

Does that make more sense?

*blink* Just where did I say that I'd say that to anyone?

Oh, right - no, I see what you meant - answered above.

Your experience strongly echoes my own, and I've been A, B, and C myself at various times... the loss of special-ness in existing relationships is a very real problem, IMO.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only