1 选择非单偶制 Choosing Nonmonogamy

:::info 🤖 AI 生成声明 本文由人工智能（Gemini）生成，本人审阅后认为内容质量优良，但是未做人工修正，因此本人不为此内容的准确性和完整性做最终担保。AI 生成内容属于公有领域，您可以自由使用。 :::

I happen to believe every story is a love story if you catch it at the right moment, slantwise in the light of dusk. ALIX E. HARROW¹

我恰好相信每个故事都是爱情故事，只要你在恰当的时刻，在黄昏的微光中斜着眼去捕捉它。 艾莉克斯·E·哈罗 (Alix E. Harrow)¹

Relationships nourish us in myriad ways. Mononormative societies teach only a handful of paths that intimacy and love, particularly romantic love, can take.

关系以无数种方式滋养着我们。单偶常态 (mononormative) 社会只教导了亲密关系和爱，特别是浪漫之爱，可以采取的少数几种路径。

These relationships are expected to follow a specific trajectory that we call the “relationship escalator,” a concept popularized by Amy Gahran in her blog Solo Poly and her book Stepping Off the Relationship Escalator. If a relationship doesn’t follow that path, there’s something wrong with it.

这些关系被期望遵循一个特定的轨迹，我们称之为“关系自动扶梯”(relationship escalator)，这个概念由艾米·加兰 (Amy Gahran) 在她的博客 Solo Poly 和她的书《走下关系自动扶梯》(Stepping Off the Relationship Escalator) 中普及。如果一段关系不遵循这条路径，那就是出了问题。

Same-sex relationships are pushed to ride the escalator, too, just with two women or two men. This is known as homonormativity: the idea that same-sex relationships should follow the same norms as heterosexual ones, including marriage and kids. Meanwhile, nonbinary people, asexual and aromantic folks, and people of various other identities are pushed to take on binary genders and normative relationship desires so they can get on that escalator with everyone else. In fact, that pressure can even sound like “If you don’t become more normal, nobody will ever love you and you’ll never find a spouse!” While lots of people resist these norms in lots of different ways, they still hold a great deal of power in our lives. They’re encouraged by laws and policies, promoted in the media and entertainment, and pushed on many people by well-meaning friends, family members and colleagues (“When are you two gonna tie the knot?”). People can choose these relationship forms and be very happy in them. But they’re not for everyone.

同性关系也被迫搭乘这个自动扶梯，只是换成了两个女人或两个男人。这被称为同性恋常态 (homonormativity)：即同性关系应该遵循与异性关系相同的规范，包括婚姻和孩子。与此同时，非二元性别者、无性恋者和无浪漫情节者，以及各种其他身份的人被迫接受二元性别和规范的关系欲望，以便他们能和其他人一样搭上那个扶梯。事实上，这种压力听起来甚至像是“如果你不变得更正常一点，永远没人会爱你，你也永远找不到配偶！”虽然很多人以各种方式抵制这些规范，但它们在我们的生活中仍然拥有巨大的力量。它们受到法律和政策的鼓励，在媒体和娱乐中得到推广，并由善意的朋友、家人和同事推给许多人（“你们俩什么时候结婚？”）。人们可以选择这些关系形式并在其中非常快乐。但它们并不适合所有人。

This cookie-cutter way of looking at relationships is so ingrained that people often try to hang onto it even when they discover nonmonogamy. Sometimes they intentionally limit the shapes of their relationships—and sometimes this works out okay, but often (as we’ll discuss later) it doesn’t. Sometimes folks try to follow an escalator trajectory with multiple people: They start by searching for two or three live-in polyfidelitous partners, or some other predetermined form of nonmonogamous relationship, instead of letting each relationship take the shape that best suits it, based on what each person wants, needs, values and offers, and how things develop over time.

这种千篇一律的看待关系的方式是如此根深蒂固，以至于人们即使在发现非单偶制时也经常试图抓住它不放。有时他们故意限制关系的形态——有时这也没问题，但通常（正如我们稍后将讨论的）这行不通。有时人们试图与多个人一起遵循自动扶梯的轨迹：他们一开始就寻找两个或三个同居的多边忠贞伴侣，或其他某种预先确定的非单偶制关系形式，而不是让每段关系根据每个人的想要、需要、价值观和付出，以及事物随时间的发展，采取最适合它的形态。

As nonmonogamy has become increasingly well-known to the mainstream in recent decades, it’s developed some of its own norms. Andrea coined the term polynormativity in 2013 to refer to the one kind of nonmonogamy for which mononormative society has made a little space in the standard blueprint, like a little optional side room tacked onto a house. This kind of polyamory starts with a couple opening up, is always hierarchical (i.e., there’s one primary relationship and other secondary ones), involves a lot of rules, and—in terms of media representation—usually looks like a white, heterosexual-ish couple with a girlfriend on the side. We’ll come back to this later, but we’re mentioning it here because we think it’s important to challenge the notion that nonmonogamy automatically avoids an escalator approach to relationships.

随着近几十年来非单偶制越来越为主流所知，它也发展出了自己的一些规范。安德莉亚在 2013 年创造了“多边恋常态”(polynormativity) 一词，指的是单偶常态社会在其标准蓝图中为其腾出了一点空间的一种非单偶制，就像是在房子上加盖的一个可选的小侧室。这种多边恋始于一对伴侣开放关系，总是等级制的（即，有一个主要关系和其他次要关系），涉及很多规则，并且——就媒体表现而言——通常看起来像是一对白人、类异性恋夫妇加上一个女朋友。我们稍后会回到这一点，但我们在这里提到它是因为我们认为挑战“非单偶制会自动避免关系中的自动扶梯模式”这一观念很重要。

One of the amazing things nonmonogamy offers is the freedom to negotiate relationships that work for you and your partners. The possibilities are not always obvious, even for people who have lived nonmonogamously for years. For example, there’s sometimes no need to break up a relationship if something (or someone) changes. Maybe you can keep a connection and reshape it in another way. You can build relationships that are free to develop however they naturally want to flow. It helps to recognize that love itself is malleable and ever-changing. Its intensity and nature vary, and this variability influences its flow, its mutable forms.

非单偶制提供的一件美妙的事情是协商适合你和你的伴侣的关系的自由。这些可能性并不总是显而易见的，即使对于那些已经过着非单偶制生活多年的人来说也是如此。例如，如果某事（或某人）发生了变化，有时并不需要结束一段关系。也许你可以保持联系并以另一种方式重塑它。你可以建立自由发展的关系，让它们顺其自然地流动。认识到爱本身是可塑且不断变化的会有所帮助。它的强度和性质各不相同，这种可变性影响着它的流动，及其多变的形式。

Are you nonmonogamous?

你是非单偶制者吗？

For some people, whether they’re nonmonogamous or monogamous is obvious; for others, it isn’t. Many people feel that nonmonogamy is an intrinsic part of who they are, like hair colour or sexual orientation. A person who feels inherently nonmonogamous can identify that way even if they have only one relationship, or none, at a given time. Eve likes to borrow terms from biology: obligate and facultative. Obligate means something is required, like how cats need to eat meat; facultative means you can adapt to different conditions but tend to do better in certain ones, like how dogs will eat just about anything to avoid starving, but will only really thrive when they have meat in their diet. Perhaps you’ll find you’re a panda, requiring highly specific conditions and suffering outside of them—or maybe you’re more like a crow, able to adapt and flourish in just about any environment.

对一些人来说，他们是非单偶制还是单偶制是显而易见的；对另一些人来说则不然。许多人觉得非单偶制是他们本质的一部分，就像发色或性取向一样。一个感觉自己本质上是非单偶制的人，即使在特定时间只有一段关系，或者没有关系，也可以这样认同自己。伊芙喜欢借用生物学术语：专性 (obligate) 和兼性 (facultative)。专性意味着某事是必须的，就像猫需要吃肉一样；兼性意味着你可以适应不同的条件，但在某些条件下往往表现得更好，就像狗几乎什么都吃以避免挨饿，但只有当饮食中有肉时才会真正茁壮成长。也许你会发现自己是一只熊猫，需要高度特定的条件，在这些条件之外就会受苦——或者也许你更像一只乌鸦，能够在几乎任何环境中适应并繁荣。

Some people embrace nonmonogamy because they see it as more honest than monogamy, which often requires denying attractions to other people. Other folks see nonmonogamy as a way to shed the assumptions about property and control that have long gone hand in hand with monogamy. Many people find that nonmonogamy most closely aligns with their political beliefs, or view it as part of reclaiming ancestral cultural practices lost through colonization, enslavement or migration.

有些人拥抱非单偶制是因为他们认为这比单偶制更诚实，单偶制通常要求否认对他人的吸引力。另一些人则将非单偶制视为摆脱长期以来与单偶制相伴的关于财产和控制的假设的一种方式。许多人发现非单偶制最符合他们的政治信仰，或者将其视为通过殖民化、奴役或迁移而失去的祖先文化习俗的复兴的一部分。

Whether you want to be nonmonogamous is just one part of the decision. You also have to think about what kind of nonmonogamy is right for you. Deciding whether more committed forms of nonmonogamy, such as polyamory, are a good fit requires deciding whether the things you want from life, and the personal ethics you bring to the world, align well with having multiple honest romantic relationships. For instance, a desire for sexual variety without romantic attachments might point to swinging, sex parties or hookup apps as a good fit. A desire for multiple romantic relationships without openness or transparency might mean some self-work is in order.

你是否想成为非单偶制者只是决定的一部分。你还必须考虑哪种非单偶制适合你。决定像多边恋这样更具承诺性的非单偶制形式是否合适，需要确定你从生活中想要的东西，以及你带给世界的个人伦理，是否与拥有多段诚实的浪漫关系相吻合。例如，渴望性多样性但不想有浪漫依恋，可能意味着换偶、性派对或约会软件更适合。渴望多段浪漫关系但不想要开放或透明，可能意味着需要进行一些自我修为了。

Nonmonogamy is not right for everyone. It is not the next wave in human evolution. Nor is it more enlightened, more spiritual, more progressive or more advanced than monogamy. Nonmonogamous people are not automatically less jealous, more compassionate or better at communicating than monogamous folks. What we critique in this book is the aforementioned mononormativity: a socially prescribed life path that’s reinforced through everything from cultural representation (films, songs, TV shows) to insurance policies and laws on things like marriage, parenting rights and more.

非单偶制并不适合所有人。它不是人类进化的下一波浪潮。它也不比单偶制更开明、更精神化、更进步或更高级。非单偶制者并不会自动比单偶制者更少嫉妒、更有同情心或更善于沟通。我们在本书中批评的是前面提到的单偶常态：一种社会规定的生活路径，通过从文化表现（电影、歌曲、电视节目）到保险政策以及婚姻、育儿权等方面的法律等一切手段得到强化。

We believe relationships that are deliberately, intentionally constructed are more satisfying, and more likely to support a meaningful life, than relationships whose shape is determined by default social expectations. It is absolutely possible for a monogamous relationship to be built by careful, deliberate choice. Many people are content in exclusive relationships, and that’s fine. Being with only one partner doesn’t necessarily mean simply following a social norm. It’s pressure of any kind that’s the problem here, not people’s individual relationship choices. So if you decide that nonmonogamy is not a good fit for your life, that’s okay. Don’t let anyone—including yourself—push you into it.

我们相信，经过深思熟虑、有意构建的关系，比那些由默认社会期望决定形态的关系更令人满意，也更有可能支持有意义的生活。通过仔细、深思熟虑的选择来建立单偶制关系是完全可能的。许多人满足于排他性关系，这很好。只与一个伴侣在一起并不一定意味着仅仅遵循社会规范。这里的问题是任何形式的压力，而不是个人的关系选择。所以，如果你决定非单偶制不适合你的生活，那也没关系。不要让任何人——包括你自己——强迫你进入它。

For many, it can be useful to think of nonmonogamy as an outgrowth of a certain set of beliefs. Rather than asking, “Am I nonmonogamous?” you could ask yourself questions like “Are the tools and concepts of nonmonogamy useful to me?” or “What is my commitment to relationship choice, and how do I want to embody it in my life?” Even if you decide you don’t want multiple relationships, the things we talk about in this book may be valuable to you.

对许多人来说，将非单偶制视为一组特定信念的产物可能是有用的。与其问“我是非单偶制者吗？”，不如问自己这样的问题：“非单偶制的工具和概念对我有用吗？”或者“我对关系选择的承诺是什么，我想如何在我的生活中体现它？”即使你决定不想要多重关系，我们在本书中讨论的内容可能对你仍然有价值。

Why be nonmonogamous?

为什么要非单偶制？

The best way to understand why someone might be nonmonogamous is to ask, “What do people get out of intimacy in the first place?” A quick answer might be “People are more likely to thrive when they’re in connection with others.” Humans are social animals. We do better when we share our lives intimately with others. We’re built for it. As complicated and messy and unpredictable as romance is, for many of us, its rewards are fantastic. Indeed, most of us feel driven to seek out people who see us for who we are, who share themselves with us, who love us.

理解为什么有人可能是非单偶制者的最好方法是问，“人们最初从亲密关系中得到了什么？”一个快速的回答可能是“当人们与他人建立联系时，更有可能茁壮成长。”人类是群居动物。当我们与他人亲密分享生活时，我们会做得更好。我们生来就是为了这个。尽管浪漫是复杂的、混乱的和不可预测的，但对我们许多人来说，它的回报是美妙的。事实上，我们大多数人都感到有一种动力去寻找那些看清我们本质、与我们分享自己、爱我们的人。

For many people, establishing a romantic relationship switches off this drive. The task is done, the race is won; there’s no need to find new partners. But for some, being in a relationship doesn’t flip off that switch. They remain open to the idea of new connections and more love. Alternatively, maybe they’re not currently in a romantic relationship, but they’re open to starting more than one at the same time—whether by getting involved with a pre-existing couple or polycule, or by starting brand-new involvements with more than one other single person, together or separately. Or perhaps they start dating someone who’s nonmonogamous and suddenly find themselves intrigued … whether by the idea itself or by someone in particular. (This is one way that a vee can become a triad!) Nonmonogamous people engage in multiple romantic relationships, and love others who do the same, because doing so enriches the lives of everyone involved. Loving more than one person at the same time is not necessarily an escape from intimacy; in fact, it can be an enthusiastic embrace of yet more intimacy.

对许多人来说，建立一段浪漫关系会关闭这种动力。任务完成，比赛获胜；没有必要寻找新伴侣。但对一些人来说，处于一段关系中并不会关闭那个开关。他们仍然对新连接和更多爱的想法持开放态度。或者，也许他们目前没有处于浪漫关系中，但他们愿意同时开始不止一段关系——无论是通过介入现有的情侣或多边关系网络，还是通过与不止一个其他单身人士开始全新的交往，无论是一起还是分开。又或者，他们开始与非单偶制者约会，突然发现自己很感兴趣……无论是对这个想法本身还是对某个人。（这是 V 型关系变成三人组的一种方式！）非单偶制者参与多重浪漫关系，并爱着那些同样做的人，因为这样做丰富了每个相关人员的生活。同时爱一个以上的人不一定是逃避亲密关系；事实上，它可以是对更多亲密关系的热情拥抱。

Be aware, of course, that for some people, nonmonogamy is appealing because it’s a framework within which they can actually have less-intimate relationships. That’s not necessarily a bad thing! It can work out great as long as everyone involved is clear about what’s going on, fully consents to it, and isn’t just hoping the other person will change their mind and want to get married in a couple of years. For example, a person who’s highly focused on their career for the moment might enjoy a low-stakes relationship in each of the various cities they visit for business travel—each of them a sort of “long-term long-distance low-commitment casual girlfriend,” as Ken says in the movie Barbie (substitute your gendered or non-gendered term of choice). Some folks who understand themselves as solo poly might want a few different non-nesting relationships because they like connecting with people but prefer to maintain a high degree of overall life independence, even if they date in their home city and aren’t overly preoccupied by their career or schooling. A third example: Someone might be allosexual, meaning they desire sex and seek it out (possibly with multiple partners), but aromantic, meaning they don’t experience romantic love (we talk more about romantic love on page 24). A fourth: Someone might be polysaturated, with one or more serious partnerships and no desire for additional ones, but still enjoy the freedom to date casually or hook up at play parties or other sex-focused events. A fifth: A person might have married themselves and be committed to raising their child as a single parent, but still enjoy hiring a babysitter once a month so they can spend time as the “jam in the sandwich” with a couple they’ve dated on and off for years. All these and more are totally valid reasons to engage in nonmonogamy without forming deep or life-entwined kinds of attachment with each person involved.

当然，要意识到，对一些人来说，非单偶制之所以有吸引力，是因为在这个框架内他们实际上可以拥有不那么亲密的关系。这不一定是件坏事！只要每个相关人员都清楚发生了什么，完全同意，并且不是仅仅希望对方会改变主意并在几年后想结婚，这就可能运作得很好。例如，一个目前高度专注于事业的人可能会喜欢在他们出差访问的各个城市中拥有一段低风险的关系——正如电影《芭比》中的肯 (Ken) 所说，每一段关系都像是“长期异地低承诺随意女朋友”（请替换为你选择的性别或非性别术语）。一些将自己理解为独身多边恋 (solo poly) 的人可能想要几段不同的非同居关系，因为他们喜欢与人联系，但更愿意保持高度的整体生活独立性，即使他们在居住的城市约会并且没有过度专注于事业或学业。第三个例子：某人可能是有性恋 (allosexual)，意味着他们渴望性并寻求性（可能与多个伴侣），但又是无浪漫情节 (aromantic)，意味着他们不体验浪漫之爱（我们在第 24 页会更多地讨论浪漫之爱）。第四个：某人可能处于多边饱和 (polysaturated) 状态，拥有一段或多段严肃的伴侣关系且不渴望额外的关系，但仍然享受随意约会或在游戏派对或其他以性为重点的活动中勾搭的自由。第五个：一个人可能已经与自己结婚，并致力于作为单亲抚养孩子，但仍然享受每月请一次保姆，以便与他们断断续续约会多年的一对夫妇共度时光，做那个“三明治里的果酱”。所有这些以及更多情况都是参与非单偶制而无需与每个人形成深刻或生活交织依恋关系的完全正当的理由。

Nonmonogamous relationships, particularly those of the more entwined variety, have practical benefits. More adults in a family often provide greater financial freedom and security. Some nonmonogamous folks combine living spaces, incomes and expenses, which increases everyone’s financial flexibility. Even nonmonogamous people who don’t cohabit or share expenses gain many things from mutual support among multiple partners. If you’re having a bad day, there are more people to comfort and help you. If you’re having a problem, you get more perspectives. You have more of everything you get from romantic relationships—more companionship, more advice, more joy, more love.

非单偶制关系，特别是那些纠缠较深的关系，具有实际的好处。家庭中更多的成年人通常提供更大的财务自由和安全感。一些非单偶制者合并居住空间、收入和支出，这增加了每个人的财务灵活性。即使是不共同居住或分摊费用的非单偶制者，也能从多个伴侣的相互支持中获得很多东西。如果你度过了糟糕的一天，有更多的人来安慰和帮助你。如果你遇到问题，你会得到更多的视角。你从浪漫关系中得到的一切都会更多——更多的陪伴、更多的建议、更多的快乐、更多的爱。

Being nonmonogamous can also be fantastic for your sex life. Sex is a learned skill, and the human sexual horizon is vast. Whatever your tastes, however ingenious your imagination, the range of sexual experience is so great that someone, somewhere, is doing something you’d love to do that would never occur to you. Each time you invite another lover into your life, you have the opportunity to learn things you might never otherwise have learned … often, things you can bring into your existing and subsequent relationships. Nobody is so creative that they have nothing to learn from someone else.

非单偶制对你的性生活来说也可能非常棒。性是一种习得的技能，人类性的视野是广阔的。无论你的口味如何，无论你的想象力多么巧妙，性体验的范围是如此之大，以至于某个地方的某个人正在做一些你会喜欢做但从未想到的事情。每次你邀请另一个爱人进入你的生活，你都有机会学到你可能永远学不到的东西……通常，你可以将这些东西带入你现有的和随后的关系中。没有人会因为太有创造力而无法从别人那里学到任何东西。

It’s also very common for couples experiencing desire discrepancy to open their relationship as a way to help reduce conflict about sex, thinking the higher-libido partner can get their needs met with other people and alleviate pressure on the lower-desire partner. Unfortunately, in a relationship that began as sexual, it rarely turns out to be quite that simple. In chapter 20, we discuss the challenges that can come up in nonmonogamy in cases of desire discrepancy between partners, and other sex-related difficulties.

对于经历欲望差异 (desire discrepancy) 的夫妇来说，为了减少关于性的冲突而开放关系也是非常普遍的，他们认为性欲较高的伴侣可以与其他人满足需求，从而减轻性欲较低伴侣的压力。不幸的是，在一段以性开始的关系中，结果很少会那么简单。在第 20 章中，我们将讨论伴侣之间存在欲望差异时，非单偶制中可能出现的挑战，以及其他与性相关的困难。

Downsides of nonmonogamy

非单偶制的缺点

Authors such as Sarah Carter, Kim TallBear, Stephanie Coontz and Carrie Jenkins² (all listed in the resources at the back of this book) have written about how compulsory monogamy—and later, amatonormativity—in North America has served as one prong of colonization and capitalism. In other words, our current system has a lot riding on our implicit acceptance of these norms. So it’s not surprising that people who take a different approach to their relationships are often met with pushback at multiple levels: social, legal, financial and more. And one way that people deal with criticism and pushback is to get defensive. In some ways, that’s a good thing; alternative life choices sometimes really need to be defended! But it can also cause people to present an excessively rosy picture of how it all works. The world of nonmonogamy is home to many activists, cheerleaders and salespeople vaunting the merits of these relationship styles. That means much of what you will hear about nonmonogamy focuses on the benefits rather than the costs. This book tries not to provide that one-sided view. Nonmonogamy is not utopia. Only you can decide whether the benefits are worth the costs at every point along your journey—and that balance may shift for you over time.

萨拉·卡特 (Sarah Carter)、金·塔贝尔 (Kim TallBear)、斯蒂芬妮·孔茨 (Stephanie Coontz) 和凯莉·詹金斯 (Carrie Jenkins)² 等作家（均列于本书后面的资源中）曾写过关于强制性单偶制——以及后来的恋爱常态——在北美如何作为殖民主义和资本主义的一个分支发挥作用。换句话说，我们目前的系统很大程度上依赖于我们对这些规范的默认接受。因此，那些对关系采取不同方式的人经常在社会、法律、财务等多个层面遇到阻力也就不足为奇了。人们应对批评和阻力的一种方式是变得防御。在某种程度上，这是一件好事；另类的生活选择有时确实需要捍卫！但这也会导致人们过度描绘它是如何运作的美好图景。非单偶制的世界里有许多活动家、啦啦队和推销员吹嘘这些关系风格的优点。这意味着你会听到的关于非单偶制的许多内容都集中在好处而不是代价上。本书试图不提供那种片面的观点。非单偶制不是乌托邦。只有你才能决定在你旅程的每一点上，收益是否值得付出代价——而这种平衡可能会随着时间的推移而改变。

Nonmonogamy is complicated. When you have more than two people involved in your romantic life, things get complicated fast. Keeping more than one relationship going at the same time is not for the faint of heart. Problems can occur in any relationship. Personality conflicts can arise, and all sorts of things can go wrong. In nonmonogamous relationships, there are more opinions being offered, more people’s feelings to get hurt, more personalities to clash, more egos to bruise. Navigating a disagreement or problem in a nonmonogamous relationship configuration requires outstanding communication skills and good problem-solving tools, which this book aims to help with.

非单偶制是复杂的。当你的浪漫生活中有两个以上的人参与时，事情很快就会变得复杂。同时维持不止一段关系不适合胆小的人。任何关系都可能出现问题。性格冲突可能出现，各种各样的事情都可能出错。在非单偶制关系中，会有更多的意见被提出，更多人的感情可能受到伤害，更多性格可能发生冲突，更多自尊可能受挫。在非单偶制关系配置中处理分歧或问题需要出色的沟通技巧和良好的问题解决工具，这正是本书旨在提供的帮助。

For some people, the fact that many nonmonogamous relationships are more complicated than many monogamous ones is “proof” that nonmonogamy is wrong. This argument is nonsense; many relationships are complicated, such as those involving blended families, or between people of different religious faiths or cultural backgrounds. Would any reasonable person say these relationships are also “wrong”? At the end of the day, the best measure of a relationship isn’t how complicated it is, but rather how much meaning, fulfillment, creativity, intimacy, support and love it brings. Sure, nonmonogamy can be complicated—but for many people, it would be much more difficult to follow a conventional path that doesn’t feel right for them.

对一些人来说，许多非单偶制关系比许多单偶制关系更复杂这一事实是“证明”非单偶制错误的证据。这种论点是无稽之谈；许多关系都很复杂，例如涉及重组家庭的关系，或者不同宗教信仰或文化背景的人之间的关系。任何理性的人会说这些关系也是“错误”的吗？归根结底，衡量一段关系的最佳标准不是它有多复杂，而是它带来了多少意义、满足感、创造力、亲密感、支持和爱。当然，非单偶制可能很复杂——但对许多人来说，遵循一条感觉不对的传统道路会困难得多。

You will grow—whether you want to or not. Nonmonogamous relationships offer many opportunities for growth, some easier than others. Whether that belongs on the list of “good things” or “bad things” depends a lot on how you feel about personal growth. You may hear some nonmonogamous people sighing about AFLE or AFOG: “another fucking learning experience” or “another fucking opportunity for growth.”

你会成长——无论你是否愿意。非单偶制关系提供了许多成长的机会，有些比其他的更容易。这属于“好事”还是“坏事”列表，很大程度上取决于你对个人成长的感觉。你可能会听到一些非单偶制者叹息着说 AFLE 或 AFOG：“又他妈的是一次学习经历”(another fucking learning experience) 或“又他妈的是一次成长机会”(another fucking opportunity for growth)。

Nonmonogamy is not safe. As polyamorous therapist Jessica Fern wrote in her groundbreaking book Polysecure, nonmonogamous relationships are inherently insecure.³ Without the external support of a relationship escalator and mononormative structures, you have to build security from within, and most people aren’t equipped to do that. Many people try to replicate the default structure provided by mononormativity by placing strict controls on the form their relationships may take or the level to which they may grow. This approach pretty much never succeeds; it merely replaces one kind of pain with another. Nonmonogamy can increase love and connection, but it also increases the odds that you’ll be hurt.

非单偶制并不安全。正如多边恋治疗师杰西卡·弗恩 (Jessica Fern) 在她开创性的著作《多边安全》(Polysecure) 中所写，非单偶制关系本质上是不安全的。³ 没有关系自动扶梯和单偶常态结构的外部支持，你必须从内部建立安全感，而大多数人并不具备这样做的能力。许多人试图通过严格控制其关系可能采取的形式或其可能成长的程度，来复制单偶常态提供的默认结构。这种方法几乎从未成功过；它只是用一种痛苦代替了另一种痛苦。非单偶制可以增加爱和连接，但它也增加了你受伤的几率。

Nonmonogamy means giving things up. When your partner has another partner, there will be times when you will lose something, even if it’s just time and attention. Any relationship needs attention in order to thrive, and no matter how close you may be to your partner’s other partner—indeed, even if you and a partner share a lover—there will be times when a relationship requires one-on-one focus. It is not always possible to schedule things in such a way that you always get everything you want.

非单偶制意味着放弃一些东西。当你的伴侣有另一个伴侣时，有时你会失去一些东西，即使只是时间和注意力。任何关系都需要关注才能茁壮成长，无论你与伴侣的另一个伴侣有多亲密——事实上，即使你和伴侣共享一个爱人——有时一段关系也需要一对一的关注。并不总是能够通过安排让你总是得到你想要的一切。

Nonmonogamy changes things. This idea comes up throughout the book, but especially in chapters 14 and 16. The short version is you cannot open your heart to multiple people and expect your life to be unchanged. There will be disruptions, and you will not always be able to anticipate or control them. All relationships are subject to change. Even seemingly idyllic nonmonogamous relationships don’t necessarily last forever, any more than perfect-seeming traditional marriages do.

非单偶制会改变事物。这个观点贯穿全书，尤其是在第 14 章和第 16 章。简而言之，你不能向多个人敞开心扉却指望你的生活保持不变。会有干扰，而且你并不总是能够预见或控制它们。所有关系都会发生变化。即使是看似田园诗般的非单偶制关系也不一定能天长地久，就像看似完美的传统婚姻一样。

People don’t always get along. Just because someone loves your partner doesn’t necessarily mean the person will mesh well with you. It’s easy to say “I will only date people who like my current partners” (or in extreme cases, “I will only date people who are romantically involved with my current partners”), but in the real world that’s not always practical. You can’t coerce people to like one another, and in consensual relationships, it’s not ethical to make your love contingent on how the person you love feels about someone else. Sometimes, the best you can do is to agree to be civil toward one another.

人们并不总是合得来。仅仅因为某人爱你的伴侣，并不一定意味着这个人会和你相处融洽。说“我只会和喜欢我现任伴侣的人约会”（或者在极端情况下，“我只会和与我现任伴侣有恋爱关系的人约会”）很容易，但在现实世界中这并不总是切合实际的。你不能强迫人们互相喜欢，而在双方同意的关系中，把你对他人的爱建立在你爱的人对另一个人的感觉之上是不道德的。有时，你能做的最好的事情就是同意彼此以礼相待。

You might hate it. Some people genuinely want nonmonogamy, do years of inner work, and still find that they’re in pain all the time, having panic attacks and nightmares, and just generally miserable. That could be because they have a partner or polycule who are mistreating or even abusing them—we’ll talk about abuse in chapter 3—but it could also be that nonmonogamy is just fundamentally incompatible with the way their nervous systems work. This isn’t a failure; if this describes you, it just means you’ve learned something important about yourself and your needs, and maybe you’ll take something from the process into your next (exclusive, hopefully lifelong) relationship.

你可能会讨厌它。有些人真心想要非单偶制，做了多年的内在功课，却发现自己一直处于痛苦之中，惊恐发作，做噩梦，总之就是痛苦不堪。这可能是因为他们有一个虐待他们甚至施暴的伴侣或多边关系网络——我们将在第 3 章讨论虐待——但也可能是非单偶制根本上与他们的神经系统运作方式不相容。这并非失败；如果这描述了你，那只意味着你学到了关于你自己和你的需求的重要东西，也许你会从这个过程中带走一些东西进入你的下一段（排他性的，希望是终身的）关系。

Being flexible

保持灵活

Let’s say you’re seeing nonmonogamy as a way out of the rigid forms you were taught that relationships had to take. It’s exciting! You get to customize everything about your relationships! Time to get planning, right? Sort of. The vast potential in nonmonogamous relationships can be misleading. A relationship can be many things, but it also has built-in constraints. It’s constrained by what you want—and also by what each of your partners wants, and what their partners want, and the inherent range of potential intimacy in each partnership. It’s constrained by outside factors, such as the health, financial status and existing life obligations of each person. And it’s subject to every individual’s personality characteristics and attachment styles, how compatible these traits are, and how each person changes over time. These same factors affect how relationships work whether you’re on the escalator or not.

假设你将非单偶制视为摆脱你被教导的关系必须采取的僵化形式的一种出路。这很令人兴奋！你可以定制关于你关系的一切！是时候开始计划了，对吧？ 某种程度上是。非单偶制关系的巨大潜力可能会产生误导。一段关系可以是很多东西，但它也有内在的限制。它受限于你想要的——也受限于你每个伴侣想要的，以及他们伴侣想要的，还有每段关系中潜在亲密关系的固有范围。它受限于外部因素，如每个人的健康、财务状况和现有的生活义务。它还受限于每个人的性格特征和依恋风格、这些特征的兼容性以及每个人随时间的变化。无论你是否在关系自动扶梯上，这些相同的因素都会影响关系的运作方式。

Also, just because you want something doesn’t mean that it will satisfy everyone the way you hope. People often have mismatched expectations, desires and skill sets, even if they love each other very much. If you go into any relationship thinking you can make a person fit your plan, you are fairly likely to be disappointed. You might want a nesting relationship, but that doesn’t mean the next person you date is going to be the right person for that level of commitment. Pushing them to become the perfect spouse might just kill the sweetness of the lighter connection you started with. And you might be really enjoying your freewheeling singlehood, but sometimes that’s exactly when Big Love shows up and asks you to shift gears. That means you may either need to rethink your priorities or have a bittersweet “the one that got away” story to tell in your elder years.

此外，仅仅因为你想要某样东西，并不意味着它会像你希望的那样满足所有人。人们往往有不匹配的期望、欲望和技能组合，即使他们非常相爱。如果你进入任何一段关系时认为你可以让人适应你的计划，你很可能会失望。你可能想要一段同居 (nesting) 关系，但这并不意味着你下一个约会对象就是适合那种承诺水平的人。强迫他们成为完美的配偶可能会扼杀你们开始时那种轻松联系的甜蜜。你可能真的很享受随心所欲的单身生活，但有时那正是“大爱”(Big Love) 出现并要求你换挡的时候。这意味着你要么需要重新考虑你的优先级，要么要在晚年讲述一个苦乐参半的“那个错过了的人”的故事。

Nonmonogamous relationships come in enormous variety, so they encourage flexibility in ways that escalator relationships don’t. Flexibility does not come naturally; it can be difficult to cast off a lifetime of ideas about how relationships should look. Because we’re typically shown a limited number of relationship models, it’s sometimes overwhelming to try to understand just how many ways relationships can work.

非单偶制关系种类繁多，因此它们以自动扶梯式关系所不具备的方式鼓励灵活性。灵活性并非与生俱来；抛弃一辈子关于关系应该是什么样子的观念可能很困难。因为我们通常只看到有限数量的关系模式，所以试图理解关系可以有多少种运作方式有时会让人不知所措。

Something people often end up saying, after a little bit of experience, is “When I started exploring nonmonogamy, the things I thought would be important and the things that turned out to be important were very different.” It’s tempting to plan out how you want your life to look and then search for people who fit the plan. But you can’t look at a person and predict what a relationship will grow into; relationships have a tricky way of zigging when you expect them to zag. Nor can you really predict how you’re going to react to the wide variety of novel situations nonmonogamous relationships will confront you with. Sure, it’s important to communicate what you want in your relationships up front—but it’s also important to remember you’re not ordering a relationship from a catalogue. Leave space for your relationships to grow, and try to adapt if they grow in ways you didn’t expect.

人们在有了一点经验后经常会说：“当我开始探索非单偶制时，我认为重要的事情和结果证明重要的事情是非常不同的。”规划好你想要的生活，然后寻找符合计划的人是很诱人的。但你不能看着一个人就预测一段关系会发展成什么样；关系有一种狡猾的方式，当你期望它们向左时，它们却向右。你也无法真正预测你将如何应对非单偶制关系带给你的各种新奇情况。当然，预先沟通你在关系中想要什么很重要——但也同样重要的是要记住，你不是在从目录中订购一段关系。留出空间让你的关系成长，并在它们以你意想不到的方式成长时尝试适应。

Defining partnership

定义伴侣关系

What is an intimate relationship? What separates one from an ordinary friendship? Does a relationship that involves no sex or romance still count as intimate? A simple, glib answer would be that an intimate relationship is anything the people in it say it is. That’s certainly true at one level, if not particularly useful. It’s helpful to consider the elements of what we might call a relationship, both to help people in a relationship communicate with each other about what their relationship is, and also because most of us desire some social recognition of our relationships, and that means communicating with others about what our relationships are.

什么是亲密关系？什么将其与普通友谊区分开来？不涉及性或浪漫的关系还算亲密吗？ 一个简单、油嘴滑舌的回答是，亲密关系就是身处其中的人所说的任何东西。这在某种程度上当然是正确的，虽然不是特别有用。考虑我们可以称之为关系的要素是有帮助的，既可以帮助关系中的人相互沟通他们的关系是什么，也是因为我们要大多数人渴望对我们的关系有一定的社会认可，而这意味着要与他人沟通我们的关系是什么。

Amatonormativity has taught many people that romantic love is an essential component of any “real” relationship. Two people feel romantic love for one another, and it’s a relationship, end of story. If they don’t both feel it, then it’s something else. But not all intimate nonmonogamous relationships include romantic love, and some people—aromantics—don’t experience romantic love at all. And even for people who feel romantic love for one another, nonmonogamy offers ways to explore new forms that love can take, including non-romantic kinds of intimate relationships. That’s before you get into what romantic love actually is, which might be even more challenging than defining partnership itself. There have been many whole books on the subject; one that we recommend, from a nonmonogamous perspective, is What Love Is by Carrie Jenkins. She argues that romantic love is “ancient biological machinery embodying a modern social role,” the latter shaped by the stories many people have learned about it.⁴ Within the modern, colonial worldview, nonmonogamous love has not been considered real love—but until recently, neither was queer love. Both perspectives are changing, but the stories many people have learned about love shape what they can imagine, and even what they feel. Romantic love is an important part of the picture for many, but it’s not the whole story.

恋爱常态教导许多人，浪漫之爱是任何“真正”关系的必要组成部分。两个人对彼此感到浪漫之爱，这就是一段关系，故事结束。如果他们不都感觉到，那就是别的东西。但并非所有亲密的非单偶制关系都包含浪漫之爱，有些人——无浪漫情节者——根本不体验浪漫之爱。即使对于那些彼此感到浪漫之爱的人来说，非单偶制也提供了探索爱可以采取的新形式的方法，包括非浪漫类型的亲密关系。这还是在你深入探讨什么是浪漫之爱之前，这可能比定义伴侣关系本身更具挑战性。关于这个主题有很多专著；我们从非单偶制的角度推荐凯莉·詹金斯的《爱是什么》。她认为浪漫之爱是“体现现代社会角色的古老生物机制”，后者由许多人学到的关于它的故事所塑造。⁴ 在现代殖民世界观中，非单偶制的爱并未被视为真爱——但直到最近，酷儿之爱也不被视为真爱。这两种观点都在改变，但许多人学到的关于爱的故事塑造了他们能想象到的东西，甚至塑造了他们的感受。对许多人来说，浪漫之爱是图景的重要组成部分，但它不是全部。

It’s also important to consider what intimacy itself means. Some people use the word as a euphemism for sex, but that’s not what we’re talking about here. There are various types of intimacy, and these can exist in many different kinds of relationships. One good description of intimacy we’ve heard comes from attachment theory scholar, coach and educator Heidi Priebe, who describes intimacy as a mirror.⁵ Your intimates are people who see you at a deep level and reflect you back to yourself. You may experience different kinds of intimacy with different people, who are each able to reflect back different parts of yourself. You may trust some people with your traumas and fears, and others with your ambitions and dreams. Physical intimacy can mean someone you feel safe to be physically vulnerable with, whether that’s by sleeping unclothed, giving or experiencing pleasure, or co-regulating (using closeness to an attachment figure to calm your nervous system). If you’re neurodivergent or live with mental illness, intimacy can mean having people you don’t need to mask with. Disability justice advocate Mia Mingus has also written about access intimacy,⁶ the experience of having one’s access needs deeply, effortlessly seen and understood without the need to explain them.

同样重要的是要考虑亲密本身意味着什么。有些人用这个词作为性的委婉语，但这不是我们在这里所谈论的。亲密有各种类型，这些可以存在于许多不同种类的关系中。我们听到的关于亲密的一个很好的描述来自依恋理论学者、教练和教育家海蒂·普里贝 (Heidi Priebe)，她将亲密描述为一面镜子。⁵ 你的亲密伙伴是在深层看到你并将你反射回给你自己的人。你可能会与不同的人体验不同类型的亲密，每个人都能反射回你自己的不同部分。你可能会把你的创伤和恐惧托付给一些人，把你的抱负和梦想托付给另一些人。身体亲密可能意味着你觉得与之在身体上脆弱是安全的人，无论是通过裸睡、给予或体验快乐，还是共同调节（利用与依恋对象的亲近来平复你的神经系统）。如果你是神经发散者或患有精神疾病，亲密可能意味着拥有你不必对其伪装的人。残障正义倡导者米娅·明古斯 (Mia Mingus) 也写过关于无障碍亲密 (access intimacy)⁶ 的文章，即一个人的无障碍需求被深刻、毫不费力地看到和理解，而无需解释的体验。

For many people, sex is a defining element of what makes someone a partner or not, though this criteria is far from universal and excludes many real partnerships. Many people on the asexual spectrum, for example, have nonsexual intimate relationships, and it’s incredibly common for relationships that start out as sexual to eventually become nonsexual—with varying degrees of agreement and comfort by the partners in those relationships. We’ll discuss these issues at much more length in chapter 20. For now, we’ll just say that while it’s helpful to know if you consider sex essential to your intimate relationships, it’s also important to recognize that for many, many other people, it isn’t, for a variety of reasons. Nor does the end of sex in an intimate relationship necessarily need to mean the end of that relationship, especially in a nonmonogamous context. In addition, nonsexual physical closeness can be an important part of many relationships, and the human need for touch can be met in a wide variety of ways, both inside and outside relationships (intimate or otherwise).

对许多人来说，性是决定某人是否为伴侣的一个定义要素，尽管这一标准远非普遍，并排除了许多真正的伴侣关系。例如，许多处于无性恋光谱上的人拥有非性亲密关系，而且以性开始的关系最终变得无性是非常普遍的——这些关系中的伴侣对此有不同程度的同意和舒适感。我们将在第 20 章更详细地讨论这些问题。现在，我们只想说，虽然了解你是否认为性对你的亲密关系至关重要很有帮助，但也同样重要的是要认识到，对于许许多多其他人来说，出于各种原因，并非如此。亲密关系中性的结束也不一定意味着该关系的结束，特别是在非单偶制的背景下。此外，非性身体亲密可以是许多关系的重要组成部分，人类对触摸的需求可以通过多种方式满足，无论是在关系内部还是外部（亲密或其他）。

Another element that may or may not be present in a relationship is attachment. We’re using attachment here in the sense of attachment theory, where it refers to a deep physiological bond we develop over time with someone we regularly co-regulate with. People need consistency and availability from their attachment figures in ways they don’t tend to require from non-attachment-based intimate relationships, and a threat or rupture to an attachment can create a uniquely painful physiological response, which Jessica Fern refers to as primal panic. Attachment-based relationships can be secure or insecure based on the behaviour of the people within them. Also, you can have attachment needs in friendships (see the book Platonic by Marisa G. Franco for more on these types of relationships).

关系中可能存在也可能不存在的另一个要素是依恋。我们在这里使用的是依恋理论意义上的依恋，它指的是我们随着时间的推移与我们定期共同调节的人建立的一种深层生理纽带。人们需要依恋对象的一致性和可得性，这种需求通常不同于他们对非依恋亲密关系的需求，对依恋的威胁或破裂会产生一种独特的痛苦生理反应，杰西卡·弗恩称之为原始恐慌 (primal panic)。基于依恋的关系可以是安全的或不安全的，这取决于其中人的行为。此外，你在友谊中也可以有依恋需求（有关这些类型关系的更多信息，请参阅玛丽莎·G·弗朗哥 (Marisa G. Franco) 的书《柏拉图式》(Platonic)）。

Based on early experiences with caregivers as well as later experiences in relationships, people develop different unconscious strategies for engaging in attachment-based relationships. Researchers generally group these strategies into four attachment styles: secure, anxious-preoccupied (or just anxious), dismissive-avoidant (or just avoidant), and fearful-avoidant (also called disorganized, though this term is falling out of favour). We’re not going to go into these styles in depth—for that, we recommend Polysecure—but we will occasionally loosely reference attachment styles in this book, where relevant.

基于与照顾者的早期经历以及后来在关系中的经历，人们发展出了不同的无意识策略来参与基于依恋的关系。研究人员通常将这些策略分为四种依恋风格：安全型、焦虑-痴迷型（或简称焦虑型）、疏离-回避型（或简称回避型）和恐惧-回避型（也称为混乱型，尽管该术语已不再流行）。我们不会深入探讨这些风格——为此，我们推荐《多边安全》——但在本书相关的地方，我们会偶尔泛泛地提及依恋风格。

People can also form varying kinds of entwined life partnerships that don’t necessarily include all the elements of an escalator relationship. You might decide, for example, to form a chosen family with a couple of close friends, move in together, and commit to supporting each other for life. You could also have a closely bonded life partnership with someone you never live with. Aromantic and asexual thinkers coined the term queerplatonic to refer to committed, bonded relationships that don’t involve sex or romance, and may or may not include other escalator markers such as cohabitation.

人们也可以形成各种类型的交织生活伴侣关系，其中不一定包含自动扶梯式关系的所有要素。例如，你可能决定与几个亲密朋友组成一个选择的家庭 (chosen family)，搬到一起住，并承诺终身相互支持。你也可能与一个从未同居过的人建立紧密结合的生活伴侣关系。无浪漫情节和无性恋思想家创造了术语酷儿柏拉图式 (queerplatonic) 来指代不涉及性或浪漫的承诺性、结合性关系，这种关系可能包含也可能不包含其他自动扶梯标志，如同居。

Kim TallBear has described how many Indigenous communities have systems of kinship and relationships that long predate settler notions of coupledom and the nuclear family. Instead, they are based in “a sense of community that exceeds rather than fails to meet the requirements of settler sex and family.”⁷ She writes, Many Indigenous communities still exhibit a framework of extended kinship where responsibilities are more diffusely distributed, where we work as groups of women (or men, or other gendered people ideally) to share childcare, housing, and other resources. In my experience, our ways of relating often seem to contradict the monogamous couple and nuclear family.

金·塔贝尔描述了许多原住民社区拥有的亲属关系和关系系统，这些系统早在定居者关于伴侣和核心家庭的观念之前就已存在。相反，它们基于“一种超越而非未能满足定居者性与家庭要求的社区意识。”⁷ 她写道： 许多原住民社区仍然表现出一种扩大的亲属关系框架，其中责任分配更加分散，我们作为女性群体（或男性，或其他性别的人，理想情况下）共同分担育儿、住房和其他资源。根据我的经验，我们的关系方式似乎经常与单偶制伴侣和核心家庭相矛盾。

Relationship anarchists have come up with various metaphors to evoke the idea of co-creating your own relationships from components that you each want to share rather than fitting into a pre-designed mould. One of these ideas is the relationship smorgasbord, which lists numerous potential elements of a relationship and invites people to choose from among them. The smorgasbord was created and iterated collaboratively by members of Vancouver Polyamory and several polyamory-and relationship anarchy–related Facebook groups. However, this metaphor only stretches so far, because not every facet of a relationship is independent from every other facet. Not all attachment or intimacy involves sex, for example, but for many people, sex very often leads to attachment and intimacy. (And for demisexuals, for example, attachment and intimacy often lead to a desire for sex.) We tend to think of nonmonogamy as more like cooking, where you can choose the kind of meal you want to make, but you have to work with the available ingredients, and not everything is going to go well with everything else.

关系安那其主义者提出了各种隐喻来唤起这样的想法：从你们每个人想要分享的组成部分中共同创造你们自己的关系，而不是适应预先设计的模具。其中一个想法是关系自助餐 (relationship smorgasbord)，它列出了关系的众多潜在要素，并邀请人们从中选择。这份自助餐是由温哥华多边恋组织以及几个与多边恋和关系安那其相关的 Facebook 小组成员共同创建和迭代的。然而，这个比喻只能延伸到这种程度，因为关系的每个方面并非都独立于其他方面。例如，并非所有的依恋或亲密都涉及性，但对许多人来说，性往往会导致依恋和亲密。（例如，对于半性恋者 (demisexuals) 来说，依恋和亲密往往会导致对性的渴望。）我们倾向于认为非单偶制更像烹饪，你可以选择你想做的饭菜种类，但你必须利用现有的食材，而且并不是所有东西都能很好地搭配在一起。

We recommend the aforementioned book What Love Is by Carrie Jenkins, along with her more recent books Sad Love and Nonmonogamy and Happiness, for a much deeper philosophical dive, from a nonmonogamous and essentially relationship anarchist perspective, into what makes up relationships—and the stories we tell about them. In Sad Love, Jenkins introduces the concept of eudaimonic love, which treats love as a shared project of meaning-making. You might also check out the book Redefining Our Relationships by Wendy-O Matik, a nonmonogamy classic that also challenges you to think deeply about what relationships can look like for you. And the book The Other Significant Others by Rhaina Cohen examines various kinds of non-romantic partnerships and life-entwined relationships that people choose instead of or alongside their romantic ones.⁸

我们推荐前面提到的凯莉·詹金斯的《爱是什么》，以及她最近的著作《悲伤的爱》和《非单偶制与幸福》，以便从非单偶制及本质上的关系安那其视角，对构成关系的要素——以及我们讲述的关于它们的故事——进行更深入的哲学探讨。在《悲伤的爱》中，詹金斯引入了幸福论之爱 (eudaimonic love) 的概念，将爱视为一个意义创造的共享项目。你也可以看看温迪-O·马蒂克 (Wendy-O Matik) 的书《重新定义我们的关系》(Redefining Our Relationships)，这是一本非单偶制的经典之作，也挑战你深入思考关系对你来说可能是什么样子的。瑞娜·科恩 (Rhaina Cohen) 的书《其他重要他人》(The Other Significant Others) 考察了人们选择用来代替或伴随其浪漫关系的各种非浪漫伴侣关系和生活交织关系。⁸

Very strictly speaking, the only things that set nonmonogamous relationships apart from monogamous ones are sex and romantic love, because having sex or falling in love with someone other than one’s partner is implicitly a violation of the monogamous contract. But mononormativity, at least as we know it in the white North American context, usually also prescribes that many or all of the other elements we’ve listed above—intimacy, attachment, nonsexual physical touch, various forms of life-entwinement and care commitments—are also off-limits with others when we are in a monogamous relationship. (Just consider the recent idea of “microcheating” that’s appearing in various online articles. It includes things like texting with a co-worker or staying friends with your exes. Yikes!) Adopting a nonmonogamous framework makes room for all these variations, not just sex—and so can expand the possibilities for our friendships, too! Going forward in this book, when we talk about intimate relationships, we’re talking about relationships that include some combination of these elements, but ultimately, what makes something a partnership is up to you and your partners.

严格来说，区分非单偶制关系与单偶制关系的唯一因素是性和浪漫之爱，因为与伴侣以外的人发生性关系或坠入爱河隐含地违反了单偶制契约。但是，至少在我们所知的白人北美背景下的单偶常态通常也规定，当我们处于单偶制关系中时，我们上面列出的许多或所有其他元素——亲密、依恋、非性身体接触、各种形式的生活交织和照料承诺——也禁止与他人发生。（只需考虑最近出现在各种在线文章中的“微出轨”(microcheating) 概念。它包括诸如与同事发短信或与前任保持朋友关系等事情。哎呀！）采用非单偶制框架为所有这些变化腾出了空间，而不仅仅是性——因此也可以扩展我们友谊的可能性！在本书的后续部分，当我们谈论亲密关系时，我们指的是包含这些要素某种组合的关系，但归根结底，是什么构成了伴侣关系取决于你和你的伴侣。

How many partners?

多少个伴侣？

It’s possible to be single and nonmonogamous. It’s possible to have only one partner and be nonmonogamous. If your intention is to remain open to the possibility of multiple intimate relationships, you are nonmonogamous, regardless of your current relationship status. Indeed, if nonmonogamy is part of your identity (for some people, it is; for others, it isn’t), you might be in an exclusive (closed) relationship with one person and still be nonmonogamous.

单身且非单偶制是可能的。只有一个伴侣且非单偶制也是可能的。如果你的意图是对多重亲密关系的可能性保持开放，你就是非单偶制者，无论你目前的关系状态如何。事实上，如果非单偶制是你身份的一部分（对某些人来说是；对另一些人来说不是），你可能与一个人处于排他性（封闭）关系中，但仍然是非单偶制者。

Is there a “right” number of partners to have in order to count as nonmonogamous? No. Is there a “right” number for you to have? Maybe. There is certainly some maximum. There’s a saying among nonmonogamous people: “Love is infinite; time and attention are not.” It’s debatable whether love is infinite; in practical terms, it probably isn’t. But time and attention definitely aren’t. Different people have different constraints on the time and attention they can offer, and different relationships require different amounts, so some people can maintain more romantic relationships than others before they become, as the term goes, polysaturated.

为了算作非单偶制者，是否存在一个“正确”的伴侣数量？不。对你来说是否有“正确”的数量？也许。肯定会有某个上限。在非单偶制者中有一句谚语：“爱是无限的；时间和注意力是有限的。”爱是否无限尚有争议；实际上，可能不是。但时间和注意力绝对不是无限的。不同的人在他们能提供的时间和注意力方面有不同的限制，不同的关系需要不同的量，因此一些人比其他人能维持更多的浪漫关系，直到他们达到所谓的多边饱和 (polysaturated)。

There is, especially, a pretty firm limit on the number of attachment-based relationships a person can cultivate securely. In an interview,⁹ Eve asked Jessica Fern and David Cooley, the authors of Polywise, what that upper limit seemed to be, based on their experience with clients. For the overwhelming majority of people Fern and Cooley had worked with, it was only one or two. On very rare occasions, a person could sustain a third secure attachment, but only when the previous two attachments were many, many years (or decades) old and rock-solid. While you can certainly try (and many people do) to have more attachment-based relationships, you are likely to have a very hard time making all those relationships secure, and your attempts to do so may end up negatively affecting all your attachment-based relationships. It’s best to be realistic about what you can really commit to, based on your existing relationships and your life circumstances, when you begin exploring a new connection.

特别是，一个人能安全培养的基于依恋的关系数量有一个相当严格的限制。在一次采访中，⁹ 伊芙问《多边智慧》(Polywise) 的作者杰西卡·弗恩和戴维·库利 (David Cooley)，根据他们与客户的经验，这个上限似乎是多少。对于弗恩和库利合作过的绝大多数人来说，只有一两个。在极少数情况下，一个人可以维持第三个安全依恋，但这只有在前两个依恋关系已经存在很多很多年（或几十年）并且坚如磐石的情况下才可能。虽然你当然可以尝试（很多人也确实在尝试）拥有更多基于依恋的关系，但你很可能很难使所有这些关系都变得安全，而且你的尝试可能会对你所有基于依恋的关系产生负面影响。当你开始探索一段新关系时，最好根据你现有的关系和生活状况，对自己真正能承诺什么持现实态度。

The number of partners you have room for can change. Some situations, such as starting a new job or caring for a baby or toddler, consume tremendous amounts of time and emotional space; it’s normal to feel that you don’t want to start a new relationship until more space opens up. On the other hand, you may meet someone who so upends your ideas about what you wanted that you are willing to rearrange parts of your life to create space for them. We discuss this kind of disruptive relationship on pages 261–264.

你有空间容纳的伴侣数量是会改变的。有些情况，比如开始一份新工作或照顾婴儿或幼儿，会消耗大量的时间和情感空间；在更多空间腾出来之前不想开始新关系是正常的。另一方面，你可能会遇到一个人，他如此颠覆了你关于自己想要什么的观念，以至于你愿意重新安排生活的一部分来为他腾出空间。我们在第 261-264 页讨论这种破坏性的关系。

Frankenpoly

科学怪人式多边恋

Because different people have different needs, and nonmonogamy allows us to distribute our need eggs into more than one relationship basket, it is possible to maintain a relationship in a nonmonogamous setting that otherwise might not survive. Stable nonmonogamous relationships can exist, for example, between people with mismatched sex drives or no interest in sex at all. The same thing can happen when one partner is more sexually adventurous than another and wants to explore being tied up or spanked, or some other kink that leaves the other cold. Maybe one person really likes ballroom dancing, but the other has two left feet. One person may have a deep religious conviction not shared by the other. Nonmonogamy offers an opportunity for different relationships to meet different kinds of connection needs.

因为不同的人有不同的需求，而非单偶制允许我们将需求鸡蛋分配到不止一个关系篮子里，所以在非单偶制环境下维持一段如果不这样可能无法生存的关系是可能的。稳定的非单偶制关系可以存在，例如，在性欲不匹配或对性完全没有兴趣的人之间。当一方伴侣比另一方更具性冒险精神，想要探索被捆绑或被打屁股，或其他让另一方感到冷淡的性癖时，也会发生同样的情况。也许一个人真的很喜欢交谊舞，但另一个人笨手笨脚。一个人可能有另一个人不认同的深厚宗教信仰。非单偶制提供了一个机会，让不同的关系满足不同类型的连接需求。

The danger here is in seeing other people as need-fulfillment machines. When a need isn’t being met, that need can feel bottomless, and it can be tempting to go out searching for a person to fill it. People have come up with different terms for this situation, such as Frankenpoly—stitching together the perfect need-providing romantic partner out of bits and pieces of other people—and Pokémon polyamory, after the idea that you need to collect a complete set of different kinds of partners.

这里的危险在于将他人视为满足需求的机器。当一个需求得不到满足时，那个需求可能会感觉像个无底洞，人们很容易受到诱惑去寻找一个人来填补它。人们为这种情况想出了不同的术语，例如科学怪人式多边恋 (Frankenpoly)——用其他人的零碎部分拼凑出完美的满足需求的浪漫伴侣——以及宝可梦多边恋 (Pokémon polyamory)，源于你需要收集一整套不同类型伴侣的想法。

When you begin to look at people in terms of which of your needs they can meet rather than as whole people in their own right, you objectify them (and not in a fun way). A person you’re with only because you get some need filled when you insert time-and-attention tokens is not a full partner joining you on the journey of life. That’s not to say that any attempt to have different needs met by different people leads this way. Such people can, of course, be intimate partners in their own right, valued for reasons beyond helping meet a given need.

当你开始根据人们能满足你哪些需求来看待他们，而不是将他们视为本身完整的人时，你就在物化他们（而且不是以一种有趣的方式）。一个只有当你投入时间和注意力的代币时才能满足你某种需求的人，并不是与你共同踏上人生旅程的完整伴侣。这并不是说任何让不同的人满足不同需求的尝试都会导致这种结果。这些人当然可以是本身就亲密的伴侣，他们的价值超越了帮助满足特定需求。

Some needs, though, don’t exist independently of the relationships you’re in. Needs for intimacy, understanding or companionship are often attached to the people you are in a relationship with, or to your baseline needs that remain the same within any relationship. For example, you might need direct communication, physical affection and some minimum amount of quality time with any partner. Just because one partner is very affectionate doesn’t mean you’ve had your fill and stop wanting touch from another partner; just because you have great dates with one person doesn’t mean it’s okay if another person rarely wants to get together. And needs in attachment-based relationships, especially, tend to be quite consistent across relationships, and must be met in each one of them if those relationships are to be secure.

然而，有些需求并非独立于你所处的关系而存在。对亲密、理解或陪伴的需求通常依附于与你有关系的人，或者是你在任何关系中都保持不变的基准需求。例如，你可能需要与任何伴侣进行直接沟通、身体上的喜爱以及最低限度的优质时间。仅仅因为一个伴侣非常深情并不意味着你已经满足了，不再想要另一个伴侣的触摸；仅仅因为你和一个人约会很棒并不意味着另一个人很少想聚在一起也没关系。特别是在基于依恋的关系中，需求在各种关系中往往相当一致，如果这些关系要是安全的，就必须在每一个关系中都得到满足。

QUESTIONS TO ASK YOURSELF 问自己的问题

Rather than telling you what you should do, throughout this book we ask a lot of questions to help you figure out what is best for you. To start with, here are some questions that can help you determine what is most important to you in relationships and whether nonmonogamy might be a good match for you:

在整本书中，我们不是告诉你应该做什么，而是提出了很多问题来帮助你弄清楚什么对你是最好的。首先，以下是一些可以帮助你确定你在关系中最看重什么，以及非单偶制是否适合你的问题：

• Have I ever felt romantic love or intimate attraction for more than one person at the same time?

• Do I feel there can be only one “true” love or one “real” soulmate? Where did I learn this belief, and how committed am I to it?

• How important is my desire for multiple intimate relationships? With the right person, could I be satisfied in one intimate relationship for the rest of my life?

• Why do I have intimate relationships? What do I get out of them?

• What do I consider essential, indispensable elements of an intimate relationship?

• Are there specific kinds of relationships that I know I am looking for? Kinds that I know I don’t want?

• What do I bring to the table for others?

• If I want more than one intimate partner, what degree of closeness and intimacy do I expect, and what do I offer? Do I want different degrees of intimacy in different relationships?

• How do I define commitment? Is it possible for me to commit to more than one person at a time, and if so, what might those commitments look like?

• If I am already in a relationship, does my desire for others come from dissatisfaction or unhappiness with my current relationship? If I were in a relationship that met my needs, would I still want multiple partners?

• What are my needs in relationships? Which of my needs are attached to specific people, and which can I meet more generally?

• Do I have a vision in my head about what my nonmonogamous life will look like? Am I prepared for it to look differently?

• If my relationships change, is that okay? Can I accommodate change, even unexpected change or change I don’t like? What kind of changes would cross my personal line of what’s acceptable?

• When I visualize the kind of relationships I want, can I leave space for partners to shape the relationships to their needs?

• What would happen if I were to connect with someone in a way that differs from how I or my current partners want my nonmonogamous relationships to look?

• How do I feel about the possibility that my current partners (if any) or future partners will develop other partnerships?

• If I’m asexual or aromantic but still interested in intimate relationships, does nonmonogamy seem like an option that could solve some of the issues that make it difficult to find relationships that fit me?

• 我是否曾同时对不止一个人感到浪漫之爱或亲密吸引？

• 我是否觉得只能有一个“真”爱或一个“真正”的灵魂伴侣？我在哪里学到这个信念的，我对它的认同程度有多高？

• 我对多重亲密关系的渴望有多重要？如果遇到合适的人，我能否在余生中满足于一段亲密关系？

• 我为什么要建立亲密关系？我从中得到了什么？

• 我认为亲密关系中必不可少的、不可或缺的要素是什么？

• 是否有我知道自己正在寻找的特定类型的关系？我知道我不想要的类型？

• 我能给别人带来什么？

• 如果我想要不止一个亲密伴侣，我期望什么样的亲密度和亲昵度，我又提供什么？我是否希望在不同的关系中有不同程度的亲密感？

• 我如何定义承诺？我是否可能同时对不止一个人做出承诺，如果是，这些承诺会是什么样子的？

• 如果我已经处于一段关系中，我对其他人的渴望是否源于对目前关系的不满或不快乐？如果我处于一段满足我需求的关系中，我还会想要多个伴侣吗？

• 我在关系中的需求是什么？我的哪些需求是依附于特定的人，哪些可以更普遍地得到满足？

• 我脑海中是否有关于我的非单偶制生活会是什么样子的愿景？我是否准备好它看起来会有所不同？

• 如果我的关系发生了变化，这可以吗？我能适应变化吗，即使是意外的变化或我不喜欢的变化？什么样的变化会越过我可以接受的个人底线？

• 当我设想我想要的关系类型时，我能否留出空间让伴侣根据他们的需求塑造关系？

• 如果我以一种不同于我或我现任伴侣希望我的非单偶制关系看起来的方式与某人建立联系，会发生什么？

• 对于我目前的伴侣（如果有的话）或未来的伴侣发展其他伴侣关系的可能性，我感觉如何？

• 如果我是无性恋或无浪漫情节者，但仍然对亲密关系感兴趣，非单偶制是否看起来像是一个可以解决一些使我难以找到适合我的关系的问题的选项？

---

Footnotes

1. Every story is a love story Alix E. Harrow, The Ten Thousand Doors of January (New York: Redhook, 2019), Kobo edition. ↩ ↩²

2. Authors such as See, for example, Sarah Carter, The Importance of Being Monogamous: Marriage and Nation Building in Western Canada to 1915 (Athabasca, Alberta: Athabasca University Press, 2008); Kim TallBear, “Making Love and Relations Beyond Settler Sex and Family,” in Making Kin Not Population: Reconceiving Generations, ed. Adele E. Clarke and Donna Haraway (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2018), 145–164; Stephanie Coontz, The Social Origins of Private Life: A History of American Families 1600–1900 (New York: Verso, 1998); and Carrie Jenkins, Sad Love: Romance and the Search for Meaning (Cambridge, UK: Polity Books, 2022). ↩ ↩²

3. inherently insecure Jessica Fern, Polysecure: Attachment, Trauma and Consensual Nonmonogamy (Victoria, BC: Thornapple Press, 2020), 137–138. ↩ ↩²

4. ancient biological machinery Carrie Jenkins, What Love Is: And What It Could Be (New York: Basic Books, 2017), 82. ↩ ↩²

5. intimacy as a mirror Heidi Priebe, “How the Mirror of Deep Intimacy Will Either Destroy or Heal Your Attachment Relationships,” YouTube (February 15, 2024), youtube.com/watch?v=v7gUXk8RyQI. ↩ ↩²

6. access intimacy Mia Mingus, “Access Intimacy: The Missing Link,” Leaving Evidence (blog), May 5, 2011, https://leavingevidence.wordpress.com/2011/05/05/access-intimacy-the-missing-link. ↩ ↩²

7. kinship and relationships TallBear, “Making Love and Relations,” in Clarke and Haraway, Making Kin Not Population, 156. ↩ ↩²

8. instead of or alongside Jenkins, Sad Love; Jenkins, Nonmonogamy and Happiness (Victoria, BC: Thornapple Press, 2024); Wendy-O Matik, Redefining Our Relationships: Guidelines for Responsible Open Relationships (Oakland, CA: Defiant Times Press, 2002); Rhaina Cohen, The Other Significant Others: Reimagining Life with Friendship at the Center (New York: St Martin’s Press, 2024). ↩ ↩²

9. In an interview Jessica Fern, Eve Rickert and David Cooley, “Jessica Fern, David Cooley and Eve Rickert Discuss Polywise,” YouTube (September 27, 2023) https://youtu.be/Odbv1WA_-dY?si=MEsVA9QkrUS6KJGV. ↩ ↩²