The year or more of upheaval and communication helped them to work through not just Philippa’s gender identity issues but also Jennie’s difficulties with monogamy. Jennie needed a man in her life, preferably a man who could be a dominant partner. Philippa had never wanted to play this role anyway, and she certainly didn’t want to play it now she had transitioned. Jennie didn’t want to deceive Philippa again, and Philippa didn’t feel threatened by Jennie’s interest in men.

So they hit on a potential solution: they would look for a man who could be partner and lover to them both. A tall order? Perhaps – but as luck would have it, their first venture to the UK Bisexual Conference (Bicon) with this aim in mind was successful. They met Don, a bisexual man who had been married twice before.

After the conference, it was Jennie who first got to know Don better while Philippa left them to it, and then Don and Philippa spent a weekend together and found that they too were very compatible. Less than a year after the three of them met, they decided over a shared ice cream in a cafe that they would commit to a three-way relationship, a triad. Don moved in with them and a while later they bought a big house together.

They have now lived there, with their two adult children staying for longer or shorter periods, for several years. Visiting them is like visiting any other family of their ages. There may be three of them, but they are as comfortable and ordinary together as any long-married couple. When I visited them they were bickering affectionately about what style of kitchen cupboards to buy. Jennie says:

There’s more people to share the bills, more people to share the worries, more people to share the work. If one is ill, there are two other people to rally round and take care of stuff. Remember, if you try to make a structure with two forms of support, it’s going to fall over, but a structure with three points of support is stable.

Triads

Triad relationships are very rare, much rarer than other kinds of Open Fidelity. Two people finding that they are compatible enough to share their lives for years or decades? This happens remarkably often, although many people spend years searching in vain for such a partner. One person finding two others who are both compatible with them? That can also happen, and if they are either honest about this and negotiate well, or (less ideally) they keep the two secret from each other, the parallel relationships can last. Those two others finding they are compatible with each other too? The chances of this happening are much lower.

All the triads I have encountered started with a committed couple getting to know a third person and finding that the liking and attraction flowed in all directions. If a triad does happen, it can be very stable, and there are a lot of advantages to this kind of relationship. As Jennie points out, buying a house with three salaries is easier than with two. Even when one partner wants to be alone or go out independently, the other two needn’t be lonely because they still have each other around. When two of a triad are in conflict, there is a third person with a vested interest in helping them to work it out but who can see the problem from the outside. And of course the possibilities for sex are enormous.

I know of only a few other triads that have lasted. Jennie, Philippa and Don are very lucky, or else (or perhaps also) very good at loving communication and negotiation. And they had an advantage in their involvement in Bicon, where there are always workshops on polyamory and on negotiation in relationships. Their example shows that it can be done.

First, you’ve probably guessed by now that I’m not the kind of blogger who writes in intimate detail about my daily life. I’ve never quite understood why some people want to do this – it’s just not my thing to reveal so much to the whole world. One reason is that Anna is my real name, so I can’t hide behind a pseudonym. But I will reveal bits of my life as we go along, when they are relevant to what I’m trying to say.

Some basic facts: I live in London, UK; I’m in my mid-30s; I am a bisexual woman. I am in a long-term open relationship; I am good friends with my previous long-term partner, with whom I also had an open relationship. I’ve been researching ethical non-monogamy since 2004. I am a Quaker. I am very lucky to be part of a close family that have supported this project from the beginning.

Personality-wise, I’m a bit of an intellectual: sometimes I’d rather retreat into a book than deal with the world around me, but sometimes I think I can be intellectual in a useful way. I have been accused of being tactless, though I can be sensitive too. I have lots of good acquaintances and just a few very close friends. I can bluff proficiently in geek, but I’m not really a geek (I’m on the edge – see below). I like personality tests, so for those who are interested in them too, I am a type 5 on the Enneagram and INTJ in Myers Briggs. Oh, and a Capricorn if you believe in that stuff too – the bit about being down to earth seems right, anyway. I value free time over possessions and comfort over beauty. I’m a fan of Terry Pratchett, Heroes, OpenOffice and David Attenborough.

One thing I’ve realised is that I’m someone who feels comfortable on the edge of groups of people. Most relevant to this blog is that I’m on the edge of the bisexual community. I am sometimes attracted to women as well as men, and I’ve been to events such as Bicon and London bisexual groups (BU and LBWG) for ten or so years. But for most of that time my primary partner has been a man and I find I fit well enough into the mainstream heterosexual community. Well, mostly: I’ve always had a problem with marriage and the assumption of monogamy, so I knew I wasn’t going to settle down and be a good wife, even if I did find one man I wanted to stay with. This led me to the polyamory community, which I suppose I am part of, though I sometimes get the feeling I’m ‘not poly enough’.

Through the bi and poly communities I’ve met quite a few people who are into BDSM (Bondage and Discipline (BD), Dominance and Submission (DS), Sadism and Masochism (SM); see this useful article for a fuller definition). I’ve discovered that the BDSM community is a thriving one that overlaps with the bisexual community. This is particularly important here, because although I’m only on the very edge of the BDSM community, I have learned quite a bit from them about negotiation, about being straightforward and upfront about the kind of relationship and/or sex and want, and about going out to find someone who wants to offer you that. It is the antithesis of the hetero romantic ideal of just waiting for someone special to come along and then sticking with them even if you find they can’t turn you on. I find this a refreshing way of thinking and I would like to help those not in the BDSM community to hear more about it.

So that’s an advantage of being on the edge: you can help one group to understand and learn from another, while not being so deeply involved in either group that what you say isn’t heard by the others. Of course the risk of being on the edge is that you can be accused by both groups of not knowing the full story!

Another group I’m on the edge of is ‘religious people’. I am part of the British tradition of liberal unprogrammed Quakerism, which I see as sitting on the liberal edge of Christianity, and perhaps even on the edge of religion altogether, which allows Quakers at times to help nonreligious people to understand why the concept of God is useful to some, and to help religious people to understand why it is less useful to others. You won’t see much about religion in this blog, but Quakerism has very much influenced my ethical principle, and particularly my willingness to question assumptions about morality.

Finally, I am also on the edge of the ‘scientists’ group. I studied biology, did a PhD in evolutionary biology and did a research job for a couple of years, became an editor on several biology journals and then went freelance – moving one step away from scientists and then another but still reading research as part of my job. I’m hoping that in the Open Fidelity project I can use the scientific way of thinking and apply it to human relationships, in so far as it can be applied to such complex systems. For example, I like to state my assumptions, put forward hypotheses, look for evidence, and question any conclusion that lacks strong evidence. I also like the way that scientists criticise each other’s ideas as ideas, usually managing not to make criticisms personal. I hope you will criticise my ideas in the same spirit.

I hope this helps you feel you know me, at least a little. In the next post I promise I’ll start on the real-life stories of Open Fidelity without further delay!

[Edited 2009 to remove surname]

If I promised to love only one person until death, I would be saying ‘never again’ to the experience of falling in love.

Never again to wallow in that delicious agony of lusting after someone.

Never again to experience the miracle of finding they lust after me too.

Never to flirt.

Never to kiss lips I haven’t kissed before (or at least only friendly kisses, not proper snogs).

Never to discover a new lover’s body, marvelling in its uniqueness, the way they respond or move or touch.

As I am also a bisexual woman, being monogamous with a man would mean ruling out all future sexual contact with a woman. And promising monogamy with a woman means the even more unthinkable suggestion of never again having sex with a man.

How can anyone volunteer for this? Does anyone really think about it this way when they make a promise to be monogamous? I can only conclude that for many people it is an intention not a certainty. Or even wishful thinking, or blind optimism, or self-deception. Or are some people even lying when they make the promise, knowing they don’t really mean it?

‘Oh no’, you may say, ‘for me it was easy, I knew I would never need anyone but my partner for the rest of my life’. Well, if so, I’m delighted for you and your partner, and good luck with never needing anyone for the years to come. My feeling, though, is that you are in the minority.

For me it is not monogamy itself that is problematic. I have been monogamous in practice for a year or two on several occasions; in other words I have had only one partner, and had sex with only them. But promising to be monogamous is another thing altogether. I tried once and lasted three months before ending the relationship. As long as I know I’m not ruling out possibilities in the future, I can live without these possibilities for the time being. But I couldn’t promise to be the exclusive lover, for the long term, of just one person.