Though I personally don’t know if I’d be into poly, a lot of what Fern lays out in the book applies to those in monogamous relationships too. I think if you’re already somewhat well-versed in attachment theory, this book may be mostly a review — I recently read Attached and found that a lot of the concepts were repeated. But regardless, I think the interpersonal skills required to have fulfilling attachment-based relationships in a poly context are incredibly relevant for everyone, regardless of whether they are in poly or monogamous relationships. Blumer, M. L. C., & Murphy, M. J. (2011). Alaskan gay males’ couple experiences of societal non-support: Coping through families of choice and therapeutic means. Contemporary Family Therapy, 33(3), 273–290. Ich bin durch das Thema Beziehungsanarchie auf dieses Buch gestoßen, da alle anderen Bücher (z.B Polyamory - Theorie.org, Radikale Zärtlichkeit, etc. pp.) nur einen Abriss davon bieten, wie patriarchal und kapitalistisch Monogamie ist (pi pa po). Alles schön und gut, jedoch wollte ich für meine eigene, erste poly Partner*innenschaft auch sachlich in die Tiefe gehen, da es in dieser Gesellschaft alles andere als leicht ist, einen alternativen Beziehungsstil zu führen. Ich wollte mal die Gesellschaftskritik außen vorlassen und mich auf meine Freund*innen- und Partner*innenschaft konzentrieren. Subsequent research found that these childhood experiences with our caregivers shape our adult relationships, because they condition—in deep, unconscious ways—what we can expect from the people we love. Adults with a “hyperactivated” attachment system are more likely to make constant bids for attention, positive and negative, because they’re worried that loved ones will get bored and wander away as their parents once did. In contrast, children who suffered abuse or loss will deactivate their attachment system in adulthood: Since people are scary, then it’s better to expect the worst and not ask them for help. There are several different ways for psychologists to categorize adult attachment styles, but in her book, Fern breaks them out into four basic units: secure, dismissive, preoccupied, and fearful.

Mohr, J. J., Selterman, D., & Fassinger, R. E. (2013). Romantic attachment and relationship functioning in same-sex couples. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 60, 72–82. Of course, I couldn't wait to get to the second and third sections, which were particularly oriented to polyamory. It was these sections however, that I found to be less than what I had hoped for. Perhaps I've just been reading too much poly literature and am (to misuse the term) polysaturated in terms of my reading. And perhaps the excitement that I felt in reading the first section, which I found so inspiring and personally actionable, led me to expect too much of the rest of the material. But I just found that there wasn't that much that was surprising or revelatory to me in the poly-specific sections, and what was there was a little bit repetitious. Since I was so clearly able to identify each of our attachment styles in the first section, (we're like the three bears of attachment), I guess I was hoping the latter sections would contain tips broken down specifically for A-B dynamics, B-C dynamics, A-C dynamics, et cetera.Moors, A. C., Ryan, W., & Chopik, W. J. (2019). Multiple loves: The effects of attachment with multiple concurrent romantic partners on relational functioning. Personality and Individual Differences, 147, 102–110. Klesse, C. (2006). Polyamory and its ‘others’: Contesting the terms of non-monogamy. Sexualities, 9(5), 565–583. As Fern argues throughout her book, polyamory can also reveal how optional attachment is to successful relationships. In consensual non-monogamy, you can have sex and friendship without attachment—as I did with my friend—and there’s nothing wrong with that kind of relationship. You can also have attachment without sex in a romantic relationship without anyone feeling a deficit. If one or both of the partners still want sexual connections, they’re ideally free to pursue them. Repair attempts are much more successful when there is a pre-existing relationship culture of understanding each other, expressing gratitude and regularly doing nice things for each other, which supports the relationship in being better able to withstand the inevitable storms." Mitchell, M. E., Bartholomew, K., & Cobb, R. J. (2014). Need fulfillment in polyamorous relationships. Journal of Sex Research, 51(3), 329–339. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2012.742998

relying too much on the structure of the relationship to ensure and safeguard secure attachment instead of the quality of relating between partners to forge secure attachment. When we rely on the structure of our relationship, whether that is through being monogamous with someone or practicing hierarchical forms of CNM [consensual nonmonogamy], we run the risk of forgetting that secure attachment is an embodied expression built upon how we consistently respond and attune to each other, not something that gets created through structure and hierarchy. Secure attachment is created through the quality of experience we have with our partners, not through the notion or the fact of either being married or being a primary partner." I think maybe one of the most personally interesting/useful things I also took away from what I read was that attachment styles are not necessarily static/fixed, which kinda confirmed something that had been on my mind since hearing folk talk in these terms... *and* that you can fall into different styles within/in response to different relationships/how others behave within the relationship. that was I think the most relevant and timely to me at the time. As the title suggests, I read this book because I've been curious about non-monagamy and saw that Polysecure is meant to be relevant for all romantic / sexual relationships. And it is! In many ways it’s an advice and self-help type of book, but given from the experience of a practicing polyamorous therapist. There are more than a few books out there about how nonmonogamy works. We haven't moved very far past them, most books are about what it is, how it works, the basics. But for regular relationships, those kinds of books don't really exist. For monogamous relationships, though, you have a seemingly infinite number of self-help books about how to make your relationships better. But these books are pretty useless for consensually nonmonogamous people. What is normal for monogamous relationships, the benchmarks, the agreements, etc., is not at all similar to what CNM people (as Fern calls them) have. POLYSECURE wants to be a relationship self-help book for people in nonmonogamous relationships, specifically people thinking about attachment styles. It is successful at what it sets out to do, though some of the task Fern has taken on slows her down a bit. But it's still so unusual to see this kind of book in the world that it feels radical.I always like to say that polyamory is the ability to have different kinds of relationships—and Fern’s book taught me that secure emotional attachment doesn’t need to be a part of every one of them. How to cultivate attachment Polysecure are involved in the supply and design of flexible film products for the safe transfer of valuable items using Das ganze Buch liest sich auch sehr flüssig und spannend und hat gar keine Ähnlichkeit zu so manch verstaubten Sachbüchern. Sheff, E. (2005). Polyamorous women, sexual subjectivity and power. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 34(3), 251–283.