A person who chooses not to
have polyamorous relationships, who is in partnership
with someone who does, may be considered monogamous and
poly-friendly, but in my book, is not polyamorous.
I think it is really worth while to talk about what differentiates
polyamory from other multiple partner styles in a formal, theoretical
sense. I think it helps us figure out what works and what doesn't and
can give us the courage to try different relationship structures.
What I think is not only not useful, but destructive to our
conversation, is to talk about who is or isn't polyamorous. In
colloquial speech many of us, myself included, use "I am polyamorous"
when we really mean "I have polyamorous relationships." This is like
"I am a guitarist" which can be true even if one also plays the
trumpet, and you can certainly say it even when you are not playing
the guitar, but is never taken to sum up everything one is in life.
If "I am polyamorous" is said in the same sense that "I am Christian"
is said, then we can have communications breakdowns. I see polyamory
as relationship technology, not as a moral/spiritual high ground. In
a lot of the definition discussions, I think there are often people
who get wigged out because they don't distinguish between an abstract
model that is useful for discussion and some sort of metaphysical
definition of ones essence.