Yes. But only if all partners involved truly love, and make love to, each other to the point that they can’t see themselves living without any of the other partners involved.
Polygamous relationships in which every member is truly happy are few. Very few. But to simplify things greatly, this is because both the math and human nature are against you. It’s far easier to find two things that work harmoniously together than to find three, and it’s far easier to find three than four, and so on. And that simple math superimposed upon the fact that people are [taught/conditioned to be] possessive, makes for bad polygamous relationships.
To clarify (using a three partner relationship to keep things simple and realistic), I don’t view any relationship in which only B is having sex and in love with A and C as polygamous. Polygamy to me means B must love A and C for their own intrinsic values, A must love B and C, and C must love A and B. Anything outside of that is more farce open-relationship to me (I’m not against open-relationships, quite the contrary, but that’s another issue). All sides of the poly must be balanced. A and C should not expect their love to be derived only from B, C must love A as much as B does, and vice versa.
In my opinion, in order for a polygamous relationship to truly work the love B gets from A must be equal to but different from the love that B gets from C, and the combined love of both A and C must be so… otherworldly for B that it in itself is treated as a different creature. B’s in a relationship in which they have four loves, not two; one directed towards A alone (1 = B + A), one towards C alone (2 = B + C), one directed towards the relationship that excludes them (3 = A + C), and one with everyone involved (4 = A + B + C). And all of this must apply to A and C as it does for B, hence why good equal polygamous relationships are almost an impossibility.
And a good polygamous relationship’s one in which A and C can make love, or go out, or whatever, excluding B, and B wouldn’t feel betrayed or the lesser of because they’d know that A can’t possibly give C what B gives C, and C can’t possible give A what B gives A. (And vice versa if B and C go out and A is left alone, or A and B.) Actually, rather than feeling left out B would more than anything welcome this exclusion (everybody needs time for themselves). Atop that, they’d all realize that no one outside of the relationship can possible give all of them what the two others give them synergistically. Once you’ve crossed over the infeasible hurdle of getting a good polygamous relationship in place, breaking one’s harder to do than it is in monogamy; when a monogamous relationship fails it means that one love has broken, but when a polygamous relationship fails it means that it’s broken not one, not two, but four loves, which, if you’ve ever seen four locks on a door, you realize is a much more difficult task (but the incalculable fickleness of humans, weaknesses, and emotions isn’t to be underestimated).
The polygamous relationship done right, though almost unachievable, is greater than the monogamous relationship done right. Comparing the monogamous relationship to the polygamous is literally comparing a one-dimensional relationship to a multi-dimensional relationship, no matter how involved that one relationship/connection is (a monogamous connection is one-dimensional, a three member polygamous connection is two-dimensional, a four member polygamous connection is three-dimensional, &.). But personally, I think any polygamous relationship with more than four people is assured doom, because, well, that’s a lot of dimensions for creatures only accustomed to one.
And I do think this type of love is a realistic love. The only things that make it unnecessarily complicated, as they always do, are sex sexuality and the legalities. if there was no paperwork or chokeholds on black-and-white labels for sex and sexuality involved it wouldn’t be so off-putting to hear someone say, “I love these people with all my heart both on an individual level and as a whole unit, I love their differences, I love their similarities, I love that they love each other, I can’t see myself living without either of them, and though sometimes I need time away from them I would die for either of them in a heartbeat, and them me.” It would sound like best friends talking about each other, like good parents talking about their children, and children about their siblings. Why can’t all our other relationships encompass such love?
But that’s not why I’m for polygamy. I’m for the open practice of equal polygamy because it’s up to the few to romantically push the boundaries of what society deems as a complete relationship even though they, the tragically romantic few, know that the odds are unimaginably stacked against them. The only way society is going to move past the monogamous relationship is if the polygamous relationship is adopted wholesale, no matter the short-term, individual, consequences.
The more the polygamous relationship’s adopted the more people will be forced to examine and question things like why it is they only see love and sex as straight-lined/one-partnered and why it is that they’re selfish with their love in this day and age (an age where a relationship is less a means for physical survival).
Why shouldn’t I be one of the tragic few that pushes this cultural examination to the detriment of my own health if I think the cause worthy and myself just (barely) strong enough?
All in all, an equal polygamous relationship shouldn’t be approached lightly, it should be seen for what it is; an indispensable absurd act of cultural revolution and higher dimension attainment. It’s that great, it’s that impossible. I’ll warn against it, but please don’t take my advice.