Kitchen Table Polyamory Isn't The Cure For Your Insecurities

Jealousy and Insecurity Aren't Always Group Projects

I recently wrote about how Parallel Polyamory is “the most under-utilized, sanity-saving tool in the entire polyamorous toolbox”, and several people commented with the same feedback: that Kitchen Table Polyamory (KTP) helps them (or their partner) “mitigate jealousy and insecurity by humanizing their metamour” (and thus making them less scary or intimidating).

For context: Parallel polyamory = people share partners, but not a social life.

In contrast to “Kitchen Table Polyamory” (and a few other more “enmeshed” styles) you and your metamours don’t hang out, don’t text, don’t co-manage the relationship — you simply coexist respectfully while each having your own separate connection with the same person. It’s polyamory without the group project (and not to be confused with “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” styles, which I’ll blog about soon).

And I just want to say—in a world in which everyone is desiring KTP (for whatever reasons) and everyone is opted in from a place of good faith and true desire, then GREAT! I’m a huge fan of things that make working through jealousy and insecurity easier without overanalyzing why it’s working. And I’m a huge side-eye-giver to educators/thought leaders who claim that inner work needs to be so fucking hard all the fucking time. Honestly that’s a very old, very toxic masculine, very capitalistic “grindset” culture thing that I think we’re being called to finally let go of here in the Age of Aquarius.

So, if KTP is helping you feel more secure or less jealous, I love that for you. Despite the spicy tagline, this article is not about telling you that you’re doing polyamory wrong. When everyone’s genuinely opted in, jealousy and insecurity can become a shared process rather than a solo burden—which, incidentally, is exactly what my course Rituals for Connection explores.

However, one commenter lamented that they are feeling really “stuck” and struggling because one partner needs parallel polyamory to feel “safe”, and the other partner feels “unsafe without KTP because they need metamour connection to help with jealousy and insecurity”.

I always like to start predicaments like this from a place of total neutrality: both people’s needs are valid. One partner not feeling safe in KTP is valid. The other partner not feeling safe in parallel is also valid. There is no moral high ground in needing more separation or needing more connection.

That said, in most cases, a dynamic should default to the needs of the person who wants more distance. Not because their needs “matter more,” but because you can’t force someone into emotional proximity they don’t feel safe in. Connection requires consent, always. And yes, that can feel really hard for the person who desires KTP.

Ultimately, though, this is where relational self-responsibility comes in.