Originally Posted by Ceoli
I agree with this, which is why I brought up the legalities of marriage in the first place. So the question is: In a long term functioning committed triad, must that level of commitment only be limited to being between two members of the triad? Must there always be a third one out in such a situation?
I don't know the answer to that. I do know that if I was approaching a long term triad arrangement, I would certainly want to have access to that kind of commitment. Perhaps Anne doesn't want that level of commitment. Perhaps she does want it but doesn't feel she can have it so she's not committing fully. I honestly don't know what her level of commitment is here because her's is the only voice that hasn't been heard in this debate.
Violet has every right to see through the commitment of marriage that she and HMA are embarking on. She has every right to want to keep her ring on as a symbol of that huge part of her life that she's giving over to HMA. But if that is indeed what she wants, then that would seem to be at odds with trying to have another equal partner to build a triad with.
Do I think there's anything wrong with that? No. Perhaps the triad isn't meant to be equal...I have no idea. That type of arrangement is a happy arrangement that exists for many people. However, since it does seem to be a source of conflict as it's been written here, then it would also suggest that it might not be happy for all involved. But again, I don't know because not all parts of this have been heard. So before anyone jumps down my throat for it, I'm only offering a perspective and that's it.
Personally I think what you wrote here makes sense. But I would put a spin on it.
Were it me, I would want all three people in a long-term triad to be equal in commitment level. I would not want anyone to be "the third". All parts equilateral so to speak.
BUT presuming that would happen at some point in my life going forward-I have already spent 11 years with Maca and I would not give up my wedding ring. I WOULD create some other form (other rings, tattoos, whatever) of recognition. But just because your life changes (My opinion) doesn't negate the importance of what WAS prior to the change...
So I think there is a way to compromise with this issue and I think it's absolutely absurd not to if the primary reason is that it is inconvenient or seems trivial to others...
I think her desire to keep her rings is reasonable (presuming the triad remains) and I think it shouldn't be such a battle. (but that's just me).