View Single Post
Old 07-20-2012, 02:51 AM
LovingRadiance's Avatar
LovingRadiance LovingRadiance is offline
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,478

the reason I feel his fb's aren't safe for my kids-is because I took the 'high road' to trust him and every single time-my kids got hurt.

So, as a parent, I feel that my first responsibility is to them, not to poly.

As a personal thing-I've had play partners get more serious with time.
But, my kids are only kids for a temporary amount of time-and I don't think it's too much to ask that people who want something that isn't compatible with raising a family not try to be in a relationship with people who are struggling to raise a family.
THAT SAID-it's MACA'S responsibility-not the other persons.

I happen to think that once the kids are grown-it would be a MUCH MUCH less big deal to me.

But, I'm tired (3 years tired) of watching my kids get screwed over.

As for play partners vs serious-as I said-I struggle with that terminology-it's not... adequate.

His long term FUNCTIONAL relationship, was one that I would classify as a "friend with benefits" for friend-lover (which is how she classified it also).
BUT-she also acknowledged that our kids came first (as did hers) and so she was COMPLETELY understanding of the need to take time to make friends with everyone at least to the point of everyone feeling safe with her and she with us, for the sake of ALL THREE kids.
In fact, I ended up being the one to escort her child to her in their new home when they moved (she had to leave prior to the school year ending).

It's not that I feel they have to be... hmmmm how to describe it? A "life commitment". But, there has to be a level of friendship developed to create a safety net for the kids that their love affair ending isn't going to result in the kids being exposed to b.s. drama OR suddenly losing a friend.

I had fuck buddies and friends with benefits before we married-and was in an open relationship for years. My daughter, who was the only child I had during that time, has retained friendly relationships with those people (as have I) even though we are NONE OF US, still sexual. Because they all understood that their PRESENCE in my child's life equated to a responsibility to be considerate of HER needs and HER feelings. So, they didn't disappear on her after we nixed our love affairs.

When you have no primary and no kids-its SOOOOOOO much easier, becuase you are really only responsible to yourself and the person whom you choose to have sex/friendship with is also responsible for themselves.

But, particularly when kids are added to the mix-this simply isn't fair to them. All of the adults who choose to interact with the kids, need to be willing to prioritize the child's well-being (I am NOT talking giving kids whatever they want, but taking time to identify behaviors that may be damaging-and NOT doing them).


I think that casual partners brought home-regardless of whether or not they are a "lead in to more" are inappropriate if you have young children at home. This only because my experience has been, that most people can't manage to consider how the loss of these "casual" people will be felt by the kids. Kids don't classify people at home as "casual" or unimportant generally. Their home is their sanctuary and adults there are considered their "safe people". So, those who aren't planning to stick around, shouldn't be in.

On the other hand-I understand the need to get to know someone and I LOVE sex. But, I CHOOSE as a mom not to allow myself the privilege of using sexual chemistry as the first factor to assess. I choose compatibility with my family first.

Ciel said it well when he said as a family or group, it's about compromise (and consideration) of EVERYONE's needs. In our case-there are CHILDREN'S needs to consider and if a "new party" doesn't want that type of concern-they shouldn't be part of our group.
EVERYONE's needs need to be considered and by default the kids needs hold greater leverage because they did not choose this lifestyle.
"Love As Thou Wilt"
Reply With Quote