Originally Posted by evanevans
I just want to provide for them to enable them. I am not interested in disabling them. That said, if they are with me, they are inside my ruleset. And if they break my ruleset, they are still free to not be with me. But my ruleset is not disabling, or demotivating, or devaluing, or abusive, or possessive.
OK, here's something else that I would suggest you think about.
Several things that you have posted about what you want out of your relationships have to do with you setting up a place according to your rules - you will work out what BC should be used, you will not allow other men to live there, but you will allow your women to have outside relationship, etc. - if they don't like them they can leave. This sounds a lot like "my way or the highway".
In order to be respectful of the people with whom you have a relationship, the "ruleset" should be something negotiated between you - because even though they may not have it all written down and thought-out, everyone has a ruleset, or set of boundaries.
So this may well be the language you are using here - in which case, maybe you could explain more, but this comes across as "I am going to make the rules. Everyone has to sign on to my rules. They will be happy with my rules, or they can leave." The undertone (without you explicitly saying it) is that their rules don't matter, because yours trumps all of them.
Do you see how this could come across?
(Oh and I think Honduras is usually considered Central America, not South America :-) )