Originally Posted by Marcus
Just for your edification, polyamory is having multiple loves. What you are talking about would most easily be described as swinging. Unless one of these threesome buddies becomes some kind of romantic love interest for one of you, it isn't poly.
I do understand the difference .. the distinction is actually part of my confusion .. I am unsure if this 'have other people in the bedroom' is the focus right now with a view to have full relationships in the future or, if it is only really about 'fucking' other people ..
Originally Posted by Marcus
Agreed, making promises of longevity actually apply negative pressure to a relationship. It builds a barrier to exit which makes it difficult to discern what decisions are made from genuine interest and which ones are motivated by being in it "for the long haul".
My goal is for my partner to do exactly nothing for me that they do not have a genuine desire to do. I don't want to emotionally bully them, guilt them, or coerce them into doing something nice for me... I want them to do it because that's what they wanted to do. If they don't want to do a thing for me then PLEASE don't do it!! While most people can get behind this sentiment they have a hard time being able to recognize the fact that they are building agreements into their relationship which are contrary to this idea.
If IV leaves me tomorrow I will be crushed; my heart will be shattered into a thousand little splinters. HOWEVER, if my alternative is for her to stay with me because she is "committed to our relationship" then I'll take my broken heart any day. Love should be genuine and offered freely, building a longevity clause into a relationship is synonymous with saying "I want you to stay with me even if you'd rather leave"...
I understand and have long understood the potential negative aspects of saying that one is 'committed' ... I get it. But, I am not going to be entirely able to divorce my tendency to want a 'partner' as well as a lover and for me to do that, I need some sense of security.
I don't believe in marriage, I refused to marry my LTR ex of 16 years because he and I met when I was just 18 and I told him that I had serious doubts that we could possibly be together forever but, unless things went horribly wrong, I was there (as opposed to "i'm keeping one toe out the door in case something better comes along/you need me too much/whatever").
I am not sure that building agreements into relationships compromises the idea that the other person is acting from their own desire to do so .. I don't think it is productive to ask for any guarantee irrespective of changing circumstances, .. I guess what I am talking about isn't so much longevity (although that does come into it) but being 'in' the relationship while it is alive. I am not 100% sure that talking about longevity automatically means that there is a 'clause' that someone restrains the other person irregardless of their needs/wants in the future .. that seems a bit reactive to me but perhaps I misunderstand what you mean here.
Thanks for your input