View Single Post
Old 08-20-2013, 07:38 PM
LovingRadiance's Avatar
LovingRadiance LovingRadiance is offline
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,510

Originally Posted by london View Post
I shouldn't need rules to ensure my partner(S) protect and maintain our relationship, that should be something they do naturally.
And my piont here-is that being free to address an issue directly to the person causing it has nothing to do with "protecting" or "maintaining" our relationship.

I have no rules to "protect our relationship".
But-I do have an absolute right to refuse to have any behavior or activity involve ME or my children as I see fit.

That someone has sex with the same person I do-does not give them a right to step all over me. REGARDLESS of how our shared lover reacts.

I agree "he should" may be true.
But if he does not-that doesn't negate my right to protect and defend myself. In fact even if he does-it doesn't take that right away.

Take it out of poly and I will use a personal example.

Recently a man attempted to sexually assault me (

That no one else stepped up-does NOT negate my right to defend myself.
That this person was a FRIEND of someone else's (not me) does not mean I have to go "through" the mutual friend in order to deal with it.
It is MY RIGHT to defend myself and set MY boundaries for anyone in MY presence.

That Maca and GG and I agree and have the same boundaries doesn't change anything.
It is every single individual persons right to set the boundaries for appropriate behavior around them.

In the case of a metamour-our shared lover is free to choose their partners without my input.
BUT-not free to enforce that I have to be around that person. None of us has the right to bring anyone into the home that doesn't treat every person who lives here in ways that are expected by each of those individuals.

As roommates-we needed to ensure that we had a similar expectation for how guests would treat us-so that having guests didn't cause discord in the household.
But-if one of us chooses to bring someone in who is not respecting the limits of the household-anyone of us has the individual right to say that this is our personal sanctuary and we aren't going to have that behavior in our sanctuary.
How we state that-depends entirely upon what the behavior is.

That I have a sexual relationship or marriage certificate with one of the guys doesn't in any way diminish my right to decide what behaviors and activities I will be subject to or participate in.

That one of my roommates (who also happen to be lovers) has a sexual relationship with someone else also does not in any way diminish my right to decide what behaviors or activities I will be subject to or participate in.

Both of the guys are 420 friendly in regards to people they socialize with (neither participate as it would impact their jobs but that's not the point). I on the other hand am not.
When we chose to cohabitate the topic arose as to how we opted to handle that. The agreement is that it won't be in our home. Period. That someone does that activity doesn't mean that they can't come over. But it does mean that they need to cease and desist while here.

I expect the guys would forewarn their friends. But if they don't-I will tell them to leave. I won't be asking if they are sexually involved in one of the guys or not. I don't care. Activity is inappropriate in this home period. Doesn't matter who you are.

And while it may see "obvious"-these examples HAVE been used against me as "too controlling" in the poly community. I have been told that if one of the guys dates a woman who smokes-I need to reconsider the rule of no smoking in our home.
Um-no. The guy can reconsider where he lives.

I have been told the same regarding pot.
Um no-I have children and I'm not willing to risk the legal ramifications. The guys can reconsider their living arrangements.

We all three have our own rooms. I have been laid into over my personal rule that no one comes in my room uninvited. EVEN THOUGH this includes my lovers and my children-people assume it is a "dig" against Maca's potential girlfriends. But it has nothing to do with that. It was my expectation before their was a girlfriend option.

Quite simply-I think that there is so much emphasis on "keeping your nose out of other people's relationships" when it comes to other people who have a sexual relationship.
But not enough on the relationships that are not sexual.
The poly math example is awesome for highlighting that there are relationships beyond the ones that are sexual.

MY point is that I have a right to manage my own relationships-and that includes nonsexual ones. Metamours do have a relationship. Even if they hate each other. There is a relationship of some sort there. It's their right to address how they manage their relationship. It's not the mutual lover who has that right.
"Love As Thou Wilt"
Reply With Quote