View Single Post
  #12  
Old 03-14-2010, 07:45 AM
SchrodingersCat's Avatar
SchrodingersCat SchrodingersCat is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Saskatchewan
Posts: 2,401
Default

One of the things that jumps out at me is "equal time for everyone" because I don't think it's a realistic standard.

I don't devote equal time to my friends, why would I do it for my lovers? If one friend wants to go out shopping twice in one week before I've seen another friend, I don't say "no, I can't, because I have to see Jamie before I spend more time with you." There are also other aspects of life that make this ideal unpractical, such as living with one person whom you're obviously going to see more often than someone you don't live with. And that's before factoring in time to deal with finances, children, household duties, etc.

The other thing that jumps out at me is doing poly "for variety." Please be clear that I'm not making a "there's a right way and a wrong way" judgement here, just saying that variety is not the reason why I am poly. I'm poly because I like to be in love with more than one person at the same time and because it's my natural inclination to do so. Do I enjoy the variety? Certainly. But it's not the "reason" for my being poly, it's just a coincidence.

Quote:
If someone has an annoying flaw, splitting your time between multiple partners reduces the amount of time you have to put up with it.
I can't place my finger on it, but this sentence irks me. My husband has some quirks. But all my previous boyfriends had "annoying flaws" and as soon as the honeymoon/NRE phases wore off, those flaws quickly became more annoying than quirky, and contributed to the ending of the relationship. I prefer to look at it as "getting 'me time'" than "getting away from my husband because he's annoying" ...
__________________
As I am sure any cat owner will be able to tell you,
someone else putting you in a box is entirely different
from getting into a box yourself.
—bisexualbaker
Reply With Quote