I became aware of a growing trend among the "popular" poly writers to adopt what was coming across to me, at least, as a kind of dismissiveness or denigrative attitude toward those people in the poly community who apparently aren't doin' it right: the people who do need hierarchy or who do need security based in rules and predictable expectations because trust (for whatever reason) isn't solid enough or communications practices aren't robust enough, to more fluidly and gracefully adapt-on-the-fly to the inevitable relational issues that pop up no matter what kind of relationships we h
This sums it up, for me. You see, when you tell someone that you feel a certain configuration like a closed triad or a family style dynamic raises "lack of trust/insecurity/fear based controlling rules" red flags, they become defensive. I totally understand why a lot of people need these type of things and, as the author acknowledges, it is because "trust isn't solid enough" and I dont always think that it is always an unfounded lack of trust but it exists all the same. We all know the risks of getting involved with someone in one or more existing relationships that lack trust and the like, so I don't understand why there would be surprise that people are wary of poly networks where the are signs that a lack of trust exists.