View Single Post
  #5  
Old 04-08-2010, 03:33 PM
MonoVCPHG's Avatar
MonoVCPHG MonoVCPHG is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: In Redpepper's heart
Posts: 4,742
Default

I'm starting to reconsider the idea of the word "rules" or boundaries. I think I prefer the word "criteria".

Simply put, I have criteria to share myself in certain ways, other people also have criteria. If those criteria don't conflict than there is positivity and potential. If they do conflict than their is a logical outcome to the question of compatibility.

Rules imply restriction for sure. But those restrictions generally only bind one partner at a time I find, their often one sided.

In a truly monogamous relationship their is no rule that says you have to be sexually exclusive because it is the natural way for both who enter it. The couple is not being exclusive because they "have to" (unless one is actually not monogamous), they are being exclusive because that is how they show love and commitment and how they want to receive it. That is the criteria they have to share their lives in that way.

So if I stand up and say I have a rule I need my partner to follow, that is self serving and definitely takes a certain power away from their individuality. But if I express the criteria I need to share myself in a certain way than the power remains with my partner to decide if I meet their criteria to share in their life.
__________________

Playing the Game of Life with Monopoly rules.
Monogamy might just be in my genes

Poly Events All Over
Reply With Quote