View Single Post
Old 02-07-2011, 03:43 PM
MMMark's Avatar
MMMark MMMark is offline
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 10

Mon. 11/02/07 10:43 EST
. post #6

Originally Posted by LovingRadiance View Post
Happy or no-doesn't impact if I fall in love again-that's impacted by the person with whom I am potentially falling in love with having something about them that I fall in love with.....
Yes, I understand this, and it makes sense to me. I suspect this is true even for "monos," but perhaps in mono relationships these feelings cause "guilt" and are hence suppressed or denied.

Originally Posted by sage View Post
A relationship can be "lightly connected" in terms off number of connections but they can be felt very deeply, i.e. ultra passionate. So how does that work? I was very connected to my husband in terms of financially, family, physically but it meant squat to me in the end.
Yes, I agree wholeheartedly. On the other hand, I'd question your use of the adjective "very." Clearly, you were connected to him in Financial, Familial and Physical terms, but "very" connected? The fact that "it meant squat to (you) in the end" seems to suggest that these connections were NOT "very" strong or passionate. But, doesn't the situation becomes more complicated when comparing two passionate relationships? For example, let's suppose that Harriet and Arthur share Emotional, Physical, Recreational, Economic, and Cultural interpersonal connections, all of them passionate, while Harriet and Andrew share only a Spiritual connection, albeit also a passionate one. Or, let's make it even trickier: Suppose Harriet and Andrew share just a passionate Physical connection. Isn't it at least possible that (for example) Arthur might become uncomfortable with Harriet's passionate Physical connection to Andrew? If so (and really, is this example so far-fetched?), then wouldn't you say that Harriet's relationship with Andrew has affected her relationship with Arthur? Take it a step further: Arthur might ask Harriet to terminate her Physical connection with Andrew. Now Harriet is faced with the prospect of having to choose between two passionate relationships. How does she decide which one is "worth more"?

Originally Posted by AutumnalTone View Post
Do you really think Harriet is going to go all schoolmarm on Arthur because Andrew approaches conversation in a different fashion?
Well yes, because that's the assumption I made in this example. Now, you can say that this assumption is unrealistic, which is a different thing. Or, you can say that this is a lousy example, which is fine, because I'm not wedded to it. But, are you willing to say that you can't think of a SINGLE example in which Harriet's relationship with one person might affect her relationship with another person? This is tantamount to saying that ALL relationships are ALWAYS independent and unaffected by any other relationships.

Originally Posted by AutumnalTone View Post
The only way your examples--and underlying question--make sense is if one posits that Harriet has no other relationships of any sort and the arrival of Andrew is earthshaking because it provides her with sudden understanding that people can relate in a wholly different fashion.
And yet, compare your statement here with that of LovingRadiance:
Originally Posted by LovingRadiance View Post
What I get from each relationship is TOTALLY different.
Now, is it reasonable to posit that she "has no other relationships of any sort"? My assumption is that she has MANY other relationships. Yet, this does not prevent her from relating to a new lover in "wholly different" (or, in her words, "TOTALLY different") ways.

Again, if you don't like my example, trashcan it and invent another. All I'm suggesting is that formation of a new (additional) relationship or connection will, by directly affecting the common partner (the hinge), will (at least, potentially) INDIRECTLY affect the existing relationship. Exactly HOW and TO WHAT EXTENT will vary tremendously, I would think.

Originally Posted by TruckerPete View Post
I find that my relationships do affect each other, but in positive ways.
Sure, yes, and why not? I did not mean to suggest that influences have to be exclusively negative.
Originally Posted by TruckerPete View Post
Of course, this example is overly simplistic, but when I notice that I'm behaving differently with one love versus another, whether that behavious is desirable or not, I try to figure out why and then apply the better behaviour to both relationships.
Hmmm. You know, I don't really understand this. What it seems to suggest is that you are constantly adjusting so as to reduce the differences in the ways you behave with different lovers...and yet, that doesn't sound right. If you didn't behave differently with different lovers, what would the attraction be? I'm sure I've misunderstood you here, so please provide some personal examples.

Originally Posted by redpepper View Post
I meant that because my partners are similar in some ways, when I talk to one about an issue I am having with another they can tell me what they think would work for them because of those similarities.
Okay, yes, I understand you now. Thanks. I hasten to add that this would be a clear case of "one relationship affecting the other."

Last edited by MMMark; 02-07-2011 at 03:46 PM. Reason: Corrected a typographical error.
Reply With Quote