compromising.

Mono and I know compromise all to well. We have based most of our relationship on compromise. Not so much now as we are looking at boundaries finally, but there was a time when the space between what I felt I could agree to and what he felt he could agree to was so large that both of us were hurting.

I ended up compromising who I am so that he would feel safe in my love for him. He needed me to be dedicated to what we had together with my family in a way that he understood it from his mainstream monogamous perspecitve. He needed me to not make changes by dating and having sex with others, so I compromised and said I would agree to no sex with others. He agreed to work on being okay with my having emotional connections with others.

The pain of being emotionally connected and not being able to act on it was very hard for me. It was painful, sad and I was frustrated and angry. I stayed the course though and learned not only how to live in those emotions and still be okay, but I learned how important integrity is to me. He learned how far I would go to love him and have him in my life. He trusts far more than I ever thought he would.

Compromises suck. Boundariy agreements feel much easier as there is no gap to deal with, just a line. Rules are one sided and enforced by another who thinks they have control over the situation or other people. That's how I see it anyway.
 
I haven't been doing this poly thing for very long. But I realized I'm never giving up FirstBoyfriend, as long as he's interested in continuing this. [that was a heckuva revelation to me!]

Compromise? I've been working at not talking to each about the other as much as I want to. When I was with CurrentBoyfriend and FirstBF was our dear friend, I talked freely to them both about anything. I tread more carefully now that I'm having sex with both of them. I hope that's because it's new. I can tell though, that neither wants to step on my expression, but they're tender about it. And I have no need to irritate their tender spots.

Compromise. There are so many things I used to insist upon; things I thought I couldn't live without, and things I thought somebody who was with me should do. I've let go of so much of that. (I'm sorry, I know that's very vague). I'll try for specifics. Both of them are complete and utter slobs. Amazingly, they are slobs in different sorts of ways, mostly (they share a few). I was absolutely insane because of that when I was living with CBF. Now that he has his own place, I don't give a crap. If his house is dirty, I can go home. Or he can visit me in my house. I used to always get sick when FBF would feed me (my skin crawls at the mere thought of his kitchen). I did feed me eggs for breakfast on Sunday, and I was fine. I watched him do the dishes. It was fascinating. It was so not the way that I do dishes. And I held my tongue. Not my job. I think if CBF did not have a dishwasher, I might not eat at his house. :9
Now that could be down to living different places. But I have no goal, no endgame; I'm not 'dating with intent to couple and marry.' I'm in loving relationships with two men. So I don't have to care that they're slobs.

Oh I'm fairly certain that's not what you were looking for. But I appreciate the questions ~ they gave me a good think. :D
 
Thank you both :)

RedPepper, so you don't have sex with your other partners?

I had a weird talk yesterday with my boyfriend... he was saying something about compromising about feelings. I don't feel good about that.. I don't want to/can't/not willing to/etc.. to do something to get rid of my feelings to that girl that I fell in love with. I honestly think it is too much to ask.
It makes me feel like a horrible, horrible monster.
There are other things I compromise on, but it seems like he doesn't seem to care..
 
I think compromise is important in any relationship, mono or poly. To me, it means that people start out on opposite sides of an issue and then each gives a little bit, and gives up a little bit, in order to meet in the middle.

I also think it's important not to hold onto grudges about what one gives up in compromises. Each party has to get on board with it all, as if it was their own idea and desire to give up what they did, in order to be happy. That also means don't give up something that will make you resentful for not having it. You have to embrace the compromise and own it fully in order to connect and move forward. We should not live in the past. Life is too short to hold onto resentments and relationships are not about keeping score. No one should be throwing it in anyone's face what they gave up and compromised on.
 
There are two ways that a possible compromise rears its head - one is at the start of a relationship configuration, when everyone is working out what everyone's respective needs are, and the other are the day-to-day things.

For the first one, instead of repeating it, I'll refer you to a blog post I did a while back on how we did it. Here it is: "Getting Your Priorities Straight"

In terms of the day-to-day stuff, we each made a commitment to try to work to the greater good - and that means being willing to be flexible on things when one person is in exceptional need.

Understanding where YOU draw the line is very, very important.
 
I had a weird talk yesterday with my boyfriend... he was saying something about compromising about feelings. I don't feel good about that.. I don't want to/can't/not willing to/etc.. to do something to get rid of my feelings to that girl that I fell in love with. I honestly think it is too much to ask.
It makes me feel like a horrible, horrible monster.
There are other things I compromise on, but it seems like he doesn't seem to care..

I don't think it's actually possible to compromise on how much you feel for someone. Like, how would that look, "Ok, I love her but you want me only to like her, so I'll compromise by liking her a whole lot but not loving her." Feelings don't work that way, you can't turn them up and down like a dial, you can only control your actions. If you've already fallen for her but he wants you not to love her, the closest you could come to compromising on that would be to not see her anymore period... but even then, maybe even especially when a connection is cut off abruptly, feelings can linger for years...
 
Last edited:
If I thoght I could forget about her I would, there is no chance. Besides, pretending not loving someone is kind of cheating yourself..and your partner.
 
I honestly don't think that I have technically compromised on anything in the 3 years I've been in poly relationships. But that's not because I'm super assertive-- the opposite. I'm very easy going on things that don't matter to me, and I try to be thoughtful about my partners' feelings on things that do matter. When there's something that really matters, and it matters to the point that I want to go against the preferences of a partner, they've always sort of sat up and listened when I state my case, and let me have what I need.

I can see some areas in the future where compromise is needed (if I move in with two of them, there are a lot of opportunities for our preferences/wants to conflict), but I think it really comes down to telling the difference between wants and needs, and working cooperatively to make sure everyone's needs are met, and that their wants are met as much as possible.

Feelings (acknowledging them, expressing them) tend to go in the needs category for me.
 
For me, the essence of compromise is its temporal nature. Compromises are not for life; at most, they can be "for now". Compromise is something you work out to reach a specific temporary goal. The goal can be increased relationship security, rebuilding trust, having a baby, getting a divorce...

Not really a good compromise: "I will never seek out any new partners although I desperately want to because you cannot handle it."

A good compromise: "I will not seek out any new partners for the two remaining years before our kid goes to school, because you cannot handle the stress of dealing with outside partners and small children at home."
 
RedPepper, so you don't have sex with your other partners?
The agreement was that I don't have sexual relationships with anyone that came into my life after him. I had a husband and three other men in my life at that time. The three other men are not with me anymore and I have a gf now that I am sexual with. The bf I didn't have sex with I met at the same time as him and agreed not to go there. He and I broke up this past winter. I think Mono realized that I was really in love with him and that it wasn't just friendship and was willing to move along his compromise into a boundary agreement. We have been together three years now and things have changed. The NRE time is over and we are quite settled. I think that has also made a difference. We have a commitment that can withstand my seeking out other possible sexual partners.

Understanding where YOU draw the line is very, very important.
Agreed. If it doesn't match up with someone elses line then that means a compromise needs to be made until something changes. That can mean that it never works out and one person becomes so uncomfortable that they have to leave in order to get their needs met or there is a shift so that there may be a boundary of some kind.
 
Last edited:
There are two ways that a possible compromise rears its head - one is at the start of a relationship configuration, when everyone is working out what everyone's respective needs are, and the other are the day-to-day things.

For the first one, instead of repeating it, I'll refer you to a blog post I did a while back on how we did it. Here it is: "Getting Your Priorities Straight"

In terms of the day-to-day stuff, we each made a commitment to try to work to the greater good - and that means being willing to be flexible on things when one person is in exceptional need.

Understanding where YOU draw the line is very, very important.



Im not much of a "techno weenie" ..... But the link you provided didn't load for me. I'd certainly be interested to read it.
 
I've been thinking about this a bit and finally am coming to some kind of conclusion. I'll be talking about romantic relationships.

To start with, if a person informs somebody (e.g. a new partner) that they will not compromise on things, ever, it is very likely that they are the most selfish jerk kind there is.

However, I think culturally there is way too much emphasis on compromising. Everybody's heard the relationship-truths that say "compromises are necessary in a relationship" a thousand times. And I don't wholly disagree, as I do think it is likely that there will occasionally be something. But there are two reasons why it is way more rare than is implied by the common understandings.

Firstly, compromises are only needed in decisions which concern both (or all) people involved. Culturally supported view of a relationship is, in my opinion, somewhat co-dependent. At least, I don't think there is enough emphasis on personal boundaries; certainly less than there is on the necessity of compromising. This is why in a couple relationship it is often the case that pretty much everything either one does is viewed as a decision that concern both persons, when actually there is no reason they would be common decisions.

Secondly, if partners are on the same side, there is quite little need for compromising. Compromise, as I understand it, refers to two (or more but two is simplest) people on the opposite sides, both of whom are primarily interested in getting their own way as far as they can; then they come together and, due to not being selfish jerks and having heard that in a relationship compromises are necessary, they calculate the middle point and do that. That is certainly better than one person dominating, and the other sacrificing. But that is the problem: this culturally supported view that either there are compromises or there is dominance.

What I want is not that my partner takes my feelings and wants into consideration and then compromises with me. Even less, of course, I want a partner who doesn't care how I feel or what I want. But, what I want is a partner who thinks my getting what I want is as important as them getting what they want. I am obviously prepared to have the same attitude towards them. Now, this doesn't negate the fact that the both of us are still responsible for our own wants. With proper boundaries both can exist simultaneously.

I don't have time to get into it more right now, and it is quite abstract, but if that doesn't seem understandable, please ask for clarification. Otherwise, I'd like to hear other's views. :)
 
Good thoughts rory.

I think that there are many instances where people don't actually have to compromise just because they have a difference in desires. Another factor that comes into play is how invested someone is in having their desire prevail and whether the joy of seeing their partner happy in getting their desire fulfilled outweighs whatever degree of disappointment they feel.

Some simplified examples.

MrS wants steak for dinner, I want spaghetti. Do we "compromise" and have lasagna which neither of us wants? No - that would be idiotic (yet I see people make "compromises" like this all of the time - "If I can't get what I want then you can't either.") If he REALLY wants steak and I only prefer spaghetti - we have steak. If we have equal desires - maybe we have spaghetti THIS time because LAST time we had steak. OR we could go out to a restaurant that serves both and each get what we want.

Dude wants to have sex twice a day, I want to have sex once a week. Do we "compromise" and decide to have sex four times a week? No - I am not going to agree to have sex that I don't want. I can agree however to open myself up to the possibility of "wanting" more sex by making other changes that might allow that to happen - not planning so many evening activities for example. He can support this by making changes that increase the chance that I will be "in the mood" - taking care of chores before I get home from work so we have more cuddle/quality time. OR he could find himself a "morning girlfriend" and have lots of sex with her :D.

I don't really see the solutions to the above examples as "compromises" in the sense of looking at what each person wants and calculating where the mathematical "middle point" is. I see it more as making decisions and structuring our lives so that each of us gets the things that are important to us most of the time. Most problems have solutions - sometimes you just have to be a little creative in getting to them. It helps if each person actually knows what they want and can look at underlying factors as to why they are uncomfortable with their partner getting what they want.

JaneQ
 
Last edited:
Back
Top