Polyamory.com Forum  

Go Back   Polyamory.com Forum > Polyamory > General Poly Discussions

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 10-31-2013, 10:41 PM
MichiganMusic MichiganMusic is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 5
Default Exploring

Hello everyone,

I am considering being open to a polyamorous lifestyle and was hoping to possibly find insight from those who currently live it. I am presently seeing someone, though we have never placed a term of exclusivity on the relationship. I do plan on opening dialogue with her after enough reflection on the matter of polyamory. I should note that I'm a male and would be considered straight on the spectrum.

INTENT
I am beginning to think that I would be most fulfilled with two life-partners without expanding beyond that (as in them or me finding other life-partners).


QUESTION
Do you consider it misogynistic to ask a partner to not look elsewhere for long-term companionship but not do the same?

FUNDAMENTAL ARGUMENTS
The argument I make to myself is that everyone is looking for something, and for some the inverse could be the right thing (one female, two men, as one example).

The counter argument is that it is not an equitable dynamic for 2/3 (in this potential instance) of those involved.



Thank you for your time and Happy Halloween! (-:
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 10-31-2013, 10:59 PM
Natja's Avatar
Natja Natja is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 822
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MichiganMusic View Post

QUESTION
Do you consider it misogynistic to ask a partner to not look elsewhere for long-term companionship but not do the same?

Yep, it is.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 11-01-2013, 02:06 AM
PolyinPractice PolyinPractice is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 518
Default Hmmmm

Quote:
Originally Posted by Natja View Post
Yep, it is.
Well, maybe. But it's a bit of a moot point, no? Look, I know the idea of two women sounds amazing....but there's such a thing as getting what you wish for

Having two women....wanting their needs met from you...and only you...

You might not be able to handle all the joy
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 11-01-2013, 03:02 AM
bookbug bookbug is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 682
Default

Hypocritical yes - if your partners do nor share your desire that you are their one and only.

That said, I have been a member of two households composed of a male and two females. The first scenario lasted a couple of decades until his passing. The other female and I were not sexually involved with each other, but she and I had mutual interests outside of our guy. With the second, I thought I was joining a similar, but more sexually integrated configuration. It didn't work out, but not for the reason you mentioned in your question.

For me, it is a dynamic I hope to experience again some day. However, I lie somewhere along the bisexual spectrum. Definitely bi amorous. (I'm still determining the extent of my bisexuality.)

In both of the above mentioned examples, the lone male did meet my sexual needs and I felt well-loved in the group. If that had not been the case, then I would have considered it grossly unfair to have been forbidden from expanding my prospects. I would suggest that the best way to form your MFF closed triad is to make sure that you keep your girls happy. Due to your desire for exclusivity, it really does put the onus on you.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 11-01-2013, 09:18 AM
Natja's Avatar
Natja Natja is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 822
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bookbug View Post
Hypocritical yes - if your partners do nor share your desire that you are their one and only.

I have no problem with Polygamy (for that is what it seems he is after - most people who know me really well know this) either but...if she says 'I'll do it if I can have another partner too' and he says 'No only me, yes, it is hypocritical.
If she says 'Oh yes, that is exactly what I would want' that is fine.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 11-01-2013, 12:20 PM
bookbug bookbug is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 682
Default

It is important to know you own motivations. A tight family unit. Yeah, I get that. That is my preference too. But if you want to be the lone male due to jealousy, can't cope with you lovers having other lovers, you might want to explore the basis for this.

As mentioned in my previous comment, the last MFF relationship I joined ended badly. I joined a couple. They had issues that both had ignored and seemed happy. Bringing me in, rocked the boat and their issues could no longer be ignored. I was gone from their home for a year, when they separated. The male (E) and I are slowly rebuilding.

The reason for my backstory is this: E never had the chance to experience compersion. He very much wanted to test the limits of his jealousy and move past it to compersion. He had watched me do during our time as three. So the other night when out of the blue a young colleague of mine invited me over to watch a movie, E encouraged me to go. I was nervous because I didn't know what my young colleague had in mind. Just a movie or was he aiming for more? I said as much to E. His reply, was that if that turned out to be the case that the young man was after sex and I wanted to indulge , I absolutely should. This was E's test.

Long story short, it was just a movie and drinks, but E didn't know that would be the case. When I spoke to him afterward, he was just giddy that he had been not only okay, but happy.

So remember, motivations. In your MFF, you will be expecting the girls to be able to cope with their jealousy and move into the realm of compersion. Yet, you have not asked this challenge of yourself. And you might, just might, be selling yourself short.

Last edited by bookbug; 11-01-2013 at 12:21 PM. Reason: Typos
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 10-31-2013, 11:05 PM
LovingRadiance's Avatar
LovingRadiance LovingRadiance is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Alaska
Posts: 5,153
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MichiganMusic View Post
INTENT
I am beginning to think that I would be most fulfilled with two life-partners without expanding beyond that (as in them or me finding other life-partners).


QUESTION
Do you consider it misogynistic to ask a partner to not look elsewhere for long-term companionship but not do the same?
(-:
Yes-it would be.

It is TOTALLY REASONABLE to end up in a scenario with someone who doesn't want to look for other partners.
But to tell someone that you reserve that right for yourself and they are forbidden is hypocritical at best and somewhere along the spectrum as you are a male it is also misogynistic. If you a female it would be whatever the word is that is opposite-as in a female to a male.
But either way-it's a fucked up a way to manage a relationship.

Treating a partner as if they should not have the RIGHT to whatever right you want-is messed up.
__________________
"Love As Thou Wilt"
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 11-01-2013, 01:05 AM
BigGuy's Avatar
BigGuy BigGuy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: East Central Illinois
Posts: 118
Default

It is a valid relationship structure for one polyamorous person to seek a closed relationship with two monogamous people. Whether they be men or women.

Is it inherently misogynistic? No. I dont think so. Theoretically. As long as everyone consents to the agreement freely. In practice, I think misogyny or it's anti-male counterpart is more likely to be prevalent. This has historically been true when societal pressures subtlety (or not so subtlety) coerce the monogamous partner to remain monogamous.

Sucessful polyamory requires great introspection.

The question you should ask is, if your needs are being met, why would you need to control the actions of another?
__________________
Me: 48 - Married, straight, male
OkCProfile
Shiela: My wife.
Suzanne: My FWB
Adam: Shiela's LDR
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 11-01-2013, 01:50 AM
MichiganMusic MichiganMusic is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 5
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigGuy View Post
It is a valid relationship structure for one polyamorous person to seek a closed relationship with two monogamous people. Whether they be men or women.

Is it inherently misogynistic? No. I dont think so. Theoretically. As long as everyone consents to the agreement freely. In practice, I think misogyny or it's anti-male counterpart is more likely to be prevalent. This has historically been true when societal pressures subtlety (or not so subtlety) coerce the monogamous partner to remain monogamous.

Sucessful polyamory requires great introspection.

The question you should ask is, if your needs are being met, why would you need to control the actions of another?
Thank you for the thoughtful response.

I agree with you - successful polyamory does require great introspection, something I am in the midst of.

You pose a good question and I think it's something I would need to think about.

My initial line of thought, and perhaps you could shed some light that would alter my perspective, is that it is simply not practical to have too many long term relationships intertwined. How would a family or household be established?

Aside from that, other elements of an open relationship, in terms of non-monogamy, are not an issue.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 11-01-2013, 02:02 AM
MichiganMusic MichiganMusic is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 5
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LovingRadiance View Post
Yes-it would be.

It is TOTALLY REASONABLE to end up in a scenario with someone who doesn't want to look for other partners.
But to tell someone that you reserve that right for yourself and they are forbidden is hypocritical at best and somewhere along the spectrum as you are a male it is also misogynistic. If you a female it would be whatever the word is that is opposite-as in a female to a male.
But either way-it's a fucked up a way to manage a relationship.

Treating a partner as if they should not have the RIGHT to whatever right you want-is messed up.
Thank you for the response, but it is rather presumptuous.

I think BigGuy is correct in that there is nothing inherently misogynistic (or the opposite) about it - only the historical context. Gender has nothing to do with it, and there are easy scenarios to create that would illustrate that point.

There is a hypocritical element to it, that I wouldn't debate. This is where your argument becomes presumptuous - you are not not necessarily forbidding or removing the rights of the other person. Rather, the parties involved could have been looking for things that happen to compatible.

Example:
Some couples have one member who desires to stay home and take care of the kids while the other works...if this was something that was desirable for both parties then where is the fault? How is this different would be the question? I ask inquisitively, not combatively.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 04:33 AM.