Polyamory.com Forum  

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

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 07-20-2012, 02:17 AM
MeeraReed MeeraReed is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: East Coast, U.S.
Posts: 351
Default

Maca sounds like a really difficult partner to deal with. Constantly breaking boundaries? Refusing to grant you the same freedoms he claims he needs? Ugh.

But my comments aren't going to be about that. I want to offer a different perspective on play partners vs. committed relationship partners.

I don't think your clear-cut distinction between the two is fair.

When I meet someone I like, I start with something casual and easy-going, a friendship with sex involved. If we are a good match for each other and have good chemistry, we might become regular lovers (or lover-friends, to use a term I encountered here). Maybe we'll keep going like that for a short time, or a long time, or maybe eventually we'll find that we have "something more" with each other.

I don't think I could get into a loving, committed relationship any other way. I just naturally gravitate toward people who like being friends who have sex, rather than people who need commitment right away. If I fall in love, it will be through sexual chemistry, through slowly getting to know a friend I have sex with.

I don't classify people I might like into "play partner" material or "relationship" material.

If someone told me, "You can either have sex with me immediately and just be a play partner who will NEVER meet my wife and kids, or you can immediately meet my family and eventually become serious," I would not get involved with him at all. Neither of those choices makes sense to me. Neither of those choices allows things to develop naturally.

Of course, maybe he wouldn't offer me the choice--he would have already decided which "type" I was.

I find this attitude really insulting. But I encounter it everywhere (not just in poly dating). So it's very common.

However, it's also pretty common for people in the dating world (both mono and poly) to start with something more casual and then see where it goes from there.

I do think that more people should question why they have such a firm distinction, why it must either be "serious dating" or "fuckbuddies" but nothing in between, and no progression from one to the other.

LovingRadiance, you seem to feel very strongly that your husband's "fuckbuddies" are people you would not want your children exposed to. You think they are people who mean nothing and will move out of your husband's life quickly.

Why couldn't they be friends your husband has sex with, but who just aren't all that involved in your family? He could have a long-term lover-friend who never has any involvement with your kids.

Or, is the problem that your husband gets too caught up in casual things and breaks boundaries? (That might be, in which case, discount my advice!)

I do understand that you want to make sure that anyone your husband gets serious with should be a good match for your family. That makes sense.

(And, frankly, that's why my approach to dating probably wouldn't work for someone with a primary partner, which is why I haven't dated someone with a primary partner yet).

But it sounds like Maca takes sex less seriously than you do, and wants the freedom to pursue relationships where sexual chemistry comes first and seriousness may come later (or not at all).

His view sounds reasonable to me, but his treatment of you doesn't seem reasonable. So...I'm not sure what I'm trying to tell you here.

I just don't feel comfortable with your attitude that you don't mind if he has a fuckbuddy or a serious partner, but it has to be one or the other, and you need to know WHICH one.
__________________
Single, straight, female, solo, non-monogamous.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 07-20-2012, 02:51 AM
LovingRadiance's Avatar
LovingRadiance LovingRadiance is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Alaska
Posts: 5,198
Default

Meera-
the reason I feel his fb's aren't safe for my kids-is because I took the 'high road' to trust him and every single time-my kids got hurt.

So, as a parent, I feel that my first responsibility is to them, not to poly.

As a personal thing-I've had play partners get more serious with time.
But, my kids are only kids for a temporary amount of time-and I don't think it's too much to ask that people who want something that isn't compatible with raising a family not try to be in a relationship with people who are struggling to raise a family.
THAT SAID-it's MACA'S responsibility-not the other persons.

I happen to think that once the kids are grown-it would be a MUCH MUCH less big deal to me.

But, I'm tired (3 years tired) of watching my kids get screwed over.

As for play partners vs serious-as I said-I struggle with that terminology-it's not... adequate.

His long term FUNCTIONAL relationship, was one that I would classify as a "friend with benefits" for friend-lover (which is how she classified it also).
BUT-she also acknowledged that our kids came first (as did hers) and so she was COMPLETELY understanding of the need to take time to make friends with everyone at least to the point of everyone feeling safe with her and she with us, for the sake of ALL THREE kids.
In fact, I ended up being the one to escort her child to her in their new home when they moved (she had to leave prior to the school year ending).

It's not that I feel they have to be... hmmmm how to describe it? A "life commitment". But, there has to be a level of friendship developed to create a safety net for the kids that their love affair ending isn't going to result in the kids being exposed to b.s. drama OR suddenly losing a friend.

I had fuck buddies and friends with benefits before we married-and was in an open relationship for years. My daughter, who was the only child I had during that time, has retained friendly relationships with those people (as have I) even though we are NONE OF US, still sexual. Because they all understood that their PRESENCE in my child's life equated to a responsibility to be considerate of HER needs and HER feelings. So, they didn't disappear on her after we nixed our love affairs.

When you have no primary and no kids-its SOOOOOOO much easier, becuase you are really only responsible to yourself and the person whom you choose to have sex/friendship with is also responsible for themselves.

But, particularly when kids are added to the mix-this simply isn't fair to them. All of the adults who choose to interact with the kids, need to be willing to prioritize the child's well-being (I am NOT talking giving kids whatever they want, but taking time to identify behaviors that may be damaging-and NOT doing them).

Frankly.....

I think that casual partners brought home-regardless of whether or not they are a "lead in to more" are inappropriate if you have young children at home. This only because my experience has been, that most people can't manage to consider how the loss of these "casual" people will be felt by the kids. Kids don't classify people at home as "casual" or unimportant generally. Their home is their sanctuary and adults there are considered their "safe people". So, those who aren't planning to stick around, shouldn't be in.

On the other hand-I understand the need to get to know someone and I LOVE sex. But, I CHOOSE as a mom not to allow myself the privilege of using sexual chemistry as the first factor to assess. I choose compatibility with my family first.

Ciel said it well when he said as a family or group, it's about compromise (and consideration) of EVERYONE's needs. In our case-there are CHILDREN'S needs to consider and if a "new party" doesn't want that type of concern-they shouldn't be part of our group.
EVERYONE's needs need to be considered and by default the kids needs hold greater leverage because they did not choose this lifestyle.
__________________
"Love As Thou Wilt"
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 07-20-2012, 03:10 AM
LovingRadiance's Avatar
LovingRadiance LovingRadiance is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Alaska
Posts: 5,198
Default

I should add, I agree with another poster who said something about the following:

When you choose to date someone who had kids or a primary already, you need to understand you are dating SOMEONE+baggage, not just SOMEONE.

What functions perfectly well when dealing with only combinations of SOMEONES, does NOT work when +baggage is added.

I prefer +responsiblities to other people.
I dislike the term "baggage" due to the negative connotations it brings.
But, the point is sound.

I am not free to be "just me" without considering EVERY SINGLE THING I DO in terms of its affect on my children and my immediate family (household). Likewise, neither is ANYONE ELSE in our family.

So, a new partner wanting to date one of us-has to except that we aren't free to offer them what someone who DIDN'T have that + responsibilities to others would be free to offer.
They are free to choose someone who is less encumbered, but if they want one of us, they have to accept that the limitations of said baggage WILL affect them as well.
__________________
"Love As Thou Wilt"
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 07-20-2012, 08:21 AM
Anneintherain's Avatar
Anneintherain Anneintherain is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Seattle-ish
Posts: 820
Default

I'd wanted to post something but had put it off since I didn't have any brilliant suggestions (well except that him seeing a counselor solo might help...thats not brilliant exactly) I suffer from similar issues - my husband Adam makes agreements with me, then when he meets somebody he likes who directly contradicts our list of agreements, instead of not pursuing, or stopping pursuing after it's pointed out to him that it breaks our agreement, his first instinct is to do the "Well but..." and start listing reasons why our agreements don't apply to this person because he feels there are extenuating circumstances.

However I've been lucky, all these things have been hashed out early. It's not nice that I've had to be firm and repetitive and downright "naggy wife" far too often for my tastes to get him to stick to our agreements, but your post makes me feel lucky because as he isn't assertively sexual, I haven't had to deal with same sort of fallout - he moves slow so it is usually dealt with in early dating stages. Still, our #1 poly issue has been our short little bullet pointed list of succinct & clearly stated B&W agreements by literal me, and regular mis or re-interpreting of them by non-literal him to suit what he is feeling at the time. As I said, I see a lot of similarities between us with our problem, but mine seems so mild compared to yours due to a differing sex drive in our partners. Considering what a stress is it on me, I can only imagine what you are dealing with.

I wish I had a magic fix for situations like this. I mean I'd say "nobody can come around our kids until X, X and X happens" (for me it'd probably you two feel like you've built a friendship/X amount of time has passed and you're still dating/they've made an effort to build a camaraderie with me/us) and stick to it, but that doesn't lessen the impact on your relationship at all or make it any less of a burden on you. Obviously I agree that you don't deserve it as you've worked really hard to establish your boundaries as have I. It's brave and really an amazing amount of work to figure out and stick to your boundaries, and therefore defeating to have somebody see your boundaries as abstract instead of black and white, or try to rewrite boundaries whenever somebody new and shiny comes along. To me it seems like there's no choice in a situation like that to become more and more of a hardass dick. Not the best thing in a loving relationship, but when you have kids to put first...well I have to imagine I'd be a lot more of a dick in these situations if I had them...

I'm just wishing you luck.
__________________
Happiness will never come to those who fail to appreciate what they already have.

Last edited by Anneintherain; 07-20-2012 at 06:42 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 07-24-2012, 03:03 AM
MeeraReed MeeraReed is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: East Coast, U.S.
Posts: 351
Default

Thanks for clarifying your situation, LovingRadiance. Everything you say makes sense.

I do see what you mean, that Maca should insist his lovers either never meet the kids or that they commit to being a regular presence in the kids' lives.

It sounds like Maca must be making poor choices in terms of who he gets involved with, if it results in situations in which your kids are exposed to unnecessary loss and drama??

But I wonder if you could approach the situation with your kids differently. For example, does it truly damage kids to experience loss every so often? Loss is a part of life--friends move away, baby-sitters grow up, relationships end, people drift apart.

Your kids have two parents, so it's not the same as the kids of single parents who long for a second parent and get hurt when the potential mates keep abandoning them.

I don't have kids myself, but I have many memories of adults who were temporary but fun presences in my life when I was little. There was a close friend of my mom's who took me to the zoo a lot, but she ended up having a falling-out with my mom (not over dating or anything like that) and the friendship drifted apart. I remember wondering why she wasn't around any more, and my mom explaining that the friend had gotten too busy with other things and sometimes that's just what happens and that it's okay to miss people. My mom didn't get angry on my behalf or allow me to dwell on feeling abandoned (although she herself still misses this friend 25 years later).

I don't know how old your kids are, but maybe it would help to put a positive "life lesson" spin on the unexpected departure of their father's lovers. From teachers to baby-sitters to elderly relatives to high school crushes, people just aren't always around forever.

Kids get hurt easily, but kids are also pretty resilient.

But I haven't been following your story so I might be missing a lot of key info.
__________________
Single, straight, female, solo, non-monogamous.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 07-24-2012, 04:22 AM
LovingRadiance's Avatar
LovingRadiance LovingRadiance is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Alaska
Posts: 5,198
Default

[QUOTE=MeeraReed;145106]
Quote:
Thanks for clarifying your situation, LovingRadiance. Everything you say makes sense.
No problem. I fully understand how impossible it is to really convey a whole situation in a few posts. I enjoy the conversation.

Quote:
It sounds like Maca must be making poor choices in terms of who he gets involved with, if it results in situations in which your kids are exposed to unnecessary loss and drama??
Yep. It wasn't a huge problem with the 2 year relationship (she just moved) even though the kids are having to face the loss of her and her daughter (friend). It's fairly easy to walk through the explanations of them having moved etc.
But, the sudden disappearances, with no explanation forth coming (from them or Maca) leaves me having to figure out WHAT to say-and that ticks me off. I don't lie to my kids-so I end up with "I don't really know honey", which as you can imagine, does not satisfy a 4-5 year old and results in the same question for MONTHS. It's been almost 2 years since one of them disappeared and she STILL asks me. Sigh.

Quote:
For example, does it truly damage kids to experience loss every so often? Loss is a part of life--friends move away, baby-sitters grow up, relationships end, people drift apart.
Certainly, which they are aware of. With a step brother and a foster brother who moved away and the loss of a number of friends who've moved away, not to mention family, they have experienced this.
But, even in the case of our oldest (20 yo now) daughters best friend committing suicide-there was an explanation. Painful, but something I can work with.
When it's "sorry daddy decided to fuck her cause he thought he was in love iwth her, but then he realized he was thinking with his dick"... that doesn't work-but that's the God's honest truth.
Really, what it comes down to for me is this:
if you want to make shitty decisions (like smoking); keep it to yourself, it's not something your kids should have to struggle with understanding.
On the other hand, if real life happens while you are doing your level best to take responsiblity for your actions; then you sit down and explain real life to your kids.
Either way-it shouldn't fall on me to explain the disappearance of the women he has drug through for reasons even he can't explain because looking back a week or two later he's smacking his forehead saying "UGH! WHY?@?@"


Quote:
Your kids have two parents, so it's not the same as the kids of single parents who long for a second parent and get hurt when the potential mates keep abandoning them.
Actually they have 4. 3 live here and one lives a few miles away.

Quote:
I don't know how old your kids are, but maybe it would help to put a positive "life lesson" spin on the unexpected departure of their father's lovers. From teachers to baby-sitters to elderly relatives to high school crushes, people just aren't always around forever.
I dont mind doing that for lovers who are actually around for more than a week or two. But, if he wants experiments or play partners-they don't need to be around. It's not fair to me as the one at home all day with the kids-to have to deal with the drama. HE doesn't have to deal with it-he's not here. It's a matter of simple respect of me.
The same way I wouldn't bring any experimental partners around his coworkers. Because HE shouldn't have to deal with their questions/concerns for something that is ALL MINE.

Quote:
Kids get hurt easily, but kids are also pretty resilient.
They are resilient-you're absolutely right.
But, they shouldn't be unnecessarily subjected to bs just beause someone is lazy about dealing with their own shit. It's neglect to subject a child to pain for no reason. There's no NEED for him to bring these women around his kids-therefore, there is no reason for the pain he's causing them in doing so.
It's not like he can't afford to rent a hotel room every week if he wanted to.
So, there are ways around it.

OR he might consider looking at people for their HEALTHY behaviors, instead of just their "fuck me fast" looks (elaborated on his type being the "I look like a drug addict slut" type in another thread); since he keeps SAYING what he wants is a second wife.

(fyi, totally NOT offended by your questions, thoughts or comments. Smiling actually while reading-very well thought out and meaningful addition to the conversation. I love when people actually elaborate with serious thought)
__________________
"Love As Thou Wilt"
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
boundaries, commitment, equality, play partners

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 08:31 AM.