Polyamory.com Forum  

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

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 03-25-2013, 12:09 AM
redpepper's Avatar
redpepper redpepper is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 7,639
Default

LR-
Quote:
It should be noted-Franklin didn't write that post. It was a guest post.
true. He participated in the thread. Lots going on there that is not really anything to do with here. So I'm glad we are moving on. Its good to be reminded of the negative side of heirarchies. Still, there is a useful side too that is a reality for many.
__________________
Anyone want to be friends on Facebook?
Send me your name via PM
My blog
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 03-25-2013, 12:36 AM
SchrodingersCat's Avatar
SchrodingersCat SchrodingersCat is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Saskatchewan
Posts: 2,130
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LovingRadiance View Post
You are so awesome with concrete-completely off topic examples and I love that!
When I say off-topic-it's a compliment.
I LOVE how you come up with these "not poly" examples for why there are some things that work best in certain ways. Its refreshing.
Thanks!

It comes from trying to teach advanced physics concepts to a railroader husband :P He's a really smart guy, but he doesn't give himself credit because he's not book smart. I get straight A's, but I get lost in a city of 260,000 on a regular basis. It's sad.
__________________
Gralson: my husband (works out of town).
Auto: my girlfriend (lives with her husband Zoffee).

The most dangerous phrase in the English language is "we've always done it this way."
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 03-25-2013, 02:55 AM
LovingRadiance's Avatar
LovingRadiance LovingRadiance is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Alaska
Posts: 5,398
Default

Tonberry-I feel the same. That part was what I appreciated, I also understand some people don't like the word being associated with negative definitions at all-but it already has negative connotations to many. I doubt any argument will alter that negative connotation any time soon. Much like "fag" or "dyke". Some people use them non-negatively, but they aren't altering the general understanding that those terms are derogatory.

RP-I know, just know some writers get really t'd off over credit for their writing being given to others. As.... Well known as Franklin is, it would be easy for that to happen. Whether the opinion is positive or negative regarding the work & regardless of his agreeing or disagreeing with the words-its not his writing.
__________________
"Love As Thou Wilt"
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 03-25-2013, 02:57 AM
LovingRadiance's Avatar
LovingRadiance LovingRadiance is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Alaska
Posts: 5,398
Default

Shrodinger-I understand. I am the straight A student, Maca is construction. But he can visualize things from all directions, I SO cannot.
__________________
"Love As Thou Wilt"
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 03-25-2013, 03:23 AM
Icewraithonyx Icewraithonyx is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Michigan
Posts: 63
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tonberry View Post
Here you go. The definition actually was: A poly hierarchy exists when at least one person holds more power over a partner's other relationships than is held by the people within those relationships.
Often when I see this, it's referring to one member of an established couple dictating what the other relationship (that they are not part of) is going to look like or function as. This is inappropriate.

My question is, does the same standard apply when one member of an established couple falls in love, decides to be polyamorous with new partner, thereby mandating a conversion from monogamous relationship to a polyamorous framework (or no relationship at all)?
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 03-25-2013, 03:43 AM
SchrodingersCat's Avatar
SchrodingersCat SchrodingersCat is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Saskatchewan
Posts: 2,130
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Icewraithonyx View Post
My question is, does the same standard apply when one member of an established couple falls in love, decides to be polyamorous with new partner, thereby mandating a conversion from monogamous relationship to a polyamorous framework (or no relationship at all)?
Well, everyone always has the right to leave a relationship that can no longer meet their needs. That those needs have changed such that meeting them requires a shift in the relationship framework does not make the needs are any less valid.

But there are respectful ways to go about that, and disrespectful ways. "Get ok with it or I'm walking" is not respectful, and therefore inappropriate. But "I'm sorry that my needs have changed and that it requires some huge changes in our relationship in order for it to meet my new needs" is.

Within that "mandate," you can choose to be supportive and accommodating of your partner's own needs, or you can choose to tell them to suck it up cupcake. Again, appropriate and inappropriate.
__________________
Gralson: my husband (works out of town).
Auto: my girlfriend (lives with her husband Zoffee).

The most dangerous phrase in the English language is "we've always done it this way."
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 03-25-2013, 03:45 AM
Vixtoria's Avatar
Vixtoria Vixtoria is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 299
Default

Two things.

First, I think in any relationships, mono, poly, open, you need to discuss what definitions mean to you. I've had this discussion with friends before. All these things people just assume about relationships and they assume everyone has the same assumptions! What is cheating, when is it serious all of that. When those assumptions YOU have are based on relationships you have seen, been exposed to, or part of. Well how could someone else have the exact same assumptions if they haven't had the exact same experiences and exposures?

Secondly, I really get annoyed, bit pet peeve, when someone else defines something for me. I've had a horrible experience in the past, including abusive behavior thrown at me and others, all because I dared to say that the way that something was defined wasn't how I or my partner's defined it. It became a mess because as was stated to us Franklin defined it this way and since he's such a poly heavy weight, it was deemed that it was THE definition. Sorry, I don't buy that. I don't buy that just because you have a 'following' of sorts that means your definitions and decisions are THE right ones. I don't care who you are. It became an epic fight that should have ended when I simply stated, "Oh well I can see why you were upset over it, however that's not how we define that. We define it this way." Instead it became a "You are wrong! What we define it as is what it is!"

Flexibility people. Know that just because you have had a bad experience with XYZ doesn't mean other people that use the term XYZ are even doing the same things!
__________________
Me: Late 30s pansexual poly.
DH: My husband of 19 yrs and father of 3 teen girls.
DC: LDR of +4 year
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 03-25-2013, 11:51 AM
Tonberry Tonberry is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,383
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Icewraithonyx View Post
Often when I see this, it's referring to one member of an established couple dictating what the other relationship (that they are not part of) is going to look like or function as. This is inappropriate.

My question is, does the same standard apply when one member of an established couple falls in love, decides to be polyamorous with new partner, thereby mandating a conversion from monogamous relationship to a polyamorous framework (or no relationship at all)?
While I don't think people should just start another relationship without checking their existing partners are okay with it (in my opinion, doing something you know your partner isn't okay with is cheating, even if you don't hide it from them), I think there is a big difference in that the former is someone saying "you shall (not) do this in your other relationship" and the latter is someone saying "I shall (not) do this in my other relationship".

In the latter scenario, the person trying to control the other is the monogamous person. At no point is the poly person from your example trying to pressure their partner into starting a relationship they do not want, or forbidding them to start one they want.

That our partners' lives affect us is a fact. And in any decision that might affect a partner, they should be consulted. It's true of changing jobs, moving or getting into another relationship. But in the end the decision should always be made by the person who has the opportunity for a new job, a new location or a new relationship. They should take their partners' feelings and opinions into account, certainly, but the decision remains theirs.

Similarly, someone's decision not to have children will affect a monogamous partner who wants children, as their monogamy doesn't allow them to have their children with another partner. However, it remains the childfree person's decision whether they want children or not, and they are not "holds more power over a partner's other relationships than is held by the people within those relationships", where the relationship here would be that of parent to (currently nonexistent) child.
Because the person who wants children can still make their own decision as well. Do they want children more than they want the relationship with their childfree partner? Or do they want the relationship more than they want children?
Similarly, the childfree partner presumably made their decision with the understanding that they might lose someone they love, and that they can't force their partner to stay, however it's important to them that someone else doesn't make the "having children" decision for them.

To put it in a polyamory context, or in a mono-poly context, I do not want biological children, but I am absolutely fine with any of my partners having them. I don't control their desire to have children, nor do I wish to. If they have children it will affect me, and I am aware of it and fine with it (otherwise, I would have the possibility to decide to leave a relationship that wouldn't work for me - this is always an option) but I will retain my own autonomous control over my own body.
Similarly, if I wanted to stop having sex with my partners, I wouldn't forbid them from having sex with others. I would retain control over my own body and make my own decision not to have sex, but that wouldn't be a decision over their body and their ability to have sex, as they would still have that option with others.
That was the case with my ex, during the times I lost trust in him and there wasn't much intimacy, but we were already open so although he never ended up having sex with others because he wasn't interested, I refuse to take responsibility of his lack of sex because I did not forbid it or try to stop it, and it's a decision he made himself not to pursue it with others.

I hope I'm being clear here about where the line is. It can be tricky, because of course what other people do will affect you, and you want basic respect and courtesy in being informed of it and being given a chance to give your opinion, but there is a difference between things that affect you but are someone else's personal decision to make, and things that you should retain control over because they are your personal decisions to make.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 03-25-2013, 01:58 PM
Vixtoria's Avatar
Vixtoria Vixtoria is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 299
Default

I see what you are saying in reply to Ice however, I too have seen where the poly person makes decisions for the mono person. Not just in teh example of, "I've fallen in love with someone else and figured out it's okay for me to love more than one person so we are a poly marriage now, you can accept or walk." Which is still totally inappropriate.

There have been examples right here on this site of the poly person saying that they and their new partner have decided together that they are SOUL MATES and so the mono spouse is just the 'comfy' relationship. Where the poly person and their new love have decided that they can be sexual but they want to be sexually monogamous so the married or established mono partner is suddenly told no sex for you with your partner! There are many more inappropriate examples when you put D/s into it and I have seen myself on here where the poly person has met a mono person, 'converted' them, and then the mono (their new playmate/partner) has told their established partner that things have changed. No discussion, no lead in, just that because their new poly partner says this is the way it is, they are doing it that way.

I'm not vilifying D/s, or poly, but I also see more often than not the will to vilify monos and 'mono thinking' and labeling them 'mononormative' like it's a bad thing. Yet when a poly makes a mistake or is inappropriate the automatic distancing done with comments like, "Oh well they are bad polys!" or "That's not the right way to do poly so we aren't talking about that!"

If you can put all mono in a box and whether someone is doing it wrong, right, or is scared out of their mind and has no idea what to do, then you can do the same for poly. So while it's wrong for a mono partner to decide what is going to happen in a relationship not their own, it's wrong for a poly too. No disclaimers, no buts, and no distancing yourself because it makes you feel bad. I feel bad every day for stupid shit women pull, I feel bad that it gives women a bad name. I feel bad every day for stupid shit poly people pull, feeling it gives poly people a bad name. I don't try and distance myself I simply explain to myself and to others that EVERYONE does things wrong at one time or another. Some learn from it, others not so much. I don't care if they are men, women, mono, or poly. If it's inappropriate in a relationship, it is inappropriate. I'm not going to make excuses for those that fit my 'label' just so I can put all the inappropriate, or the vast majority, on someone else's 'label'.
__________________
Me: Late 30s pansexual poly.
DH: My husband of 19 yrs and father of 3 teen girls.
DC: LDR of +4 year
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 03-25-2013, 04:56 PM
Tonberry Tonberry is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,383
Default

Yes, I don't think it's about being mono or poly, but about being considerate. I made sure to use some examples that had nothing to do with polyamory in order to illustrate that. For instance, where you live is your own decision in the end. However, informing a partner you're moving away in two days, without involving them in the decision at all, isn't very considerate, especially if they live with you. It will affect them so they should be made part of the decision.
Of course if they refuse to talk until you absolutely have to make the decision on your own, it's another story >.>

Anyways, I think some people have suffered from having to live mono for years, and they feel it's only fair that they get to decide now since their partner did for so long and they were miserable. The issue here is one from another thread: if all this time you never told your partner you were miserable, then you can't hold them responsible for it.

It can be hard to see both (or all) sides of an issue, but yes, everyone needs to. Now, in your examples, the only one I disagree with is the sex one, as I don't see how someone could force themselves to have sex with someone they don't want to, or be called inconsiderate. Nobody ever owes anyone else sex.
This being said, if the person says "So and so has decided I shouldn't have sex with you, and although I would like to, well I've got to honor their decision" then yes, it's the definition we've mentioned above. It doesn't really matter whether so and so is an older or recent partner, or whether so and so is mono or poly.

If a decision involves you, you should be involved in making it.
If a decision doesn't directly involve you but affects you, you should be able to give your opinion and input before the decision is eventually made (by those actually involved).
If a decision doesn't involve you, you shouldn't be the one making it, although you might be given the opportunity to present your opinion.

How long you've been together or how mono you are isn't relevant. It's about treating others with respect, and working together when it gets tough rather than just telling someone to go away or shut up because they're making the situation less convenient.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
heirarchy, primary, primary/secondary, secondaries, secondary, secondary feelings

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 07:54 AM.