Polyamory.com Forum  

Go Back   Polyamory.com Forum > Polyamory > Poly Relationships Corner

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #91  
Old 07-12-2013, 06:04 PM
sparklepop sparklepop is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 350
Default

hi blue

I sympathise. I know what it's like to have a metamour you can't stand. And a bratty, disrespectful one at that. I also know what it's like to date a person like that. The difficulty is that the emotional (or otherwise) attachment can make it hard for the partner *in* the relationship to see it, or to let it go.

There are pros and cons to every personality trait. You sound like you strong-headed, feisty. That's great, because it means that you don't get dragged into unhealthy situations yourself. But, on the other hand, it may mean that you have a tendency to be overbearing and make your husband feel stuck between you and his girlfriend. It may even make him feel even less capable of sticking up for himself. In your husband's case, he's extremely forgiving, patient and understanding, I assume. On the downside, you might say he's a pushover.

I do understand your protective feelings. And, from your side of the story, she does sound like a nut job. But you don't have to date her. I really, really don't agree with veto power at all. There have been partners my girlfriend has had, who I haven't liked for whatever reason, but I've never actively said "it's time to get rid." I have, however, been on the other side of that recently, when a woman I was heavily involved with essentially had to break up with me for her own girlfriend, because her girlfriend was feeling too insecure. Sure, I absolutely understand it and empathise with her girlfriend - but it doesn't make it any better. I absolutely do not think you should call veto. It's not fair on your husband.

What you can do, as everyone else has suggested, is set up some guidelines relating to her personally. If she has to come to yours to even out the travel, like you were saying, then can you make yourself scarce often during those times, if you don't want to be around her? The rest of the time, I would advise doing as you have done and only offering your opinion when it is asked for.

The need for an apology is an interesting one. So often, we think of our marriages or primary relationships as this holy grail that demands respect from all secondary partners. For sure, I would have a major problem if I found out that any of my girlfriend's partners were trying to split us up. But if they just didn't like me? Why should they like me?

I actually don't think that 'Mary' was being disrespectful to you, or your marriage - she was, however, being vicious and trying to hurt your husband. I do not think that her apologising to you is necessary. My girlfriend is very similar to you in this sense - and I have been this way too. Her ex secondary really offended me once. When he realised it, he did absolutely nothing about it. I became stubborn and indignant about it, which put my GF in the position of having to defend him, which only pissed me off more... ~grins~ and right at this very moment, my girlfriend wants the blood of me ex, because they exchanged some vile words about our breakup. My GF was trying to be protective; just as you are. But all it has ended up achieving is more trouble. War between two women I care about. Don't put your husband in that position. Ask him to make his own mind up about her and not to come to you as often with problems.
__________________

Me: (30f) open poly
Serious long-distance relationship with GF (40f)
Casual FWB with Descartes (27f)



“Peace comes from within. Do not seek it without." ~ Buddha
Reply With Quote
  #92  
Old 07-12-2013, 06:42 PM
Flowerchild Flowerchild is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 145
Default Seriously

Quote:
Originally Posted by BoringGuy View Post
I'll kick whoever i want out of my house. There are like, laws and stuff that give me that right. "seniority" and "community" can eat my sweet shorts.
But that's the point. If you're trying to join an existing couple/triad/whatever, it's not your house. It's theirs.

In this case, it's the OP's house. So, yeah, she kind of does have the right to kick someone out. What I was trying to say was, once the other woman, in this case, starts becoming a real part of the group, it's much, much harder to make that person go away. No matter how "toxic" you feel they are.

As for Marcus, there's absolutely seniority in multi-person relationships. If I'm newer, I'd like to think they would treat me respectfully, but it's kind of my issue if I can't get along with someone more established (what am I going to do, tell my partner they have to divorce a spouse?). Member, partner, call it what you will. There's structures and rules....and it's difficult to remove someone from the group....hmmmm, come to think of it, it's totally like a union.

My, people get touchy on this forum.
Reply With Quote
  #93  
Old 07-12-2013, 06:53 PM
Inyourendo's Avatar
Inyourendo Inyourendo is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: sw missouri
Posts: 858
Default

I understand what your mean Flowerchild. I've brought people into my circle before and wished I hadn't. Once they are in, they're in. I chose to leave rather can continue being around a liar, it was a slap in the face the way everyone lapped up her bullshit.
__________________
Sue, openly in a vee with Nate (polysexual, many fwb) and Sam (Mono)
Reply With Quote
  #94  
Old 07-12-2013, 07:11 PM
Marcus's Avatar
Marcus Marcus is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Haltom City, TX
Posts: 1,289
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flowerchild View Post
As for Marcus, there's absolutely seniority in multi-person relationships. If I'm newer, I'd like to think they would treat me respectfully, but it's kind of my issue if I can't get along with someone more established (what am I going to do, tell my partner they have to divorce a spouse?). Member, partner, call it what you will. There's structures and rules....and it's difficult to remove someone from the group....hmmmm, come to think of it, it's totally like a union.

My, people get touchy on this forum.
Yes, people do get touchy on this forum.

You and I just have different ideas of what a relationship looks like. I don't do the interdependence thing where everyone is a link in a chain - all directly affecting the other. To me, my romantic relationships are almost identical to my platonic relationships. I don't have any say over their time, I don't have any rank, and I am responsible for my own level of involvement. If there is someone in my group of friends who I don't get along with I don't try and get them booted... I just don't spend time with that person any more than I'm comfortable with.

IV has been with CV for years and their "relationship seniority" is perfectly irrelevant. I'm dating IV, not CV... I don't directly impact their relationship any more than theirs impacts mine. If CV and I didn't get along the three of us wouldn't have moved in together and he and I wouldn't hang out... why would the goal be to get him booted out of the relationship just because I don't see eye to eye with him?
__________________
Independent (Anarchist) Non-Monogamy

Me: male, 40, straight, single
Reply With Quote
  #95  
Old 07-12-2013, 09:07 PM
Flowerchild Flowerchild is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 145
Default Good point, but

Quote:
why would the goal be to get him booted out of the relationship just because I don't see eye to eye with him?
You and I actually agree on this. My points don't really apply to you, more to the OP.

No, I wouldn't personally want to boot someone out. But a lot of people go into this-- this is from talking to friends in the poly community-- thinking that they can just bring people in and kick them out with no regards to that person's feelings OR their partner's feelings. As if their "relationship structure," or whatever you want to call it, is some kind of Mr. Potato Head, where you can just pop pieces in and out as you like, depending on your mood. And that can get very dicey....

You knew what you wanted and created an environment where you don't have to worry about that, but not everyone is that secure when they start out in poly.

Last edited by Flowerchild; 07-12-2013 at 09:09 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #96  
Old 07-12-2013, 09:27 PM
Marcus's Avatar
Marcus Marcus is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Haltom City, TX
Posts: 1,289
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flowerchild View Post
You and I actually agree on this. My points don't really apply to you, more to the OP.
Oh, were you being ironic? You've got to give me a heads up!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flowerchild View Post
You knew what you wanted and created an environment where you don't have to worry about that, but not everyone is that secure when they start out in poly.
I'm certainly no master of relationships. Prior to IV I was in a toxic relationship with a narcissist which brought me a couple of years of agony. That's right, I put up with it for a couple of years; not only that but the relationship was so horrible that it took me a further 6 months to fully wrest this poison from my life. Lessons learned the hard way.

My intention is not to rub my successes or worldview in anyones face (generally)... if someone can benefit from my agonizing failures then I think I'm doing ok, but I have to *express* the worldview in order to risk anyone benefiting.
__________________
Independent (Anarchist) Non-Monogamy

Me: male, 40, straight, single
Reply With Quote
  #97  
Old 07-12-2013, 10:34 PM
LovingRadiance's Avatar
LovingRadiance LovingRadiance is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Alaska
Posts: 5,261
Default

I find it most helpful to hold myself accountable to the concept I preach to my children daily.
You can't change ANYONE but yourself.

In the OP's example;
using this concept means-defining limits and boundaries around what behavior/people/activities you will participate in/listen to.
Outside of that-let it go.

Regarding the apology-same thing. You can't MAKE someone else apologize and honestly-why would you want to? I find it SO ANNOYING when parents do-because it's teaching the child that words can fix the damage of their actions which is bullshit.
If they are sorry-their behaviors will make that clear and no words will be necessary.
Words are nice accouterments-but in the long run-if they aren't identifying actions they are meaningless. It's like having a weapon-that you won't use but you wield it-Stupid. Words that you don't mean-stupid.
__________________
"Love As Thou Wilt"
Reply With Quote
  #98  
Old 07-13-2013, 08:43 AM
BoringGuy BoringGuy is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Nowhere
Posts: 1,647
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flowerchild View Post


My, people get touchy on this forum.

LOL.

All you have to do is say "I perceive hostility in this thread" and GAME OVER. Someone will be there momentarily to make it all better.
Reply With Quote
  #99  
Old 07-13-2013, 08:49 AM
london london is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: UK - land of the free
Posts: 1,635
Default

A really good point has been raised that is practical and applies to the majority of people. What if it is the spouse/live in partner that is toxic? The majority of us do or will one day end up living with a partner and being significantly entangled with them as a result. Primary style entanglements. Joint financial obligations, kids perhaps, family responsibilities. If someone I met had a toxic partner, or a partner that became toxic and they had a primary style relationship in this fashion, and I really loved them or whatever and didn't feel ending the otherwise healthy relationship was a real option, you would be screwed.

Of course you can put up boundaries about the physical and emotional space you share with that person but those boundaries you enforce are more likely to limit the relationship you have with your partner. If you decide never to be in the same room as them, that means you can never go to your partner's house. If you decide to never socialise with them, that restricts you from certain social events that you may wish to attend and therefore, potentially limits the time you could be spending with your shared partner.

It puts limits on the future, the idea of you all sharing a home is not just unrealistic or challenging, it is a complete no no.
Reply With Quote
  #100  
Old 07-13-2013, 11:34 AM
nycindie's Avatar
nycindie nycindie is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: The Big Apple
Posts: 7,235
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flowerchild View Post
What if the toxic person was an established member of the group? Say, if YOU were the new person, and the wife/established partner was the toxic one? THEN what do you do? You, having less seniority, how do you kick that member out? Should you? How would you even begin to go about that?

My point is, if you and he are established....and she is earning her way in, then, seriously, tell him that she goes . . .

Once she's an established member, and has equal rights to you, you're not going to be able to do anything about it.
Just have to say... this is such a foreign, unattractive concept to me, that I am having a problem wrapping my brain around what you wrote. Earning seniority within a group... angling to oust someone... sounds like the goings-on within a 16th century royal family, with shadowy figures lurking about on the landing and all that.

I mean, if I start dating someone who is partnered, I would not view myself as having to earn my "place" among his spouse or other lovers, or not having any rights until I am "established," whatever the hell that means. I'd just be thinking about my relationship with that person... stuff like how much we like each other, conversations we've had, how often I will see him, the sex, what to do on our dates, etc. I'm not plotting to overthrow a monarchy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flowerchild View Post
. . . once the other woman, in this case, starts becoming a real part of the group, it's much, much harder to make that person go away. No matter how "toxic" you feel they are.
At what point is a person considered "real?" And until that time, other partners can make them go away? See, this doesn't sound like polyamory to me - that is, the kind of loving relationships I'd want to have in dating multiple people. It sounds like a corporate work environment or a country club. I am just stymied here.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flowerchild View Post
As for Marcus, there's absolutely seniority in multi-person relationships. If I'm newer, I'd like to think they would treat me respectfully, but it's kind of my issue if I can't get along with someone more established (what am I going to do, tell my partner they have to divorce a spouse?).
When you say "multi-person" relationships, do you mean when everyone is involved with each other, like triads, quads, and so on? Or are you applying that to vees as well? I disagree that there is "absolutely seniority" in poly situations, or in other words that there has to be. Every relationship is different. Someone I meet can be so right for me, it doesn't matter how long we've been together. I would always treat them with equal respect as anyone else I might already be involved with prior. What does seniority look like in love relationships, anyway? That the senior person gets first dibs on my time or affection? It just doesn't make any sense to me to place people I love in a hierarchy or pecking order.

In addition, there is no rule in poly that decrees all metamours have to get along, become friends, or even have contact. I certainly would consider it a bonus if I felt a metamour was a friend, but it's definitely not a necessity. If a guy I was dating required me to befriend his other lover or spouse, I'd seriously question how deeply I'd want to be with someone who has such control issues. I'll befriend whomever I want, thank you very much. If a metamour and I don't seem to hit it off or get along, I just wouldn't hang out with her. I'm not dating her, I'm dating him, so what's the big deal?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flowerchild View Post
. . . a lot of people go into this-- this is from talking to friends in the poly community-- thinking that they can just bring people in and kick them out with no regards to that person's feelings OR their partner's feelings.
I would never get involved with people like that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by london View Post
A really good point has been raised that is practical and applies to the majority of people. What if it is the spouse/live in partner that is toxic? The majority of us do or will one day end up living with a partner and being significantly entangled with them as a result. Primary style entanglements. Joint financial obligations, kids perhaps, family responsibilities. If someone I met had a toxic partner, or a partner that became toxic and they had a primary style relationship in this fashion, and I really loved them or whatever and didn't feel ending the otherwise healthy relationship was a real option, you would be screwed.

Of course you can put up boundaries about the physical and emotional space you share with that person but those boundaries you enforce are more likely to limit the relationship you have with your partner. If you decide never to be in the same room as them, that means you can never go to your partner's house. If you decide to never socialise with them, that restricts you from certain social events that you may wish to attend and therefore, potentially limits the time you could be spending with your shared partner.

It puts limits on the future, the idea of you all sharing a home is not just unrealistic or challenging, it is a complete no no.
Does it really seem to you that the majority of people in polyamorous relationships eventually want to cohabit with all their partners? I highly doubt that. There are many, many, many solos out there, who do not want to share our homes with anyone. That doesn't mean the relationships we have are limited, less serious, or have no future. Not everyone can all live together - especially if a lover is already partnered and living with someone. I don't think it should always be assumed that any lovers a partnered person gets involved with will ultimately want to move in, nor that cohabitation is always the goal. As a solo, and an introvert, I value my personal space and independence, and I prefer my relationships to be independent and separate from each other.

It would not be a priority to me to try and cultivate a close friendship with a metamour, although it would be great if it happened organically. If she's toxic, I'd avoid her and re-assess whether or not the guy I am involved with has his head screwed on straight. If he's into crazy bitches, he's probably not into me, but I might rethink putting more investment in a relationship with someone who attracts nut jobs.
__________________
The world opens up... when you do.

Oh, oh, can't you see? Love is the drug for me. ~Bryan Ferry
"Love is that condition in which another person's happiness is essential to your own." ~Robert Heinlein

Last edited by nycindie; 07-13-2013 at 01:51 PM.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
cheating, hate metamour, husband, living situations, living together, metamour, metamour concerns, metamours, poly v

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 10:45 PM.