I think something that gets missed (a lot) in these conversations is a detail.
WE have a rule/agreement/boundary.
As in-we talked and agreed that we all feel xyz is important to all of us and we agree to uphold it.
That doesn't mean "I" make Maca enforce xyz with other partners.
That means we all three back each other up with anyone else who tries to press any of us to break these agreements.
I got SO MUCH SHIT from the local community when I set my foot down with a woman who flat tried to tell me that I would let my daughter go socialize with her and her daughter-because she was a potential date for Maca.
He had tried to tell her no-she was walking over him.
He is soft spoken. He didn't want to offend her and he was in a quandry with himself over the fact that he liked her, was attracted to her, was caught up in "omg this might be the only woman who will date a married man in the whole state".
But-that is all irrelevant-the bottom line is-WE already have agreed to what is in the best interests of our children and THAT IS NOT IT.
We re-discussed in in light of the person in question specifically (as we do with all new people) and were MORE certain that it wasn't in their best interests. So the answer was NO.
I AM more vocal and when she stepped up to me on the topic-hell yes I did tell her NO I WILL NOT ALLOW IT.
Which got interpreted by teh community as "LR is controlling Maca".
No. No I'm not. He can see anyone he darn well pleases.
But he doesn't want to break agreements that ARE important to him also. Just because he chooses to just walk away silently and not look back-doesn't mean I am dragging him on a leash.
I don't need a "rule" to tell me that I am not going to go out and screw someone I met today.
I only have an agreement-so I know what is meaningful to my current partners and what doesn't matter-that way I can decide what my priorities are.
IF I don't know what matters to them-I can't consider their preferences in my decisions.
So-yeah-the whole anti-rule thing is annoying. rule/boundary/framework/understanding/agreement.
Call it what you will. It IS important that people identify what their hard and soft limits are AND KEEP THEIR PARTNERS AWARE. If they choose to do that in writing or verbally or whatever-who gives a shit?
Yes London it would-and if he then tells her to bug off-and she refuses and continues to meddle in any way she can-such as following me to every single social event I plan or attend-
then it would become my privilege to tell her to fuck off publicly.
The point is-that just because something looks reasonable at first glance-doesn't mean it's going to continue that way.
On this board-people get all wired up over "omg you/you or you have no right to "make rules" over xyz blah blah blah because.....
when they read that people have rules or agreements.
As Mag noted (while I was writing my post) she didn't even SAY SHE HAD A RULE. They have an agreement.
If I and my partners agree that we don't want anyone doing handstands around our family-
that is TOTALLY OUR RIGHT.
And ANY OONE OF US is free to tell ANYONE ELSE that they need to knock it the fuck off.
Who is fucking who doesn't matter. It doesn't matter if the handstand person is only fucking GG.
I can still say "knock your handstands off or get off the property".
Because it's OUR home and it's OUR family.
I think way way way way way too much focus is put on "who is the sex partner".
IF you have totally segregated lives that can work fine. (much like Nycindie has outlined her lifestyle).
If like us you have completely integrated lives-it doesn't work. Because whose having sex with whom is completely irrelevant. ANYONE WHO WANTS TO BE INVOLVED IN ANY WAY (friend, lover etc) with our FAMILY in any way that means they will be hanging out in OUR space is subject to OUR rules and expectations for OUR family in OUR home.
IF someone becomes PART OF OUR FAMILY-then they get to participate in the creating/changing/updating of OUR family rules (which has happened on numerous occasions as various people move in and out of the home over the years.
But someone doesn't get the privilege of only being subject to ONE person telling them the rules because that's who they share sex with. I don't give a hot damn whose screwing who. We have had adult children living here with their spouses-STILL have to function within the family dynamic of expectations & ANYONE is free to point out when that is not being done. Not just their spouse.
Same with kids. If joe blows kids come over to stay for the night-they are subject to OUR rules and they will follow OUR rules and they will be told by WHOEVER IS HERE AT THE TIME-not just THEIR parent.
It's truly truly ridiculous-because if we are really talking about adults-as everyone keeps pointing out-then the truth is we also are capable of realizing that all adults have moments when they have a need or a failure or a weakness or they are busy or what the fuck ever.
So if my boyfriend is being a dickhead and my hsuband is the one standing there-he's going to say "GG-you are being a dickhead and need to back off". If I'm standing there I will say it.
If I am in the hospital and find out I have some rare and highly infectious disease-my husband and boyfriend will notify whoever needs to know-including any other people who were potentially exposed-regardless of who was sleeping with whom etc.
And then there is the whole "privacy thing".
I have herpes. Maca and GG do not.
WE ARE FLUID BONDED and have been for 15 and 20 years respectively. We will continue to be until we decide not to be.
TECHNICALLY it's not their place to share about my herpes because of all of the various "privacy" privileges of metamours. THEY don't have it. THey are responsible to share that we are fluidbonded.
BUT I HAVE a responsibility to share.
EVERY POTENTIAL except the one I met first; Maca has EVER dated in this poly community has been disinterested in meeting me, hearing about me, knowing ANYTHING about me & thought sti testing could be tossed to the wayside "because they knew they weren't exposed to anything". IT NEVER OCCURRED TO ANY OF THEM to give a shit if he was! NOT ONE.
EVERY SINGLE ONE was offended when he insisted that sti testing was a REQUIREMENT and they ALL brought up the expense.
They all figured it was reasonable to "just use condoms".
so you are ok with the risk of getting whatever sti's HE could have at any given point???
Every time-he tried to tell them about me-they went on a trip over not wanting to cross boundaries of privacy-everything about them is private between him and then-everything about me is private between him and I.
UM NO YOU FUCKTARDS-I have an sti and by your own idiocy if he sleeps with you (or kisses you or a half a dozen other things you aren't realizing as you try to crawl all over him in my kitchen with your hands down his pants and tongue down his throat) YOU COULD GET TOO.
He hasn't gotten it-but he could at any time because we DO NOT avoid each other sexually or use protection.
So they don't become lovers and they are pissy.
Yeah there's a theory that all adults are mature and should act xyz way. But we do not live in utopia.
Yeah there's a theory that in some situations having no contact and no info works. But not in a family environment.
And yeah I've heard the theory that in relationships each person should be individually responsible for all of the "boundary crossing monitoring" of their own relationships & in theory its great.
But in reality-that's not always great.
The same rule is applied to stepparents. Guess what? I was the stepparent who had a child 24/7 while BOTH PARENTS WERE GONE FOR WEEKS AT A TIME. So the kid has no fucking rules because the bio parent should always discipline? No. That's asinine.
Same kind of asinine as suggesting that if someone is crossing over OUR boundaries and in doing so is stepping on MY FOOT that I should not be free to say "GET THE FUCK OFF MY FOOT". Then his/her partner can discuss with them what the hell ever they need to discuss. But if they are on MY FOOT it just became MY business that they get the hell off it.
No, no I'm not off my rant.
The reality is that relationships criss cross.