Polyamory.com Forum  

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

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old 08-22-2013, 01:34 PM
Marcus's Avatar
Marcus Marcus is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Haltom City, TX
Posts: 1,277
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by idealist View Post
And- in my opinion- when person A is offended by something person B and C are doing within their own relationship- it means that person A is projecting their own unresolved issues onto the couple......but that's just psyche 101.
I don't agree with the modern aversion to the idea of judgment. I don't know when it turned into something bad, but I missed that meeting. We interpret our environment, weigh the details we have access to, and make assessments. We judge whether something is "good or bad" or "indulge or avoid" or whatever. We make judgment calls... I don't see how that has become synonymous with intolerance or oppression.

I also don't agree with the "coexist" assertion that all ideas are equal and that they should all be treated with dignity. I couldn't disagree with this more. When I see what appears to be bunk ideology I judge it accordingly. If someone can explain their support of the bunk ideology then maybe at some point I will change my stance and stop calling it bunk... I will have made a new judgment call. However, my recognizing that hierarchical terms are indeed a ranking system and that ranking our loved ones is both unnecessary and restrictive is perfectly reasonable. Now that doesn't mean that *you* can't or shouldn't use hierarchical terms for your loved ones but *I* reserve the right to call them like I see them.

You can call that projection if it makes you feel better. You can judge me in that fashion.
__________________
Independent (Anarchist) Non-Monogamy

Me: male, 40, straight, single
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 08-22-2013, 01:57 PM
london london is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: UK - land of the free
Posts: 1,635
Default

There is absolutely nothing wrong with using those sorts of terms at all. In a polyamorous relationship in which the people involved don't believe in privileging relationships, there is nothing wrong with using those terms providing they refer to levels of practical entanglement rather than how much you love/respect/cater for each person.

I really wouldn't pay too much attention about this subject to someone who was coerced into believing it's okay for his live in partner of nine years to basically say that he is her friend with benefits.

I think what the OP meant in this thread is that she wanted to be the person he starts to plan a future with (house, kids, other joint stuff) and he doesn't think they are compatible for that sort of thing.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 08-22-2013, 05:16 PM
RainyGrlJenny's Avatar
RainyGrlJenny RainyGrlJenny is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Seattle
Posts: 159
Default

For me, it's more about layers of intimacy. I don't have good words to describe my relationship to other people, so hierarchical terms seem easiest.

Fly is a primary. Moonlight and I just aren't at that level yet. Every day she becomes closer to what I think of as a primary partner - someone you make plans for a long-term future with, someone you enter into commitments with (like buying a house, raising a child), but I'm just not there yet. And I don't think it's appropriate or authentic of me to try to force equality, just for the sake of "everything's fair." Some of it is time-related. I've been with Fly for 7.5 years, Moonlight only a little more than 1. Fly and I have been through shit and come out the other side, and that has created a greater trust and closeness. Do I think Moonlight will become a primary partner? Definitely. But not yet.

Punk and I are secondary to each other, because that's how we choose to structure the relationship. Both of us have a lot going on, and we like having something loving but uncomplicated with each other.

To be clear, it's not as if this is how I describe or introduce my lovers. Fly is boyfriend, Moonlight is girlfriend, Punk is friend. It's just how I try to organize things in my head when I think about it, which is not very often. This also isn't about loving someone more or less than someone else, because I don't even understand how people measure love anyway. They're just words that try to encapsulate degrees of intimacy.

For the OP - if Fly and I broke up, Moonlight would not automatically become a primary partner for me, simply because that's not where our relationship is at currently. That doesn't mean it wouldn't happen, but I don't view my primary relationships as job positions that must be filled, especially not as a promotion. If I were you, I'd hang back, give it some time, and see what happens naturally.
__________________
35/bi/f

- Moonlight, single, leans monogamous, girlfriend since 6/2012
- Punk, married guy, poly, FWB since 9/2011 with an emphasis on the "F"
- No longer lives with ex-boyfriend Fly (1/2006 - 12/2013, my introduction to nonmonogamy), and his 9-year-old son Kiddo
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 08-22-2013, 05:35 PM
bookbug bookbug is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 613
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marcus View Post
I don't agree with the modern aversion to the idea of judgment. I don't know when it turned into something bad, but I missed that meeting. We interpret our environment, weigh the details we have access to, and make assessments. We judge whether something is "good or bad" or "indulge or avoid" or whatever. We make judgment calls... I don't see how that has become synonymous with intolerance or oppression.

I also don't agree with the "coexist" assertion that all ideas are equal and that they should all be treated with dignity. I couldn't disagree with this more. When I see what appears to be bunk ideology I judge it accordingly. If someone can explain their support of the bunk ideology then maybe at some point I will change my stance and stop calling it bunk... I will have made a new judgment call. However, my recognizing that hierarchical terms are indeed a ranking system and that ranking our loved ones is both unnecessary and restrictive is perfectly reasonable. Now that doesn't mean that *you* can't or shouldn't use hierarchical terms for your loved ones but *I* reserve the right to call them like I see them.

You can call that projection if it makes you feel better. You can judge me in that fashion.
Perhaps at one point "judgement" and "assessment" meant the same thing, but currently "judgement" is the more more emotionally charged of the two and carries the implication that someone is putting forth an opinion that has little basis in fact. For example the religious person who tells the atheist that s/he is immoral because of the lack of belief in a god - as if actual behavior was irrelevant.

Judgement also seems to emotionally carry the implication that the judger actually has the right to make judgements about others. I personally, try to make the least amount of judgements possible. I often do assess and analyze for cause and effect, and often note that people embrace behavior that leads to outcomes that are bad for them. The only time I make a judgement, however, is when someone or something affects me personally or goes against societal tenets like killing, assault, etc.

Like you I would not use a hierarchical system for defining relationships, because by *my* definition, it would indicate importance of said relationship. However, by idealist's definition, it seems to denote the degree of entanglement. The definition is different. Realizing this, while I still would not use hierarchy because of the emotional response it engenders in me, I logically understand that her definition is different, so I do not judge the rightness or wrongness of the system in her life.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 08-22-2013, 06:05 PM
northhome northhome is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Western Europe
Posts: 172
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by idealist View Post
Okay- I guess I would agree. It is certainly your right to make a judgement call if that is what you feel like you need to do.
It's also everyone's right to choose whether to express oneself politely or not. The term "bullshit" is, in many English speaking cultures, a rather impolite term.

Others use it frequently in their normal discourse. It's always difficult to know exactly what someone is saying without having access to the non-verbal cues such as tone, expression etc.

Personally I try hard to assume the best when I find myself reacting to someone expressing themself in a way that I find difficult, but it's not always easy.

As for judgement - in many philosophical traditions judgement is something to be avoided. In fact for many someone who is quick to judge is often a person to be avoided or discounted.
__________________
Compassionate toward yourself, you reconcile all beings in the world.

- Tao Te Ching
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 08-22-2013, 08:28 PM
Dirtclustit Dirtclustit is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Middle of Oregon
Posts: 431
Default It's a matter of respect

Respecting others autonomy to live according to any dynamic that they choose to be right for them, even if it appears wrong to you. One can easily speak of any dynamic in completely unflattering terms, and when somebody chooses to do that, why?

Is it out of concern to make sure that people are educated about the many flavors of non-monogamy or especially polyamory and you genuinely desire for them to have the necessary "tools" in their arsenal so that they can discern what will be necessary in their lives so that they feel content?

In other words, do you want to help others and not hinder?

If that is anywhere near your goal, and you regularly take time to reflect on your behavior to ensure that's what you are doing, and you are honest with yourself then it will not be likely that your words will cause harm.

It is important to keep in mind that the specific details will vary from one person to the next. That for many those details will be polar opposites

The "coexist" philosophy is about respecting others autonomy to decide for themselves exact what those details are and what they mean. Coexisting does NOT mean that every ideology must be given equal weight in a person's life. The philosophy is about ensuring that YOU have the right to have the dynamic of your relationships to mean everything and another to be meaningless in your life.

Labels must be given so that people can communicate in ways that are coherent and understandable to people not familiar with the experience. Each label comes with "assumptions" as that is in essence the very meaning/definition of words. Words need to have definitions as that is what gives them the power to communicate

and this is exactly why attempts to marginalize or debunk any labels that are assigned to polyships, must be based in truth, and the furthest away from biased opinion the better, lest these debates inadvertently do "poly" a great disservice because the focus was on making sure you appeared "right" in relation to another person's opinion.

People have felt the need to hide who they are for far too long, poly has already been marginalized too much. There is nothing wrong with desiring to keep your private life hidden, but it is a problem when people don't get a choice, which is why some of these "debates" are deleterious to everyones' freedom to be who they are, unless we are mindful to be consciously speaking the Truth

Last edited by Dirtclustit; 08-22-2013 at 08:35 PM. Reason: typos
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 08-22-2013, 11:52 PM
Marcus's Avatar
Marcus Marcus is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Haltom City, TX
Posts: 1,277
Default

The idea of classifying loved ones by hierarchy was called "bullshit"... that's all that happened. While some find that a tad harsh, there was no insistence that a person is morally damaged for using the hierarchical terms or that they must cease and desist immediately. There was no insistence of action of any kind given nor implied by the statement. It was merely an observation that classifying loved ones by their rank is backwards and counter productive. We are discussing it and I think that hiding behind "don't judge me because that's bad" is also "bullshit". This is an INCREDIBLY civil conversation and if the word "bullshit" really causes people to lock up because they feel so deeply attacked then I don't know what to tell you



Quote:
Originally Posted by northhome View Post
As for judgement - in many philosophical traditions judgement is something to be avoided. In fact for many someone who is quick to judge is often a person to be avoided or discounted.
All ideas are not created equally.
__________________
Independent (Anarchist) Non-Monogamy

Me: male, 40, straight, single

Last edited by Marcus; 08-22-2013 at 11:54 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 08-23-2013, 02:09 AM
idealist's Avatar
idealist idealist is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Deep South
Posts: 540
Default

I like to be challenged. Especially if the argument is good enough to make me change my mind. But we are far from that in this case.

I didn’t say “don’t Judge” because I think judging is “bad”. Quite the contrary. I don’t believe in labeling things as “good” and “Bad” hence there is no need to judge them as such. I find “labeling” things as “good” or “bad” to be a futile endeavor. However- we as humans love to do just that.

Where would we be without the villain and the hero? But at the end of the play- they stand side by side on stage and the audience applauds them both equally.

*********************
There is a Taoist story of an old farmer who had worked his crops for many years. One day his horse ran away. Upon hearing the news, his neighbors came to visit. "Such bad luck," they said sympathetically. "We’ll see" the farmer replied.

The next morning the horse returned, bringing with it three other wild horses. "How wonderful- it’s good," the neighbors exclaimed. "We’ll see" replied the old man.

The following day, his son tried to ride one of the untamed horses, was thrown, and broke his leg. The neighbors again came to offer their sympathy on his misfortune saying “it’s bad”.

"We’ll see" answered the farmer. The day after, military officials came to the village to draft young men into the army. Seeing that the son's leg was broken, they passed him by. The neighbors congratulated the farmer on how well things had turned out. "We’ll see" said the farmer…..
**********

It’s the yen and the yang. The diamond looks ever so much beautiful against the black cloth.

This physical existence is held together by the polarities. Can’t have one without the other. So again- why judge?
__________________
The key to life is in being fully engaged and peacefully detached simultaneously and authentically in each moment.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 08-23-2013, 02:12 AM
Dirtclustit Dirtclustit is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Middle of Oregon
Posts: 431
Default Civil discussions aren't offensive

It's the subtle and indirect ways that imply that any member's relationship dynamic describes your very negative opinion of the label you're adversed to. To be blunt, it comes off as manipulative and controlling -- even if you think you are being clear by adding clauses of plausible denial -- from my perspective, it wasn't the use of "BS" or later "bullshit" that's offensive.

It's not disagreeing or stating that a one person's dynamic wouldn't work for them, it's the subtle indirect ways you choose to discuss (read debate) and the plausible denial that detracts from a legitimate discussion.

Last edited by Dirtclustit; 08-23-2013 at 02:15 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 08-23-2013, 02:18 AM
idealist's Avatar
idealist idealist is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Deep South
Posts: 540
Default Projection

I also wanted to share something about projection. The best way for me to do that is to share something that I have experienced- in the last few weeks.

For me- saying that someone is "projecting" is not a judgment call. We all do it- all the time.

Here is what I've been going through.

My Dad is very ill and possible dying. At first I was seeing that he is scared. But his words were to the contrary.

Then I realized I was projecting my own fear of death onto my Dad. I spent about a week taking time in the evenings- laying very still and thinking about death. I did a lot of crying, breathing, talking to friends etc. When I finally broke through my own aversion to death and I looked at my Dad again, I didn't see fear in him any more.

Now- that is not to say that the fear of death will never take hold of me again. But- for today- I have looked at it directly.
__________________
The key to life is in being fully engaged and peacefully detached simultaneously and authentically in each moment.

Last edited by idealist; 08-23-2013 at 02:20 AM.
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 07:42 PM.