Polyamory.com Forum  

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

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old 08-27-2013, 06:25 PM
LovingRadiance's Avatar
LovingRadiance LovingRadiance is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Alaska
Posts: 5,440
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SchrodingersCat View Post
And that's perfectly valid. However, it does put you in a completely different situation than LR, who prefers to have friendships with her metamours, and whose partners prefer to bring their other partners home. Your approach of letting your partner be a buffer would never work if your metamours were frequently in your space. Then like with any friend, you would need to stand up for your own self.

Because your and LR's family arrangements and friendship preference are completely different, it's nonsense to make the leap from

to a generalized

To turn it on its head, Maca and GG are metamours and they live together. Obviously that would never happen in your world. But in theirs, it would be ludicrous to expect LR to buffer their interactions.
Exactly! It is TOTALLY not the same when you are dealing with a segregated romance.

For ANY OF US to date someone that had no contact with our group-we would have to give up some of our responsibilities and commitments to children, grandchildren, pets and household. Because-we haven't yet managed to figure out how to be in two different places at one time.

Maca has tried. He hated it.
I didn't try-I did the segregated thing when I was younger and it worked ok because I lived alone with my daughter so I could invite whoever to come over whenever. They need not be around each other. But-I didn't enjoy it.

My friends are friends. My friends friends are often friends of my friends and my other friends friends. My siblings and I are very close and share a large common group of friends. My lovers and I share the same extensive group of friends.
Our home is the "hub" for social life because we have the largest amount of space (inside and out). Social activities are always going on here at home for various birthdays, bbqs, family get togethers ("family" being very loosely defined).
It's COMMON for friends and extended chosen family to wander in unannounced at random times. We've woken up to friends who all happened to appear during the night and decided to socialize with each other while we were asleep.
People wander in and out regularly. Hell-we have several different households who still receive mail here and wander through to check the mail every few days.
There's just not that sort of segregation in our LIVES.

Maca's hunting buddies are his coworkers. His boss is driving my new motorcycle out this week ( I have no license yet). We're meeting my ex brother in law, his new wife and kids at a camping spot in another town (we figured out we happen to be going at the same time so decided to join up) next weekend as well as a neighbor who is already there and took money to pay for our first nights camp spot.
The neighbors are also our eye care specialists.

In a weird sort of way it's like a cross between Little House on the Prairie and Friends.
So yeah-metamours need to be up to dealing with that lifestyle. Cause otherwise, they aren't going to see us. Cause this IS our life. This is how we are. Shrug.

I went to Haelstorm Friday (fucking awesome concert) with my sisters now ex-lover. They've been fwb for 20+ years. They've been having a war the last 8 months. But, he and I have been friends for 25 years. Her take on it-"Oh! That's so cool you two found a band you both like!" (we generally have very different tastes in music).
All summer we had people over for various events-they were both here in attendance.

We don't really do "goodbye" around here. We alter the form of our relationships. But pretty much, if you are in, you are in for life.
__________________
"Love As Thou Wilt"
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 08-27-2013, 06:30 PM
LovingRadiance's Avatar
LovingRadiance LovingRadiance is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Alaska
Posts: 5,440
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by london View Post
Nope, I still can't see how anything changes once you drop the expectation to have metamours that you like. A house rule such as no smoking should be maintained by my partner and if I don't want to spend time with my metamour whilst s/he is in our home, I'll go somewhere else so we don't share the same space.
Nope. Can't even guarantee the shared partner would be here. So-nope.

Same rule for kids-WHATEVER ADULT is present deals with whatever problem crops up with kids in our house. Doesn't matter whose kids. There are house rules and the kids are expected to follow them.
Now-if it happens REPEATEDLY then yes-we will take away the invitation for being here.
But we expect everyone to be responsible for the situation they are involved in AS IT HAPPENS.

Absolutely house rules should be shared before the person is brought into the environment when feasible. But if something crops up in the moment-I can guarantee that anyone standing/sitting here will feel free to tell the new party that they need to adjust their shit.
Our FRIENDS who don't live here would be comfortable looking at a new date and saying "yeah-not in the house dude! Take it outside-the bucket is by the shed, don't throw butts on the ground!"

Hell-for that matter if someone lit up a smoke-the kids would tell them too.

There isn't any "pass the buck" in our house.
We are each individually responsible for handling a problem when we see it arise..
__________________
"Love As Thou Wilt"
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 08-27-2013, 06:34 PM
london london is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: UK - land of the free
Posts: 1,635
Default

Quote:
For ANY OF US to date someone that had no contact with our group-we would have to give up some of our responsibilities and commitments to children, grandchildren, pets and household.
This wouldn't be relevant to me because if my partner and I decided that we would introduce other partners to our families, I would trust that they would only consider doing that with people that are suitable to be around our loved ones. If he decided that someone was okay, I wouldn't need to meet them first to check myself. Them being at a joint activity of some description wouldn't mean I have to share space with them. It would be up to my partner to ensure his partner is towing the line. That's why they would be the person I chose to have kids with.
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 08-27-2013, 08:28 PM
LovingRadiance's Avatar
LovingRadiance LovingRadiance is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Alaska
Posts: 5,440
Default

London-your comment makes no sense to what I said.

It's not a RULE for us to not have a lover who doesn't want to be a part of the group.

I don't give a hot damn if one of hte guys wants to go find a lover that they keep away from the family.

You keep assuming I'm saying I control them. I don't care.

GG and were FWB for YEARS AND YEARS. He had girlfriends I didn't meet. I've had girls and guys I dated he wasn't around. That's neither here nor there.

It's not about one of us controlling the other. It's that we all
**JUST SO HAPPEN TO HAVE THE SAME PERSONAL PREFERENCE**

There's no rule.

None of us as individuals is WILLING to date someone who doesn't play the way we as individuals prefer to play and that play is socially-together.
(Sexually apart).
So if someone isn't willing to come be a part of our social group, they wouldn't ever get the opportunity to see us.

The one woman who wanted that got her panties in a bunch cause she couldn't get a date more than once every few months because HE DID NOT WANT TO MISS OUT on HIS time with HIS kids. She didn't want to be here-and he didn't want to be anywhere else.

Likewise-my social group are all people who accept my lifestyle completely.

It may also be notable-we aren't in the closet about anything. So there aren't people in our lives who "aren't appropriate" for metamours or anyone else to meet.
__________________
"Love As Thou Wilt"
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 08-27-2013, 08:41 PM
SNeacail's Avatar
SNeacail SNeacail is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Near Disneyland
Posts: 1,647
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by london View Post
This wouldn't be relevant to me because if my partner and I decided that we would introduce other partners to our families, I would trust that they would only consider doing that with people that are suitable to be around our loved ones. If he decided that someone was okay, I wouldn't need to meet them first to check myself. Them being at a joint activity of some description wouldn't mean I have to share space with them. It would be up to my partner to ensure his partner is towing the line. That's why they would be the person I chose to have kids with.
LOL - This attitude works when single and dealing only with EXTENDED family. Guaranteed, if we are talking about YOUR minor children, you will feel differently as the Mom. It's one thing to have your kids meet someone they will see only long enough to bump into and spill something on as they wiggle up to the food table. It is totally different, if they will be spending time in the shared home for extended periods of time in the presence of said children. I'm not even talking about lovers, just friends.
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 08-27-2013, 09:14 PM
SchrodingersCat's Avatar
SchrodingersCat SchrodingersCat is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Saskatchewan
Posts: 2,130
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by london View Post
Nope, I still can't see how anything changes once you drop the expectation to have metamours that you like. A house rule such as no smoking should be maintained by my partner and if I don't want to spend time with my metamour whilst s/he is in our home, I'll go somewhere else so we don't share the same space.
Maybe I'm just being obtuse, but I keep reading the tone of your posts as implying "shoulds" for other people's lives. It's the generalizations combined with examples from your own life that are throwing me off.

LR and I are the type to feel disempowered by deferring to our partners to lay down the law with their guests. You are the type to expect your partner to lay down the law with their guests. There's nothing objectively wrong with either approach, but they are 100% incompatible.

The only reasonable answer to "Whose responsibility is it to enforce household rules?" is "Whomever is appointed by the household members who made up the rules in the first place." In other words, enforcement is part of the rule.
__________________
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
  #47  
Old 08-28-2013, 03:48 AM
london london is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: UK - land of the free
Posts: 1,635
Default

Quote:
R and I are the type to feel disempowered by deferring to our partners to lay down the law with their guests.
And that to me is the issue: the need to maintain the boundaries of other people's relationships in order to feel empowered.

My son regularly meets and spends lots of time with people in his father's life that I haven't ever met. I trust that his father wouldn't allow our son to be around undesirable people and that he will ensure that our son doesn't do anything that I or we particularly disapprove of. His dad and I aren't together anymore but I can still trust him to make sound decisions in their best interests of our child. That's why he is my baby daddy. We regularly have to spend time and even cooperate with people we don't like to achieve a common goal. Me not liking them doesn't make them any less worthy of a place in the team.
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 08-28-2013, 05:59 AM
SchrodingersCat's Avatar
SchrodingersCat SchrodingersCat is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Saskatchewan
Posts: 2,130
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by london View Post
And that to me is the issue: the need to maintain the boundaries of other people's relationships in order to feel empowered.
No one said anything about "the boundaries of other people's relationships." Those are their boundaries. They have nothing to do with my boundaries.

I don't "need" anything to "feel" empowered. I already am empowered. That's exactly why I can walk up to people who are pissing me off and tell them myself, like a big grown-up, that they're pissing me off.

You're coming across as believing your way is better and everyone else should emulate it. Is that the message you're intending to send? It would be good to know that, so I can stop explaining the reasons I do it differently.

Quote:
My son regularly meets and spends lots of time with people in his father's life that I haven't ever met.
People that you've never met have no relevance to this discussion, but it does highlight your understanding of the issue. We're not talking about the ways people we'll never meet impact the other people in our lives. We're talking about people who are directly and personally involved in our own lives, and what's the most efficient way to communicate with people who are directly involved in our lives.

Your own relationship with your baby daddy is far more relevant to this discussion than the people he hangs out with. When you need to discuss parenting issues, do you speak to his father directly, or do you send messages through your son?

Quote:
We regularly have to spend time and even cooperate with people we don't like to achieve a common goal.
See, you do get it! Whether the common goal is "raising a healthy son" or "having a harmonious household," sometimes you actually have to talk to people yourself in order to achieve your goal.

I find it interesting that when it's parenting, you acknowledge that fact, but when it's your own household, you place the full burden on your partner to make your needs known. Why give up your voice when it's your home and not your child?
__________________
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
  #49  
Old 08-28-2013, 07:33 AM
london london is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: UK - land of the free
Posts: 1,635
Default

Quote:
We're talking about people who are directly and personally involved in our own lives,
Your metamour isn't directly and personally involved in your life. Not by default. It's a choice to have that sort of relationship with your metamours,and some people need that to feel secure and in control.

Quote:
your own relationship with your baby daddy is far more relevant to this discussion than the people he hangs out with. When you need to discuss parenting issues, do you speak to his father directly, or do you send messages through your son?
No a direct comparison would be whether I "maintain boundaries" we have established as co parents with the people my ex introduces to my son, or whether I expect him to do that. The answer is that I expect him to do that. If someone my ex introduced to my son encouraged something I/we consider undesirable, I'd speak to my ex about it, not that other person. It's my ex's job to make sure the people he brings in my son's life are kosher.

Quote:
I find it interesting that when it's parenting, you acknowledge that fact, but when it's your own household, you place the full burden on your partner to make your needs known. Why give up your voice when it's your home and not your child?
As you will now read, I wouldn't try and maintain the boundaries in either situation. My ex/partner know/will know the rules about our kid/house, and therefore I expect them to maintain those rules within their other relationships. If we have a no smoking rule, or no shoes in the living room, it is up to him to tell his guests that we have those rules. I am not giving up my voice, I never had a voice in someone else's relationship to begin with. That's the thing.

[QUOTE]sometimes you actually have to talk to people yourself in order to achieve your goal.[QUOTE]

Talking to someone and attempting to maintain the boundaries of their relationship with your partner are two different things. Yes, I might discuss with my ex's girlfriend why I have a certain ethos or rule in general conversation but not as an attempt to maintain the boundaries of her relationship with my son. That's his dad's job. If shit happens that shows that he hasn't maintained those boundaries, then I'd have words with him, not her. He is my co-parent, not her. He is the one who has a responsibility to our son and me to maintain agreements, boundaries and rules - not her.

To me, this can be summed up by trusting your partner. If you feel secure in the fact that you have chosen a considerate, respectful, intelligent partner, you'll find it easier to trust that they can do things like maintain the rules and boundaries of your relationship without being supervised, micromanaged or you having to go over their heads to step in. The talk about being able to work with people you don't like is in reference to the idea that you need to meet a metamour and get a "vibe" off of them before you decide whether they are okay to be in your kid's life. When you trust the judgment of your partner/co-parent, you don't need to do that simply because their call is good enough for you.
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 08-29-2013, 01:26 AM
LovingRadiance's Avatar
LovingRadiance LovingRadiance is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Alaska
Posts: 5,440
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by london View Post
Your metamour isn't directly and personally involved in your life. Not by default. It's a choice to have that sort of relationship with your metamours,and some people need that to feel secure and in control.
Unless they ARE.
I didn't say anything about metamours I never meet. If I never meet them-who gives a RIP? Certainly not me.

I spoke of people who enter MY space, actual physical space, actually OWNED BY ME. MY home, MY car, MY job.

I never have given a holy hell what the guys do away from me. Now-they may or may not care what I do away from them.
But I DO NOT care what they do away from me.

I DO CARE that when someone is going to be socializing WITH ME PERSONALLY I do not need someone else to monitor my conversations, babysit my emotions (or theirs) and be the telephone for any issues that may arise.

If someone is in MY living room-I do not need to go speak to someone else to deal with them. I will speak to them my own damn self.

I don't feel "more empowered" or "less empowered". I just recognize that unless we speak different languages, I don't need an interpreter.

I trust Maca and GG to chose who is apppropriate for hte kdis to be around while in their care-and vice versa. HOWEVER the THREE OF US all happen to believe personally (before we were together) that if anyone is disrespectful to a parent-they should not be allowed contact with the child. Period.

So if someone is disrespectful to Maca-he doesn't tell me I can't have the kids around that person. I MYSELF tell me-that the kids aren't going to be around that person. (and vice versa the whole circle/triangle).

That was my whole point-it isn't about one of us controlling another. We all happen to have the same viewpoint on the topic. We don't tell each other "this is a rule". The "rule" is personal as individuals-but we happen to all have the same expectations in regards to the children-which is why we are co-parents. We chose co-parents who had the same expectations because none of us likes the drama of dealing with parents who can't agree regarding the kids.


Likewise-all of us HAVE in the past dated randomly. However-we all hated the dramatic nightmare of dealing with the calendar. Now-we socialize and date with people who are willign to socialize with the whole group. If they aren't-that's ok-invitations always open. But we don't go out of our way to go see them. If people want to see us-they can come see us in OUR SOCIAL GROUP. Which means that they WILL meet the metamours and they WILL be involved with the metamours-or they won't be dating us-because in order to date someone-you have to spend time with them and in order to spend time with any one of us-you are going to have to come into our circle. Because, that is where we are.

There's no rule. It's just convenient for us and so we do it that way. IF one of the guys decided to change it up and say "hey won't be home x night each week-going to go do blah blah blah"-
no skin off my back. Whatever. I don't care.
__________________
"Love As Thou Wilt"
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
boundaries, personal rights, privacy

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 05:08 AM.