Polyamory.com Forum  

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

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #101  
Old 09-07-2013, 06:01 PM
LovingRadiance's Avatar
LovingRadiance LovingRadiance is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Alaska
Posts: 5,430
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by opalescent View Post
^^^^ Is why I live in a big city.

I would hate that level of interconnectedness. I'm sure it has lots of good things about it but the lack of privacy would get to me. To each his own!
ABSOLUTELY!
And THAT is why I love talking with you guys so much! It's so educational to be able to read about such differences.

It is very true-that our "biggest city" is smaller than most small towns in the US. LOL!
Our small communities have less than 30 people living in them and tend to be isolated (no road system).
__________________
"Love As Thou Wilt"
Reply With Quote
  #102  
Old 09-07-2013, 11:43 PM
ColorsWolf's Avatar
ColorsWolf ColorsWolf is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: CA, U.S.A.
Posts: 360
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LovingRadiance View Post
ABSOLUTELY!
And THAT is why I love talking with you guys so much! It's so educational to be able to read about such differences.

It is very true-that our "biggest city" is smaller than most small towns in the US. LOL!
Our small communities have less than 30 people living in them and tend to be isolated (no road system).
I'm actually the opposite, I don't find the idea of living in a city to be very appealing: one reason is because I really enjoy nature more than any thing Human made and the other I haven't quite put my finger on it.~

About the "interconnectedness" thing: the thought of every one keeping secrets from me or just not having that "interconnectivity" among people that I love seems so horrible and cold. I think that's one of the reasons I don't like things that are "purely physical", because people aren't willing to share themselves their whole soulful selves with you, the thought leaves me feeling cold.~

I just love the idea of being in something that feels like every one is conncected and friendly and cares about you and each other!~ ^_^

Update: about the privacy thing, I never really saw a need for it other than to hide some thing from some one who may want to take volatile action against you because they don't agree with what you do.~

Last edited by ColorsWolf; 09-07-2013 at 11:56 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #103  
Old 09-08-2013, 10:31 PM
JaneQSmythe JaneQSmythe is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Pennsyl-tucky
Posts: 1,201
Default

We don't have any rules about meeting metamours (or friends for that matter - MrS and Dude were friends for 3-4 years before I met Dude). We also don't have any rules about metamours getting involved with each other (either for or against). Whatever happens, happens.

Since we are currently expanding our socializing to include poly meet-ups etc. it is certainly possible that we are going to meet people who have their own "rules" in this department. None of us has any objection to meeting or talking to anyone that the others is involved with if that is what they would need to feel comfortable. After that, the level of socializing and friendship/more that developed between any of the individuals involved would be up to the individual people involved.

That being said, we share a lot of interests, it wouldn't be unusual for potential dates/metamours to also share those interests. We would likely meet our potential dates at places where more than one of us was present. If one of us was interested in someone and it got to the potential dating stage then it would seem natural to invite them to things that we are attending that they might enjoy.

For instance, last night Dude invited his new interest from OKC to a concert that we were all attending along with a friend of his - we all went to dinner, the concert, and then back to her place for chit-chat - her husband was asleep. We all had a great time. They agreed that there was enough interest there for them to aim for a one-on-one date in the near future.

This is actually a model that feels very comfortable to me - how we used to hang out and meet people when I was in high-school/college. People would invite friends, people had interests in common, sometimes people would hit it off and go on to date each other. (This is how I found MrS - and I wasn't even "looking"!)

As usual, that was more than I meant to write...

JaneQ
__________________
Me: poly bi female, in an "open-but-not-looking" Vee-plus with -
MrS: hetero polyflexible male, live-in husband (22+ yrs)
Dude: hetero poly male, live-in boyfriend (3+ yrs) and MrS's best friend
Lotus: poly bi female, "it's complicated" relationships with Dude/JaneQ/MrS (1+ years)
TT: poly male, married to Lotus, FB with JaneQ
VV and MsJ: bi-women with male primaries, LTR LDR FWBs to JaneQ


My poly blogs here:
The Journey of JaneQSmythe
The Notebook of JaneQSmythe

Last edited by JaneQSmythe; 09-08-2013 at 10:43 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #104  
Old 09-09-2013, 12:16 AM
LovingRadiance's Avatar
LovingRadiance LovingRadiance is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Alaska
Posts: 5,430
Default

Jane-I've always been that way too. In school, after school-just always invite people to "come along" or "join in".
__________________
"Love As Thou Wilt"
Reply With Quote
  #105  
Old 09-09-2013, 02:29 AM
alibabe_muse's Avatar
alibabe_muse alibabe_muse is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: North Idaho
Posts: 346
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dragon13 View Post
This is just my opinion, and how it works at our house. Either spouse may have a lover just for themselves, but that lover must be approved by the other spouse. Otherwise, I have to question the love and respect that the couple has for each other. We have said for years, that either of us can go out and find another lover, but before you get to spend time with that lover, it must be approved by the spouse. We have no doubts in our mind that our love for each other will continue no matter who is brought home. Our concern is that the person being brought into the relationship thinks they might be able to steal the person away. While we have no fear of it, we do not allow that kind of thinking. We will share our love with others, but do not allow anyone else to think they can steal the love away.
There is no way my spouse can tell me I can date so and so and vice versa. The only time we've agreed to meeting each other's partner is if it's going to involve our children. I have enough faith and trust in him that he'll make the right judgement for himself; otherwise that is nothing but CONTROL. No one can control me and I wouldn't be happy if any one tried.

As far as a cowgirl or cowboy, again, I have faith my spouse will recognize this and the same for me. This sounds like an insecurity. I realize this works for you but still no way in h#ll will my spouse control my other relationships; otherwise I might as well stay monogamous and be dictated to about who I can like or not like as my friends.

As far as letting a new partner know they can't steal you from your spouse or vice versa, can't that be discussed when you start seeing them. Why do they need to meet your spouse or vice versa? It just doesn't make any sense to me aside from it being a control thing. But that again is my opinion.
Reply With Quote
  #106  
Old 09-09-2013, 06:08 AM
SchrodingersCat's Avatar
SchrodingersCat SchrodingersCat is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Saskatchewan
Posts: 2,130
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nycindie View Post
I would never date a guy who had to seek permission and approval from his wife or gf. I only want to date people who are secure in their relationships and not couple-centric.
I didn't think I would, but when I met Auto, things really clicked. Her husband has a severe anxiety disorder and part of that entails him feeling a lot of insecurity about their relationship. So to cope with that, they've agreed to a veto in regards to starting relationships. Their veto does not extend to ending relationships already in progress. Also, Auto requires her husband to come up with sound reasons to veto someone, it can't just be the result of his control issues.

When they started dating, Auto hadn't heard of polyamory. She thought of herself as a cheater because she'd never been faithful to anyone in her life. So in the interest of disclosure and honesty, she told him up front that she was probably going to cheat on him. He didn't like that, but they soon worked out for themselves that it didn't need to be "cheating" if they both knew about it. So they agreed on some guidelines that have since evolved.

I wouldn't describe them as "couple-centric," but rather family-centric. They place a lot of importance on their children and their family. Part of that means prioritizing family things over outside-romantic things, and that in turn entails making sure they take care of their marriage.

Some people cling to ideas just because they can't be bothered to learn and grow. But the more I interact with people with mental illness, the more I realize that some circumstances that are less than ideal are also unavoidable. Having diagnosed anxiety disorder is not the same as "I don't want to deal with my insecurity." That was, admittedly, difficult for me to accept at first. Auto's husband knows better than anyone how he's "supposed" to react and think and behave. And if he could just flick the switch and make it so, believe me he would. But there's only so much you can accomplish even with medication and therapy, and so I can choose to just walk away and not deal with it, but then I would lose Auto. So I deal with it.
__________________
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
  #107  
Old 09-09-2013, 12:56 PM
nycindie's Avatar
nycindie nycindie is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: The Big Apple
Posts: 7,417
Default

SC, in your and Auto's case, it doesn't sound like what I was referring to in my post that you quoted. It sounds like thoughtful discussion took place, important issues handled with specific actions/remedies, and everyone clear about their choices.

My issue, personally, is always about when someone in a relationship makes rules for their partner's relationships in order to preserve and lord their couplehood over others. Some of the stories I read here about what people put up with, because they think that is what poly has to be, are true life horror tales IMO! Perhaps that kind of bullshit is why the OP started this thread with:
Quote:
Originally Posted by NowIKnow View Post
I don't buy into this polyamorous requirement that if you are legally married to someone that your spouse has to also be romantically involved with the other person you are in love with.

Beyond the issue of time management, I simply don't want someone not in a relationship with me making rules for my relationships, so I hope that anyone I get involved with has a strong relationship and a strong need of equanimity in their relationships, so that no one thinks they can create rules for me. I certainly would never allow myself to be coerced into some weird psycho-sexual arrangement with a guy's spouse just to be with him.
__________________
The world opens up... when you do.

"Oh, oh, can't you see? Love is the drug for me." ~Bryan Ferry
"Love and the self are one . . ." ~Leo Buscaglia "

An excellent blog post on hierarchy in polyamory:
solopoly.net/2014/10/31/why-im-not-a-secondary-partner-the-short-version/
Reply With Quote
  #108  
Old 09-09-2013, 01:40 PM
london london is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: UK - land of the free
Posts: 1,635
Default

In the case of anxiety issues, I might make an exception but this still seems very vague:

Quote:
Also, Auto requires her husband to come up with sound reasons to veto someone, it can't just be the result of his control issues.
Who decides what is a "sound reason" and what isn't? I mean, most of the reasons someone will come up with to veto a potential metamour will be as a result of control issues anyway because, assuming that everyone is of sound mind and generally avoids unhealthy relationships, anything else that was obviously bad about the potential partner would have been a red flag to the hinge anyway. So to me, it sounds like the vast majority of the time he presents an issue with someone, she will just say that it's his control issues and the attempted veto will be just that, attempted. Having veto powers and then having them rejected every time you attempt to use them would be confusing at best. Your partner being able to regularly point out genuine reasons why you shouldn't date the person you are seriously considering dating should highlight that your partner selection is somewhat off.
Reply With Quote
  #109  
Old 09-09-2013, 08:56 PM
ColorsWolf's Avatar
ColorsWolf ColorsWolf is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: CA, U.S.A.
Posts: 360
Default

I think because I love to be every moment I can with someone I love, I mean literally think "joined at the hip" kind of constant closeness, we would naturally gravitate towards us together dating other people because we wouldn't spend that much time doing our own things apart from each other, plus I naturally am a sharing person and I would like to get to know the person who is also making my lover happy to and maybe love them to.~

I also have no boundaries, so getting a hug and a kiss or giving a hug and a kiss while on the toilet would NOT be out of the question for me.~ I'm also the kind of person to invite other people to use the toilet while I'm using the shower since it's only practical.~ In fact I wouldn't mind showering together with many people at once in one shower.~ I would do all of this with anyone regardless of whether I just met them or not, BUT ESPECIALLY with my lover(s).~ ^_^

Last edited by ColorsWolf; 09-09-2013 at 09:12 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #110  
Old 09-09-2013, 11:13 PM
Marcus's Avatar
Marcus Marcus is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Richardson, TX
Posts: 1,308
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nycindie View Post
My issue, personally, is always about when someone in a relationship makes rules for their partner's relationships in order to preserve and lord their couplehood over others.
Quote:
Originally Posted by alibabe_muse View Post
Why do they need to meet your spouse or vice versa? It just doesn't make any sense to me aside from it being a control thing.
This is the issue, it is either a request or it is a demand - it can't be both (no matter how it is worded).

If "no" is not an acceptable answer then it was not a question... it was a demand (again, no matter how it is worded).

Quote:
Originally Posted by ColorsWolf View Post
I think because I love to be every moment I can with someone I love, I mean literally think "joined at the hip" kind of constant closeness... I also have no boundaries
Off hand, I can't think of a worse kind of torture than to be in this kind of relationship. At least the Borg get cool tech implants.
__________________
Independent (Anarchist) Non-Monogamy

Me: male, 40, straight, single
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 02:21 AM.