Polyamory.com Forum  

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

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old 03-26-2010, 12:30 AM
Honestheart's Avatar
Honestheart Honestheart is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 91
Default

Red,
what you just is a perfect example of open and honest communication WITH a veto rule... basically you saw something your partner didn't and yes i quite agree it had nothing to do with insecurities. i am saying thats why you have you look at why you are having a veto rule. if it is for control, insecurities, emotionalism, problems with the core/primary relationship...then i think a veto rule is a bad idea but if it is because you see a potentially harmful situation for your SO (like in your case Red) then it isnt messy and it is beneficial. the key was you didnt just say "veto!" you said "veto, and heres why"
i think veto rules are messy, but when applied like in your case they arent.
it all boils down to "why" are you having a veto rule which determines if it is messy...

Quote:
Originally Posted by StitchwitchD View Post
Yeah, when I say "retroactive veto" I'm referring to a situation where the primary partner was originally okay with the secondary relationship, then the primary started having problems with it, and instead of working through the issues, demanded that they break up. Of course, when 2 people are happy together and some 3rd party tries to force them apart, that doesn't do anything to change their feelings, and rarely goes well in any context. well.
this is exactly what i mean when i say that think that SOME vetos can be gateway to cheating. afterall, the feelings don't just go away.... it does not make the cheating right by anymeans....but certainly explains it a lot. don't you think?

I'm finding more and more that there is a trend in "poly talk" to make absolute statements about other peoples reality. Why is that? Is someone out there saying, "this is the way" and everyone following along? Can we not encorporate what others say and make it our own when we have some experience in it or in terms of our lives? The same language seems to come up over and over and it all says the same thing.... this is totally an aside, just something I have noticed.[/QUOTE]


agreed with the statement above. i'm sorry if ever i come across as "this is the only way" i'm open and i ask a lot of questions and i put my 2 cents in... i lack the ability to adequately communicate at times too... i apologize in advance.
but i will say when i know 100% something is wrong... in this case..cheating is 100% wrong even if it involves feelings and a previous partner whose relationship recently ended.
__________________
"...Love itself is what is left over when being in love has burned away, and this is both an art and a fortunate accident." ~St Augustine

Last edited by NeonKaos; 03-27-2010 at 02:10 PM. Reason: merge posts
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 03-26-2010, 10:57 AM
thunkybunny thunkybunny is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 44
Default

'Protection' of one's family implies anticipation of an actual or imagined threat. Such a fearful attitude in life makes the choices and the assessments of new connections troublesome, because it diminishes one's tendency to make wise and loving connections. It also makes one question the legitimacy of existing relationships. A less fearful person/couple might have enough confidence to choose better partners, while the fearful tend to choose poorly. It's the same explanation for why children of loving homes tend to have the confidence to explore the world. They know that whatever happens, things will be ok because they already have love so they tend not to latch onto just anything that catches their fancy. They choose better friendships. An already secure and loving partnership does not need a veto, because the partners have enough confidence to choose wisely. Partners who feel they need to 'protect' their families would be better off concentrating on confidence-building before trying to connect with new people. This can be difficult when the sources of insecurities come from childhood, other formative experiences, or betrayals in the existing relationship. Why have an open relationship if the partners have so little confidence in each other's abilities to make good choices in the first place? Even a veto applied judiciously can mask deeper problems within the existing relationship. It is worth exploring why the established partners lack such confidence in themselves and in each other that they believe they need a veto to protect the family. After all, a new partner chosen wisely and lovingly can become an additional family member.

Last edited by thunkybunny; 03-26-2010 at 11:17 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 03-26-2010, 01:34 PM
MonoVCPHG's Avatar
MonoVCPHG MonoVCPHG is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: In Redpepper's heart
Posts: 4,742
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by thunkybunny View Post
'[B] After all, a new partner chosen wisely and lovingly can become an additional family member.
Very true in some cases...but a wisely chosen sheep to add to the herd can also quickly turn into a wolf. This isn't poly exclusive, it happens in all relationships. Look at the person who marries the love of their dreams who after the ceremony becomes a controlling abusive spouse. The abuser's act is so complete that even the sharpest of people can be fooled from time to time and often it takes outside eyes to see what is happening...I.E. family members.

Restraining orders are a form of veto and serve the purpose to protect. Do we blame the person who needs protection for not "chosing better"? Are they the perpetrator of putting themselves into that situation or a victim?
__________________

Playing the Game of Life with Monopoly rules.
Monogamy might just be in my genes

Poly Events All Over
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 03-26-2010, 03:20 PM
thunkybunny thunkybunny is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 44
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MonoVCPHG View Post
Very true in some cases...but a wisely chosen sheep to add to the herd can also quickly turn into a wolf. This isn't poly exclusive, it happens in all relationships. Look at the person who marries the love of their dreams who after the ceremony becomes a controlling abusive spouse. The abuser's act is so complete that even the sharpest of people can be fooled from time to time and often it takes outside eyes to see what is happening...I.E. family members.

Restraining orders are a form of veto and serve the purpose to protect. Do we blame the person who needs protection for not "chosing better"? Are they the perpetrator of putting themselves into that situation or a victim?
This is where a realistic perspective comes in handy. The likelihood of having a long-term relationship with a psychopath is extremely rare for two reasons. Psychopaths are rare, and psychopaths lack the commitment necessary for long-term relationships. Instead of a veto, a more surgical device would be a set of gas-and-break pedals. Vetos result in absolutest, black-or-white, thinking whereas a device for moderating the speed of a relationship allows for a wider range of possibilities. In practical terms, that can be something as mundane as scheduling. For example, one can 'date' an established partner twice a week while seeing the new partner once a week. Scheduling requires commitment and is a much more useful device for moderating relationships than a veto.

This brings us back to the topic of motivations. If the motivation is to moderate, then a veto is still too clumsy. A simple calender would serve the purpose better than a veto.

Last edited by thunkybunny; 03-26-2010 at 03:34 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 03-26-2010, 03:38 PM
MonoVCPHG's Avatar
MonoVCPHG MonoVCPHG is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: In Redpepper's heart
Posts: 4,742
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by thunkybunny View Post
This is where a realistic perspective comes in handy. The likelihood of having a long-term relationship with a psychopath is extremely rare for two reasons. Psychopaths are rare, and psychopaths lack the attention necessary for long-term relationships. Instead of a veto, a more surgical device would be a set of gas-and-break pedals.
A person doesn't have to be a clinical psychopath to be destructive; the person could just become a freak which is reality. That is taking the example to the extreme but I do see the value of gas break as well.

The word veto is over used and artifically isolated to the concept of secondaries. Having to tell a partner to stop a destructive behavior spans many subjects. It could be reckless driving that is threatening the health of family members. It doesn't mean they will stop, it but then you can decide not to let your family in the vehicle with them.
__________________

Playing the Game of Life with Monopoly rules.
Monogamy might just be in my genes

Poly Events All Over
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 03-26-2010, 03:48 PM
thunkybunny thunkybunny is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 44
Default

The difference between a veto and a schedule is the difference between obedience and (self-)discipline.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 03-26-2010, 03:51 PM
MonoVCPHG's Avatar
MonoVCPHG MonoVCPHG is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: In Redpepper's heart
Posts: 4,742
Default

Insecurities over the idea of a veto for lack of a better word indicate to me that there is a feeling of less self worth or alternately a bloated sense of it.

The big thing for me is recognizing that it's ok for a person to not want to become involved with a situation where "veto" power is held. But it is equally ok for someone to be ok with it. It's judging the relationship criteria of others that is the real problem. They will find what they need and that won't be the same for others.

I'm a die hard secondary in my relationship. I am proud of the supportive role I have. I am also completely dedicated to the health of the primary relationship and core family above my own needs. This is because I have had that already and recognize the importance of it. I accept the veto power of either primary partner because I trust and respect their ability to recognize a constructive situation as well as a destructive situation. If I had to leave it would be for a good reason. So the onus becomes less one sided on the primary partners to pick good partners and more shared with the secondary to pick appropriate partners. Secondaries need to own up to their responsibility in some cases and stop pointing fingers perhaps.
__________________

Playing the Game of Life with Monopoly rules.
Monogamy might just be in my genes

Poly Events All Over

Last edited by MonoVCPHG; 03-26-2010 at 03:53 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 03-26-2010, 03:53 PM
MonoVCPHG's Avatar
MonoVCPHG MonoVCPHG is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: In Redpepper's heart
Posts: 4,742
Default

This thread has gone on a tangent hasn't it? My apologies everyone....
__________________

Playing the Game of Life with Monopoly rules.
Monogamy might just be in my genes

Poly Events All Over
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 03-26-2010, 03:56 PM
MonoVCPHG's Avatar
MonoVCPHG MonoVCPHG is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: In Redpepper's heart
Posts: 4,742
Default

Thought provoking comments Thunkbunny..thanks. I really like the idea of GAS and Brake.
__________________

Playing the Game of Life with Monopoly rules.
Monogamy might just be in my genes

Poly Events All Over
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 03-26-2010, 03:58 PM
thunkybunny thunkybunny is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 44
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MonoVCPHG View Post
This thread has gone on a tangent hasn't it? My apologies everyone....
Not totally. I think there's something useful here. Remember the connection between the lack of emotional fulfillment and cheating. The point is not whether one uses a veto or a schedule, but whether one is having choices made for them or a responsible adult making relationship choices. A person making their own choices in cooperation with rather than in obedience to others is going to feel more fulfilled emotionally in the arrangement.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
adultery, affairs, break ups, cheating, love triangle

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 12:27 PM.