Polyamory.com Forum  

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

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old 03-22-2011, 07:03 PM
Beodude123 Beodude123 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 69
Default

Maybe you have to think of it from the other side of the fence too? For example, with Jen being the poly one in our marriage, I feel pretty stretched thin thinking of her having more than one BF. Different situation, sure, but I think it's pretty applicable.

Not to mention, I think Jen feels the same way... But that could have more to do with the time thing. While I don't think time and love go hand in hand, time is a factor no matter what, especially with the busy schedules most people have these days.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 03-22-2011, 09:54 PM
River's Avatar
River River is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: NM, USA
Posts: 1,894
Default

Does love lessen with more partners? Not necessarily. Sometimes the opposite happens!

However, it is true that there are only so many days in the week, hours in the day, etc.... Time is limited, and very busy people almost certainly cannot manage several (or many) "romantic" relationships simultaniously.

There are so many variables in this question. Love itself doesn't divide, like pie does. But time does -- and there's no getting away from that. But some people are okay with only a few hours a week, while others really do need a lot more together time with each of their partners.
__________________
bi, partnered, available

River's Blog
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 03-23-2011, 08:38 AM
preciselove preciselove is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 83
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by redpepper View Post
you are talking time no? In my experience it is time that limits my love, or tries too. I can feel love and not express it because of time... that doesn't limit love though.
If there is a time limit on love, then how would you know you have infinite love? You haven't been able to reach the point of saturation yet due to time constraints.

As I said though, when I think of one of my girlfriends and trying to remember everything I know about them for even 5-10 people would be incredibly difficult for me. Tell me how many people you could handle in a close relationship? You seriously believe if time was infinite your brain could hold all the information needed for 20, 50, 100, 1000 people? Let alone an infinite amount.

Not only would time need to be infinite, so would the brain's storage. Basically saying love is infinite is a cop out in my opinion because it will never happen while we are humans and have a 4th dimension called time. "Love is infinite" seems like the war cry of NRE addicts trying to rationalize why they need to have a new boyfriend/girlfriend every month. Not that I'm necessarily saying addiction to NRE is bad, at least it's a natural and internal drug compared to other more deadly and costly forms of addictions. It's very similar to adrenaline junkies. However I think it would eventually take a toll on any long term relationships that person had, as most addictions tend to.

Quote:
Originally Posted by redpepper View Post
logical? maybe to you my friend. yes, more people seems to increase more potential for drama or mishaps as you put it.
It's logical in that one or two extra partners over monogamy can actually increase your time with your loved ones. Anything over that usually will decrease the time spent with any particular loved one.

My point was simply that adding a new boyfriend/girlfriend to a monogamous relationship can paradoxically give you MORE time with your first lover. Whereas most people think the exact opposite "I now have half a man".

Last edited by preciselove; 03-23-2011 at 08:43 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 03-23-2011, 09:11 AM
RobFire RobFire is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Milford, Michigan
Posts: 29
Default Time is Finite, but Shareable

Quote:
Originally Posted by preciselove View Post
As I said though, when I think of one of my girlfriends and trying to remember everything I know about them for even 5-10 people would be incredibly difficult for me. Tell me how many people you could handle in a close relationship? You seriously believe if time was infinite your brain could hold all the information needed for 20, 50, 100, 1000 people? Let alone an infinite amount.
No. Nobody's brain can handle the number of people you're talking about here. However, the likelihood that you'd find that many people compatible enough to build substantially deep relationships with seems a long shot bet. But that's just me, I'm picky.

Quote:
Originally Posted by preciselove View Post
Not only would time need to be infinite, so would the brain's storage. Basically saying love is infinite is a cop out in my opinion because it will never happen while we are humans and have a 4th dimension called time. "Love is infinite" seems like the war cry of NRE addicts trying to rationalize why they need to have a new boyfriend/girlfriend every month. Not that I'm necessarily saying addiction to NRE is bad, at least it's a natural and internal drug compared to other more deadly and costly forms of addictions. It's very similar to adrenaline junkies. However I think it would eventually take a toll on any long term relationships that person had, as most addictions tend to.
For some, yes. For some, no. Some who value the second more enduring phase of a romantic relationship may be shooting for it, though they may still enjoy the NRE while it lasts!

Quote:
Originally Posted by preciselove View Post
It's logical in that one or two extra partners over monogamy can actually increase your time with your loved ones. Anything over that usually will decrease the time spent with any particular loved one.

My point was simply that adding a new boyfriend/girlfriend to a monogamous relationship can paradoxically give you MORE time with your first lover. Whereas most people think the exact opposite "I now have half a man".
Of course if you restrict time spent to romantic lovers to one-on-one time, then the practical time limits are reached much sooner than if you allow for spending time as a group.

Some are comfortable with spending group time together, some are not.

Even if it's the non-sexual activity time, spending time as a whole can offer the opportunity to enjoy the company of more romantic lovers as well as forge new friendship bonds and further open up the channels of communication that are so critical to any relationship.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 03-23-2011, 09:23 AM
preciselove preciselove is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 83
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobFire View Post
For some, yes. For some, no. Some who value the second more enduring phase of a romantic relationship may be shooting for it, though they may still enjoy the NRE while it lasts!
Yes NRE is great, and I look back on the NRE I had with my first girlfriend with fond eyes. However to me there is more to life than having that NRE feeling over and over again, the benefits I get from having 2 permanent lovers far outweighs anything I could get from 1 permanent and many short term lovers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobFire View Post
Of course if you restrict time spent to romantic lovers to one-on-one time, then the practical time limits are reached much sooner than if you allow for spending time as a group.

Some are comfortable with spending group time together, some are not.

Even if it's the non-sexual activity time, spending time as a whole can offer the opportunity to enjoy the company of more romantic lovers as well as forge new friendship bonds and further open up the channels of communication that are so critical to any relationship.
Agree mostly with this. Most people want at least some one on one time, I've never met a girl that would be ok with only having group time, not that they don't exist but I'm thinking it's rare.

If you factor in the amount of time even the least demanding partners in the world want you're still going to reach a theoretical limit around 5-20 people at any one time I think. Hardly infinite.

When it comes to traditional relationships as you see in most monogamous circles I think a triad is the most beneficial when it comes to one on one time. Monogamy isn't the optimal solution if you want to be mainly with one person, a triad is. As ridiculous as that sounds. I like a good paradox though.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 03-23-2011, 09:37 AM
RobFire RobFire is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Milford, Michigan
Posts: 29
Default Don't I Know It

Quote:
Originally Posted by preciselove View Post
If you factor in the amount of time even the least demanding partners in the world want you're still going to reach a theoretical limit around 5-20 people at any one time I think. Hardly infinite.
Very, very true.

Not that it's entirely related, but LONG, LONG AGO when I was a bachelor, I had an experience trying to date multiple people at the same time.

I tend to think analytically, and I figured that there's X amount of time one must invest before one can determine if a person will be compatible. There was also a pretty low percentage of the population that I would find compatible (picky). From a practical perspective, I reasoned that if I could date multiple women simultaneously, it would increase the odds of finding a compatible mate.

I am also a programmer, and knew that I would need help sorting it out and scheduling things. So I wrote a "Date-a-Base" application. It was pretty thorough, with logs of dates, scheduling module, ranking of women on many levels (so rude, I know) and money spent.

O.K., so I was young, so forgive the rather mercenary approach, but I knew that I would forget things or mix them up between dates. Therefore the Date-a-Base allowed for logging "factoids" from every date, so that before I went on a date I could spin up a printout and prep, so that I could make conversation like, "How did you do on that exam you were studying for?", or "Did your mom's surgery go well?".

Even worse yet, based upon the rankings that were entered, and the money spent over time, if a scheduling conflict were to occur, the scheduling module would calculate a "Bang for the Buck" ratio and choose a victim for rescheduling.

The end result was that the program worked too well. I kept things straight, and went on MANY dates. I think the max was actively dating 6 or 7 girls at the same time.

It.... was.... exhausting.....

I only lasted for a couple of months on that system. I was a zombie. There are practical limits. Of course, these were all separate women individually being dated, not cooperatively dated with group activities.

Long story short, I *really* see your point.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 03-23-2011, 09:56 AM
preciselove preciselove is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 83
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobFire View Post
I tend to think analytically, and I figured that there's X amount of time one must invest before one can determine if a person will be compatible. There was also a pretty low percentage of the population that I would find compatible (picky). From a practical perspective, I reasoned that if I could date multiple women simultaneously, it would increase the odds of finding a compatible mate.

I am also a programmer, and knew that I would need help sorting it out and scheduling things. So I wrote a "Date-a-Base" application. It was pretty thorough, with logs of dates, scheduling module, ranking of women on many levels (so rude, I know) and money spent.
Well we are very similar then. Not that I have wrote a date-a-base before but I have written similar things.

Being able to tear away the emotional things and think logically probably makes us able to see reality a bit easier than some. Though it may appear "cold" to those people. You can actually see a pattern to most relationships if you look closely enough, not that it diminishes what it brings you at all.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 03-23-2011, 01:51 PM
GroundedSpirit GroundedSpirit is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: New England USA
Posts: 1,231
Default Confusion over resources and poly love

In reading through this thread again something occurred to me.

It seems fairly common to point to various time and resource conflicts as a "weakness" of polyamory. It's legit of course to take a particular example where one person has more time (or more needs) than another that seem to be going unmet and underline that as a problem with the logistics of poly.

Now my thought was that the weakness is also the strength !

It seems to really become the biggest problem when one of the parties are mono or stuck in some mode where their options for meeting their needs/desires is limited. So they want to point the finger at a love/partner and the model (poly) in general.

But think about this.............

'Where' really is the problem/weakness ?

Assuming they profess to embrace poly, why is it that they aren't reaching out to find ways to meet their desires from multiple sources themself, rather that sitting back crying foul about shortcomings of a preferred (primary?)partner or the poly model as a whole ?

Is this just our natural selfishness coming out ? We want what we want when we want it. And if it involves someone else and their needs/desires/schedules are conflicting with our desires, it MUST be THEIR fault !
Or anyone/any things fault except our own...........

Choices, choices...............

GS
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 03-23-2011, 02:27 PM
MarryMe MarryMe is offline
New Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1
Default

New here, so don't know my way around the software yet. I don't think that it is a question of love or about love being less or more etc. Love is infinite. As the population grows, have you noticed children born without the capability of love?

That being said, as you add more partners, have bigger families, etc. Sometimes, not always, but sometimes the stress also goes up. It may not be a question of love becoming less, but stress becoming more.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 03-23-2011, 02:45 PM
preciselove preciselove is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 83
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GroundedSpirit View Post
'Where' really is the problem/weakness ?

Assuming they profess to embrace poly, why is it that they aren't reaching out to find ways to meet their desires from multiple sources themself, rather that sitting back crying foul about shortcomings of a preferred (primary?)partner or the poly model as a whole ?
Perhaps it's finding people that they find attractive. If they have spent many years finding the right partner they will of course be upset if they have no alternative or lesser alternatives. Your conclusion that all lovers are equal is quite politically correct but doesn't have much association with reality in my mind.

That's even to say that all people want to have multiple "secondary" partners, or people they don't trust down to the bone. Every random or semi random sexual encounter you have puts you at risk of numerous diseases, regardless of protection used.

"Open poly" people in my opinion seem to have a rather low barrier to entry. "You're ok with my lifestyle and my existing partner(s)? Wassup new boyfriend, let's have sex and see how it goes". Wooo NRE!!! A month later it's someone new. That's just my experience though.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
asexual, asexual poly, love, love language, marriage vs. polyamory, non sexual, secondaries, secondary, sex vs love, third partner

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 02:18 PM.