Polyamory.com Forum  

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

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old 04-06-2011, 08:44 PM
Ariakas Ariakas is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,868
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by redpepper View Post
and this! protection... again, that harks of children and animals to me. Not grown ups free to make their own choices.
exactly

Quote:
That being said, I am all for making sure that my loves know my thoughts and opinions about a person. If there is some huge glaring "whatever" about a person then I will be honest about my concerns.
Precisely
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 04-07-2011, 10:47 AM
BlackUnicorn's Avatar
BlackUnicorn BlackUnicorn is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 906
Default

I think this is a good thread since for me before reading TP's response, the difference between a veto and a boundary was conceptually very fuzzy.

Don't normal people have like dealbrakers or somesuch to function in a similar capacity ? I think the problem here is thinking that if you are already involved with someone else, they somehow need the right to impose their own deal-breakers on your other relationships in order to feel secure.
__________________
Me: bi female in my twenties
Dating: Moonlightrunner
Metamour: Windflower
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 04-07-2011, 03:11 PM
Morningglory629's Avatar
Morningglory629 Morningglory629 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: PA
Posts: 727
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BlackUnicorn View Post
I think this is a good thread since for me before reading TP's response, the difference between a veto and a boundary was conceptually very fuzzy.

Don't normal people have like dealbrakers or somesuch to function in a similar capacity ? I think the problem here is thinking that if you are already involved with someone else, they somehow need the right to impose their own deal-breakers on your other relationships in order to feel secure.
Often the one imposing the "dealbreaker" is left holding an empty bag, especially if there is no real merit to it. So of course any ONE person can have dealbreakers...but that means they have their own independent choice of leaving a situation or not engaging in that dealbreaker activity. Right? I mean a relationship is bilateral NOT unilateral. Dealbreakers are decisively unilateral. Relationships are two people coming together with their own independent offerings to the relationship. One does not own the other. You cannot control someone who does not want to be controlled. So each person is making a choice to engage or not engage. The veto power is only viable if it is a mutually agreeable dealbreaker. And even that can change or end if one partner decides the dealbreaker is now something that is attractive. So veto as I said before is just a temporary block for the most part and in the end becomes as contentious as the dealbreaker in most cases.
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 04-07-2011, 03:26 PM
NeonKaos NeonKaos is offline
Custodian
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: new england
Posts: 3,221
Default

Everyone ultimately makes their own choices, so if an adult decides to let another adult make choices FOR them, that is itself a choice.
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 04-07-2011, 03:45 PM
Morningglory629's Avatar
Morningglory629 Morningglory629 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: PA
Posts: 727
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NeonKaos View Post
Everyone ultimately makes their own choices, so if an adult decides to let another adult make choices FOR them, that is itself a choice.
OMG! We agree!!!!
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 04-07-2011, 03:52 PM
NeonKaos NeonKaos is offline
Custodian
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: new england
Posts: 3,221
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Morningglory629 View Post
OMG! We agree!!!!
It wouldn't be the first time.
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 04-07-2011, 05:30 PM
Morningglory629's Avatar
Morningglory629 Morningglory629 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: PA
Posts: 727
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NeonKaos View Post
It wouldn't be the first time.
No but it is welcomed and rare. I celebrate it when it happens.
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 04-07-2011, 07:29 PM
Tonberry Tonberry is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,374
Default

I'm not comfortable with vetoes. I'm not comfortable with telling a partner "if you say stop, I have to drop everything" or "if I say stop, you have to drop everything".

However, in a case-by-case basis, I will take my partners' opinion into account when making decisions, and if my boyfriend told me that he's got a really, really bad feeling about a specific person, I might decide not to take things further.

What I would hate though is a veto that happens later on. What I mean is that I am fine with partners being "consultants" when a new relationship develops, but at no point is it fine in my book to tell someone "dump him/her, just because".

It's important to me that my partners get along though, so if they don't, it's likely that the newer relationship won't go very far.

I also have a principle I've always stuck to so far, and that is that if someone ever tells me "it's me or X, you've got to pick", I pick X, no matter what or who X is. Or really, it's more of a matter of "I don't pick you", because sometimes I pick neither. But I just can't stand ultimatums like that, they feel controlling and disrespectful of both me and X.

Now, if a partner tells me "You spend a lot of time doing X (no matter what/who X is :P) and not a lot of time with me. I'm feeling lonely. Is there a way you could spend more time with me so I don't feel like I always come last?", that would be different. It's not an ultimatum, it focuses on what they feel and not what I "should" do, etc. Then I'll see about working things out with everyone involved so people are happy (including me).

For me, a veto is a hard rule that one person can just decide to step into another's relationship and break it off. That's not cool with me. I much prefer communication with everyone involved, and finding case-by-case solutions.

However, before there is any relationship at all, setting some harder rules might seem more comforting because everything is so new and unknown. So I can understand that. Guidelines you set to have an idea where you're going.
However, which any new relationship, or any shift within a relationship, these tend to need to be examined.
And after all, don't a lot of people start their journey into poly this way, by re-examining what used to be a hard rule of monogamy, because their relationship has evolved or it just doesn't work for it?
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 04-08-2011, 12:18 AM
Morningglory629's Avatar
Morningglory629 Morningglory629 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: PA
Posts: 727
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tonberry View Post
However, in a case-by-case basis, I will take my partners' opinion into account when making decisions, and if my boyfriend told me that he's got a really, really bad feeling about a specific person, I might decide not to take things further.

What I would hate though is a veto that happens later on. What I mean is that I am fine with partners being "consultants" when a new relationship develops, but at no point is it fine in my book to tell someone "dump him/her, just because".

It's important to me that my partners get along though, so if they don't, it's likely that the newer relationship won't go very far.

Now, if a partner tells me "You spend a lot of time doing X (no matter what/who X is :P) and not a lot of time with me. I'm feeling lonely. Is there a way you could spend more time with me so I don't feel like I always come last?", that would be different. It's not an ultimatum, it focuses on what they feel and not what I "should" do, etc. Then I'll see about working things out with everyone involved so people are happy (including me).

And after all, don't a lot of people start their journey into poly this way, by re-examining what used to be a hard rule of monogamy, because their relationship has evolved or it just doesn't work for it?
great points.
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 04-20-2011, 10:17 AM
rory's Avatar
rory rory is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Europe
Posts: 496
Default

This topic was an interesting read for me. I'm quite new to poly so I did not know that there are veto practices commonly used. However I have been thinking the exact same things now that entering polyamorous relationship has become a practical thing.

We have had an open marriage with my husband for years but we hadn't really discussed the possibility of more serious relationships with others. But I met a girl who I found attractive on multiple levels and the feelings were mutual. So after that I talked with my husband, and if he had not been okay with the whole thing I wouldn't have started anything more with the girl. Although for us it was more the conversation of "is it alright if we have a polyamorous relationship" than "is it alright if I start a relationship with this person". I don't identify as poly and am sure I could be happy in a mono relationship, so that was not something I insisted of.

However, now that we have established that he is okay with polyamory, I would not think it fair for him to have a change of heart. So even though "he was here first" I am definitely not giving him veto.

Also, I am inclined to think "I choose the person who is not making me choose". As in, I choose the freedom to choose, if that makes sense.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
agreements, contracts, control issues, envy, jealous, jealousy, metamour concerns, new to poly, nre, relationship dynamics, relationship issues, secondaries, secondary, sex, veto, veto policy, veto power, vetos

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 05:20 PM.