Polyamory.com Forum  

Go Back   Polyamory.com Forum > Polyamory > Poly Relationships Corner

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #61  
Old 06-22-2011, 03:17 PM
Minxxa Minxxa is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: California
Posts: 497
Default

I think treating others the way you want to be treated works in terms of the broader things like respect and honesty. If you want people to be honest with you and respect you and listen to you, then you should do those things to/for them.

When it comes to specifics, I think treating them the way you want to be treated can be problematic. I know that it's taken me a while to realize that I need to treat my husband very differently than I want him to treat me with regards to specific items because he doesn't feel the same way I do about those things. For a long time I thought I was being respectful and thoughtful because I was treating him the same way I wanted him to treat me-- and in the end it was causing problems because he does not see things the same way as me, and I was in fact making things worse. :-/

Now we just have to talk it out... I have to actually ask him what he'd like in certain situations and though sometimes it mystifies me because it's so completely opposite of what I'd do, I'm taking his word that he knows himself better than I do (at least at that particular moment).
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 06-22-2011, 03:48 PM
Tonberry Tonberry is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,386
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Minxxa View Post
When it comes to specifics, I think treating them the way you want to be treated can be problematic. I know that it's taken me a while to realize that I need to treat my husband very differently than I want him to treat me with regards to specific items because he doesn't feel the same way I do about those things. For a long time I thought I was being respectful and thoughtful because I was treating him the same way I wanted him to treat me-- and in the end it was causing problems because he does not see things the same way as me, and I was in fact making things worse. :-/
Yes, that's what I was referring to. I don't doubt that Neon is a smart person, but I think giving that advice can be problematic as some people will just follow it without thinking instead of communicating and figuring out what their partners want.
I think advice such as "treat others you want to be treated" just contribute to people thinking everyone works the same and it's already a too common misconception, so point out that people don't all work the same way is always good to do.
That's why I'm careful to say, communicate, figure out how people want to be treated, and treat them that way. Sure, it's more complicated than treating them the way you'd want to be treated, there are more steps and more effort required, but that's usually a better rule of thumb as far as I'm concerned.
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 06-22-2011, 04:34 PM
serialmonogamist serialmonogamist is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 164
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tonberry View Post
I think giving that advice can be problematic as some people will just follow it without thinking instead of communicating and figuring out what their partners want.
I think you're really onto something here. So many people take a manipulative attitude toward interacting with others. They think they have to come up with a secret recipe for how to act and then follow that program and if it doesn't work they have to go back, change the program, and start again. Why are people afraid of communicating and negotiating their actions as they're happening? I think it may be because many people have been abused/bullied in a way that makes them feel like they have to remain closed or they will be dominated. It's sad because they can end up dominating others by remaining so closed.
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 06-22-2011, 05:07 PM
nycindie's Avatar
nycindie nycindie is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: The Big Apple
Posts: 7,423
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tonberry View Post
. . . treating people the way you'd want to be treated would mean treating everyone the same . . .
Um, no. It doesn't. It's rather silly to think that it does.
__________________
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/

Last edited by nycindie; 06-22-2011 at 05:10 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 06-22-2011, 07:23 PM
Tonberry Tonberry is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,386
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nycindie View Post
Um, no. It doesn't. It's rather silly to think that it does.
Why? I don't get what's silly about it. If I want people to make chocolate cake for me, I make chocolate cake for everyone. If I want people to hug me, I hug everyone. If I want people not to share naked pictures of me, I share naked pictures of nobody. I'm a single person, if I need to treat everyone the way I want to be treated, well there is only one way I want to be treated.
That's why I think it should be dependent on the other person and not on yourself.
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 06-22-2011, 07:42 PM
nycindie's Avatar
nycindie nycindie is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: The Big Apple
Posts: 7,423
Default

No, it means, if I want to feel respected and heard, and for my wishes to be considered, I respect and listen to others and consider their wishes. It doesn't mean I treat everyone the same because everyone is different but if I tune into them and listen to them, treating them the way I want to be treated, then I relate accordingly.

It is adjustable to the people I'm relating to. It doesn't necessarily have to do with specific tasks. Let's say, for example, someone wants me to do something sexually that for me would feel degrading. I'm not into degradation or humiliation at all. So, if I did it, I would be giving them what they want, but it would be something I couldn't bear to have done to me. However, if I listen and respect them, in the way I want to be listened to and respected, and saw that this fulfilled them in a way that something else would fulfill me, I might be comfortable with that. I would consider their wishes just as I would want my wishes considered. I wouldn't have to go along with it or do it if I was totally against it or it made me uncomfortable, but I would communicate honestly with that person, just as I would want honest communication. THAT is treating someone the way I want to be treated.
__________________
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/

Last edited by nycindie; 06-22-2011 at 07:51 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 06-22-2011, 08:02 PM
Tonberry Tonberry is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,386
Default

I understand your explanation, but it seems to me, you're treating them the way THEY want to be treated, not you. Unless the only thing that sentence means is "respect people, don't be a jerk", but then just saying that is faster. Or "try to put yourself in people's shoes" but that goes with acting depending on what THEY would want, not you.

Although, "what want if I was in this situation" is still the wrong question to ask yourself. "What do they want, in this situation", is the right question, and the only way to know is ask them.

I understand the principle, but hearing that sentence over and over, I'm afraid it contributes to people's idea that people want the same things and work the same way. Like, someone thinks something isn't cheating, they do it, and to their partner it was cheating. If they didn't think of it in terms of what they'd want, or what they'd be fine with, and instead asked their partner to establish rules, they could avoid things like that.

I think you need to consider each new person like someone who requires a new manual. There really isn't much, if anything, that's the same from one person to the next. Every time you meet someone you need to relearn to interact socially, and they might be completely different from anyone else you've interacted with. So of course you start from a few things you learned from past experiences, but only to check how the new person works.
So I think a sentence like that, focused on yourself rather than other people, can just ingrain that message even more. People aren't consciously deciding not to talk to their spouse about what's okay or not. They just don't imagine people might not all have the same boundaries. And really, I have yet to have two partners who had the same ones.

If "treat others the way you'd want to be treated" is supposed to be code for "respect people and communicate", I'd rather say "respect people and communicate". Otherwise, it seems either too vague to really mean anything, or specific and literal but completely untrue.
Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 06-22-2011, 09:23 PM
Minxxa Minxxa is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: California
Posts: 497
Default

It's looking more and more to me like we all agree on the concept, but the phrase "treat others like you wish to be treated" is being interpreted differently by everybody.

Some of us are seeing that as "if you would like massages, then you should offer massages to others". Which in my case doesn't work because hubs doesn't like massages, but I do. So he won't accept my massages and to get one I need to ask.

And some of us are seeing it as a broader sense of treat others with respect and honesty like you wish to be treated. Which I'm thinking we all agree with.


So instead of arguing semantics of a phrase that can be interpreted either way, how about we talk about what we seem to be agreeing on:

Act in good faith, with good intentions, honesty, respect and love, in order to receive same back. Communicate with your partner(s) about what they want and need, so that you know how to treat them specifically in the manner they wish to be treated, even though that may be completely opposite of how you wish to be treated. (And respect the differences.)
Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 06-22-2011, 10:14 PM
nycindie's Avatar
nycindie nycindie is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: The Big Apple
Posts: 7,423
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tonberry View Post
If "treat others the way you'd want to be treated" is supposed to be code for "respect people and communicate", I'd rather say "respect people and communicate". Otherwise, it seems either too vague to really mean anything, or specific and literal but completely untrue.
Well, it's more than just that, really.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Minxxa View Post
It's looking more and more to me like we all agree on the concept, but the phrase "treat others like you wish to be treated" is being interpreted differently by everybody.

Some of us are seeing that as "if you would like massages, then you should offer massages to others". Which in my case doesn't work because hubs doesn't like massages, but I do. So he won't accept my massages and to get one I need to ask.

And some of us are seeing it as a broader sense of treat others with respect and honesty like you wish to be treated. Which I'm thinking we all agree with.

So instead of arguing semantics of a phrase that can be interpreted either way, how about we talk about what we seem to be agreeing on:

Act in good faith, with good intentions, honesty, respect and love, in order to receive same back. Communicate with your partner(s) about what they want and need, so that you know how to treat them specifically in the manner they wish to be treated, even though that may be completely opposite of how you wish to be treated. (And respect the differences.)
Here is a nice little description of how the The Golden Rule works in life, written by a Humanist and relating it to empathy:

"Sometimes people argue that the Golden Rule is imperfect because it makes the assumption that everyone has the same tastes and opinions and wants to be treated the same in every situation. But the Golden Rule is a general moral principle, not a hard and fast rule to be applied to every detail of life. Treating other people as we would wish to be treated ourselves does not mean making the assumption that others feel exactly as we do about everything. The treatment we all want is recognition that we are individuals, each with our own opinions and feelings and for these opinions and feelings to be afforded respect and consideration. The Golden Rule is not an injunction to impose one’s will on someone else!

Trying to live according to the Golden Rule means trying to empathise with other people, including those who may be very different from us. Empathy is at the root of kindness, compassion, understanding and respect – qualities that we all appreciate being shown, whoever we are, whatever we think and wherever we come from. And although it isn’t possible to know what it really feels like to be a different person or live in different circumstances and have different life experiences, it isn’t difficult for most of us to imagine what would cause us suffering and to try to avoid causing suffering to others. For this reason many people find the Golden Rule’s corollary – “do not treat people in a way you would not wish to be treated yourself” – more pragmatic.

The Golden Rule cannot be claimed for any one philosophy or religion; indeed, the successful evolution of communities has depended on its use as a standard through which conflict can be resolved. Throughout the ages, many individual thinkers and spiritual traditions have promoted one or other version of it. Here are some examples of the different ways it has been expressed:
  • Do not to your neighbour what you would take ill from him. (Pittacus, 650 BCE)
  • Do not unto another that you would not have him do unto you. Thou needest this law alone. It is the foundation of all the rest. (Confucius, 500 BCE)
  • Avoid doing what you would blame others for doing. (Thales, 464 BCE)
  • What you wish your neighbors to be to you, such be also to them. (Sextus the Pythagorean, 406 BCE)
  • We should conduct ourselves toward others as we would have them act toward us. (Aristotle, 384 BCE)
  • Cherish reciprocal benevolence, which will make you as anxious for another’s welfare as your own. (Aristippus of Cyrene, 365 BCE)
  • Act toward others as you desire them to act toward you. ( Isocrates, 338 BCE)
  • This is the sum of duty: Do naught unto others which would cause you pain if done to you. (From the Mahabharata (5:1517), 300 BCE)
  • What is hateful to you, do not to your fellow men. That is the entire Law; all the rest is commentary. ( Rabbi Hillel 50 BCE)
  • Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. (From the Bible, Leviticus 19:18 1440 BCE)
  • Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them. (Jesus of Nazareth, circa 30 CE)"
The above is from http://www.thinkhumanism.com/the-golden-rule.html
__________________
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/

Last edited by nycindie; 06-23-2011 at 06:44 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #70  
Old 06-23-2011, 06:05 AM
redpepper's Avatar
redpepper redpepper is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 7,639
Default

thank you NYCindie, I was waiting for someone to use the word "empathy"... I would add "compassion" and "consideration" to that... Mono likes to use "extended consideration" when it comes to poly dynamics as metamour love is sometimes the make or break of a dynamic...

To me, "empathy" is a bit different than doing "unto others as you would have them do unto you." It revolves around thinking how you would feel in the situation rather than doing what YOU would like or do in the situation. It takes the "I" "me" and "self" out of it for me and looks at it from "they" "we" and "us" instead. This to me is what builds strong community, strengthens communication, builds trust and quite frankly is what I think will be the only way to end wars, create peace and save our planet... just saying.
__________________
Anyone want to be friends on Facebook?
Send me your name via PM
My blog
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
boundaries, comminication, communication, compassion, dadt, empathy, honesty, metamour, metamours, overshare, privacy, secrecy, sex talk, sharing information

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 03:39 PM.