New to Living Poly

She came home last night and crumpled into my arms. I was watching some UFC so she laid there with me, crying and very upset . . . So, we laid there, I pet her, we quietly watched the fights, she wept.

. . . Seeing her like this is just freaking torture. Instead, I use my better judgment, shut my "helpful" mouth, and try not to cry in her hair.
At some point, you will know when it is appropriate and right to say to her, "come lay down with me" in a nurturing, tender way and she will go with you to bed. Maybe sex will happen the first time she goes, maybe not until the next time or the time after that, but right now you are letting her know she can safely have and experience her feelings with you while her world feels so sad and complicated, and that is a good thing.
 
Getting Better

Thursday IV was home all day so we spent some light, friendly time together. We didn't talk about her family all day; just enjoyed each others company (I was working which probably helped keep it light). That evening we ran a couple of errands and got some dinner. Her mother is doing a lot better and is moving in with a family member which will be a good spot for her. This causes IV to worry about her mom less, which increases the odds of IV being able to recover.

Later that night she told me how nice it was to spend some time with me again, to feel like we could be "normal".

Sunday I got back from a weekend game (we do monthly table top role-playing benders) and was exhausted. As I was napping she came in and joined me. So, we were super lazy, ate, talked, napped, cuddled... it was exactly what I wanted.

She still hasn't spent the night and there has still been no sexy time between us, but I consider this to be HUGE progress. I'm just glad to see any movement back toward our romantic relationship. I miss her dearly and am excited to see a glimpse of her.
 
Last edited:
Sleep Date

We have a sleep date tonight!!

To catch up:

This past Wednesday IV was home, we spend most of the day together, ended up in the shower and then some light sexy time after. It was wonderful to feel connected to her like that again. I'm pretty sure she felt like I was trying to suck her face off I was so excited to be in an embrace with her again!

She's heading out of town this coming week, starting Monday. So yesterday I thought now would be a good time to make my desires known to her. I sent her a text while she was at work telling her I'd like her to spend the night with me before she went out of town, if there were time and desire.

She said that would be great. We didn't discuss when, but my schedule is pretty forgiving so I didn't press the point. I figured she would let me know when she had a time in mind.

Today she asked me for a "sleep date" tonight, as well as a leisurely tomorrow morning with breakfast, followed by laundry lol. While I won't be doing any laundry tomorrow, I'm beside myself with happiness that our romantic relationship seems to be heading into a direction I find more desirable.
 
That's great to hear! I'm glad that she's feeling better and things are already starting to get back to normal.
 
Friends With Benefits

It's been quite some time since I have posted about my relationship status. Since this update is kind of related to this particular thread I thought I'd put it here instead of creating a new one.

My relationship with IV has leveled out quite a bit since last we talked. The family tragedy is all but forgotten and she has recovered admirably, as I expected she would. She has in the last couple of weeks, made notable adjustments in her work life (hired a couple of key people) which has freed up some of her time. The frequency of our sleepovers has increased dramatically and it seems that we are slipping into a more comfortable routine. My friendship with CV seems to be continually growing; he and I share nerd interests and sense of humor so I would consider our friendship to be on the upswing.

The conversation of "commitment" has come up a few times recently and it has me pondering my relationship strategy and has prompted me to take a closer look at my association with IV.

IV has told me a number of times that her relationship viewpoint is that she is "just here to party". This means that the ideals of sacrifice and compromise are not applicable and that only the things we *want* to express with each other get expressed. That the idea of "relationships take work" is bullshit outright and won't be given any weight. On all of these fundamentals we agree.

The other night IV, CV, and I were chatting about this topic because a friend of mine is in a point in his life where commitment is on his mind and so I brought it up and they were happy to discuss it with me. The central idea of the conversation was "when does commitment to a relationship become unhealthy?". The three of us agree more or less on where this line is.

As I have said in one of the threads on this board, I would consider myself committed to IV. As with my relationships with my close friends, I would cut any of them slack if they were going through some kind of contextual issues and that ending the relationship would only come about due to a fundamental change in our ability to relate to each other in a positive way. CV took it a bit further and explained that, once the relationship continues because of ideals like duty, sticking to your word, toughing it out, marriage, sacrificing, that is unhealthy. The only reason that a relationship should continue is that there is a positive exchange between the people involved; external pressures are nothing but barriers to a rational exit.

To illustrate his commitment to living life without artificial commitment, CV described their relationship as friends with benefits; friends and roommates who have sex. Something about the conversation made me uneasy; the assumption being that I am also considered a FWB to IV. Intellectually I know that this is the only way to relate to people effortlessly, which is something I greatly desire. However, I don't really have any experience actually treating people with this kind of laissez faire approach. While I have always considered myself to be independent and hesitant to put labels and responsibilities on people, this is a whole different level.

What I am currently trying to work out is, why am I having a negative reaction to the prospect of being considered her FWB? I've had FWB in the past and it was a stress free win-win. What I have never experienced is this kind of dedicated FWB where we are in love, live together, split expenses, share affection and laughs when we have time, have sleepovers and secks periodically... It's very good, but I can't shake the feeling that something is missing. Maybe it's because I've been in exclusively dramatic "serious" relationships for so long that it's like having something negative removed from my life but I miss it anyway. Like an abused spouse who doesn't know what to do with themselves now that the abuse is gone.
 
Forget about labeling yourself according to what someone else labels themselves. You know i make fun of it when people get all "OMG how DARE you try to label me AUUGH the NERVE of some ppl!!!!!one!!!1!"

But what i see here is a classic case of a label allergy-attack, combined with an episode of comparing your relationship to someone else's.

The question is, is this "real" to you, or is it just another reaction to old programming and thinking patterns rising to the surface to be confronted and neutralized? Is IV doing this TO you, or are you doing it to yourself?

You're welcome. I hope this helps the way that other thing you said did.
 
The question is, is this "real" to you, or is it just another reaction to old programming and thinking patterns rising to the surface to be confronted and neutralized? Is IV doing this TO you, or are you doing it to yourself?

It isn't real, it's just an emotional response born of old stuff. I have a habit of self-identify through the roles that I instinctively try to impose on myself. It can be a struggle to keep from surrendering to this kind of thought process. I'm using you guys as part of my therapy routine. Fortunately this isn't a crisis of identity; this is just an emotional response that I'm trying to get a handle on.

It doesn't have anything to do with IV and she certainly isn't doing anything to me.

Also, "label allergy-attack" is fantastic! :)
 
"label allergy-attack" is fantastic

Yeah i do have my moments in the sunshine, don't i.
 
"why am I having a negative reaction to the prospect of being considered her FWB? I've had FWB in the past and it was a stress free win-win. What I have never experienced is this kind of dedicated FWB where we are in love, live together, split expenses, share affection and laughs when we have time, have sleepovers and secks periodically... It's very good, but I can't shake the feeling that something is missing. "

I'm confused: are you feeling like something is missing in the relationship, or that the label is not accurately describing some aspect of the relationship? Seems more like the latter but I'm not certain.

In that FWB probably doesn't include love for most people, I can understand why you might be experiencing some dissonance.

"That the idea of "relationships take work" is bullshit outright"

Why is the idea that relationships take work so awful? Acting like an adult, taking responsibility for your own issues (the stuff you generally espouse) takes work, and being willing to put effort (work) into things we value (like a relationship) seems reasonable to me. I don't understand the distinction.
 
I'm confused: are you feeling like something is missing in the relationship, or that the label is not accurately describing some aspect of the relationship? Seems more like the latter but I'm not certain.

Nothing is missing from the relationship, I just have the "feeling" that something is missing. If something were actually missing that would be an issue I would need to take action on, my feeling of something missing just means I need to do some introspection and do a blog post :p

Acting like an adult, taking responsibility for your own issues (the stuff you generally espouse) takes work, and being willing to put effort (work) into things we value (like a relationship) seems reasonable to me. I don't understand the distinction.

The distinction for me is this first part of what you said from the second part.

The work I do to have a healthy and adult worldview is my personal business. This conversation and most of the conversations I have on these boards, for example, is me working on my worldview and making sure I am pointing in the right direction. None of this (including these recent posts) actually has anything to do with IV or my "relationship" with her.

When it comes to putting effort into a relationship, that is what I call bullshit on. The relationship is not a thing, it doesn't need to be worked on. If the people involved in a relationship have issues they need to figure that out but the concept that there is some third entity which needs to be helped out is imaginary. It also assumes that there is a priority that we stay together regardless of the fact that we are having fundamental issues relating constructively with each other... which I also don't see as positive.

I think of my romantic relationships the same way I think of my friendships. It would be an absurd thing to say to one of my dear friends "look, we need to sit down and do some work on our relationship. We need to come up with a plan of action so that we can properly address the issues with our relationship". That conversation is nonsensical, there is no entity between my friends and I which has some opinion or needs some extra set of rules or actions applied to it.

Does that illustrate it a bit better? I can't tell if I'm making the idea more clear or muddy.
 
I used to have an aversion to the idea of being "in love with" someone, that it creates this baby of "our love" which takes a life of its own and you become stupidly beholded to it.

I recognised a similar sense in the way you talked about "working on relationships".

For me, now, it's largely semantic. But it's still an important difference to me. I don't owe my relationships anything (per se). But I owe it to myself to recognise what I want, and do the best at achieving that. And I owe it to others to treat them well, be honest (esp about expectations) and all that other good stuff.

But yeah... sometimes now I do say things like "I value our relationship and I want to make this work with you." And that makes sense to me, and doesn't freak me out like OMG WE'VE CREATED A MONSTER THAT WILL SLOWLY BUT SURELY CONSUME OUR INDIVIDUAL SELVES AND VOMIT AN ABOMINATION

Then again, maybe I've crossed to the dark side and don't even know it.

Keep rocking things the way it makes sense to you - all power to ya.
 
I agree with Fuchka; this seems like largely a semantic distinction.

As I read it, you don't like thinking of "the relationship" because to you it implies a duty or a mandated outcome, and for me it doesn't automatically have that association.

If I have a friend or love whose presence in my life I value and want to maintain, but I am having difficulty understanding or communicating with this person, I will put effort into into improving the situation. To me, that would be working (obligation free, out of choice) on our relationship. Maybe you'd rephrase it as each person working on him/herself at the same time together, or working on communication rather than on the relationship, but to me it's not that important of a distinction.

Anyway, thanks for explaining how you see it. I like a bunch of what you write, but this point, which seems particularly important to you, had been puzzling me.
 
I agree with Fuchka; this seems like largely a semantic distinction.

How language is used conveys our meaning and intention of action. The fact that it is a semantic argument (you are both correct, that's what it is) does nothing to diminish the critical nature of the distinction.

"Working on the relationship" is a statement of action, one that is diluting the importance of dealing with ones issues and placing artificial importance on the longevity of the association. It is a distraction from reality, shifting focus from the issue at hand "I am insecure, what do I need to do about that?" (which is basically what this post was about) and placing it instead on "What can we do to force this failing association to continue ambling on?" (which is the opposite of a constructive conversation).

So while I agree that what we are having is a semantic discussion, I disagree that this makes it any less important. Words are powerful and they carry our intentions with them. I suppose as long as "working on the relationship" doesn't carry with it the distraction from self improvement and the confusion of the importance of longevity over living genuinely then it doesn't matter. However, I will continue to make this point and prompt people to have this conversation with me. The reason being, just because *you* might be constructive enough to not be distracted by this phrase as I've described above, I would hate to encourage other people to continue having unhealthy couplings simply because a turn of phrase they heard reinforced on here gave them "permission". Our lives are jam packed with excuses to externalize responsibility for our actions and motivation to live restricted and disingenuous lives, my hope is to minimize that.

No, I am not a crusader. No, I don't particularly care about the lives of the strangers on this forum or elsewhere - but while I'm on here talking with people I might as well be expressing the ideals that I think will bring about the most flourishing.
 
Sure, I hear you. Words are powerful. I too have particular phrasings I prefer / avoid because of how I'd like to grow. e.g. I dislike the use of "talk to" as in "I was talking to him about that" and would rather use "talk with". Just sounds more like a dialogue than a monologue, which is what a conversation should be.

I suppose the downside of having strong views about terminology (like you have, about "working on the relationship") is when the words themselves are broad enough to encompass a range of meanings that include both the meaning you dislike and the meaning you like. Because then when you say something like "'relationships take work' is bullshit" - people can get confused. Do you mean that you won't make any effort, in order to improve how things feel between you and this other person - if things are tense? Of course not!

Many times, you can rephrase to say "I need to work on this aspect of myself."

Other times, though, that's a bit of a stretch (in my mind.) E.g. there's been a miscommunication. Things feel gross. I'm really tense and I need to sit down and talk through what this situation is bringing up for me. I'm finding it difficult to relate to you at the moment. We need to make time to work this through. Maybe neither of us have anything in particular to work on personally - we just need to put the time in to talk and unravel.

As I've said, I recognise where you're coming from - having a violent aversion to allowing a demented idea of "the relationship" to grow. But you seem to be saying more than "I hate this phrase because to many people it implies X". You seem to be saying "don't say X, cos it grows the wrong conceptual structure in your head." I disagree with that. I think some words have powerful tendencies to grow a particular way, if unchecked. But words are also very malleable and with mindfulness (coupled with shared understandings, in conversations) you can take them almost anywhere. And internalise what exactly it is that you mean or don't mean by things that could be ambiguous.

I think I do understand what your objections are. Nonetheless I wouldn't have the issues you have with those phrasings. I find it quite abrasive/alienating for someone to insist I phrase things how they think is best. Not saying you were doing this, and also this is your blog so clearly not an open debate. Just trying to explain how I share your level of passion (I reckon!) for not seeing a relationship as this third entity you have to suckle and pamper, while still being OK with talking in ways that acknowledge that sometimes I do certain things in order to improve how well I'm relating with someone.

You've said you feel "committed" to IV. I'd say that's a similarly loaded word, that some people use to reinforce an idea of an external entity that requires their loyalty. But - you weren't using it like that. You were describing a feeling of commitment. Not an obligation you had to honour.

Yup, we have to choose our words carefully and - with particular words especially - occasionally have to clarify what we meant by that. But ultimately, I reckon, whatever works for us is okay.
 
You've said you feel "committed" to IV. I'd say that's a similarly loaded word

Commitment is a very frustrating word to me. I only use the word to mean one thing, and unfortunately (unlike the other uses for the word) I am not aware of another word that can be used. Commitment can mean "life long", "married", "sharing bills", "having kids", "sexual exclusivity", or it can mean... well... committed. I only use it to mean that I view my relationships as important and that I will not abandon it willy-nilly, that unless there is a fundamental inability to connect and there doesn't appear to be the likelihood of changing - I don't foresee ending it. While these other uses of the word have much more precise synonyms I am not aware of another word that shares this definition.

Because of that, I very rarely use it. The concept is too specific and the word has WAY too many uses - uses which are antithetical to how I mean it.

You seem to be saying "don't say X, cos it grows the wrong conceptual structure in your head."...

I am making the assertion that talking about the relationship as if it were some kind of entity which needs to be addressed is counter productive, yes. I am further making the assertion that when we need to "work on the relationship" that what we are in essence doing is refusing to recognize that the nature of the relationship is changing or possibly ending and are instead placing artificial value on longevity and stagnation.

I find it quite abrasive/alienating for someone to insist I phrase things how they think is best

If I had a nickle for every time someone on these boards told me I was abrasive. I have considered just copy and pasting a disclaimer at the top of all of my posts: "I am not telling you what to do. I am not your master. I am expressing my own point of view which may be in conflict with ideals you cling to. I may not be gentle with how I express my words but know that I have no interest in harming you or making you cry."

People on here often find my method of expressing my ideas to be offensive. I'm more interested in discussing the meat of the matter and not so much interested in getting distracted by hand holding and coddling. Some people find me to be offensive because my ideas are contrary to their own and make them feel uneasy. Maybe people have a problem with my ideas because they are just bad ideas... I'm sure some folks think that is the case.

If they don't present me with a well thought out counter argument (as you just did) then I don't much care that they don't agree with me. I am not so much interested in getting people to stop using that phrase (though I do think it would be an improvement to how people relate to one another) as I am interested in causing a discussion like this one to happen. You may disagree with me fuchka, but what is actually happening is that you are working with me through this idea and helping me to better articulate my point.
 
You may disagree with me fuchka, but what is actually happening is that you are working with me through this idea and helping me to better articulate my point.

I know this :)

Another thought I had, when reading this:

just because *you* might be constructive enough to not be distracted by this phrase as I've described above, I would hate to encourage other people to continue having unhealthy couplings simply because a turn of phrase they heard reinforced on here gave them "permission".

was how the same could be said for speaking in a way that can be taken to imply you don't value making an effort to relate well to other people or to spend time becoming intimate with someone (e.g. "I don't see the point of working on relationships".)

I think it's important to be clear about how you're nourishing a connection vs not, and to be aware of your agency here. You hang out with someone, you get to know them. You don't, you don't. Simple as that. I decide who I want to be close to, in what way, and adjust my energy accordingly.

Yup, longevity is not necessarily a good thing. A relationship that ends when it should is a success.

That said, I've found relationships not to be an on-off thing for me anyway. People I no longer relate to in this way, I can generally still relate to in this way. The relationship hasn't ended per se, we just do different things together now and have different understandings/expectations of how our lives relate (or don't) at the moment.

I didn't say your attitude was abrasive. I'd like my nickel back, please ;) I was just stating that being told what to do (instead of sharing reasoning and at most trying to convince) annoys me. It was maybe at most a warning, but definitely not an accusation. If you insisted that I use the words you do, I wouldn't value your opinion too much. But I feel I understand your project here - you're expressing your world view. I'm doing much the same.

I appreciate people who disagree with me because it clarifies my own thoughts. Hey, even abrasion is useful sometimes.
 
I know this ... I appreciate people who disagree with me because it clarifies my own thoughts. Hey, even abrasion is useful sometimes.

I rewrote that statement a couple of times. I was worried that it was going to come off as though I was trying to educate you on something you were pretty obviously aware of (I've debated enough people to be able to tell the difference between the ones who are working shit out and using me as a proving ground and those who simply want to be 'right'). What I meant was more to illustrate that I recognize that *this* is the way growth through debate is meant to happen. You and I are both trying to articulate our views and are learning in the process of expressing them; regardless of whether or not we agree on the details.

I like win-win situations.

I think it's important to be clear about how you're nourishing a connection vs not, and to be aware of your agency here. You hang out with someone, you get to know them. You don't, you don't. Simple as that. I decide who I want to be close to, in what way, and adjust my energy accordingly.

Well put. You may see this in my future posts /stolen

I didn't say your attitude was abrasive. I'd like my nickel back, please ;) I was just stating that being told what to do (instead of sharing reasoning and at most trying to convince) annoys me. It was maybe at most a warning, but definitely not an accusation.

I've been thinking about it all day. IV and I even discussed it, which is good because it was an opportunity to bring her into the core conundrum so she could offer her opinion (she did, I am continually impressed by her).

There is always a delicate balance in how to communicate with people "brutally". While my intention might be to deliver the fruit without any of the rind, I might, in actuality, be throwing the rind free fruit at the intended recipient.

While I am not willing to curtsy to get my information to its intended target, I also don't want to alienate people simply because I am being difficult when it comes to my word usage. So, what I have been pondering today is how to say "the statement 'working on the relationship' is bullshit" without taping the message to a brick and throwing it through a window. In the later case, the message received is "a brick was thrown through my window" and the note is irrelevant. Perhaps I need to find a more concise method to offer people that discussion - since having the discussion is what I think brings about the most value.
 
IV and I even discussed it, which is good because it was an opportunity to bring her into the core conundrum so she could offer her opinion (she did, I am continually impressed by her).

I meant to tell you guys about my conversation with IV about this but forgot.

In true IV fashion, I mentioned the issue to her and she immediately responded with a "question" which clearly stated what the issue was. She asked, "Does 'FWB' feel like it is belittling the value of the relationship?"

Yes, point of fact, it does seem to devalue the relationship. While I intellectually know that the approach of being lovers with my best friends is really the only way to have the effortless romance that I want - "FWB" in my mind also comes with an assumption that there isn't love and that it has an inherently lower value. It gets clumped in with "fuckbuddies" which I would only use to describe a surface level casual association. While I realize that this isn't necessarily the way FWB works, it is nonetheless an association I make with the term.

My close friendships are very dear to me. I love my small number of close friends intensely and I view our friendships as being something of immense value. If we were to share sex and sleeping together that would make the relationship that much more intimate. That's what I have with IV, she is a dear friend who I care for deeply, we are helping each other financially by splitting rent, we share sleep and lovemaking, she cries on me when she is hurt, we laugh together while watching Bobs Burgers, our relationship is exactly what I want minus the things I don't want.

I don't like the term friends with benefits and won't use it to describe my relationship with IV, but as long as I remember the reality of what it means it won't bug me to think that she might describe our relationship that way. It's just a difference in preference of terminology and not a difference in assessing the value of what we have.

I love having smart friends (I'm including you bozos in that as well)
 
Intelligence and sense of humor are the two biggest turn-ons in my experience. Everything else is gravy.
 
I think that the term Friends with Benefits probably rankled you because it gets tossed around a lot, and most people seem to really mean Fuck Buddy when they say FWB. Perhaps your first reaction was connected to the thought that you ought to be regarded as more than a fuck buddy. I wrestled similarly with the term FWB; hence I prefer the term "lover-friend," which holds more meaning for me. But really, having a friend is awesome, and having one with whom you share your body is awesome, too! So, FWB doesn't bother me as much as it used to. The thing is - for me anyway - just to be clear about what the words "friend" and "benefits" mean to you. It is interesting that she was talking about CV and you extrapolated from there and applied the FWB to yourself when she actually did not apply it to you at that moment. What kept you from asking her what she would call her relationship with you during the initial conversation? Did you not want to hear her answer, in case she did indeed think of you that way? Glad to read you did talk more about it with her.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top