Ask a triad - advice column

One thing that I think our triad of a year never managed to happily do was establish new protocols. There was the way that things were done, with rules decided before I got there that in the end had to be discarded and renegotiated because of unworkability, and the idea was that anything could be renegotiated. Which sounds great, except I'm realizing that it comes with the following assumptions:

There is the way the couple has done things
By default, this will be adopted as the way the triad does things
If there is a problem with it , the newbie can bring up, and if a solution is acceptable to the couple, it will be adopted.

Which sounds good, but if you reverse it, it sounds ridiculous and power-centric:

There is the way the newbie has done things.
By default, this is the way things will be done.
If this is problematic, the couple can bring a solution to the newbie, and if it is acceptable to the newbie, it will be adopted.

The difference points out the assumption, almost, that the couple will vote as a block and approach change as a block, and set the tone and leadership in forming the new relationship. and acceptance of that. Couple privilege.

I have a theory that negotiating couple privilege is a normal relationship crisis occurring after the first year that makes or breaks a triad. This has a sample set of one and a quote from Dan Savage supporting it, so it's not exactly well-researched.

But for my curiosity:

Have you addressed this in your relationship at this stage yet? Have you found a way so that a concern is approached from a fresh, non-couple centric position in negotiations? For your newbie, do you see one or the other of the original couple siding with you individually on a regular basis as easily as they side with their original partner? Are you comfortable with that? How do you eliminate the tendency to fallback to how things were done before you became a triad when things get tense or break down? Or can you?
 
I actually wonder if couples have a right to exercise privilege and act as a two-person collective if they want to. After all, that's what they've always done in the past (before trying polyamory), and besides, the new partner has perfect freedom to set her own boundaries and walk away if the situation becomes unacceptable ... doesn't she?
 
I actually wonder if couples have a right to exercise privilege and act as a two-person collective if they want to. After all, that's what they've always done in the past (before trying polyamory), and besides, the new partner has perfect freedom to set her own boundaries and walk away if the situation becomes unacceptable ... doesn't she?

I think they do have a right, of course, to do what works for them. And, in theory, anyone can walk away. In reality, this often doesn't come out as cleanly as it does on paper, though.

If the couple is being very open and honest, and saying "look, we are going to act as a couple, we aren't interested in changing our ways or our outlook, and that is something you can accept or leave," then that is totally fine. But, it almost never happens that I've seen or heard of. Generally, it's far more insidious than that, and often just flat out lied about.

And, the "third" can walk away--if she can walk away. People sometimes present themselves one way for long enough to "hook" their "victim," and then change. This seems to happen with couples (generally unicorn hunters) not infrequently. So, like the woman we saw here a short while ago, the "third" gets hooked in by what seems like a great relationship, and then, through a serious of steps, they make sure she becomes dependent on them, often financially, which makes it really difficult to just walk away. This definitely happens in mono relationships, too, of course. Just pointing out that walking away is sometimes more complicated than that. And, of course, everyone should be responsible for themselves, not let themselves get into that situation, etc. But, especially for younger people who may not have as much experience, it can happen without the even realizing it.
 
So, you're saying some couples lure in a young, inexperienced lady with a bait-and-switch tactic? which I pretty much agree with, except I wonder if it's (usually) done unintentionally on the couple's part?

Is monogamy to blame for this "unicorn hunting culture?" People get conditioned/programmed to think a certain way, and then the thought's not even thought consciously? For example, maybe the couple can't imagine that the young lady of their dreams would want things to be at all different from how they'd want things to be. And again, this assumption might be made beneath the conscious level.

Who, then, is at fault for this "unicorn hunting culture?" Could it be that it's just a present-day tragedy? No one's at fault? Is everyone a little at fault?
 
I think sometimes it's unintentional, and sometimes it's intentional. Some couples who do it intentionally probably truly don't realize the issues (we've definitely seen that here), while others definitely do (I've seen that one in person). Sometimes it's likely subconscious.

The monogamy culture is partly to blame, I think. But, I think selfishness, a lack of interest in exploring one's own insecurities, and a lot of porn are also to blame (don't get me wrong, I am not saying porn is bad--I actually like and watch a fair amount of it--but I do think many people have issues deciphering the fantasies from the realities, or, at the very least, seeing the difficulties in the potential realities). And, again, i am not sure it's a lot different than many mono relationships in some respects In many ways, I've always disliked the traditional "dating" concept of meeting someone new and going out on dates, because what you see up front is almost never what you get long-term, and for the same reasons. Almost everyone puts on a "good face" to new people, and, especially if they find that person attractive, a face that they think will get them what they want (a second date, a night in the sack, etc.). Couples are, I think, often just doing the same thing.

Yes, I am cynical.
 
Re: the role of porn in this unicorn hunting business ... perhaps in turn is an extension of people's tendency to forget that movies are just movies? People (like me) are strongly influenced by what Hollywood shows them, while within Hollyword, I think the actors and directors and producers are often very jaded, they're so conscious of the size of the illusions they sell -- for the sake of art, or to make money? There's no movie without lots and lots of money.

Re:
"Almost everyone puts on a 'good face' to new people, and, especially if they find that person attractive, a face that they think will get them what they want (a second date, a night in the sack, etc.). Couples are, I think, often just doing the same thing."

Hmmm, good point. Almost without meaning to, people put on their good face for dating. It's what you do. And then, crazy as it is, one tends to view what one sees in one's dating partner/s as what one will get in the day-to-day long run.

Reminds me of the scene in Magnolia (a movie), where a policeman and a troubled young lady go out on a first date together. They're both nicely dressed up and that, yet the young lady decides she wants to cut through the façades we wear, elicits a confession from the policeman that he lost his gun earlier that day, then flees the scene anyway because she's too afraid that he won't approve of her.

Sad how separated and lonely we all are, isn't it? One of my personal sayings is that we all die alone ... even when we're surrounded by loved ones, only one person can walk down that long dark tunnel ...
 
One can only hope that's what's at the end of the tunnel. :p
 
Well, theoretically, it is a right to decide to function as a couple. But....

John Gottlieb's research showed that one of the predictors of a relationship failing or not was influenceability: could a particular partner be influenced and changed by the other. If the newbie cannot influence a decision because it has to go through the original couple, and so only they can truly influence each other, it seems counterintuitive to me that this would actually form the basis of something that works, especially when it seems to be a common thread running through the tales of hurt third partners that influenceability didn't happen.

It's always your right to behave how you want in the relationship, but it steps on other people's rights sometimes, if behaving that way is unwise. (For example, you have the right to stonewall (refuse to discuss your problems). But it steps on the Riggs of a partner to be able to air grievances without fear. So it is unwise.)


To have an equal say in determining the form of your relationship is a primary right. I would posit that being able to have ideas carefully considered from an unbiased by history perspective is a right. If you have a problem with the form of the relationship with one person , to be able to deal with it between the two of you and make a decision which is best for the two of you without being referred back to the influence of how the two of them do it also seems to me to be a right. (If you were dating a widower or divorced person. You woulnd't want to hear "well, my former wife and I did it that way" every time you brought up a problem, would you?)

What everybody has a right to is self-determination: the couple absolutely can function as a couple and as they used to when spending couple time. They can talk about what works for them individually. But if they are only advocating for what works for the two of them as a couple, and not what works for the newbie in the triad, power is going to unbalance fast.
 
Last edited:
What about concerns the original couple may have that their marriage may become threatened/destabilized if they don't present a united front?
 
I actually wonder if couples have a right to exercise privilege and act as a two-person collective if they want to. After all, that's what they've always done in the past (before trying polyamory), and besides, the new partner has perfect freedom to set her own boundaries and walk away if the situation becomes unacceptable ... doesn't she?


And devil's advocate: you have the right to exercise white privilege in a mixed-race scenario where one is white. But it's not going to make you two happy. Same with Hetero- cis- male- or any other privilege that applies. But is that love? More likely, it would be hurtful at best, abusive at worst. True love advocates for the equality of your partners. And many newly added partners are hurting for that kind of true love to be shown.
 
Are there any cases where the newly-added partner is "the predator" in the situation? such as if she is a cowgirl?
 
Great post, Asparagus.

What about concerns the original couple may have that their marriage may become threatened/destabilized if they don't present a united front?

This is just my opinion, but in that case, they shouldn't consider opening up their marriage in the first place, for many reasons:

-They have unresolved trust and jealousy issues.
-They don't work under the basic reality that yes, their relationship will absolutely change by opening it up, but do work under the assumption that change is bad and should be tamped down.
-They aren't interested in an organic relationship, but in constraining and controlling the relationship another person is allowed to have
 
Can they open up their marriage in a swinging capacity, as long as they don't attempt poly with it?
 
And devil's advocate: you have the right to exercise white privilege in a mixed-race scenario where one is white. But it's not going to make you two happy. Same with Hetero- cis- male- or any other privilege that applies. But is that love? More likely, it would be hurtful at best, abusive at worst. True love advocates for the equality of your partners. And many newly added partners are hurting for that kind of true love to be shown.

Agreed.
And a lot of people only realise that they are couple fronted after they have changed their whole lives also, how can that NOT be hurtful if you have sacrificed so much? Of course it is hurtful and abusive behaviour.

How many women have lost so much because couples have given them the choice of Our way or the Highway?
 
vee thinking of moving to triad

Lady Real and I had a long talk last night about exploring changing our structure to an open triad. We've flirted with this option before and needed to step back for a bit. After working on stuff (communication styles, personal needs for physical affection etc) we talked about our long term goals and our mutual desire for a family style situation together. We all decided to take a week to think about what each of us would need to be comfortable moving forward together. I'm currently compiling a list of discussion questions as well as contemplating my needs.

I would love to hear input about things to think about as we explore.

Real and I have been together for 2 years. Lady and I have been good friends and occasional sex partners for that long as well. We go to large family gatherings together. We have all vacationed together. They help me care for my disabled mom. I function as an 'aunt' to their kiddos. So lots of the big stuff are things we've worked out.

What I would like here is advice/input from folk about things to look for as we change our structure. Discussions that would need to happen that we might not think about etc. We are going slow and while we recognize that if things don't work it will never go back to how it is now but that as caring adults we hope that no matter what we will find an avenue that works for us.
Advice/critical analysis welcome. I'm ok with a harsh light being shed.
Thanks,
Playful
 
Last edited:
Triad love is beautiful. If I were to do it again, I would make sure that each person had the capacity to be a full-on lover for me. That it's not just a play partner you could be, but a live-in partner with Lady, if that's where you're headed; that you would individually take a relationship to the level the three of you are headed. Maybe that's a bit optimistic. But I'd want that, next time.

Also, ask - now- about breakups. Can you break up with one and keep going with he other - either one? If they break up, are you free to date them both?

Read more Than Two's couple privilege thing together. What might show up? How are you going to handle that?

Are they up for creating a new entity, not just "adding on" to what they have?

Do you feel comfortable with how they do things? Can you respect how thy deal with problems, communicate, etc?

What do you have with each of them that they don't have together you may want to bring into the relationship? Is there freedom to do that? Or at least,
Discuss and decide openly?
 
Hi Playful,

If/when you transition from a vee into a triad, what do you think will be different? Will you move in with them? become a primary partner? engage in some threesomes? Will you and lady develop a romance with each other and if so, what will you do to make that happen? Will you go on formal dates with her?

What changes have the three of you discussed so far? Is it mostly just a change in how you view yourselves? that you are more of a family unit now?

Just some questions to consider.
Regards,
Kevin T.
 
Asparagus thanks for list of things to think on. Now I have more to put on my list! Yes we are looking long term partner. Lady and I occasionally play together already but we are looking for emotional love share life stuff. We are all three reading and talking through more than two.

Kevin - I think for us the status change is an indicator of the developing closeness between lady and i. She and I are going to spend more time together as a dyad and see what develops if anything romantically. That's probably the big change. We are wanting to date. We are thinking about scheduling in dates. Lady would like to do this on non family hangout / real and i days where we'd meet in town and have traditional dates (movies museum, music, etc). I think its a good idea. We've been really close metamours but dating each other will change how the whole system works. We can't avoid every pitfall, but we are talking through it slowly because we all value the current good situation.

As for threesomes, well we have those intermittently but while rewarding and intense... threesomes are way too exhausting for daily activity. We all 3 long ago talked and agreed on that. As for living together current life barriers (jobs and family needs) keep that from happening so we live about an hour apart on different sides of the city. Oddly real ' s work is half an hour closer to my house than his.

We have talked about future living circumstances. At the current time , in order for me to feel comfortable as a live in partner, I would need all three of us to move into a new to us place together. I already own my own home, have a serious need for personal space. We have talked about future housing but that's 2 to 5 years into the future so other than agreeing that when/if we do live in the same house, we all need to start fresh together in that space.

Ok I'm rambling now so I'm gonna post now.

Playful
 
It sounds like combining domiciles is something you're not ready for yet, and it may never be the right thing for you. I am sympathetic about needing one's own space and privacy. I am like that myself (in spite of my forum activity). I think you can be a triad even if you have your own place to live, you just have to figure out what works best for the three of you.

@ happytriad ... my apologies for kind of taking over this thread and/or stealing your thunder. It was not intentional, I just post a lot and there is much to be discussed on the subject of triads (especially MFF triads). Please rejoin the thread if you're willing, I won't bombard you with so many questions.

Sincerely,
Kevin T.
 
Back
Top