play vs ? partners, boundary equality

LovingRadiance

Active member
I'm not sure how to word the scrambled thoughts I'm struggling through at the moment.
But, I wanted to come here and get some feedback and thoughts and different viewpoints to expand my perspective in order to come to some sort of conclusion in my mind-because it won't stop spinning this rubix cube thought pattern.

Ok, so to me there is a difference between a play partner (swinger partner, fuck buddy, friend with benefits maybe) & a long term committed partner such as my boyfriend, who lives with us and is a daily part of our world, is a parent to our children, financial burdens etc.

I don't have an issue with either, but I'm not currently interested in having play partners.

My IMPRESSION is that in all honesty, play partners is more what Maca wants.. but that's not what he says (a whole other topic).

I struggle, because the behaviors that are acceptable with play partners and those that are acceptable with potential long term partners are different BECAUSE
a long term partner needs to be able to function with the family as a whole, be on the same page with how we're raising our kids (which includes our choice to be open about our dynamic), and have similar long term goals. For their sake and ours.

However, a play partner doesn't really need to be any of these things. A play partner doesn't need to associate with any of the rest of us at all.



BUT

even if its simple enough to define that someone is attractive and your both interested in being play partners-
we do still HAVE kids who we are open with.
But... I don't think that they should be exposed to these play partners

BECAUSE
these partners tend to rotate through more quickly and its upsetting for the kids to lose people they've come to care for.


I'm struggling because these thoughts seem very clear cut to me and even fair.

But, in creating our boundary list (and we have established that with all of us being so damn ADD, we NEED a written agreement),

we seem to come up with agreements with no major issue.

UNTIL
there's another woman. In every case, it's been evident that the relationship dynamic being established has been a play partner. Someone to enjoy a romp with, some amusing conversation periodically, but not someone who would ever be a significant "match" for our family.

The latest has a real issue with me "not being poly" because I'm not interested in "falling in love with falling in love", based upon my disinterest in starting new relationships (over and over again) which then get replaced by newer ones.
Also has issues believing that I'm "holding Maca back" and not allowing him freedom to grow and expand "into his real self" with others. Because I am pissed over him breaking our boundaries with her. But, they're boundaries she feels are silly-because she tends to be more of a "multiple play partner" person.
:confused:
I don't see this at all.

The thing is-Maca takes their side-when he's in NRE. Saying he deserves more freedom and I'm being unreasonable (not making new rules, just insisting on him upholding the rules that exist). But, these same rules he still expects me to abide by.

The latest drama that unfolded came down to him saying that the difference is that you can't MAKE a new relationship with the rules we have and I don't have to do that so it's not fair. I can't prove him wrong-as I am not interested in starting a new relationship. But, I know that the rules we have, I could create a new relationship with. But-I probably couldn't start a play partner relationship under them.

THAT I think is the real crux of the issue. Not that he couldn't create and make a long term relationship (which takes longer to establish anyway), but that he can't start a play partner relationship as easily, because the people who want to just play, aren't interested in spending much time getting to know the family first....

My biggest battle is-I don't really give a fuck about him having play partners and doing whatever he wnats in that arena-with sexual protection in place.

But-I do have a big fucking chip on my shoulder over the rules applying to both of us and even though I'm not interested in having a play partner at the moment-I KNOW he would NOT be ok with it if I did want to. So, I'm loathe to establish that privilege knowing it won't be upheld for both of us.

(just to be clear, it's not that I mind him doing what I don't choose to-I just want him to be clear that we both HAVE THE RIGHT)

So.... anyone got thoughts on the differences between play partners and long term partners,
getting the relationships started,
how the family as a whole is or isn't included,
how to ensure that both people are creating the boundaries from a heartfelt place and not just saying the words.....???
 
I borrowed Ciel's quote from another thread-cause I think it sums up some of what I was saying much better than I did.
As I said, I'm struggling with this topic in my head.

I'm going to take a walk, to the park with the kids. I'll check back later for thoughts.


Originally Posted by CielDuMatin
The agreement that I have with my partners is that we will meet with new interests before anything happens that could be considered a relationship. We value each others opinions and really like to get input, since this person may well become a significant part of one of our lives.

If the other person doesn't want to meet yet, then that's perfectly fine, but it puts a limit on how far the relationship can develop. So in other words it just slow things down, which may be what you want anyway.
 
But-I do have a big fucking chip on my shoulder over the rules applying to both of us and even though I'm not interested in having a play partner at the moment-I KNOW he would NOT be ok with it if I did want to. So, I'm loathe to establish that privilege knowing it won't be upheld for both of us.

(just to be clear, it's not that I mind him doing what I don't choose to-I just want him to be clear that we both HAVE THE RIGHT)

Part of the problem with absolute equality, is that we are not equal. Likely part of Maca's double standard is based what he knows about you (even if he can't verbalize this) and how you handle relationships vs how he does. If you came to him saying you wanted to sleep with someone, he would likely freak out, knowing you had already formed a very strong attachment to that person and now it's serious. I'm just guessing here. We all have at least some double standards to work through - we know they're wrong, but they are still there.

Maybe the both of you can agree/admit that the beginnings of his relationships are more along the lines of "play partners" with the possibility to become more and make your boundaries accordingly. Unfortunately you probably won't get the same rights (at least not in the immediate future). You don't want/need play partners or what looks like play partners, so maybe you can give up equality in this area (for the time being) and see how things play out. If there's just as much drama - well then, that wasn't the issue. If it causes less drama overall can you live with this double standard?
 
LR, thanks for quoting me - quite a compliment! ;)

Luckily, none of us in our current configuration has any interest in play partners, so this issue hasn't come up yet.

Part of me would say that, should someone wish to, then boundaires would be laid down (like safer sex, testing, etc) and go nuts - we wouldn't need to meet them and get "approval". The problem with that, as we see so very often with folks coming here from the swing world, is that even if everybody intends this to be a casual FWB type thing, often it can quickly evolve into something a lot more committed. The issue then is that things have already "gone beyond" a level of commitment where anyone else involved could say "I don't think this person is a good fit for us for the following reasons...." - it's too late for that at that point.

If your partner says he doesn't want casual things, and you put boundaries in place that support that, and he doesn't want to respect those boundaries, then there is an issue, obviously.

It's worth getting to the bottom of what he really wants - is he not telling you because he feels you may not want to hear it? Does he not really know himself? Opinions on relationships can evolve and it's hard to bring up "you know we agreed to us wanting this? Well, I've changed my mind."
Work this out before you start worrying about whether or not boundaries should change.

If he has a pattern of wanting to ignore boundaries while in NRE, then you need to call him on that. Do the boundaries really no longer work for him?

If you want the ability to have causal partners (whether or not you choose to actually DO it) then you need to discuss that with him, too.

Time for some renegotiation, methinks.
 
Ciel-

EVERY time he meets someone-he thinks she's "the newest one". So far, all but one exploded in a HUGE nightmare. The one that didn't-was truly a lot of work on her part and mine to save his ass from the multiple boundaries broken.

EVERY time-there are boundaries broken.
Every time-he wants the boundaries changed to be more lenient.
Every time-when it ends, he is dead set on those boundaries being put in place again (for me).

(my one other relationship has remained solid the whole time)

I don't want a play partner, but he knows full well that the reason is because I don't have TIME right now.
In the past I have had many and enjoyed it to its fullest-but with school and the kids school-I don't have time.

At any rate, it's not that I expect our situations to be mirrored. Thats silly.
But I have a big problem with him saying its ok for him to kiss some random person "in order to decide if there is chemistry", but not ok for me to. It's neither here nor there to me, that I have no intention of doing so-it's about respect and that his attitude leaves me feeling like I'm not being respected.

(Ciel-I have called him out over the boundaries being broken-and we went rounds again over it this last weekend. No boundaries have been broken currently-but I'm not interested in going through it AGAIN. To me-it's just NOT that hard to come home and say-look, I want to make a change. Or come home and say Hey-I want to do xyz".
As a rule of thumb, I'm pretty much open to anything-as long as he accepts that for every privilege he requests, he needs to be willing to allow me the same privilege IF I WANT IT. I'm sick of being treated like I should allow him to do whatever the hell he pleases while I kiss his ass and insecurities and don't do anything JUST because I ALREADY have a boyfriend.
 
All I can say here is that I think that you're entirely right that there is a big difference between play partners and long term partners, that it's ok for there to be different boundaries for each, that it's not ok to constantly expose your kids to new partners who then disappear, that it's not ok to break boundaries, that it's not ok to constantly change boundaries to suit one person's desires one minute and then change them back to suit their insecurities the next minute...

You're entirely, completely right. There's no rubix cube here that I can see, no puzzle, except for this one: why can't he see all the things that I listed above and then be strong enough to adjust his behavior accordingly even if he doesn't like it, even if it means he can't have something he wants right away on the one hand or that he has to allow you the possibility of something that will make him jealous on the other?

Only he can answer that.
 
Annabel put the whole situation very clearly.

What I would do in your position is try to change my perspective. There is a pattern here that you are not satisfied with: you both agreeing to strict boundaries when he has no other interests and him breaking them (or trying to change them) when he has. You can do little to change his part in this, only he can control his own behaviour. So what is it that you can do to make the situation one you are satisfied with?

For my part, I would definitely have an issue with being in the position of having my trust broken over and over again. Agreements have no use if only one party sticks to them. For me, it would be the time to make some personal boundaries around not ending up in that position again. Whether the relationship would survive with those personal boundaries would remain to be seen, but if it comes down to that I find it healthier to protect myself than the relationship.
 
It sounds like the problem boils down to hypocrisy....character, being able to have and follow a code of conduct. Not causal vs long term.....hump day friend ( pin a coladas day friends ) ...< recently changed> vs live in boyfriend.
 
I can't respond right now-giggling so hard over you D!

But, I will be back to elaborate.

I think you're right-it's time to figure out the personal boundaries-which is part of why I made this thread.

To get a feel for others thoughts, experiences.

I've noted in another thread a LOT of heat over meeting both partners before sexual involvement.
I don't happen to see that one changing in our terms.

My terms are-either they meet me first-or they don't meet me (or the kids) at all. I don't care which. It's easy enough to tell if something happens-because he has little to no free-time unless I carve it out of the schedule for him. Besides-it shows on his face.

But-there's other things that need to be figured out regarding this whole boundary breaking thing.

He's sincere in his apologies. But as those who've watched through the last 3 years already know-he ALWAYS IS-until he meets someone and then its "brain be gone" like a crack addict.
 
Maca sounds like a really difficult partner to deal with. Constantly breaking boundaries? Refusing to grant you the same freedoms he claims he needs? Ugh.

But my comments aren't going to be about that. I want to offer a different perspective on play partners vs. committed relationship partners.

I don't think your clear-cut distinction between the two is fair.

When I meet someone I like, I start with something casual and easy-going, a friendship with sex involved. If we are a good match for each other and have good chemistry, we might become regular lovers (or lover-friends, to use a term I encountered here). Maybe we'll keep going like that for a short time, or a long time, or maybe eventually we'll find that we have "something more" with each other.

I don't think I could get into a loving, committed relationship any other way. I just naturally gravitate toward people who like being friends who have sex, rather than people who need commitment right away. If I fall in love, it will be through sexual chemistry, through slowly getting to know a friend I have sex with.

I don't classify people I might like into "play partner" material or "relationship" material.

If someone told me, "You can either have sex with me immediately and just be a play partner who will NEVER meet my wife and kids, or you can immediately meet my family and eventually become serious," I would not get involved with him at all. Neither of those choices makes sense to me. Neither of those choices allows things to develop naturally.

Of course, maybe he wouldn't offer me the choice--he would have already decided which "type" I was.

I find this attitude really insulting. But I encounter it everywhere (not just in poly dating). So it's very common.

However, it's also pretty common for people in the dating world (both mono and poly) to start with something more casual and then see where it goes from there.

I do think that more people should question why they have such a firm distinction, why it must either be "serious dating" or "fuckbuddies" but nothing in between, and no progression from one to the other.

LovingRadiance, you seem to feel very strongly that your husband's "fuckbuddies" are people you would not want your children exposed to. You think they are people who mean nothing and will move out of your husband's life quickly.

Why couldn't they be friends your husband has sex with, but who just aren't all that involved in your family? He could have a long-term lover-friend who never has any involvement with your kids.

Or, is the problem that your husband gets too caught up in casual things and breaks boundaries? (That might be, in which case, discount my advice!)

I do understand that you want to make sure that anyone your husband gets serious with should be a good match for your family. That makes sense.

(And, frankly, that's why my approach to dating probably wouldn't work for someone with a primary partner, which is why I haven't dated someone with a primary partner yet).

But it sounds like Maca takes sex less seriously than you do, and wants the freedom to pursue relationships where sexual chemistry comes first and seriousness may come later (or not at all).

His view sounds reasonable to me, but his treatment of you doesn't seem reasonable. So...I'm not sure what I'm trying to tell you here.

I just don't feel comfortable with your attitude that you don't mind if he has a fuckbuddy or a serious partner, but it has to be one or the other, and you need to know WHICH one.
 
Meera-
the reason I feel his fb's aren't safe for my kids-is because I took the 'high road' to trust him and every single time-my kids got hurt.

So, as a parent, I feel that my first responsibility is to them, not to poly.

As a personal thing-I've had play partners get more serious with time.
But, my kids are only kids for a temporary amount of time-and I don't think it's too much to ask that people who want something that isn't compatible with raising a family not try to be in a relationship with people who are struggling to raise a family.
THAT SAID-it's MACA'S responsibility-not the other persons.

I happen to think that once the kids are grown-it would be a MUCH MUCH less big deal to me.

But, I'm tired (3 years tired) of watching my kids get screwed over.

As for play partners vs serious-as I said-I struggle with that terminology-it's not... adequate.

His long term FUNCTIONAL relationship, was one that I would classify as a "friend with benefits" for friend-lover (which is how she classified it also).
BUT-she also acknowledged that our kids came first (as did hers) and so she was COMPLETELY understanding of the need to take time to make friends with everyone at least to the point of everyone feeling safe with her and she with us, for the sake of ALL THREE kids.
In fact, I ended up being the one to escort her child to her in their new home when they moved (she had to leave prior to the school year ending).

It's not that I feel they have to be... hmmmm how to describe it? A "life commitment". But, there has to be a level of friendship developed to create a safety net for the kids that their love affair ending isn't going to result in the kids being exposed to b.s. drama OR suddenly losing a friend.

I had fuck buddies and friends with benefits before we married-and was in an open relationship for years. My daughter, who was the only child I had during that time, has retained friendly relationships with those people (as have I) even though we are NONE OF US, still sexual. Because they all understood that their PRESENCE in my child's life equated to a responsibility to be considerate of HER needs and HER feelings. So, they didn't disappear on her after we nixed our love affairs.

When you have no primary and no kids-its SOOOOOOO much easier, becuase you are really only responsible to yourself and the person whom you choose to have sex/friendship with is also responsible for themselves.

But, particularly when kids are added to the mix-this simply isn't fair to them. All of the adults who choose to interact with the kids, need to be willing to prioritize the child's well-being (I am NOT talking giving kids whatever they want, but taking time to identify behaviors that may be damaging-and NOT doing them).

Frankly.....

I think that casual partners brought home-regardless of whether or not they are a "lead in to more" are inappropriate if you have young children at home. This only because my experience has been, that most people can't manage to consider how the loss of these "casual" people will be felt by the kids. Kids don't classify people at home as "casual" or unimportant generally. Their home is their sanctuary and adults there are considered their "safe people". So, those who aren't planning to stick around, shouldn't be in.

On the other hand-I understand the need to get to know someone and I LOVE sex. But, I CHOOSE as a mom not to allow myself the privilege of using sexual chemistry as the first factor to assess. I choose compatibility with my family first.

Ciel said it well when he said as a family or group, it's about compromise (and consideration) of EVERYONE's needs. In our case-there are CHILDREN'S needs to consider and if a "new party" doesn't want that type of concern-they shouldn't be part of our group.
EVERYONE's needs need to be considered and by default the kids needs hold greater leverage because they did not choose this lifestyle.
 
I should add, I agree with another poster who said something about the following:

When you choose to date someone who had kids or a primary already, you need to understand you are dating SOMEONE+baggage, not just SOMEONE.

What functions perfectly well when dealing with only combinations of SOMEONES, does NOT work when +baggage is added.

I prefer +responsiblities to other people.
I dislike the term "baggage" due to the negative connotations it brings.
But, the point is sound.

I am not free to be "just me" without considering EVERY SINGLE THING I DO in terms of its affect on my children and my immediate family (household). Likewise, neither is ANYONE ELSE in our family.

So, a new partner wanting to date one of us-has to except that we aren't free to offer them what someone who DIDN'T have that + responsibilities to others would be free to offer.
They are free to choose someone who is less encumbered, but if they want one of us, they have to accept that the limitations of said baggage WILL affect them as well.
 
I'd wanted to post something but had put it off since I didn't have any brilliant suggestions (well except that him seeing a counselor solo might help...thats not brilliant exactly) I suffer from similar issues - my husband Adam makes agreements with me, then when he meets somebody he likes who directly contradicts our list of agreements, instead of not pursuing, or stopping pursuing after it's pointed out to him that it breaks our agreement, his first instinct is to do the "Well but..." and start listing reasons why our agreements don't apply to this person because he feels there are extenuating circumstances.

However I've been lucky, all these things have been hashed out early. It's not nice that I've had to be firm and repetitive and downright "naggy wife" far too often for my tastes to get him to stick to our agreements, but your post makes me feel lucky because as he isn't assertively sexual, I haven't had to deal with same sort of fallout - he moves slow so it is usually dealt with in early dating stages. Still, our #1 poly issue has been our short little bullet pointed list of succinct & clearly stated B&W agreements by literal me, and regular mis or re-interpreting of them by non-literal him to suit what he is feeling at the time. As I said, I see a lot of similarities between us with our problem, but mine seems so mild compared to yours due to a differing sex drive in our partners. Considering what a stress is it on me, I can only imagine what you are dealing with.

I wish I had a magic fix for situations like this. I mean I'd say "nobody can come around our kids until X, X and X happens" (for me it'd probably you two feel like you've built a friendship/X amount of time has passed and you're still dating/they've made an effort to build a camaraderie with me/us) and stick to it, but that doesn't lessen the impact on your relationship at all or make it any less of a burden on you. Obviously I agree that you don't deserve it as you've worked really hard to establish your boundaries as have I. It's brave and really an amazing amount of work to figure out and stick to your boundaries, and therefore defeating to have somebody see your boundaries as abstract instead of black and white, or try to rewrite boundaries whenever somebody new and shiny comes along. To me it seems like there's no choice in a situation like that to become more and more of a hardass dick. Not the best thing in a loving relationship, but when you have kids to put first...well I have to imagine I'd be a lot more of a dick in these situations if I had them...

I'm just wishing you luck.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for clarifying your situation, LovingRadiance. Everything you say makes sense.

I do see what you mean, that Maca should insist his lovers either never meet the kids or that they commit to being a regular presence in the kids' lives.

It sounds like Maca must be making poor choices in terms of who he gets involved with, if it results in situations in which your kids are exposed to unnecessary loss and drama??

But I wonder if you could approach the situation with your kids differently. For example, does it truly damage kids to experience loss every so often? Loss is a part of life--friends move away, baby-sitters grow up, relationships end, people drift apart.

Your kids have two parents, so it's not the same as the kids of single parents who long for a second parent and get hurt when the potential mates keep abandoning them.

I don't have kids myself, but I have many memories of adults who were temporary but fun presences in my life when I was little. There was a close friend of my mom's who took me to the zoo a lot, but she ended up having a falling-out with my mom (not over dating or anything like that) and the friendship drifted apart. I remember wondering why she wasn't around any more, and my mom explaining that the friend had gotten too busy with other things and sometimes that's just what happens and that it's okay to miss people. My mom didn't get angry on my behalf or allow me to dwell on feeling abandoned (although she herself still misses this friend 25 years later).

I don't know how old your kids are, but maybe it would help to put a positive "life lesson" spin on the unexpected departure of their father's lovers. From teachers to baby-sitters to elderly relatives to high school crushes, people just aren't always around forever.

Kids get hurt easily, but kids are also pretty resilient.

But I haven't been following your story so I might be missing a lot of key info.
 
Thanks for clarifying your situation, LovingRadiance. Everything you say makes sense.
No problem. :) I fully understand how impossible it is to really convey a whole situation in a few posts. :) I enjoy the conversation.

It sounds like Maca must be making poor choices in terms of who he gets involved with, if it results in situations in which your kids are exposed to unnecessary loss and drama??
Yep. It wasn't a huge problem with the 2 year relationship (she just moved) even though the kids are having to face the loss of her and her daughter (friend). It's fairly easy to walk through the explanations of them having moved etc.
But, the sudden disappearances, with no explanation forth coming (from them or Maca) leaves me having to figure out WHAT to say-and that ticks me off. I don't lie to my kids-so I end up with "I don't really know honey", which as you can imagine, does not satisfy a 4-5 year old and results in the same question for MONTHS. It's been almost 2 years since one of them disappeared and she STILL asks me. Sigh.

For example, does it truly damage kids to experience loss every so often? Loss is a part of life--friends move away, baby-sitters grow up, relationships end, people drift apart.
Certainly, which they are aware of. With a step brother and a foster brother who moved away and the loss of a number of friends who've moved away, not to mention family, they have experienced this.
But, even in the case of our oldest (20 yo now) daughters best friend committing suicide-there was an explanation. Painful, but something I can work with.
When it's "sorry daddy decided to fuck her cause he thought he was in love iwth her, but then he realized he was thinking with his dick"... that doesn't work-but that's the God's honest truth.
Really, what it comes down to for me is this:
if you want to make shitty decisions (like smoking); keep it to yourself, it's not something your kids should have to struggle with understanding.
On the other hand, if real life happens while you are doing your level best to take responsiblity for your actions; then you sit down and explain real life to your kids.
Either way-it shouldn't fall on me to explain the disappearance of the women he has drug through for reasons even he can't explain because looking back a week or two later he's smacking his forehead saying "UGH! WHY?@?@"


Your kids have two parents, so it's not the same as the kids of single parents who long for a second parent and get hurt when the potential mates keep abandoning them.
:) Actually they have 4. 3 live here and one lives a few miles away. :)

I don't know how old your kids are, but maybe it would help to put a positive "life lesson" spin on the unexpected departure of their father's lovers. From teachers to baby-sitters to elderly relatives to high school crushes, people just aren't always around forever.
I dont mind doing that for lovers who are actually around for more than a week or two. But, if he wants experiments or play partners-they don't need to be around. It's not fair to me as the one at home all day with the kids-to have to deal with the drama. HE doesn't have to deal with it-he's not here. It's a matter of simple respect of me.
The same way I wouldn't bring any experimental partners around his coworkers. Because HE shouldn't have to deal with their questions/concerns for something that is ALL MINE.

Kids get hurt easily, but kids are also pretty resilient.
They are resilient-you're absolutely right.
But, they shouldn't be unnecessarily subjected to bs just beause someone is lazy about dealing with their own shit. It's neglect to subject a child to pain for no reason. There's no NEED for him to bring these women around his kids-therefore, there is no reason for the pain he's causing them in doing so.
It's not like he can't afford to rent a hotel room every week if he wanted to.
So, there are ways around it.

OR he might consider looking at people for their HEALTHY behaviors, instead of just their "fuck me fast" looks (elaborated on his type being the "I look like a drug addict slut" type in another thread); since he keeps SAYING what he wants is a second wife. ;)

(fyi, totally NOT offended by your questions, thoughts or comments. :) Smiling actually while reading-very well thought out and meaningful addition to the conversation. I love when people actually elaborate with serious thought)
 
Back
Top