What is ethical non-monogamy?

Praxis

New member
I am an older male and my partner is younger - together for five years. We are queer identified and have always been committed to polyamory. We never explicitly discussed what that would look like. All of our actions in exploring implicitly looked like (and I thought were aimed at) a triad. The triad was emotional friendship & community with me (to be the basis of a trust bond) and an emotional and sexual partnership for my partner - with eye towards long term committed relationship to adopt and raise children with.

This was never meant to be casual and all of our discussions understood long term commitment to community and mutually supportive family; even moving to less expensive locale eventually together (we live in Bay Area).

Six months ago, my partner met a person who for first month seemed open to all of this and they quickly became bonded. We - this other person and I - met alone on two occasions to see if we "fit" and we got along great and they reported this as so to both myself and my partner.

Then, about 6 weeks in they resisted any efforts to work on a friendship at all and want no communications with me at all. They now talk of parallel polyamory or even relationship anarchy (neither was ever mentioned early on... though kitchen table poly was). There is now discussion of never living under same roof if they do move in together.

The two of them are deep into an emotional relationship and I feel forced into a kind of relationship to which I would never have agreed to join. Certainly not without open honest face to face discussions-negotiation of boundaries. But here we are.

My partner does not dispute the facts of the situation and is mad at both of us for not finding a way we all three can live with situation. I insist on face to face reboot of our agreements and boundaries but the other person refuses any discussion at all. I simply must accept the situation as is. I argue this is unethical non-monogamy and cannot be made right without open negotiation of consent and frankly, an apology for having been defacto misled with initial seeming being on same page wiling to work toward our ideal outcomes as outline above.

There is more details but for brevity sake here and now, I am curious as to any thoughts or feedback?
 
Hello Praxis,

It sounds to me like the current situation does not have your consent. This means it is not polyamory, it is cheating. Cheating out in the open, with your knowledge but without your consent.

Semantics aside, you have to decide if you are willing to stay in this parallel poly situation. How important is it to you to stay with your partner? If you need to stay with your partner, then you need to find a way to be okay with parallel poly. It is not an easy decision.

What about the idea of a temporary breakup? You break up with your partner for awhile, perhaps a month or so, and use that time to decide what you can put up with, and if this relationship with your partner is something that you want?

In any case, you are in a crappy situation. I do not envy you.

Sincerely,
Kevin T.
 
Hi Praxis

it sounds like the newer party to this (your metamour) has taken a dislike to you for whatever reason and has moved to secure their own boundaries and needs from their relationship with your partner. While this is unfortunate, it's their right to express what they want from their relationship. If your partner agrees to keep seeing them knowing that it wasn't a part of your agreements, then your problem isn't actually with your metamour, it's with your partner, who is continuing to pursue both relationships despite them being woefully incompatible. I'm guessing right now that your partner is shifting that responsibility by being mad at the both of you, but really they've put themselves in a position now where they have to choose how they are going to move forward, and grumpily nagging you and your metamour to sort it out between yourselves just isn't going to cut the mustard.

You also have choices, but from what information you've provided, none of them are going to be pleasant in the short term. Still, if you walk away you never know what's just around the corner.
 
There is nothing un-ethical about this. There is a difference of opinion. It may or may not be able to be resolved.

One can fantasize all they want about what kind of relationship they want, but reality is usually much messier.
 
There is no way a polyamorous person or couple can decide ahead of time what relationship structure they want, meet a potential (hitherto unknown) partner, then insist on slotting them into this set-up. Not without the full agreement of a willing "third" party.

What you describe is borderline "unicorn hunting".

Granted, this new person DID initially indicate they may be willing to try what you propose, but at some point they decided it wasn't for them (it'd be helpful to know the reason, though ultimately not necessary). The choice belongs to them. They have the right to consent, or not, to whatever kind of relationship is on offer.

Your partner meanwhile MAY have broken an explicit agreement with YOU - and you have a right to be disappointed, hurt and angry. You also have the right to decide if you are willing to keep seeing them under these circumstances. It sucks that you may not get the kind of family situation you were hoping for, but you cannot force it on anyone either.
 
My argument is this you and your partner were practicing nonethical nonmonogamy when you decided on a relationship configuration without the input of your metamour whom that configuration inpacts.

Just because you share a partner you have no right to dictate how they conduct THEIR relationship.
 
Last edited:
My partner does not dispute the facts of the situation and is mad at both of us for not finding a way we all three can live with situation. I insist on face to face reboot of our agreements and boundaries but the other person refuses any discussion at all. I simply must accept the situation as is. I argue this is unethical non-monogamy and cannot be made right without open negotiation of consent and frankly, an apology for having been defacto misled with initial seeming being on same page willing to work toward our ideal outcomes as outlined above.
Have the talks with your partner about how they are going to handle the situation.
The metamour has stated their intentions clearly -- six weeks in, which to me seems rather early. As others have said, they can't be expected to have the relationship on your terms.
Your partner, however, is in the position to say no to their terms.
And if they accept them, you are the one to say no to her. ((?) I'm sorry I'm not sure about the pronoun.)

And yes, if she decides to have her new interest in parallel-poly style and you decide to cope just to keep your partner (and perhaps the meta also decides to settle for something less-then-ideal just to keep the hinge) --- that is a situation I'm in, a situation some would not call poly, a situation where consent can be highly questionable. But I'm not sure anyone made a mistake.

It's a difficult situation to be in and difficult to take about any step forward, but it's just a situation of misaligned preferences. I would liken it to dating a workaholic while being family oriented, or to one partner preferring big cities with while the other wants to live on a family farm.

My advice is, if you want to stay, focus on being truly on the same page with your partner. Try to survive this initial period of your partner being absorbed by the other - six months is still pretty much NRE :( Concentrate on what you need from the relationship, not on what's "fair" or any comparison with the metamour. Ask for it. Seek a vision that both you and your partner can be fully on board with. You can have these talks with your partner and expect her to include the meta's preferences.

Of course, all this is easier said then done.
 
I was confused by referring to THEY (one person) & THEY (two people).

In common parlance, your partner is the hinge of a vee.

It is the responsibility of the hinge to keep things balanced. A hinge who cannot do so is a sloppy hinge.

Your partner takes it past "sloppy" by whining about how much his playmates SUCK "for not finding a way we all three can live with situation." :rolleyes:

My suggestion is that all three of you need to figure out (individually) what it means to be a responsible adult -- nobody is going to magically "fix" anyone else, especially without their active desire to improve.

You probably won't get an apology, & probably shouldn't pursue one anyway as that tends to be petty vengeance for being wronged.

You are correct in feeling that a "reboot of our agreements and boundaries" is now necessary, but for being "always been committed to polyamory" you seem to have been caught unawares that this would be REQUIRED. There's no way to have a "kinda open-ish" dyad magically blossom into a triad, because there is NO WAY to neatly fold a "third" into a "couple": the old status quo ends in order for the new relationship to begin.

And you might not have any way to wedge yourself into their little monogamish dyad. On the surface at least, it looks like you've been cowboyed.
 
Back
Top