Family Style vs Spoke/Hub (?)

I do think people who demand that metamours spend time with them and make petty, unreasonable and often emotionally manipulative "rules" around how and when their partner interacts with other people are insecure and controlling.

So do I. But what does that have to do with family style poly?
 
Because in a family style of poly, the expectation is that you spend time as a "family", ie altogether.
 
Because in a family style of poly, the expectation is that you spend time as a "family", ie altogether.

But what does that have to do with insecurity and control issues?

i.e. What's manipulative and controlling about three people mutually choosing to spend time together?
 
Last edited:
Ok, people who need (oppose to prefer) a family style of polyamory expect all members of that network to spend time together. A sizeable amount of people who require a family style of poly where everyone spends time together need it because it allows them to have some form of control over their partner's relationships, lets them screen metamours, all the stuff I said before. I've said how I feel about this already. It's a red flag for me, and yes, kind of personal because it something I come across often as a straight women who prefers a hub style. I guess in a similar way that bi women are hypersensitive to unicorn hunters.
 
I am not sure where we fall in this argument.

Most of the time my relationships run parallel to each other but there are times due to the deepness of my relationships they cross paths. For example Murf is in my boys lives. He has become very important to them, so they want him at important events along side Butch and I. Also holidays and sometimes for us to see each other he has to come spend time at my home with Butch due to life events and scheduling issues.
 
Last edited:
I am not sure where we fall I'm this argument.

Most of the time my relationships run parallel to each other but there are tinges due to the deepness of my relationships they cross paths. For example Murf is in my boys lives. He has become very important to them, so they want him at important events along side Butch and I. Also holidays and sometimes for us to see each other he has to come spend time at my home with Butch due to life events and scheduling issues.
Just sounds like you've organically evolved into what works for you.
 
Ok, people who need (oppose to prefer) a family style of polyamory expect all members of that network to spend time together. A sizeable amount of people who require a family style of poly where everyone spends time together need it because it allows them to have some form of control over their partner's relationships, lets them screen metamours, all the stuff I said before. I've said how I feel about this already. It's a red flag for me, and yes, kind of personal because it something I come across often as a straight women who prefers a hub style. I guess in a similar way that bi women are hypersensitive to unicorn hunters.

All right, I can accept that. You've finally whittled it down to where it's not a sweeping generalization about all people who prefer family style polyamory. Thank you.

I still don't see how that answers the OP's question about being judged as a hub-style polyamorist, but at least it helps to explain your triggered response.
 
Ok, that bit comes in when you're discussing with one of the red flag family style people I'm talking about. When you discuss why you're a fan of a hub style, especially in relation to trust, they become very defensive and will often call you naive or something because you don't feel it necessary to supervise your parners relationships in the way that they do. It's a trigger spot for them. Similarly to someone who absolutely forbids any contact with metamours. As soon as someone ponders whether insecurity/low self esteem etc is a factor in their quite extreme repulsion of any sort of interaction with metamours, they get nasty.
 
Nope, you specifically said it about "people who practice that form of poly." The OP referred to "family type" poly, and you did not specify the sub-group of them who make rules governing their partners' behaviour. Indeed, you routinely make that generalization about the entire group of family-oriented polyfolk. You have spoken publicly with enough people from that group to dispel the "family poly preference = control issues" myth that you seem to harbor, and yet you apparently refuse to acknowledge it as a valid form of polyamory.

Not like there aren't hub-style poly folk who make just as many control-based rules. Some people impose limits on how close their partners are allowed to become with other partners, or how often they're allowed to see them. I find that happens much less frequently with family-type poly, because everyone is comfortable hanging out together and sharing time.

Control issues are about individual personalities. There is no correlation between style of polyamory, or for that matter poly vs mono, and control issues. People from all walks of life are just as likely to have control issues, be insecure, and put limitations on the behaviours of other people in their life. It has absolutely nothing to do with the pleasure some derive from being friends with their partners' partners.

I have never once seen you acknowledge that family-type polyamory is just as valid as hub-type polyamory, or even that there exist family-type polyamorists who are not insecure control freaks. I implore you to prove me wrong. Just once, admit that forms of poly other than your own are equally valid. I dare you.
Thank you.
 
I dont understand why you are thanking someone for a post directed at me. Especially one that the person. partially rescinded once I clarified my opinion. My opinion will alter when I come across more people in a family style of poly who do not try and control their partner's relationship, demand to be asked permission to date someone they like, have sex with them etc. Can you give me any examples of people who don't play that way, LR? People in family style poly situations where the members are allowed to develop relationships at their own pace without the most vocal and manipulative member of the network constantly throwing a spanned in the works just to remind everyone that they run the show? Do point them out.
 
Ok, that bit comes in when you're discussing with one of the red flag family style people I'm talking about. When you discuss why you're a fan of a hub style, especially in relation to trust, they become very defensive and will often call you naive or something because you don't feel it necessary to supervise your parners relationships in the way that they do.

That need to supervise partners is not a feature of family style poly at all. It's a feature of controlling, insecure people, no matter what relationship style they prefer. I've seen exactly the same behaviour, with exactly the same frequency, in hub-style poly as well as monogamy.

I dont understand why you are thanking someone for a post directed at me. Especially one that the person. partially rescinded once I clarified my opinion.

The thank you was directed at me, so you don't have to understand it. I understood the reason perfectly well.

I've rescinded nothing. I got you to clarify your position, and it was your clarification that I accepted, not your original statement by any means.

I stand firmly by my assertion that there's nothing inherently wrong with family style polyamory. That some people make a mess of it by having unrelated insecurity and control issues is irrelevant to the question of whether or not family style polyamory is a valid form of relationships. Just like people having jealousy issues is irrelevant to the question of whether or not polyamory is a valid form of relationship.

For each and every relationship style in existence, there are people who fuck it up. Pointing at the fuck-ups and saying "that's because they have such-and-such relationships style" is flat out wrong, a logical fallacy: "If there exists a black sheep, then all sheep are black."

What I accept is that you have personally run into a lot of these fuck-ups and this has coloured your observations of other family-style polys, caused you to put assumptions on them and then only see the evidence that fits those assumptions, and ignore any evidence that contradicts your beliefs. That's unfortunate. It's that kind of short-sightedness that leads to racism, sexism, classism, and discrimination in general.

My opinion will alter when I come across more people in a family style of poly who do not try and control their partner's relationship, demand to be asked permission to date someone they like, have sex with them etc.

I don't believe that you will. Your opinion is pretty clearly set. You HAVE seen counter-examples, and you've chosen to cloud them with your pre-existing beliefs. You can't see that which you have already decided does not exist.

Can you give me any examples of people who don't play that way, LR? People in family style poly situations where the members are allowed to develop relationships at their own pace without the most vocal and manipulative member of the network constantly throwing a spanned in the works just to remind everyone that they run the show? Do point them out.

LR herself is in one of those relationships. Her partners are free to develop relationships however the fuck they want. What you can't seem to comprehend is that THEY CHOOSE to only form relationships that are compatible with the family model, because THEY are not willing to give up family time in order to date other people.
 
I'm sorry, from what I've read, I can't agree with you about your last comment at all.
 
All right, I can accept that. You've finally whittled it down to where it's not a sweeping generalization aboutallpeople who prefer family style polyamory. Thank you.

^^

And also, are you this condemning of people who have similar "red flags" about unicorn hunters? Ie every couple seeking a triad is a unicorn hunter until proven otherwise?
 
And also, are you this condemning of people who have similar "red flags" about unicorn hunters? Ie every couple seeking a triad is a unicorn hunter until proven otherwise?

I'm this condemning of all people who use broad brushes to paint their assumptions on all the people in a particular group without giving individuals a chance to show their true colours.

I acknowledge that I myself have my own preconceived notions, and I strive to rise above them and allow people to show me who they are as individuals and not merely as members of their associated group. I may not always succeed, I am human after all, but I try not to make generalized assumptions about entire social groups based only on encounters with a small subset of those groups.
 
Last edited:
What I've read. I'm not prepared to discuss this further, here, but that is my opinion. Feel free to message me further about this if you so wish.

I will, however, recap my views on the topic itself:

When someone says that they practice a family style of poly where the expectation is for all members of the network to spend time as a unit and meeting potential metamours is an absolute must and that sort of thing, it raises red flags for me. It does this because when I hear the reasons why they want this, more often than not it relates to them requiring some form of.supervision of those relationships opposed to the benefits of family poly living, although they may be mentioned as an afterthought. Requiring supervision.signifies that one or more of the people in this relationship either cannot trust or cannot be trusted. I agree that people in other relationship styles raise similar red flags and I'm sure you've seen me say as much, but like a closed triad is an attractive route for a couple with all the flaws notorious in unicorn hunters, I feel a family style of poly is attractive for another type of dyad with similar flaws. And again, since I am a straight female, I am less concerned about unicorn hunters than this.
 
I do give people a chance to show what they are about. That is why I now don't immediately dismiss guys who have that relationship style, I will at least ask their expectations if it isn't clear from the offset. Hearing "family style" or similar prompts me to ask additional questions to normal because of the red flags it raises for me.
 
The thank you was directed at me, so you don't have to understand it. I understood the reason perfectly well.

LR herself is in one of those relationships. Her partners are free to develop relationships however the fuck they want. What you can't seem to comprehend is that THEY CHOOSE to only form relationships that are compatible with the family model, because THEY are not willing to give up family time in order to date other people.

I could give other examples as well-but it wouldn't make sense since none of them are people who post here.

The truth is-that just because people choose to do things similar, doesn't mean anyone is making them.

I choose to attend UAA. Other people choose to attend UAA. We take classes together, we study together, we learn together, we do group projects together. We aren't forcing each other or manipulating or controlling each other into that. We are individually choosing to do something the same way.

There are other people who are choosing to go to college somewhere else. They are also not being manipulated by us, nor are they manipulating us. They simply have choosen to do something different that we have.

Likewise with family style/hub. Both are do-able. For different people. My sister operates very "family style" with us and our larger group of friends. However-she is very "hub style" with her boyfriend and his family. The two groups aren't intermixed and theirs doesn't socialize outside of their household, together.

So for example; she had a "household bday" at their place. Then, tonight, we had friends and family and extended family including kids and oso's BUT NOT INCLUDING her household here. Her idea. Her plan. In both cases.
Because she CHOOSES to use both styles.
Shrug.

For our household we each have different REASONS for choosing a family style. But it's our choices. Once the kids are grown, a lot of that will change. But the kids aren't grown.
 
When someone says that they practice a family style of poly where the expectation is for all members of the network to spend time as a unit and meeting potential metamours is an absolute must and that sort of thing, it raises red flags for me.

I agree with this. Now.when I was seeing Z, it was fine to.do activitiea with his gf and her other partners ans N because we were already friends anyway. Bit if I was talking to someone new and it was required that I.mostly spend.time with his.other partners I would back away. I don't mind meeting someone but mt relationship is with the person I am involved.with, not their partners. I understand people like that dynamic and that is fine.for thwem and.there's but I choose not to participate. Unless it just happen to develop that way. I had never expected to friend J but since she lived with my bff and N'a mom we happened t spend time together in group activities that we just naturally became frienda.
 
I understand people like that dynamic and that is fine.for thwem and.there's but I choose not to participate.
And there is the key detail that has been repeatedly missed in the conversations.
None of the examples I ever gave suggested someone else should EVER EVER agree to be a part of our dynamic if they weren't comfortable with our chosen relationship styles.
It would make some people crazy.

But-the fact that we all three choose to do it that way-works for us. We're not trying to force other people to do it our way. We're saying, we don't date people who aren't like-minded.

The guys flat refuse to write on here-because they think it's a wasted effort to explain to "internet people" what they prefer or how they choose to live their lives and neither is interested in participating in any poly groups because they think there is too much "this way or you aren't really poly" attitudes that they find offensive.
But-that doesn't mean that they don't have opinions. It doesn't mean I "make them" do things "my" way. It means-they don't want to talk to anyone on here.
 
Back
Top