How to handle being vetoed or being on the bad end of an ultimatum

They didn't have a veto agreement. She just decided she was not okay with me, and told him he had to choose: her or me.

I've cut all contact with him. I am working on not settling for things that I don't actually want, and at this point in time I have zero interest in being his friend. Without the hope or desire for the return of our romantic connection... I'm out.

On the plus side... This experience (which was AWFUL for a few days, but I know better for me in the long run) has made a few of the people I've been talking to from OKCupid and the like revisit their agreements with partners. Apparently seeing how ridiculous a veto/ultimatum situation is from the side of the person being dumped makes people realize how terrible it really is. Maybe my pain will save someone else from this fate in the future. :rolleyes:
 
I believe that veto can be used sanely and responsibly to keep toxic and destructive people out of your relationship when your partner may be a bit too wonked out on NRE to see things clearly. The OP's situation does not appear to be this, of course.

In my primary relationship, we have decided that veto is permissible if a third party has substance problems that are creating issues in the relationship, if they do anything to endanger our children, or if they fail to disclose things that we need to know for our sexual health. Mental instability may be grounds for veto if it creates significant issues in the relationship. Lying may be as well, it depends on the seriousness of the deceit. We had a situation some years back where my husband's brand-new love interest was telling me, unsolicited, how great her marriage was, while she was telling my husband she was unhappy and wanted out. (No clue why it never occurred to her that he and I actually talked to each other now and then. That's not the only reason I vetoed her, but it was a contributing factor.) Trashtalking the primary, and then continuing to do so after a warning, is definitely grounds for veto with us, we don't insist that our partners become friends but we do insist on mutual respect.

I have been on the bad end of a veto myself, similar to the OP's, his wife threw a hissy fit that lasted for months, because we fell in love. She never owned what was really bothering her, but it was obvious. They as a couple never owned that a veto was what was happening, but that was also obvious, since he and I were having a successful long-term relationship before she threw her tantrum, in fact, we had just fluid bonded, with her consent.

I am so sorry that this happened to you, AlwaysGrowing. I know how painful it can be.
 
AG-sounds like you made the right choice.
But-since I have been in the role of the wife who was accused of this; I thought I would give some feedback from that side that may not have occurred to you (or any other potential reader).
I'm NOT saying this is what SHE was thinking/doing. But it is an alternate scenario that can arise.

In my situation, I am the V between Maca and GG. Maca found someone he was interested in and they started talking. A few months in he opted to share that info with me (which was directly in conflict with our agreement). It took 4 months before he bothered to give either of us contact info for the other so we could even say hello via email or anything.
Within days of that she decided she should be free to wander through his life at will and I had no right to a say so.
It JUST SO HAPPENED that her decision occurred within a month of me having to go off of my ADD, Depression and anxiety medications suddenly-due to a health issue that needed immediate attention. The health issue didn't require his "full time attention". However-the loss of those other meds in January; quite certainly sent me into a tailspin of depression (suicidal and attempting), out of control anxiety (full scale panic attacks repeat times a day so bad I couldn't leave the bathroom or bedroom).
The doctors HAD WARNED US that this was LIKELY to happen and that I needed to be watched round the clock.

But-he was in NRE and she wanted more and more of his time and attention. She wanted nothing to do with me because I wasn't "her problem".
I wanted nothing to do with her-because the fact that I DID NOT KNOW HER made her presence increase my anxiety issues (not about THEM; just in general).

But-I sure as hell needed GG to stay around.

She spent over a year after that spreading rumors all through our community that I was a controlling, possessive psycho bitch who wanted to have my cake and eat it to, but wouldn't let Maca date. Because he called it off with her when she refused to accept that he temporarily needed to get me through the medical procedures so I could go back on my meds (which I did within a month, but it took another month for all of the meds to even out in my system and my anxiety and depression to level off to normal again).

Two months-which I needed her to stay away from me (and my home which is what pissed her off) for MY HEALTH.
But that was seen as derailing their chances.

There's two key points.
One is the same one that Galagirl made.
Skills. The skills for being a hinge are VERY different than the skills for being a metamour and someone who doesn't have them, will have to deal with the emotional and intellectual changes that happen. It just is that way.
In my case, I had been a metamour. I had not been a metamour with someone I didn't know DURING a time when I was having a major health crisis. The previous health crisis; I already knew the girlfriend and she was supportive and helpful as a friend to me directly. It still meant that they had to derail some of their personal plans, but she didn't mind being home with me for their dates. In fact she enjoyed having me get sexy and romantic pictures for them. But mostly-she knew it was temporary because she also struggles with depression and anxiety and she KNEW I would be at her place to support her when she struggled (which also happened).

Two; we can't always see the issues that someone else is struggling through that impact how they behave. Even a year is a short period of time in terms of a life. I spent 1 year requiring round the clock care due to 3 major surgeries one after the other. That was a time with dating new people wasn't an option for ANY OF US. I couldn't do any of my duties in the household or as a parent. So the guys had to pick up ALL of the slack, maintain their normal responsibilities AND split the time caring for me. An existing relationship that had already been established and was comfortable being involved who we were all comfortable hanging out with as well; would have been fine. But a NEW person would not.

It's important I think to realize, that someone who does dysfunctional relationship behaviors COULD be needing to just do the learning to resolve it. They COULD stay that way indefinitely.
They COULD be struggling through a temporary, short term issue that is creating that seemingly dysfunctional need.
They COULD be struggling through a temporary, long term issue that is creating that dysfunctional need.

It's not always as simple as "what a possessive bitch".
In truth, I'm not possessive. I'm also the only one in our V who isn't. GG isn't possessive of me. But he's VERY VERY possessive of the kids. Maca is EXTREMELY possessive of both.
I'm not possessive.
EXCEPT when I am not ok. When I am having a health crisis, I am absolutely possessive of the two people I know I can trust to make sane, reasonable and rational decisions on my behalf when I am unable to.

It really does pay, when one is wanting a long term, intricately involved relationship, to take the extra time REGARDLESS of NRE, to establish a relationship with each person involved. Because things like medical crisises don't always come in a form of a hospital stay. Sometimes they come in the form of medication changes that you will never see. The person LOOKS fully functioning and continues most of their normal activities. But in fact they are NOT fully functional and they require MUCH more assistance and support. That's something one needs to know is a risk in situations where it is higher risk. So you can assess your own expectations.
 
I just wanted to share my experience with a guy that I see and his wife....I call them Lee and Judy.

First I want to start out by saying infatuation and NRE are one thing. But a lasting love is something altogether different. And- in my opinion, it takes time to realize whether a relationship is going to mature into a emotionally healthy long lasting love connection that each person will be committed to into the future.

For me- when I happen upon one of those, I value it and I adapt myself to the circumstances which are much more complex in the poly world.

So- I met Lee and Judy 4 years ago. She is straight so there was never the thought that she and I would develop an intimate relationship. She also never showed much of an interest in getting to know me well.

But Lee and I did have a connection and we both desired to see how that connection would develop.

As Lee and I began to see each other gradually and it became clear that we are interested in a long term connection, Judy's fears began to come up.

So- at that point, I could either run the other way (which you are saying you are going to do) or I could honor Judy in her process and continue to be authentic and present when Lee and I were able to spend time together.

It took 2 1/2 years for Judy to feel comfortable with Lee spending the night with me.

6 or 8 months after that, they invited me over to their house and we went out to eat, dancing and I spent the night at their house.

She and I had a heartfelt discussion where she admitted her fears and insecurities to me. She told me that she trusts me. That meant a lot to me and it meant a lot to Lee.

The next time Lee and I spent time together, I felt a much deeper connection developing between us.

I guess my bottom line message to you is this:

Things don't always go like I want them to go. Sometimes I have to adapt and let things happen gradually. And- it's not always black or white.
 
Things don't always go like I want them to go. Sometimes I have to adapt and let things happen gradually. And- it's not always black or white.

So true. In the world of therapy, dealing with patients fears means helping them to face that which they fear, go through the emotions of fear and see that they survived.
In context of a poly dynamic; that means allowing them to feel the emotions while continuing to experience the things they are afraid of (like their partner having another love). But-they can't do that if every time they express their fears and insecurities, the metamour bails.

Not saying that anyone has to stay.
But worth considering the ramifications. Especially if you are considering leaving someone you really love.
 
In my primary relationship, we have decided that veto is permissible if a third party has substance problems that are creating issues in the relationship, if they do anything to endanger our children, or if they fail to disclose things that we need to know for our sexual health. Mental instability may be grounds for veto if it creates significant issues in the relationship.

Seemingly because you cannot trust your husband not to get significantly involved with a drug addict or someone who would harm you or your children. People who can trust a partner to have appropriate and healthy partner selection doesn't require this.

OP, I strongly, strongly advise that you keep away from people who are not trusted by their partners. If you think waiting 2.5 years for someone to allow you to express the way you feel about someone they happen to be in a relationship with, sure, try that method where you keep earning the privilege of using someone else's possession. That's not for me though. I want relationships where the people in them have control. Not a possessive metamour with numerous issues, all of which will negatively impact on me. To me, that's not a real relationship.
 
Oh, good lord, London. Just because we came up with a list of potential acceptable grounds for veto doesn't mean my husband is an idiot, or that I am.

It's very easy for people who are not in long-term relationships and don't have kids, to get in a froth about veto power. I reveal all our agreements to my potential partners, and anyone who has a problem with them is free to halt things right there. No one ever has.
 
Can you not see how it's strange to require a rule stating that you won't date drug addicts and psychos? I have a child and I've had long term relationships that included boundaries on how we would interact with other people, I've never felt I've had to state a rule or boundary prohibiting either of us from interacting with people that would cause us harm or has an unhealthy, risky lifestyle that would negatively impact on us. Not because we didn't have anything of value between us to protect, but because the assumption would be that neither of us would consider such a relationship and would terminate any relationship that turned out that way.

The only time a veto rule has ever made sense to me is when I was in a very dark place, plagued with doubt and insecurity about myself and everyone else. At that time, the thought of trusting a partner to make wise decisions about anything of note was laughable, let alone judging who would be a decent person to have a relationship with.
 
Oh, good lord, London. Just because we came up with a list of potential acceptable grounds for veto doesn't mean my husband is an idiot, or that I am.

It's very easy for people who are not in long-term relationships and don't have kids, to get in a froth about veto power. I reveal all our agreements to my potential partners, and anyone who has a problem with them is free to halt things right there. No one ever has.

I have children, I really don't like you implying that people who dislike vetoes just don't understand family responsibility.
I really do not see the point of having a veto against a person who might be on drugs or is a psycho...I mean, really, for realz? You expect your husband or yourself to get into a relationship with a crack addict and want to continue....that is a little bit sad that you don't trust each other NOT to do that that you even need a veto for it.

I don't know what London was saying but I don't get it.
 
Sorry if I seemed to be implying that parents who did poly without veto power were irresponsible, Natja. That is not what I meant at all. But I have noticed that the poly activists and those who otherwise write about polyamory a lot online, who weigh in as strongly anti-veto, seem to be either child-free, or else their kids are grown and gone. And that their thinking on this issue is often very, very simplistic.

My husband and I like to make lists. We had always been vague about veto power, just that we saw it as a nuclear option. A couple of years ago we felt a need to be clearer, so we tossed around ideas for what would constitute grounds for veto. That was how we came up with the list I posted here.

It IS true that my husband tends to see the best in people, as I have posted in a different thread here, and to excuse bad behavior. And that I have doubts about his judgement of people and find it difficult to trust in it. So we have veto power, but we both feel it is important to define how it can, and can't, be used, so that our partners are protected as much as possible.

I do not think my husband would ever tolerate continuing in a relationship with a partner who developed serious substance issues or endangered our children. If he did, I can't imagine that veto power would even be relevant, since I can't imagine sticking around in the marriage if that was the case.
 
We have young children and we don't have a veto. N isn't attracted to people with bad character, I don't have to worry about him pursuing a relationship with anyone who would be a danger to our family. J also doeant have a say who N dates just like he doesn't have a say who we date. We don't bring people home though so if I didn't like someone he was seeing it wouldn't affect.me or my kids because I don't have to socialize with them.
 
There's a school of thought about the veto rule that attempts to turn my Trust theory back on itself. Basically, it says that if you have this amazing trust between you, then you should be able to trust that your partner will not misuse the veto power by ending your other relationships due to insecurity or jealousy. It's a good point. If veto powers were a requirement of poly relationships, that's how I would think and structure my relationships accordingly.

However, veto powers aren't a requirement at all. People who rely on veto power to make them comfortable enough to proceed with polyamory give me enough doubt about the trust in their relaionship(s) to make me skeptical about their ability to use their veto responsibly.
 
Last edited:
I have children, I really don't like you implying that people who dislike vetoes just don't understand family responsibility.
I really do not see the point of having a veto against a person who might be on drugs or is a psycho...I mean, really, for realz? You expect your husband or yourself to get into a relationship with a crack addict and want to continue....that is a little bit sad that you don't trust each other NOT to do that that you even need a veto for it.

I don't know what London was saying but I don't get it.

I have children. 19, 10, and 7.

We do not have a veto power. We trust each other to be responsible adults and not bring people with unacceptable habits, issues, or lifestyles into their lives.

And yes I am in a long term relationship. Been with Butch 13 years and Murf 2 years.
 
In our Vee, we technically have a "veto" rule, but I don't know that it would ever come into place - at least on my end.

The only time I'd ever even think about it would be if the other person were a disaster on wheels (no idea how to describe this, but I once had a friend who Vegas-married a woman who pretended to be the illegitimate daughter of John Lennon and Janis Joplin, tried to pass herself off as everything from a Playboy Bunny to a nurse to a racecar driver, tried to pull his daughter away from her mother, and wanted him and his friends to contribute money to "her cause" - helping children of celebrities. THAT is a combination of harmful and crazy that I'd run screaming from if I ever saw it again). However, if P were hell-bent on dating someone like that, I'd certainly tell him what my impression was, that I didn't want anything to do with her, and then reevaluate my own relationship with him if he started going down the cuckoo path as well. I wouldn't put my foot down and say "no", but I'd have one foot of my own out the door.

Laying down an ultimatum somehow seems to encourage either resentment or finding ways to sneak around it, neither of which I want to deal with, especially if it's a legitimate concern. I'd much rather just talk about it and take it on a case-by-case basis.

Luckily, P is pretty communicative (small-talk-wise, not privacy-violating-wise) about the people he sees, either as friends or as dates, so we seem to be moving well in that direction.

If it were ever turned back around on me (which I find highly unlikely :) ), and I saw no basis for it, I'd push back. No different from P telling me who can and can't be my friend, in my opinion. I would have to talk, at length, about WHY this is a problem, before agreeing to anything.

However, P and I never opened a marriage, do not have kids between us or a family "unit" that we feel we need to protect. That may make a huge difference to some folks. Your mileage may vary.
 
Last edited:
In our if I ever saw it again). However, if P were hell-bent on dating someone like that, I'd certainly tell him what my impression was,

That is kind of what I was referring to both on here and on the 'first date' thread. I wonder what would make someone get involved with a person who is a hot mess, at least mentally... To give you some background, I once worked a season at a 'resort' (not glamorous at all) as a waitress, I had a terrific crush on a co-worker, he was about 10 years my senior so seemed very sophisticated and he was handsome. I had a feeling he knew I liked him too, there was quite a lot of flirtation, anyway, there was a girl from the town who worked the weekends, she was truly an emotional wreck, she had no sense of self, was abused and used to sleep with any of the blokes for trinkets, I think she was learning disabled too, she was pretty vulnerable.

One day I realised he was sleeping with her. I was sickened, not because I was jealous but because he knew she was vulnerable, he slept with her because she would do it, rather than because she liked him and that made him one of the long line of blokes just using this girl. It made me lose respect for him and I never looked at him again. He realised I turned off him, not to sure he realised why.

Anyway, I wonder with people going after the vulnerable or emotionally fragile, is it just to fulfil their own selfish needs? The desperation for a partner at all costs or what?

Why would someone wish to be with someone who simply isn't stable?

I should have raised my concerns about that girl but that was a really exploitative working environment they were unlikely to do anything anyway and I was pretty young at the time. :(
 
OP, the title of your thread is How to handle being vetoed or being on the bad end of an ultimatum and I think the only way to do that is to avoid situations like that. How? If you are considering dating someone who is poly and already involved in other existing relationships, then you have to ask as many questions of them as possible in order to get a clear understanding of how they work in relationships. I am very wary of partnered poly peeps and my first question is always, "What agreements do you have with your partner that will affect me?" Sure, go out a few times but try to get to know them and how the dynamic of their partnership operates, BEFORE letting yourself get emotionally involved. Also, make sure you have clearly established your own personal boundaries about what is and is not acceptable to you and make sure your potentials know what they are. Know what you will and will not compromise on.

I believe that veto can be used sanely and responsibly to keep toxic and destructive people out of your relationship when your partner may be a bit too wonked out on NRE to see things clearly.

I mean no disrespect to you, because it seems that this view works for you, but whenever I read this statement from people, I can't help but cringe.

See, I think the whole NRE excuse is pure bullshit. Yeah, I know what it's like to be totally enamored of someone, but crying "it's NRE!" as a way to excuse behavior makes me question someone's maturity and intelligence. Just because a person is turned on by someone they just met and is allowing themselves to walk around in a cloud of euphoria doesn't mean they are automatically absolved of all responsibilities in other areas of their life. I just never understand the emphasis many polyfolk seem to place on NRE, NRE, NRE.

I never want to police someone I am involved with, and I will not allow anyone's other partners to police me. So, if I learn that there is any hint at some kind of veto arrangement between a potential lover and any of his partners, or rules about what I can or cannot do with him, I simply will not go there. I would rather exit than waste my time walking on eggshells hoping a metamour approves of me or that they will let that rule go. My time and energy is more valuable to me than that. In addition, I am not someone who feels any need to have a friendship or shared social life with a metamour (if it happens, fine, but don't expect me to be your bff just because I'm boinking someone you also happen to be boinking). So, that is why I try to get a feel for what kind of poly they do BEFORE getting involved on a deeper or emotional level. And I make sure that he and his metamour understand that I have boundaries of my own that need to be respected. If they've opened their relationship and the guy wants to get involved with me, they both have to know that obviously there is a new dynamic in the mix and it simply won't be all about them anymore.
 
Last edited:
Functionally; every person has veto power.
We all have the right to say "i won't deal with xyz. You can choose xyz or me."
Officially-we don't have veto.

But-level of probability says that if my current partners can't stand you, I won't be continuing a relationship.
It's a guarantee that if you disrespect them or in any way I believe you are mistreating them; you will be out of there.
 
Sure, we all have boundaries. One boundary might be that all partners have to get on. However, expressing your boundaries isn't giving a veto. It might come to a point where someone has to choose between two people because their needs are so different and it's impossible to even try and meet them both. That isn't a veto. A veto is where your partner can stop your other relationships as soon as anything like that comes up. The decision is made for you: if things get sticky, you go with the person who has the veto power.

Another thing that can get in the way is when one or more of the people involved in a relationship can fail to comprehend that your partner can do things in their other relationships that have absolutely no impact on their union whatsoever. Say, for example, Wifey is strongly opposed to anal sex. She thinks it's very wrong for a variety of reasons. Hubby respects that Wifey isn't into it, but found him a nice little anal whore who makes him laugh and loves to let him bugger her. Wifey cannot let go of the idea that what Hubby does with GF has no bearing on her or their marriage and it becomes an issue. A big issue. She sees it as a "fundamental incompatibility" and wants to give an ultimatum/use her veto/force him to stop. The whole issue could be a non issue if she just let go of the idea that her husband is her possession and where he puts his protected penis is her business. It's a situation where a veto could be used or an ultimatum given purely because one partner can't relinquish their attempts to control.

Sure, someone might refuse a veto, ie, give their partner veto powers and when they attempt to use them, refuse to end other relationships but the partner still was given that power and if anything it makes you a bit of a bastard for letting them rely on having a veto. You let them believe that they had ultimate control over your other relationships and now, when they try to exercise that power, you tell them that their power was an illusion. People who need veto power will often only consent to a non monogamous relationship if they have that power. So by not sticking to it, you have gained consent from them under false pretences. Wifey told Hubby that he can veto anyone that has a substance abuse problem, well Hubby thinks that BFs penchant for a joint every evening is substance abuse and wants to veto. Yeah, he never saw that as an issue before he met BF and when his best friend smokes every night, but it is when BF does it and not just because Hubby is insanely jealous of BF, it's about the weed. Swearsies. Nobody can tell hubby that he doesn't feel that way. It's futile arguing that BF hasn't got a substance abuse problem. Wifey can either allow him to veto the relationship, or refuse and deal with all the possible consequences of that.

People in existing relationships often do have the ability to make their partner's life extremely awkward and unpleasant if they don't do what makes them happy, especially if they have kids. Being able to make your partner suffer for wanting, needing or behaving in a way that you don't approve of or that isn't about meeting your needs isn't utilizing veto power. Using that power you have over each other to manipulate them into behaviour you want to see is a terrible, harmful way of obtaining veto power you haven't been given to control your partner's other relationships. It's frightfully common, unfortunately.

Healthy relationships don't need anyone to make a rule saying I'll listen to your concerns, I'll maintain my parental and spousal obligations or I wont date a serial killer.
 
Last edited:
If you are considering dating someone who is poly and already involved in other existing relationships, then you have to ask as many questions of them as possible in order to get a clear understanding of how they work in relationships. I am very wary of partnered poly peeps and my first question is always, "What agreements do you have with your partner that will affect me?" Sure, go out a few times but try to get to know them and how the dynamic of their partnership operates, BEFORE letting yourself get emotionally involved. Also, make sure you have clearly established your own personal boundaries about what is and is not acceptable to you and make sure your potentials know what they are. Know what you will and will not compromise.....

See, I think the whole NRE excuse is pure bullshit......

In addition, I am not someone who feels any need to have a friendship or shared social life with a metamour

I agree with the above 2 statements.
But, we are all different and we get to figure out how this is going to work for us and for me--- I to like to have a friendship or shared social life with a metamour or metamours. It is not something I would try to force- sometimes there is no interest, but the ideal situation for me is that there is a family/community dynamic.
 
Back
Top