Polyamory.com Forum  

Go Back   Polyamory.com Forum > Polyamory > Articles

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 05-13-2016, 03:30 PM
FeatherFool's Avatar
FeatherFool FeatherFool is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 161
Default

I absolutely agree people should be clear on what they want, and be aware that other people's styles and desires may not match that and that's okay. It's also okay to choose not to relationship with someone who doesn't match your style. The only way to figure it out, though, is to talk!

I'm not a real fan of permanent-forever either. I currently equate that with a level of life-entanglement that I am not comfortable with. I have zero intention of sharing finances, or living with someone(s), etc. Maybe that will change in the future, but I don't think that's very likely. I know in my head that "permanent" doesn't necessarily mean "entangled", but my gut is pretty convinced it does.

I take a really long time compared the the general population to develop those "eat 'em up" feelings. If I waited for that to start a relationship I'd still be a virgin! My initial assessment is far more intellectual than emotion-based. All of my partners have been good friends before anything else developed. I honestly don't know immediately if I'm interested in another person (other than sheer physical attraction). I've never had a single conversation with someone and just lit up inside. I can't even imagine it!

For a while I thought something was wrong with me that I just don't seem to develop those "squee" feelings as fast as most people without some kind of other level of relationship, but now I figure it's just me. And that's okay. If I'm willing to deal with the fact that my partner is unicorn-and-rainbowing all over the place, while I'm still like "mmmm, yes, this is nice", and they are too, then it's all good as far as I'm concerned.

However, I've definitely had people be uncomfortable with the fact they are fluttering, and I'm just kind of... content and pleased. "Cold fish" was a quote, as well as several other less complimentary things. It's not true; I care for them or obviously I wouldn't send time with them. Eventually I get to the giddy stage, but in my experience it generally won't be when they are. It is also a bit weird for some to be past that stage, and me just beginning to really toss the sparkles around. Especially since in some cases it took months, and they are used to me laughing at their antics. Suddenly I'm the one anticing!

I don't know if lying to get sex is "normal". A common societal convention, maybe, but I object to that being normal lol
__________________
FeatherFool: 29, heteroflexible, healing heart
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 05-13-2016, 05:15 PM
Spork's Avatar
Spork Spork is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Colorado Springs
Posts: 2,540
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FeatherFool View Post
I absolutely agree people should be clear on what they want, and be aware that other people's styles and desires may not match that and that's okay. It's also okay to choose not to relationship with someone who doesn't match your style. The only way to figure it out, though, is to talk!

I'm not a real fan of permanent-forever either. I currently equate that with a level of life-entanglement that I am not comfortable with. I have zero intention of sharing finances, or living with someone(s), etc. Maybe that will change in the future, but I don't think that's very likely. I know in my head that "permanent" doesn't necessarily mean "entangled", but my gut is pretty convinced it does.

I take a really long time compared the the general population to develop those "eat 'em up" feelings. If I waited for that to start a relationship I'd still be a virgin! My initial assessment is far more intellectual than emotion-based. All of my partners have been good friends before anything else developed. I honestly don't know immediately if I'm interested in another person (other than sheer physical attraction). I've never had a single conversation with someone and just lit up inside. I can't even imagine it!

For a while I thought something was wrong with me that I just don't seem to develop those "squee" feelings as fast as most people without some kind of other level of relationship, but now I figure it's just me. And that's okay. If I'm willing to deal with the fact that my partner is unicorn-and-rainbowing all over the place, while I'm still like "mmmm, yes, this is nice", and they are too, then it's all good as far as I'm concerned.

However, I've definitely had people be uncomfortable with the fact they are fluttering, and I'm just kind of... content and pleased. "Cold fish" was a quote, as well as several other less complimentary things. It's not true; I care for them or obviously I wouldn't send time with them. Eventually I get to the giddy stage, but in my experience it generally won't be when they are. It is also a bit weird for some to be past that stage, and me just beginning to really toss the sparkles around. Especially since in some cases it took months, and they are used to me laughing at their antics. Suddenly I'm the one anticing!

I don't know if lying to get sex is "normal". A common societal convention, maybe, but I object to that being normal lol
Lying, or perhaps more commonly encouraging someone to believe whatever will lead them to consent. And then ghosting, or rebuffing.

I hear a lot of men, especially online, complaining about initial rejection from women, in the whole dating game...I have wondered, really, which is worse...rejecting someone upfront, or using them and THEN rejecting them once they've had an opportunity to develop an interest or an emotional connection.

Thing is, I had to work my way around to the notion of "wait to have sex"...because when I meet someone who is very appealing in that way, I wanted to just get it on! No games, no playing hard to get, no expectations or demands, just get right in there. But the fact that there is not only the well known physical risks of STIs and such (at least I cannot get pregnant anymore) but also emotional risks, means that I sadly am a lot safer waiting a bit. Not waiting for a commitment, but to get a sense of who a person is, to protect myself from feeling used and discarded, to give them a chance to form a bit of a bond, or to give trust a chance to form.

It still feels like unnecessary game playing, and annoys me slightly on some basic level...but it's better than "make him wait because otherwise he'll think you're easy" which just makes me table-flipping furious.
__________________
Spork 39 F
Zen Sadist late 50's, M - Sadomasochistic Top, Lover, Nesting Partner. My all around wonderful Man Person.

Analyst, Fire & Hefe My poly quad from August 2015 to July 2016. Still dear & loved friends.

Blood:
Ninja- 19, Son
Q- 17, Son

Old Wolf- Ex Husband
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 05-13-2016, 11:56 PM
CTF CTF is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: California
Posts: 403
Default

I don't know... Now, admittedly, I'm more to the extreme side (as many of you already know), but I personally don't believe in the concept of "casual love"...

While I do think that love can be one sided, and I applaud anyone who is willing to admit it to someone without pressure of reciprocation (as has happened to me), I have a hard time of seeing love as this vast, plentiful, even infinite emotion. Not to sound harsh, but I think that sort of devalues love itself.

There are but only a handful of people that I can say that I "love"... My wife & kids, my Mom & my sister... Granted, I have other people that are important to me... People that I care about & want only the best with them, and enjoy spending time with them... But to me, that's not love. It's caring, respect & admiration.

Just as it may be hard for someone like myself to grasp the concept of "casual love", I'm sure it's equally as difficult for others to understand the concept of "rare love". I got together to catch up with an old friend a while back, and she told me "I love you"... Now, to be clear, she wasn't talking in the romantic sense (at least, I was pretty confident of that. It just didn't have that tone), but I had to tell her that I was sorry, but that's just not something I can say back to her. She seemed taken aback, but accepting of it.

To best explain it, it's like the "special" paradox. Like, if everyone is special, then no one is special.

But I'm just a cynic... Don't mind me.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 05-14-2016, 06:43 PM
Ravenscroft Ravenscroft is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: NW Minnesota
Posts: 1,724
Default

I've always disliked the term "casual sex" because it's a not-so-veiled putdown of "the way those people are." Seems like "casual love" sorta leans the same direction, so I'm wary of it.
Quote:
We have a mythology surrounding romantic love that says it’s a special, rare feeling, reserved for just a few people in your whole life.
Yep -- maintaining a culture where something is continually not just finite but in short supply makes it "valuable."

Then again, it's kinda weird how all the "love one another" & "brotherly love" stuff is so important to Christians who'd be horrified by polyamory.

I'd like it if more people would clearly separate "I love you/them" from "I'm IN LOVE with you/them." The latter is (far too often!) used to state the former, which REALLY confuses the situation. "I feel an abiding connection with you" is NOT anything like "it goes both ways" & to use it as such is sorta baldly pretentious... or controlling/demanding.

I disagree with Blanton in a significant way, & that's OVERLY casual use of "love" as a universal. Okay, I love my family... my kids... my cats... but Blanton looks to be saying that I should include in the same set stuff like caterpillar rolls, fresh tomatoes, pesto, Camembert, Harlan Ellison, Bill Nelson, various actors, fictional characters, suede leather, dry socks, & flannel sheets. That I simply cannot countenance (well, in MY head, anyway).

There are close friends with whom I have had a truly loving relationship without any intent of sex, & we've been known to smile & say "I love you" in public, sometimes startling married couples who rareky used the word AT ALL with each other.

While I strongly doubt that LOVE is some sort of Precious Bodily Fluid that must be conserved & protected & carefully kept away from all but The Deserving Few -- wow, doesn't that sound like what Mom said about sex? -- there's a part of me that feels to slather "love" all over the place & on whatever object strikes my aesthetic fancy in the least way is to minimize the value of the term. But, as noted above, there's plenty of "love hoarders" that do so, & maybe it shouldn't be a conversation-stopper.
Quote:
Originally Posted by FeatherFool View Post
"love" should exclusively be defined as that feeling of twitterpation- tingly and exciting and breathtaking- but that it should not encompass commitment, which is proposed as a separate entity and likely not an emotion.
A false dichotomy -- turning the extremes into an either/or choice, ignoring the center of the curve -- & not one I got from the article.

Spork, I resonate with you on so much. I don't "size people up" the same way, though -- quite often, I'll chat with someone for HOURS before I realize that this is someone I'd like to get naked with.

A few times, I've had the "Some Enchanted Evening" thing happen, where I'd be scanning a crowd looking for friends & spot someone whose image just sorta leapt out, like a spotlight, then later get chatted up & find that she'd gotten the same "flash." (There's a hilarious story there that I'll post someday.)

I don't seek out one-night stands... but I've had a few that were situationally perfect. So long as we're on the same page, & one of us doesn't decide to "fall in Love" & then use that as leverage, it seems to me like an honest interaction.

Certainly, if something mutual DOES develop, I find it reassuring to know we're not totally incompatible in the sack!! I mean, how much of a bummer would it be to get 100% emotionally invested in someone only to find they're a total turnoff?

But I should add that some HAVE bugged me, & it's kinda that "sorry, not interested" thing. Oh, NOT the "rejection" -- heck, nothing ventured, nothing gained -- but when I get rudely brushed off or totally shot down... then later (weeks, months, even a couple of years) I get chewed out because her advances slide right over me without even getting noticed. Well, HELL: if someone tells me "ain't gonna happen," & doesn't have the brain to SAY "well, y'know, my feelings have sorta changed," this doesn't make her MORE desirable.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 05-14-2016, 08:38 PM
FeatherFool's Avatar
FeatherFool FeatherFool is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 161
Default

Quote:
A false dichotomy -- turning the extremes into an either/or choice, ignoring the center of the curve -- & not one I got from the article.
I do think there is a false dichotomy presented in the blog, but we all take in information through our own bias filters: which is why I asked for clarification in the first pace! I'd never understand the other side if I didn't ask My own bias comes from a distrust of labels in general. For me, it gets all mixed up when labels are applied without additional communication. In my view, people are going to naturally make assumptions about the labels you chose to apply to yourself, and they are going to make those assumptions through the lens of their own bias. I can't see how that could be prevented, other than by clear explanation and communication. We're only human, after all. From the blog post:

Quote:
... separating the wacky, butterflies-in-the-gut, unpredictable feeling of “love” from the ideally rational, cool-headed decisions and agreements of “commitment”.
That seems to define love pretty narrowly, with an exclusion clause for commitment. This section:

Quote:
As long as love is theoretically reserved for people whom you want to date and possibly marry...We’ll imprint upon them like baby ducks, and resolve to stick with them through thick and thin, through hell or high water, through abuse and neglect and lies and bickering and frustration and mutually-assured destruction, whether or not it brings us (or anyone else) any kind of joy.
...seems to set up the idea that "love-as-exclusive = bad" (and also pretty victim-blame-y: "If you'd only had the proper ideals of love you wouldn't have been stuck in an abusive relationship" which is a vast over simplification of harmful relationships), while this:

Quote:
If love was casual, we could take it as a high compliment, say “thanks!”, and feel some warm fuzzies.
...sets me up to believe the author thinks that all expressions of casual love should end in appreciation from the receiver which, for me, would be very much untrue. Someone expressing love for me is not what I would consider a compliment, any more than someone expressing apathy for me would be considered an insult. Neither has anything to do with me; that is their emotion to own.

I don't think it's wrong to "slather" love all over the place if that is your way; nor do I think it's wrong to reserve that term for specific instances or types of relationship. If someone understands that champagne-feeling to be their idea of love and pours it over everyone, that is absolutely cool with me. I'm glad they are so happy! If someone wants to reserve the term exclusively for that sweet heartache you get watching your kid sleep, then that is fine with me too.

I've really appreciated this discussion. It's made me think and reassess a lot!
__________________
FeatherFool: 29, heteroflexible, healing heart
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 05-14-2016, 10:42 PM
Ravenscroft Ravenscroft is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: NW Minnesota
Posts: 1,724
Default

Okay, I can sorta see the "love-as-exclusive = bad" thing, which is a little overboard as a universal... just as it would be to claim that exclusive love is universally a GOOD thing.

To stretch a grammatic conflict, there's the difference between the descriptive & the prescriptive -- how things are vs. how they "should be." Flipping the thesis would have "love-not-exclusive = bad" which is already the majority opinion & likely will be for a long time. So, sure, Blanton is going overboard in a reactive manner, but that doesn't negate the general thesis.

As Robert Anton Wilson wrote, common sense is what tells you the Earth is flat. Because of the common sense of exclusivity, I'd offer up that there's a LOT of craziness resulting from a person feeling abiding love for one person... then for another as well. Having been told from birth that it's a one-&-only-one situation, this sets off problems up to outright psychosis, something that is often spread to the love interests as well, & maybe beyond -- that may be a root as to why some monogamous people see polyamory not just as weird, but as a direct THREAT to their worldview.

In that sense, then YES, I'd agree with the assessment that exclusivity-for-everyone does indeed set up victims & place blame upon those are unwilling or unable to fit nicely into the nice safe preconceptions of the (often imaginary) majority.

I know from experience that I have my own limitations, not on Love per se, but on how many people I can be with enough to feel a deep abiding connectedness -- & this includes not just lovers/partners/whatever but the closeness I've had with metamours. Roughly, it was like six sexual partners & their main partners, & after that I start forgetting names & it's just any typical Worldcon. One lover was more gregarious & she could easily handle twice that count (& still make us all feel super-special!). And I'm sure there's plenty of people not as weird as me who're truly happy with three, or two, or one.

Often, the only difference between a home & a prison is who controls the lock on the door.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 05-16-2016, 01:45 PM
Spork's Avatar
Spork Spork is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Colorado Springs
Posts: 2,540
Default

The only thing that I think is universally bad, is the assumption and insistence that because any one of us operates in a particular fashion (whether that is in our emotions, relationships, beliefs, etc) that other people should also think/do as we think/do, and if they don't then they should be judged (they are wrong, immoral, crazy, a threat to the order of things, etc.)

It's just part of my live and let live thing.

A person who does not think/feel/believe/do in the same way that I do may not be compatible with me, but they are not a threat. I would do what I could to treat them with consideration, honesty and kindness, and I'd prefer that they did that for me as well. Especially if we are testing the waters for intimacy or a potential relationship...where we should be behaving as allies, not enemies or opponents.

It is my opinion that laying our cards on the table as soon as possible helps us to not waste time if we're not compatible, or get on with enjoying "us" if we are.

I also wonder how much of the difference of opinion about love has to do with just core personality components of various people. I'm super extroverted. I love people. I just think humans are great and I like to spend time listening and talking and interacting. If I could sit down and have a conversation with every person on Earth, I'd totally do it. I want to hear their stories, even if they walk a totally different path than me. I have no enemies, and I have hundreds of people that I call "friend." Funny though, Facebook is a great boon to me because I remember names best when I see them written. And as an analytical and organizing sort of thinker, I like to be able to sort my friend list into categories, and yes the vast majority of my friends on Facebook are actual friends. People who are part of my two "tribes" of those I have strong commonality and goodwill for. Not frenemies, coworkers, or distant relatives I barely know (though I do have a small handful of those.)

I hear others complaining about their Facebook feeds being full of annoying stuff...mine is not. Mine is full of people I like and ideas I appreciate. And funny cat videos.

So anyways. Once I did an exercise. I went through my friend list, fantasizing about throwing a huge beach party. One of my "if you could dream without limits" mental jaunts. Who would I invite? How small could I trim the list? Could I even fit the group into ONE beach house, and how much would it cost?

The answers... I could not get my list smaller than 60-70 people. Those are friends that I consider to be "like family." I have a lot invested in them. It would cost me tens of thousands, I can't even remember now, but I DID find two matching beach houses for rent with hot tubs and pools and such that each slept 30 people that would have worked. It was a fun fantasy. If I ever have like $30K to drop on a week of partying, I will know what to do (yeah right lol...but a girl can dream! Who needs pink lamborghinis when you can party like a rock star...with rockstars in the pool and steak on the grill baby?)

That's the social reality of me, of my life, and where I come from when I say that I give love casually and easily. Is my love less valuable? I don't know. It's certainly in high demand. Lots of people enjoy it and appreciate it and want it. It isn't meaningless to me for all that I share it with many. I do not confuse it with TIME or other forms of investment though. I have un-bundled my enthusiastic feelings for others, from my personal investments and other stuff.

Let me put it this way...I adore my Mom, but I don't want her to live anywhere near me and I don't think I'd lend her money. Do I love her though? You bet your ass. I might not see her for years, I might not talk to her for weeks, but I love her dearly.

I also read people (usually) with some ease and I am (usually) fairly confident of my assessments of them. I'm not scared of deception. I don't hate liars. I can usually see through them, and I have loved liars before even knowing when they are lying. They don't make me feel unsafe. The mentality of love-scarcity, reserving love for only one or few, withholding loving behavior or emotion...that scares me some because I fear it leads to a desire to grasp, control, or possess me. And so I wonder if those who are afraid of my easy, casual love style are assuming that I want to grasp or control or possess them, because their scarcity model is behind their understanding of love...?

(Sorry again, writing novels over coffee...)
__________________
Spork 39 F
Zen Sadist late 50's, M - Sadomasochistic Top, Lover, Nesting Partner. My all around wonderful Man Person.

Analyst, Fire & Hefe My poly quad from August 2015 to July 2016. Still dear & loved friends.

Blood:
Ninja- 19, Son
Q- 17, Son

Old Wolf- Ex Husband
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 05-16-2016, 06:29 PM
FeatherFool's Avatar
FeatherFool FeatherFool is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 161
Default

Spork, I agree with you on many points.

I am very much an introvert. I can fake extroversion in certain situation for a certain amount of tie, but I definitely need to recharge away from people. I don't have any enemies- that's a waste of time and effort- but there are people I'd go to great lengths to avoid given the chance, and there are people who I find challenging to get along with. There are plenty of people I just don't care to know. I'm also slow to recognize my own emotions (and like whoa am I bad at recognizing motivations in others), so laying out stuff right at the beginning is likely to result in me going "uh, I don't know" which is not an encouraging response I imagine!

Your "huge party" exercise made me laugh when I applied it to myself! I think I could be happy with 6 to 10 people at my perfect party. I even know who those would be. More than 10 people and I start heading for the outskirts of the party, but even if that wasn't the case I really only have maybe 10 people whose presence would be required to make the party "perfect". My family throws gigantic holiday celebrations where there can actually be 60+ people in attendance (most of my family refuses to use contraceptives, so I'm sure you can imagine). Afterwards, even if I had fun, I feel like I've taken a beating and then maybe been drowned. I call it my party hangover. It often takes me days to regenerate my energy levels. Over-socialization has actual physical affects for me that are similar to a bad flu, never ind the mental exhaustion.

Quote:
The mentality of love-scarcity, reserving love for only one or few, withholding loving behavior or emotion...that scares me some because I fear it leads to a desire to grasp, control, or possess me. And so I wonder if those who are afraid of my easy, casual love style are assuming that I want to grasp or control or possess them, because their scarcity model is behind their understanding of love...?
When a quick-love person bounces up to me and expresses their love (*cough*Tails*cough*) I do have this spurt of panic. Sometimes it is because I fear they want to possess/control me but that has less to do with the sentiment and more to do with the person (talking to you, creepy smelly dude at Perkins). I am definitely a disaster-planner, and it's hard for me to recognize that particular tail spin. So I start considering things like "What if I hurt their feelings?" and "Should I return their sentiment, even if I don't feel that way?" and "If I do say I love them too, to smooth the situation, then I'm a liar and I'm not a liar therefore I cannot say that thing" and "If I don't say it will they be hurt and take their friendship away?".

I am not very good at identifying motivations and if someone is being truthful. I am a dismal failure with subtle communication: I need people to just tell me straight or I will never guess whatever it is that they want me to assume. I try to be kind (I value kindness a lot) but I am not very good at subtlety. My sister once claimed that my communication toolbox was filled with blunt instruments. She's not far wrong.
__________________
FeatherFool: 29, heteroflexible, healing heart
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 05-16-2016, 07:23 PM
icesong icesong is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 644
Default

I am *absolutely* in the "big party" camp too - I just sent out FB invites for a brunch party in a few weeks, and had to make myself stop at ~40ish not counting partners. I hope they don't all show up as my house will be PACKED.
__________________
37/bi/F, married to TheKnight (together 21 years)
Partnered with AnotherArtist (4 years)

Other Dramatis Personae are detailed in my blog.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 05-16-2016, 07:25 PM
GirlFromTexlahoma's Avatar
GirlFromTexlahoma GirlFromTexlahoma is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 937
Default

Spork, I actually think this

Quote:
I do not confuse it with TIME or other forms of investment though. I have un-bundled my enthusiastic feelings for others, from my personal investments and other stuff.
is a big part of why you feel comfortable with "casual love", while many others don't.

I very much bundle "love" with commitment, time, resources, etc. I don't see love as creating obligations, exactly, but it does convey investment and priority for me. I'd be thrilled to throw the wild party for 70+ people, but I would never say I love all of them. Enjoy their company. Appreciate them. Like them. But I think of love as applying only to the half dozen or so people for whom I would do just about anything. I feel weird saying I love someone if I wouldn't, say, take a leave from my job to care for them if they were sick.

So if someone I barely know says they love me, it does confuse me. I don't worry they want to possess me - I just worry they think we have a relationship that we don't, or want things from me that I'm not ready to give.

I think if someone was able to articulate that they don't see love the way I do - that they're really just saying, "I'm so happy and I enjoy you and yay!!!"- I would be able to take that at face value. Love is not the word I'd use for that feeling, but it is a feeling I know.
__________________
~ Claire

Female, straight, 38
Married 14 years to Andy
In a relationship with Castle
Sharing Andy with Stephanie and other friend-girls
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:56 AM.