Relationships and commitment without the escalator?

A non-escalator style connection can be hard for someone who craves reassurance and affirmation. But I see this as opportunity for growth, because I do not want to be a person who is clingy and in need of constant reassurance. For me being in non-escalator style relationships helps me to be more independent, to be able to live in the moment more, to be more autonomous.

This is the cornerstone of non-escalator: emotional self sufficiency (or a strong desire to develop more self sufficiency.) I think that this is where the "older" and "more established" comes in because if you're in the time of life when you're all about nesting, you're gonna want to put your energy into relationships that will be part of your years long vision to make a home and a family, whatever that means to you. If you're on the other side of "making a family" or have basically put that issue to bed, you're free to explore unlabeled relationships that don't come with implied responsibility. You also need a good deal of self possession and ongoing self reflection to sustain an unlabeled lover connection and this usually comes after quite a few years (decades, in my case) of learning the hard way (the best way!) that constant reassurance is actually the opposite of what creates stability. Experience is what gives a person emotional independence, presence and the confidence necessary to allow lovers to be close without assigned roles. The "lovers" model vs. the "relationship escalator" model definitely challenges ones ability to find inner security, but it also provides an opportunity for enormous growth, as Cleo points out. It can be a beautiful thing and in my experience, is so worth working for and waiting for.
 
I actually had a conversation with my BF about this yesterday, we were talking about my being insecure and sometimes jealous (he experiences zero jealousy and only very occasionally feels insecure, so talking about this subject is always a bit like we're both speaking different languages. It is also, I think, why he is pretty awesome at having 2 non escalator relationships and managing them extremely well).
He said that insecurity needs affirmation and reassurance to go away, and I pondered that for a bit and then said, no, while reassurance helps for a brief moment, it is only learning from positive experiences that will help self esteem to really develop. The reassurance that is often part and parcel of escalator style relationships (where you tell each other you will never love someone else, be with them always, forsake all others etc.. ) oh it feels so good, and I do crave it sometimes, but I know now that it is all meaningless when I don't feel good about myself and don't trust my own abilities to survive and thrive.

Often friends who know me really well and who know that I struggle with depression and anxiety, will say 'why do you do this poly stuff, it's only making things worse for you' and it's hard to explain that not only does it bring an enormous amount of joy to my life, it is also one of the best ways I know to learn and grow.
 
I resonate a lot with most of what GirlFromTexlahoma said in the opening post in this thread.

Nycindie's post (#3) also makes perfectly good sense to me, though we may not agree in every nuance as to what or who is a "partner" (or is/isn't in a "partnership" ... or what a partnership is).

Like GirlFromTexlahoma, I think / feel (at least for me!) that folks who build a relationship from the beginning based on seeing each other for a few hours every month or so are not likely to be much involved in one another's lives, or even know one another very well, or be very much bonded.

It was partly because I saw so little of him (and he was fine with that) that I stopped seeing somone I was "seeing" not very long ago. He was also unavailable in other ways, but had he genuinely wanted to spend more time with me, and made time for it, we may still be "seeing" one another.

I certainly don't think people need to be living together, having kids together, holding property or sharing bank accounts... to be in a deeply bonded loving relationship -- and I always thought of those as some kind of partnership. Just because I live with Kevin is no reason anyone I'm deeply bonded with, with whom I do not share a home, is less a partner with me. But that's probably just a matter of semantic notions and preferences.

I think folks should have the kinds of relationships they want to, without ranking them as as better or worse just because they are different. It's good for us to know what we want and to seek -- or live-- that. I prefer relationships where we are very close and spend a lot of time together. Whether we live together is far less significant to me than how we are with one another and how much time we share together. I'd definitely not want a boyfriend or girlfriend (or whatever) relationship where I only saw him or her once a month or less! But I certainly don't need to see him/her or talk with him/her daily, or even twice a week. Though, at the beginning, I like a lot of contact.
 
For me being in non-escalator style relationships helps me to be more independent, to be able to live in the moment more, to be more autonomous.

I thought this might happen for me, but it hasn't. Yet. I've found that if I care about someone, I don't want autonomy or independence from them, if that makes sense. The only enjoyable non-escalator relationships I've had were with guys with whom I had no real emotional connection, we were just very casual friends who had sex. I have a very hard time still separating the emotional bond from the tangible escalator stuff.

if you're in the time of life when you're all about nesting, you're gonna want to put your energy into relationships that will be part of your years long vision to make a home and a family, whatever that means to you.

That's very much how it feels to me... My husband and I are "nesters" in the most literal sense, our main activity together is buying land out in the wilderness and building vacation homes. For me working together on stuff like that is the ultimate in bonding. Both in the shared work and shared accomplishments, and in the planning for our shared future - places we will spend our weekends or spend our retirement. (I am very obviously not a "live in the moment" type :eek: )


Does something bad happen if you get off the escalator halfway? Like, once you get started, you can't get off? (... )That's more important than whether you "qualify as poly." Does this feeling stem from wanting more primary partners? or perhaps something else?

I don't feel any real longing for another primary relationship, although I wouldn't rule it out if the right person came along!

I think what I struggle with is needing the emotional commitment and the tangible commitment of time and energy to "match" - basically I want those things to climb the escalator together (or for neither to climb it at all).

I feel that parity between emotions and priority with my husband - we have a deep love and we are 100% committed to making all major life decisions as a team. And I feel it with my friends - I love my friends, I do factor my friendships into my life choices, but the emotional connection is less intense and the priority I give those relationships in making decisions is lower. (When my best friend moved away for school, we cried and hugged and planned out two years worth of visits. But if my husband wanted to move for school, I'd move with him, or if I couldn't move, he wouldn't go. Big difference.)

My issue right now is that my emotional commitment with Dag is intense and strong, but there isn't a parallel commitment to making our relationship a long term priority. If Dag moved away to go back to school, we would do the friend thing - miss each other and visit. Which makes sense, for us, with our lives and other commitments the way they are. But it would be heartbreaking and life-disrupting for me in a way that having a platonic friend move away would not. That leaves me feeling stressed and confused, that the emotional bond and the priority we give the relationship are so out of balance.
 
What I'm left with, though, is wondering if I'm cut out for poly. Because in effect I'm saying non-primary relationships are always going to feel more like fwb to me. I'm committed (in the way I'm committed to my friends), I feel love and trust and intimacy (as I do for my friends). But I will always value the nesting partnership more, because it meets the deep needs I feel for entwinement and partnership.

:confused::confused::confused:

I'd be happy to live together with more than one loving companion (of a 'romantic' kind). But I certainly don't need to ... or have some really big need for having all of my partners (if there more than one) under a single roof.

If and when I ever do have another partner other than Kevin, what I'd want with her or him would mainly be simply warm connection, affection, intimacy, love.... And if we've got all that going on and are really into one another, I'm pretty sure I'd spend some time in the home I share with Kevin and some time (including nights, of course) in the other dwelling.

Just because I live with Kevin is no reason he has to be a "primary" and anyone else must necessarily be "secondary," or in any way less bonded with me in love.

Loving relationships, for me, are not about setting up housekeeping together. I love living with Kevin. But our home is not at the center of our lives. Our lives are.
 
My issue right now is that my emotional commitment with Dag is intense and strong, but there isn't a parallel commitment to making our relationship a long term priority. If Dag moved away to go back to school, we would do the friend thing - miss each other and visit. Which makes sense, for us, with our lives and other commitments the way they are. But it would be heartbreaking and life-disrupting for me in a way that having a platonic friend move away would not. That leaves me feeling stressed and confused, that the emotional bond and the priority we give the relationship are so out of balance.

Sounds to me that, in your "head" -- at least -- you are being very pragmatic about considering / thinking about commitment and prioritization. You're generating "what if?" scenarios, little thought experiments. And you find that you love both of the men in your life (romantically), but if you came to a fork in the road, as Yogi Berra put it, you'd have to take it -- since you cannot split yourself down the middle and live.

Such pragmatism is not a problem. It does not mean you are not in love with both of them or that one is less valuable or important to you. There is no need here for ranking! You are not in a situation in which you must either split yourself down the middle or choose one over the other.
 
You're generating "what if?" scenarios, little thought experiments

I'm the "what if" champion :rolleyes: I once had a therapist who tried to treat my anxiety by having me play out worst-case scenarios... After a few weeks of watching me demonstrate how a hangnail could plausibly lead to watching everyone I love be tortured and killed, she just gave me a scrip for antidepressants ;)

Loving relationships, for me, are not about setting up housekeeping together. I love living with Kevin. But our home is not at the center of our lives. Our lives are.

I love this :) And I agree.

I think what I need is not the physical "housekeeping" part of nesting but the sense of making room for one another in our lives.

For example - Christmas. Usually my husband and I hustle on Christmas to spend the day with our closest friends and their kids, and the evening with extended family. Last Christmas Dag and I had only been seeing each other a few weeks, we just texted back and forth all day. This year I wanted... Something :confused:... I talked to our friend group and made sure he would be welcome at the day-long drunken mess we call Christmas brunch. I talked to my husband and explained that if Dag preferred one-on-one celebrating, I wanted the day before or after Christmas to spend just with him. Aaaand... turns out for Dag, the whole Christmas season is kids and extended family and no time for girlfriend :(

Which is ... Fine. But I can't reconcile that with his saying I am one of the most important people in his life, and the closest intimate relationship he's ever had. It's the disconnect between emotions and day-to-day priorities that confuses me.
 
Which is ... Fine. But I can't reconcile that with his saying I am one of the most important people in his life, and the closest intimate relationship he's ever had. It's the disconnect between emotions and day-to-day priorities that confuses me.

Wow. You should count your blessings a lot more and fret about the details a lot less, I think. You have some freaking amazing good blessings to count. If he's sincere about how important you are to him, never mind the details! I wish I had what you have. You've hit the lottery.
 
I'm the "what if" champion :rolleyes: I once had a therapist who tried to treat my anxiety by having me play out worst-case scenarios... After a few weeks of watching me demonstrate how a hangnail could plausibly lead to watching everyone I love be tortured and killed, she just gave me a scrip for antidepressants ;)

As one with a lifelong interest in what I call "emotional healing," I'd like to recommend that if and when you should ever seek therapy again -- especially for anxiety or depression --, please seek out a body-oriented or "somatic" psychotherapist. All of the others are good at working at the "cognitive" level, but don't generally understand how the body is involved in anxiety / depression. And the body -- soma -- is right at the root.

Send me a private message if you'd like to hear my views on this in more detail. The field of somatics (body-mind integrity) is a long time special area of study for me.
 
I've found that nesting compatibility and depth of relationship are not necessarily the same thing. Fly and I were together for 8 years, and although it was stressful and an emotional roller coaster the entire time, we were extraordinarily good at living together. I actually think we stayed together too long because we didn't want to disrupt the nesting. We even considered having a platonic nesting relationship after we broke up, but I ultimately decided it would be heathier for me to find some independence.

Moonlight, on the other hand, is probably the closest thing to a soulmate I will ever find. I do not want to live with her, though. She is extremely extraverted and hates to be alone, while I am finding that as I get older I am becoming more and more introverted and need space and quiet to thrive. We differ in a lot of day-to-day ways and habits, and I am not interested in trying to negotiate that kind of stuff. We see each other 2-3 ties a week, and that is good for me. I miss her when I'm not with her, but I'm happy with my life and how she fits into it.
 
Wow. You should count your blessings a lot more and fret about the details a lot less, I think. You have some freaking amazing good blessings to count.

I know... Believe me, I do know how lucky I am to have both my guys :)

That's why I'm here, tryingto find a way of understanding life and love that lets me appreciate what I have instead of worrying about the "next step".

I mean, how much more relationship escalator can I get, whining that "people in relationships are supposed to spend holidays together damn it!" I even annoy myself sometimes :rolleyes:
 
I mean, how much more relationship escalator can I get, whining that "people in relationships are supposed to spend holidays together damn it!" I even annoy myself sometimes :rolleyes:

That's a thought, perhaps a belief....

I was suggesting that you actually deeply FEEL the great blessing of the two men in your life who love you.

And if the thought pops up, just notice it. Don't feed it energy. Instead, feel how very fortunate you are to have these two amazing men in your life who love you.

Lather, rinse, repeat.

Fearful thoughts can be like weeds that take over the garden of the heart and soul. Such weeds require you to feed them your life energy. If you choose to feed happy thoughts (feelings) instead..., flowers appear where weeds were.

Whenever you start to worry about this or that which "might happen," re-direct your attention to the many great blessings you have in your life. Smile and be happy. Know you are blessed.
 
I had to take a break from this topic because it was making me increasingly frustrated and I couldn't figure out why. I ended up digging pretty deep into my past and realizing that there are a lot of personal reasons non-escalator relationships trigger stress and anxiety for me.

I posted a long version on my blog :) but the tldr is that my family and a lot of my high school and college friends treated me horribly yet claimed to love me, and now I have trouble trusting feelings that aren't backed up by actions and behaviors.
 
I had to take a break from this topic because it was making me increasingly frustrated and I couldn't figure out why. I ended up digging pretty deep into my past and realizing that there are a lot of personal reasons non-escalator relationships trigger stress and anxiety for me.

I posted a long version on my blog :) but the tldr is that my family and a lot of my high school and college friends treated me horribly yet claimed to love me, and now I have trouble trusting feelings that aren't backed up by actions and behaviors.

Wow. That's all very honest, challenging, rich....

Because we're all human, and all of us have experienced a lot of differing kinds and degrees of betrayal by trusted others in our lives, learning how to be "current" in relationships is an ongoing, never-ending, homework assignment. But it is very well worth the necessary effort.

Personally, I think it perfectly natural and healthy to engage in intimate relating in such a way as to discover, gradually, how much (and which kinds of) trust we want to have in our friends and companions. And we can be "current' and do that. But when the large and small traumas and betrayals of our past distort our perspective on the present we aren't so readily present to seeing and knowing what's going on NOW with the folks we're wanting to trust, share with, bond with, and love.

So we revisit that personal biography, feel into the places that pinch and hurt ..., compare and contrast the now with the then.

Much of what I said to you about your boyfriend, GirlFromTexlahoma, was based on my impression that YOU KNOW he's worthy of trust -- as much as he is, which appears to be a lot. He's not perfect, of course. None of us are. We're human. But you may want to ask yourself ... Are you current with him? Not completely, no. Few of us are fully "current" very often or for very long. But you can explore what being current with him FEELS like. And in doing so you may find that The Escalator may soften in its appeal, shapeshifting somehow. Who knows?

You may also find, eventually, that The Escalator trope may become well beside the point, an irrelevancy. Who knows?

Trust your best instincts. Explore the becoming current process. Trust yourself. Love yourself. Welcome the loving when it is real.


///

Looking past the glitz and glamour, this is worth a listen.:

http://www.supersoul.tv/supersoul-sessions/the-anatomy-of-trust/
 
Last edited:
I found an interesting old article on commitment and polyamory linked in the golden nuggets section...

http://aphroweb.net/stories/commitment.htm

Lori, who is 40, also lives alone, although she has two partners that she feels committed to. She thinks her concept of commitment is, in general, fairly conventional in “that the person is in it for the long haul and you can count on each other for a certain level, which is quite high, of trust, emotional availability, physical availability, communication.” The only areas in which she thinks she differs from the generic concept of commitment is that to her it doesn’t involve having to live together and it doesn’t involve sexual exclusivity. Lori believes in letting relationships grow to whatever level feels right for those involved, but she recognizes that time and energy create natural limits.

This rang very true for me... And I liked the acknowledgement of finite time and energy. No matter how much love I feel, I can't *commit* my time, energy, and resources to an infinite number of people.

Authenticity is very important to Rogelio. He believes that commitment involves “being willing to show up and confront other people on the parts of them that aren’t real; and saying, I think you’re fucking up here; and welcoming that from another person as a spiritual exercise. That to me is the ultimate commitment. Commitment to one’s spiritual growth.”
Shakti also views growth and evolution as vital in their commitment. Being honest, she feels, is the most important thing in her relationship to Rogelio. Making the relationship last isn’t as important as making it “as truthful, as deep, as mutually supportive, as evolving for the other person and for ourselves as possible.” She sees openness to change as a requirement for any committed relationship


This... Well, it's a little new age-y for me :rolleyes: It's also just not how I define commitment. But it's a good example, I think, of how commitment means different things to different people. And a good reminder that the only people whose definitions matter are the people in the relationship.
 
I've found that nesting compatibility and depth of relationship are not necessarily the same thing.

I am in love with this post. Lately I've been picking apart how I view intimacy, chemistry, and compatibility, and one of the functioning parts of compatibility is definitely ease of cohabitation.

I have found that it is helpful to understand what I *do* want out of a relationship by breaking it down into parts. It's a tangled web... I still don't have it figured out yet.

It's also just not how I define commitment. But it's a good example, I think, of how commitment means different things to different people. And a good reminder that the only people whose definitions matter are the people in the relationship.

Umbrella terms like "commitment" and "love" just annoy the balls off of me. If a term is meant to serve as shorthand to express an idea - these terms fail embarrassingly. I can't count the number of times I've been in a conversation about commitment only to hear the sounds of "oh, well that's not what I meant when I said commitment". Aaaaaand start over...

I was having dinner with a young lady a few months ago, discussing labels or something like that and she, with so much frustration, said "who cares what you call it, that's meaningless, I want to know how it works!" Her level of irritation made me smile, but her point was sound. Whenever I use one of these umbrella terms I am denying myself the wonderful opportunity of concisely expressing who I am and what I want out of life, which just builds barriers between myself and who I'm talking to.
 
I've found that nesting compatibility and depth of relationship are not necessarily the same thing. Fly and I were together for 8 years, and although it was stressful and an emotional roller coaster the entire time, we were extraordinarily good at living together. I actually think we stayed together too long because we didn't want to disrupt the nesting. We even considered having a platonic nesting relationship after we broke up, but I ultimately decided it would be heathier for me to find some independence.

Moonlight, on the other hand, is probably the closest thing to a soulmate I will ever find. I do not want to live with her, though. She is extremely extraverted and hates to be alone, while I am finding that as I get older I am becoming more and more introverted and need space and quiet to thrive. We differ in a lot of day-to-day ways and habits, and I am not interested in trying to negotiate that kind of stuff. We see each other 2-3 ties a week, and that is good for me. I miss her when I'm not with her, but I'm happy with my life and how she fits into it.
yes, they are not the same things. I was in love for four years with a man I would never - not even during my most starry eyed period - consider living with. I like to keep things relatively clean, he is a mess. I like my quiet time, and steadily inviting friends, he varies between hermit life one month and party like no tomorrow the next. I thought for a while that I could see him 1-3 times a week but I found over time that our differences were not only practical but we did not connect on a mental level - he was TOO spontanious. What started off as new and fresh started to feel pointness and chaotic.

Two years ago I started dating this other guy who resembles the first guy a lot, BUT he is cleaner and his social life is less errattic and I find that I don't mind living with him even if we differ in lots of other aspects of life.
 
Back
Top