Polyamory.com Forum  

Go Back   Polyamory.com Forum > Polyamory > General Poly Discussions

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 09-03-2010, 02:08 PM
Tonberry Tonberry is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,374
Default

I think I kind of agree... I feel ORE for Rag, NRE for Sean and limerence for someone else (have felt that since before meeting Sean).
I have delayed starting a relationship with him because I feel it would be unmanageable. While I think it would be possible emotionally, I think it would be a strong back-and-forth and be exhausting. Also, I doubt I'd have enough time for that.

I still think it's possible, but I think it would involve a lot of on-off for me, focusing all of my attention and thoughts onto someone, then someone else, then the first one, etc, if I'm making sense. I would probably become overwhelmed if they were both in the same room. Too much emotion at once!

Right now, because I'm in a different stage with all three, I find it manageable (and wonderful).
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 09-13-2010, 04:03 PM
PollyPocket PollyPocket is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 135
Default

"I think the the anthropologist said it best in the other thread, where almost everyone agreed...."there can be ONLY one Romantic Love at a time". "
--------------------------------------
When she described the various forms of love, I paid close attention since I had come to a new realization that like the Eskimo word for Snow, English should have 20 different words for love. As I processed her "Romantic Love" pieces over the next several weeks, I began to see how she was right. When you have that FRESH NRE, there is no possible way that you could have double the amount for 2 people. It would kill you. I mean you could have excitement about seeing a couple, but you can really have that Romantic Love for ONE. IMHO.

As far as the baggage goes, I think that Unicorns come with baggage (don't we all). I haven't intimately known a LOT, however....it seems that they have some broken pieces. It's about dealing with them somehow, I suppose. Or not. Definitely 3 is complicated!!

Here is the talk in the vid format: http://www.ted.com/talks/helen_fishe...ove_cheat.html

Good luck! P2
__________________
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars. ~ Oscar Wilde

Last edited by redpepper; 09-14-2010 at 08:00 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 09-13-2010, 04:28 PM
MonoVCPHG's Avatar
MonoVCPHG MonoVCPHG is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: In Redpepper's heart
Posts: 4,742
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NeonKaos View Post
I haven't been reading that thread, so I'm not sure what you're referring to. However, I'm hard-pressed to believe that "almost everyone" on a forum about polyamory would "agree" to that sentiment.
In her e-mial to me she was specific in Highlighting the word "intense" romantic love which I think we consider to be the NRE Phase. She also states no hard and fast can't or cannot, even experts don't deal in certainties around the topic of love...that is usually done by "self enlightment" individuals pushing an agenda or trying to justify their behaviour....Like me .
__________________

Playing the Game of Life with Monopoly rules.
Monogamy might just be in my genes

Poly Events All Over

Last edited by MonoVCPHG; 09-13-2010 at 04:32 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 09-13-2010, 05:22 PM
NeonKaos NeonKaos is offline
Custodian
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: new england
Posts: 3,221
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MonoVCPHG View Post
In her e-mial to me she was specific in Highlighting the word "intense" romantic love which I think we consider to be the NRE Phase. She also states no hard and fast can't or cannot, even experts don't deal in certainties around the topic of love...that is usually done by "self enlightment" individuals pushing an agenda or trying to justify their behaviour....Like me .
I didn't see the word "intense" at all, highlighted or not, in the quote mentioned earlier in this thread. The phrase "can only" DID appear. I'm not sure what I'm expected to assume or read in to that statement, and I'm still hard-pressed to believe that most of the people on here agreed with it, "intense" NRE or not.

Last edited by NeonKaos; 09-13-2010 at 05:25 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 09-13-2010, 05:32 PM
MonoVCPHG's Avatar
MonoVCPHG MonoVCPHG is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: In Redpepper's heart
Posts: 4,742
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NeonKaos View Post
I didn't see the word "intense" at all, highlighted or not, in the quote mentioned earlier in this thread. The phrase "can only" DID appear. I'm not sure what I'm expected to assume or read in to that statement, and I'm still hard-pressed to believe that most of the people on here agreed with it, "intense" NRE or not.
Yeah, it was in the original, just a misquote is all and I agree with you as well. I'm sure there are people who would disagree that you can only have NRE for one person at a time where as other won't....there is no certainty for sure.
__________________

Playing the Game of Life with Monopoly rules.
Monogamy might just be in my genes

Poly Events All Over
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 09-13-2010, 10:47 PM
AutumnalTone AutumnalTone is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Kansas City Metro
Posts: 2,186
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NeonKaos View Post
I haven't been reading that thread, so I'm not sure what you're referring to. However, I'm hard-pressed to believe that "almost everyone" on a forum about polyamory would "agree" to that sentiment.
Ditto. I don't recall reading that, though I don't read every thread in detail. I can say that I disagree with that notion wholeheartedly--my experience shows me different.
__________________
When speaking of various forms of non-monogamy...it ain't poly if you're just fucking around.

While polyamory, open relationships, and swinging are all distinctly different approaches to non-monogamy, they are not mutually exlusive. Folks can, and some do, engage in more than one of them at a time--and it's all good.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 09-14-2010, 12:34 AM
MonoVCPHG's Avatar
MonoVCPHG MonoVCPHG is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: In Redpepper's heart
Posts: 4,742
Default

Here's the original email sent to me: Just for reference.

"I apologize for being so slow to respond. I am overwhelmed with work. But to answer your question briefly. I certainly think you can feel deep attachment to more than one person at a time. We see this all the time. You can be attached to your work, your family, your children, and more than one lover. The attachment system doesn't seem to focus on just one person. Same with the sex drive. You can feel lust for several people at a time. But I don't think you can feel INTENSE romantic love for more than one person at a time. This particular brain system is associated with deep and intense focus on one individual, and people tend to get quite possessive too."
__________________

Playing the Game of Life with Monopoly rules.
Monogamy might just be in my genes

Poly Events All Over
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 09-14-2010, 01:17 PM
Magdlyn's Avatar
Magdlyn Magdlyn is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Metro West Massachusetts
Posts: 3,591
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MonoVCPHG View Post
"... I don't think you can feel INTENSE romantic love for more than one person at a time. This particular brain system is associated with deep and intense focus on one individual, and people tend to get quite possessive too."
Well, she's just wrong on that.

When I'd only known my gf 3 mos, I met a guy who seemed to meet all my qualifications for a good boyfriend. I was over the moon for him and still in NRE w my gf... I tell you, it was confusing at first! But I definitely felt NRE for 2 at once.

And while we were all feeling NRE, me for both of them, each of them for me, no one was possessive... b/c we were all poly.
__________________
Love withers under constraint; its very essence is liberty. It is compatible neither with envy, jealousy or fear. It is there most pure, perfect and unlimited when its votaries live in confidence, equality and unreserve. -- Shelley

me: Mags, 59, living with:
miss pixi, 37
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 09-14-2010, 02:32 PM
MonoVCPHG's Avatar
MonoVCPHG MonoVCPHG is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: In Redpepper's heart
Posts: 4,742
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Magdlyn View Post
b/c we were all poly.
Poly people can still be possessive. Not all obviously, but some.
__________________

Playing the Game of Life with Monopoly rules.
Monogamy might just be in my genes

Poly Events All Over
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 09-14-2010, 02:44 PM
Magdlyn's Avatar
Magdlyn Magdlyn is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Metro West Massachusetts
Posts: 3,591
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MonoVCPHG View Post
Poly people can still be possessive. Not all obviously, but some.
Well, just to make the distinction, NRE does not automatically cause possessiveness in poly relationships.

I guess this Helen Fisher has not heard of compersion... i still havent made time to watch her youtubes.
__________________
Love withers under constraint; its very essence is liberty. It is compatible neither with envy, jealousy or fear. It is there most pure, perfect and unlimited when its votaries live in confidence, equality and unreserve. -- Shelley

me: Mags, 59, living with:
miss pixi, 37
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
brain, science

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 09:36 AM.