Polyamory.com Forum  

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

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old 05-26-2014, 10:09 PM
ColorsWolf's Avatar
ColorsWolf ColorsWolf is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: CA, U.S.A.
Posts: 360
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nycindie View Post
You missed the point altogether. "Fake it 'til you make it" isn't about lying at all. Sheesh, where did you come up with that? It's about giving oneself certain self-motivating cues when one feels less than confident, capable, or secure in new situations. Basically asking yourself what a confident person would do or say, or what a wise person would do or say, and then emulating that kind of person and doing those things to find your own sense of confidence from doing/saying those things before you actually feel confident. It is a way to become more grounded in expressing and/or living with your choices by using an exercise that is about practicing what you preach, and building a foundation from the outside in.
As long as you're not actively telling other people things that "aren't yet true" then you are right: this isn't lying.~

I do know what you mean though: if you are normally reserved and not prone to speaking your opinions in public because you are afraid to do these things and you decide to be the opposite of what you are usually like: you will still have that fear, but the hope is that the more you keep doing this the less afraid you will be until that fear is gone and you become closer to being like the person you really want to be.~

I'm also honest with people, if some one were to ask me if I ever get afraid to speak my mind and be myself in public (as I am often flamboyant, loud, and my opinions are usually the opposite of what is considered "conservative"): I would answer them honestly and say "yes", but I would also tell them that courage is not the absence of fear, but the realization that some thing is more important than fear and to keep going even with that fear present.~

I do this almost every chance I get for the above reasons to.~

Thank you for clearing that up, I think I understand it better now.~ ^_^
__________________
Love yourself, you are beautiful!~ ^_^

*Believe in yourself, you can do anything*!~ ^_^

Appreciate every thing, every thing is precious.~


Last edited by ColorsWolf; 05-26-2014 at 10:14 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 05-29-2014, 08:30 PM
LadyLigeia LadyLigeia is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Utopia
Posts: 25
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by london View Post
It all depends on the person and I know plenty of people who subscribe to relationship anarchy have thriving, successful relationships. The risk, from what I've seen and experienced from people who subscribe to this model, is that the person lets a partner down and then uses this relationship anarchy theory to tell them why they didn't let them down and also why they were pretty stupid/naive/controlling to have that expectation of them in the first place.

It does ultimately come back down to partner selection, that is true, but it makes me uneasy to let go of the idea that people have any obligations to those they have relationships with.
You're lucky to have met others who live by Relationship Anarchy because I've only met one other person who knew what it was without me telling them. And yes, you are correct that some people use it as an excuse disregard the desires and boundaries of others. Relationship Anarchy is about choosing commitments as opposed to have them pushed upon you and conforming your relationships to a cultural script.

There are many overlaps, but Relationship Anarchy involves the emancipation of love from all hierarchical, social, and power imbalances. For instance, I have what many would call a "primary" partner. Although I don't call him my primary partner (and I DO call him my boyfriend), he is the main love interest in my life because Relationship Anarchy promotes judging your relationships soley on their individual qualities and depth. There's no couple's privilege - I value all of my relationships, romantic and otherwise, on a qualitative basis as opposed to assigning one to be my main while all others come "secondary." The ones that other would consider "secondary" are individually valued based on the quality of our connection. I've yet to meet someone whom I bond with as great as I do with my boyfriend.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 05-29-2014, 08:54 PM
LadyLigeia LadyLigeia is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Utopia
Posts: 25
Default

Here's another good example that I just thought of:

I've noticed that in the United States - notably, among my peers (people in their late teens to early/mid twenties and beyond) - people get squeamish about developing emotionally intimate connection with individuals who aren't "exclusive" with them or on the road to being exclusive. I've noticed that they divorce any emotional connection from non-monogamous people or even outright objectify them if they are in a casual relationship. Any kind of connection that is personal and beyond the physical makes them automatically assume that the infatuated party is trying to make them commit, or that they want "more" from the relationship than what the other person has to offer. Y'know how the ever-wise "they" say that you shouldn't sleep with someone who you see as a potentially serious partner on the first date because there's nothing to discover after? I feel as though they often bar any emotional connection from developing under the delusion that it always forecasts clingy behavior and expectations that they cannot fulfill. Basically, emotional intimacy is reserved for more serious relationships and if any develops in casual relationships, it is ignored or shunned because they assume that it means something that it doesn't always mean.

Please don't mistake Relationship Anarchy as a justification for people to be selfish and negligent in "untitled" relationships, something that has become more frequent especially in people who prefer monogamy. As my friend Will said prior to my discovery of Relationship Anarchy, "People get in 'relationships' all of the time - They just don't call them that." Just because you don't call that person your "significant other" doesn't mean that your relationship doesn't have all of the content of a emotionally and sexually intimate relationship. It's best explained by the concept of an "emotional affair," infidelity which takes place not physically but mentally. For example, think of the spouse who regularly sends steamy e-mails to another person and remains infatuated with them while claiming to be in a monogamous relationship. Even if no one knows about it but the person who's committing it, it's still there.

What do you guys think? Personally, the label "polyamory" always felt a little cumbersome to me and the relational structures involved didn't feel natural, even if my own relationships happened to fall into that format. When I discovered Relationship Anarchy, I understood where the innate discomfort came from. Personally, I feel as though Relationship Anarchy is my true emotional orientation.
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 05-30-2014, 12:14 AM
ColorsWolf's Avatar
ColorsWolf ColorsWolf is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: CA, U.S.A.
Posts: 360
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyLigeia View Post
Here's another good example that I just thought of:

I've noticed that in the United States - notably, among my peers (people in their late teens to early/mid twenties and beyond) - people get squeamish about developing emotionally intimate connection with individuals who aren't "exclusive" with them or on the road to being exclusive. I've noticed that they divorce any emotional connection from non-monogamous people or even outright objectify them if they are in a casual relationship. Any kind of connection that is personal and beyond the physical makes them automatically assume that the infatuated party is trying to make them commit, or that they want "more" from the relationship than what the other person has to offer. Y'know how the ever-wise "they" say that you shouldn't sleep with someone who you see as a potentially serious partner on the first date because there's nothing to discover after? I feel as though they often bar any emotional connection from developing under the delusion that it always forecasts clingy behavior and expectations that they cannot fulfill. Basically, emotional intimacy is reserved for more serious relationships and if any develops in casual relationships, it is ignored or shunned because they assume that it means something that it doesn't always mean.

Please don't mistake Relationship Anarchy as a justification for people to be selfish and negligent in "untitled" relationships, something that has become more frequent especially in people who prefer monogamy. As my friend Will said prior to my discovery of Relationship Anarchy, "People get in 'relationships' all of the time - They just don't call them that." Just because you don't call that person your "significant other" doesn't mean that your relationship doesn't have all of the content of a emotionally and sexually intimate relationship. It's best explained by the concept of an "emotional affair," infidelity which takes place not physically but mentally. For example, think of the spouse who regularly sends steamy e-mails to another person and remains infatuated with them while claiming to be in a monogamous relationship. Even if no one knows about it but the person who's committing it, it's still there.

What do you guys think? Personally, the label "polyamory" always felt a little cumbersome to me and the relational structures involved didn't feel natural, even if my own relationships happened to fall into that format. When I discovered Relationship Anarchy, I understood where the innate discomfort came from. Personally, I feel as though Relationship Anarchy is my true emotional orientation.
I honestly already saw love and relationships this way as every time some one tried to tell me "you have to have these rules if your going to do that" I always asked "why?".~

I decide what to do with my relationships, I feel how I feel, and I see things how I see them and no matter what any one else says no one is ever going to control me unless I let them.~

It doesn't have to make "sense" to other people, it is what it is, I don't live to please others all the time.~

Others don't like me: fine, don't talk to me if you don't want to, you don't like how I kiss a man on the lips because I am a man myself, you don't like the way I dress or walk around naked, then don't look, your (other people's) issues are your's to deal with, not mine.~


I don't know why a lot of people need these "terms" like Relationship Anarchy or "Radical Honesty" to be their own persons and retain their individuality no matter what their societies think of them.~

But if it helps, then more self-empowerment to them!~
__________________
Love yourself, you are beautiful!~ ^_^

*Believe in yourself, you can do anything*!~ ^_^

Appreciate every thing, every thing is precious.~

Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 05-30-2014, 12:24 AM
nycindie's Avatar
nycindie nycindie is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: The Big Apple
Posts: 7,877
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ColorsWolf View Post
I decide what to do with my relationships, I feel how I feel, and I see things how I see them and no matter what any one else says no one is ever going to control me unless I let them.
Are you in any relationships right now, ColorsWolf? Have you been in any besides the online ones you had from playing Second Life, since starting to post here? You said back then that you had never had any real-world relationships yet, so I was wondering if that changed for you.
__________________
The world opens up... when you do.

"Oh, oh, can't you see? Love is the drug for me." ~Bryan Ferry
"Love and the self are one . . ." ~Leo Buscaglia "

An excellent blog post on hierarchy in polyamory:
solopoly.net/2014/10/31/why-im-not-a-secondary-partner-the-short-version/
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 05-30-2014, 06:58 PM
ColorsWolf's Avatar
ColorsWolf ColorsWolf is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: CA, U.S.A.
Posts: 360
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nycindie View Post
Are you in any relationships right now, ColorsWolf? Have you been in any besides the online ones you had from playing Second Life, since starting to post here? You said back then that you had never had any real-world relationships yet, so I was wondering if that changed for you.
That's the nature of things isn't it?~ I don't see things as 'being in a relationship or not'.~ I honestly don't know.~

I don't consider connecting with some one offline to be "more meaningful" than online and to imply that my online interactions were "not in the real-world" is highly disrespectful of that.~
__________________
Love yourself, you are beautiful!~ ^_^

*Believe in yourself, you can do anything*!~ ^_^

Appreciate every thing, every thing is precious.~

Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 05-31-2014, 01:11 AM
FarAwayLover FarAwayLover is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Boston
Posts: 38
Thumbs up But we will always be friends and even lovers

Quote:
Originally Posted by ColorsWolf View Post
The wind and the river may dance away and come and go as they please and I may or may not ever see them again, but we will always be friends and even lovers.~
I really like this quote from November. ColorsWolf, is it yours?

I've been wondering if I've been thinking about my old boyfriend Jacques too much. It's not clear that we'll ever be in _any_ kind of communication again, because his wife was so freaked out over e-mail on even everyday topics like the weather. This quote gives me a nice way of looking at the situation.

A few things have come together to make me feel better about things. One was this thread. I like the idea that each relationship iis unique and doesn't have to fit any pattern that you've ever heard of.

Another was an article in the Boston Globe about the myth of closure from 2011 (it was in a pile of old newspapers in the bathroom). Part of what I'm getting from that is that it's OK to not "get over" Jacques. Things keep coming up that make me think of Jacques. Fortunately, Clyde says it's OK - he's not bothered by this.
http://www.boston.com/lifestyle/heal...th_of_closure/

And this thread, while a totally different story, gave me some hope because people are getting together 1 1/2 years after it seemed hopeless.
http://www.polyamory.com/forum/showt...t=28525&page=6

Hope this isn't _too_ far off topic.

FAL

--------------------------------

M - Me - female, 59 - _trying_ to figure out if I'm poly
Clyde (previously B) - 56 - my husband for over 34 years
Jacques (previously JP) - 58 - my high school boyfriend, newly appeared in the picture after 38 years; very long distance; haven't actually seen him
Artemis (previously A) - 65? - Jacques's wife of over 30 years, who's not cool with things
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 05-31-2014, 06:25 AM
copperhead copperhead is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 109
Default

I'll check the links in a minute but your post already gave me much to think. After the break up with Salamander I tried to google stuff about closure and how to move on after cheating. I really hated that most articles were about getting back together or about how to remove the person from your life completely. It was all about how to pretend that you've never been better, no matter how sad or messed up you really are and there were actual instructions to start hating the other person.

None of this fits me as I'm not about to fake anything for other peoples sake and I'm not going to hate someone just because they are my ex now. But is this really the relationship stereotype? The model for everyone to follow? Because thinking so makes me sad. I wish more people had the courage to shape their own relationships, even the ex-ones and see how they become post-lover-new-and-improved-friendships or something.

I don't expect the pain to go away any time soon. I expect to live through it until it fades away one day.

Too many thoughts filling my head right now. I'll have to sort them out before I ramble on about anything else.
__________________
Me: female, solo poly, two children.
Mir: Lover-friend, with wife and child
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 06-01-2014, 06:30 AM
nycindie's Avatar
nycindie nycindie is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: The Big Apple
Posts: 7,877
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ColorsWolf View Post
That's the nature of things isn't it?~ I don't see things as 'being in a relationship or not'.~ I honestly don't know.~
Well, that is a non-answer, isn't it? You don't know if you are in a relationship or not? You often write about how you want your relationships to be or how you want to conduct your relationships, so I was curious if there is anyone you are intimately connected to. Why don't you know whether you have a relationship with someone or not? Is there a grey area in your interactions that you can't figure out?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ColorsWolf View Post
I don't consider connecting with some one offline to be "more meaningful" than online and to imply that my online interactions were "not in the real-world" is highly disrespectful of that.~
"Real world" is a common term often used to mean the opposite of "virtual world." You can take offense at the question if you want, but I didn't say anything about real world relationships being "more meaningful," so that is totally your interpretation - however, you were the one who stated, when you first joined this forum, that your virtual interactions were painfully dissatisfying for you and that you wanted a relationship with someone "here" in "this world," which obviously means "offline," in "meat space," the "real world," etc. :

Quote:
Originally Posted by ColorsWolf View Post
I've had sex before but it was online in a 3D virtual world (Second Life), I thought why not try out this whole "just bang anyone thing" and it was just like I thought it would be: briefly satisfying but cold and hollow afterwards...so cold *shiver*.~

I stopped playing Second Life, because even without the sex, the things I was doing in that 3D world I wanted to do here in THIS world: I wanted to hold someone, to kiss someone, to touch someone, and the more I realized I had't done that yet here the more depressed I became. So I stopped playing Second Life because it had lost its' appeal to me and it was just too painful to bear anymore.
__________________
The world opens up... when you do.

"Oh, oh, can't you see? Love is the drug for me." ~Bryan Ferry
"Love and the self are one . . ." ~Leo Buscaglia "

An excellent blog post on hierarchy in polyamory:
solopoly.net/2014/10/31/why-im-not-a-secondary-partner-the-short-version/
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 06-02-2014, 01:30 AM
ColorsWolf's Avatar
ColorsWolf ColorsWolf is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: CA, U.S.A.
Posts: 360
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FarAwayLover View Post
I really like this quote from November. ColorsWolf, is it yours?

I've been wondering if I've been thinking about my old boyfriend Jacques too much. It's not clear that we'll ever be in _any_ kind of communication again, because his wife was so freaked out over e-mail on even everyday topics like the weather. This quote gives me a nice way of looking at the situation.

A few things have come together to make me feel better about things. One was this thread. I like the idea that each relationship iis unique and doesn't have to fit any pattern that you've ever heard of.

Another was an article in the Boston Globe about the myth of closure from 2011 (it was in a pile of old newspapers in the bathroom). Part of what I'm getting from that is that it's OK to not "get over" Jacques. Things keep coming up that make me think of Jacques. Fortunately, Clyde says it's OK - he's not bothered by this.
http://www.boston.com/lifestyle/heal...th_of_closure/

And this thread, while a totally different story, gave me some hope because people are getting together 1 1/2 years after it seemed hopeless.
http://www.polyamory.com/forum/showt...t=28525&page=6

Hope this isn't _too_ far off topic.

FAL

--------------------------------

M - Me - female, 59 - _trying_ to figure out if I'm poly
Clyde (previously B) - 56 - my husband for over 34 years
Jacques (previously JP) - 58 - my high school boyfriend, newly appeared in the picture after 38 years; very long distance; haven't actually seen him
Artemis (previously A) - 65? - Jacques's wife of over 30 years, who's not cool with things
Yes, yes that is quote of me saying that.~ I'm glad you like it~ ^_^

And I'm glad you found this topic comforting, it brings me such joy to make other people happy!~ ^_^

Quote:
Originally Posted by copperhead View Post
I'll check the links in a minute but your post already gave me much to think. After the break up with Salamander I tried to google stuff about closure and how to move on after cheating. I really hated that most articles were about getting back together or about how to remove the person from your life completely. It was all about how to pretend that you've never been better, no matter how sad or messed up you really are and there were actual instructions to start hating the other person.

None of this fits me as I'm not about to fake anything for other peoples sake and I'm not going to hate someone just because they are my ex now. But is this really the relationship stereotype? The model for everyone to follow? Because thinking so makes me sad. I wish more people had the courage to shape their own relationships, even the ex-ones and see how they become post-lover-new-and-improved-friendships or something.

I don't expect the pain to go away any time soon. I expect to live through it until it fades away one day.

Too many thoughts filling my head right now. I'll have to sort them out before I ramble on about anything else.
Thank you for sharing that, sending love your way!~ ^_^

Quote:
Originally Posted by nycindie View Post
1. Well, that is a non-answer, isn't it? You don't know if you are in a relationship or not? You often write about how you want your relationships to be or how you want to conduct your relationships, so I was curious if there is anyone you are intimately connected to. Why don't you know whether you have a relationship with someone or not? Is there a grey area in your interactions that you can't figure out?



2. "Real world" is a common term often used to mean the opposite of "virtual world." You can take offense at the question if you want, but I didn't say anything about real world relationships being "more meaningful," so that is totally your interpretation - however, you were the one who stated, when you first joined this forum, that your virtual interactions were painfully dissatisfying for you and that you wanted a relationship with someone "here" in "this world," which obviously means "offline," in "meat space," the "real world," etc. :
1. I don't know what to say other than what I've already said.~

2. How common a word is used does not make it any less insulting.~ It's strange, I don't like interacting with people in a 3D online world intimately like hugging and kissing because it makes me depressed about what I want to do in the offline world but haven't done yet; but I do value the conversations I have with people in a mostly text-based way because to me that is very intimate to me.~
__________________
Love yourself, you are beautiful!~ ^_^

*Believe in yourself, you can do anything*!~ ^_^

Appreciate every thing, every thing is precious.~


Last edited by ColorsWolf; 06-02-2014 at 01:41 AM.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
anarchy, methodology, radical, relationship anarchy, terminology, theory

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 05:34 PM.