Veto Arrangements - Merged Threads, General Discussion

Who knew that such a "common" option would be so unpopular here?

But, I too, abhor the veto option. If I were married, desperate to live out my poly dreams, then I might accept the veto option to make it feel more safe to go there. But, I'm not sure that it is as helpful as we might believe.

In the end, if you can't trust my judgment about people, you need to be willing to work with me as I learn to be a better judge. Deciding for me is not particularly helpful. I realize that this willingness might not be without some pain. But, it is pain that could help strengthen the relationship because of the trust given, wisdom shared, and stick with me through those growing pains.

If I'm a fool and can't learn, then you might as well get out while you can anyway...
 
I think veto power is flat cruel.

It takes the "person" out of the "secondary role".

From the perspective of the "third" (or subsequent number):

WHY on earth would you want to date someone that you knew-even if you both fall madly in love, have a healthy, happy, loving relationship that doesn't ACTUALLY disrespect or infringe on their other relationships,
their other lover could "terminate" your relationship at will?

Nope. Wouldn't do it.

In a healthy relationship (hell even in many unhealthy relationships) there SHOULD be the ability to say "honey, that person is smoking crack on the weekends, they just aren't an appropriate fit for you".
AND
Having the where with all in ourselves to say "you know what honey, as much as I WANT a relationship, you're right. I don't want that kind of b.s. in my life either."

But, that's not veto power, that's communicating honestly and openly.

At the point where someone ELSE has the right to decide if a relationship is or isn't important enough to me, for me to keep it... we're no longer in a relationship, we're in a dictatorship.


(no, I didn't feel that way when we first started poly-but it became quite clear to me after reading all the horror stories and encountering a few "I'm not so sure" moments myself. I figured out pretty quick that I don't need veto power-I just need to know I can express my concerns and Maca will listen.)
 
As a secondary involved with a couple who have a child, I would completely accept the concept of Veto Power for them if the stability of their family was at stake. The child and those who are responsible to provide a stable and healthy environment come first. Then again I believe marriages come first as well...I would just go into a relationship with my eyes open to the idea that my impact would be less than that of the married/established or parenting couple. In order to do that you have to "want" to be with the partner and not "need" to be with them in a specific way.

I'm weird..I know :eek:
 
I see vetos as a step along the journey to opening up an existing relationship. It's one of those safety line things that many people have in place when testing out the waters. All I can say is be open with anyone who you are considering dating about there being a veto power in place so that individual can make the desision whether or not they want to get involved with you. You might find as things go on that there is less and less need for veto.

I used to be a strong defender of veto power but I'm not a big fan of it anymore. I figure the only person you can really make desisions for is yourself. If a situation isn't working for you it's best to talk it out and find a mutually agreed upon solution. Plus the person who is having the veto used against them is a person with real emotions too and it's got to be hard being in a realtionship where you have the possibility of having it ended by an outside source over your head all the time. I wouldn't chose to be in a relationship like that.
 
Karma and I call it our Happy Healthy Sane rule. Very similar to BU's #2. We both feel it is something only to be used when happy, healthy,sane is not being met. And even then it's with a lot of talking. Even when all hell broke loose with Cricket lying time and time again and putting our health in jepardy, I told Karma what I would like to see, that I was removing myself from the situation, and he could make whatever decision he felt right, but that I would no longer be supportive of them being together.

It was still his choice to stay or go, but as part of our honesty agreement, he needed to know that I felt happy healthy sane wasn't being met for him and in a way for me.

We've both agreed that the only time we are going to flat out veto a relationship is when health and/or sanity is being threatened in a major way.
 
I equate veto power to a sort of panic button. It allows one partner to pull the plug without any need to work through their own emotions or have a dialogue with their SO about concerning behaviour, etc.

Want poly without the work? Try Veto™*!



*side effects may include: resentment from your partner, treating others as disposible objects, never learning to deal with shit

TP you are hilarious! Love your posts!
 
As a secondary involved with a couple who have a child, I would completely accept the concept of Veto Power for them if the stability of their family was at stake. The child and those who are responsible to provide a stable and healthy environment come first. Then again I believe marriages come first as well...I would just go into a relationship with my eyes open to the idea that my impact would be less than that of the married/established or parenting couple. In order to do that you have to "want" to be with the partner and not "need" to be with them in a specific way.

I'm weird..I know :eek:

I dont know if you are weird or not. I agree that the stability of the family has to come first.
BUT-if my husband isn't providing a stable environment for the family-it's HIM that needs to go, not his lover that needs to be veto'd by me.

IF his lover is a detriment to the family-then he should handle that.

Of course-that's not an issue for me, because his lover is the most amazing woman I've met.

BUT-I still hold to it being his responsibility to make that decision as a responsible party in the family.

Likewise-it's my responsibility in the family.

Veto power allows the wrong person to have 100% control over the staying or going of another. (IMHO)

But-you know I love you Mon. So you be your weird self. :) hehehe
 
:eek:
You SAW!

Damn, did you see the pic of you and your Harley on the wall too?
SHIT! I was trying to keep that secret.

heheheheh

I wouldn't have noticed if it wasn't for all the candles burning around it...and the lip stick kisses :D

Enough Hi-jacking!
 
I think that doing as I would want to have done to me is the best bet for me. I would not want to be told flat off to just fuck off because someones wife or whomever else decides I am not what "they" want for their partner... that is bullshit to me. But, I would be very willing to negotiate something that works better for a partner that is struggling or even decide to let the relationship go because I can see they have far too much to work on before being truly ready for what poly brings to ones life.

There is no way in hell I would accept a partner of mines veto. I have come too far :p

I think veto and primary/secondary language and descriptions are for newbies. Those who are stuck in the realm of relationships where one owns another and isn't able to let go of that just yet. It's based on fear and that, I think, needs to be broached before stepping into being an individual in ones relationship... I get that. I don't operate like that, but I get it... we are fed it in every bit of pop culture there is... it's hard not to get it. I just don't do that, is all.
 
I think veto and primary/secondary language and descriptions are for newbies. Those who are stuck in the realm of relationships where one owns another and isn't able to let go of that just yet. It's based on fear and that, I think, needs to be broached before stepping into being an individual in ones relationship... I get that. I don't operate like that, but I get it... we are fed it in every bit of pop culture there is... it's hard not to get it. I just don't do that, is all.

Perfect break down of how that language can damage.
 
..............
In the end, if you can't trust my judgment about people, you need to be willing to work with me as I learn to be a better judge. Deciding for me is not particularly helpful. I realize that this willingness might not be without some pain. But, it is pain that could help strengthen the relationship because of the trust given, wisdom shared, and stick with me through those growing pains.

If I'm a fool and can't learn, then you might as well get out while you can anyway...

This is a good summation I think MA.......

Because of the control dynamics involved, one of the basics of poly involves giving up that control option.
And I know that in many cases, after you do that, your example is the way that's left to flow.
You either choose to accept SOME risk and try to work towards something better long term - or you call a spade a spade - and bail !

Every situation is unique and everyone's willingness or ability to risk is different. So the "bail point" moves..........

GS
 
This is a good summation I think MA.......

Because of the control dynamics involved, one of the basics of poly involves giving up that control option.
And I know that in many cases, after you do that, your example is the way that's left to flow.
You either choose to accept SOME risk and try to work towards something better long term - or you call a spade a spade - and bail !

Every situation is unique and everyone's willingness or ability to risk is different. So the "bail point" moves..........

GS

Glad it resonated with you. I like the way you put a finer point on it. Giving up control, taking some risk, and committing to growth is inherent in making this shift.
 
We have agreed we can veto someone early on if we get a really bad feeling about somebody - I know sometimes people get giddy over somebody new and don't really see things that could be problems. That is why we prefer to meet people the other is dating fairly soon, I don't think its fair to the third party to try be able to pull the plug whenever.

I don't picture using it - my husband hasn't dated crazy needy dysfunctional women for a long time, and I have only seen him date sane ones since we have been together, most of whom I have liked.

We do have veto in another way I suppose. We don't have hard and fast rules about dating somebody based on their sexual activities, lifestyle, or dating style (some things really just aren't our thing but we don't have a "you can't date somebody who does that" clause preset up because each person is an individual), but it is possible that we realize after awhile that we aren't going to be comfortable with that third person's choices. I have found some of that information just doesn't come up in the first few dates, and decisions might be made a bit later down the line.

I imagine that (working hard to come up with an example I would actually want to veto) if somebody my husband was dating for awhile started having unprotected casual sex now and then, got into risky blood play & started phoning at 2 am wanting to chat because she was feeling insecure - well he probably would've already broken up with her, but I imagine in that case I would be sitting him down at some point if there were ongoing issues and saying I didn't want this person in his life as a girlfriend anymore.

Admittedly if somebody he dated cheated on say - their primary partner, he might be more tolerant because he just is and knows people make mistakes - but I might ask to veto that person at that point because of a lot of personal reasons and history. Hmm that makes good conversation fodder for tonight.
 
I do not believe in Veto's as for me that belongs to a mono relationship. If someone loves me they do not want to decide for me who is my loved one and who is not. When a couple has multiple relationships i sometimes wonder if it is really polyamory or more like an open relationship. If there is one most important person to me that is an open relationship that has overlap with polyamory but isn't so to me.
In my relationships both my partners are equal which in the case of veto means they would both have a veto option. If only one of them dislikes the other and therefore uses his veto what the hell would be the point?? Even when someone is a drug addict I would say it is my partners choice.

Even though somewhere you of course have to respect one another and have the same idea what the word respect involves for you both. If you love someone you do not want to put that person in danger and you will make sure your other relationships do not do so.
Veto could be meaning: communication. Stay open about your feelings, give your partner time to trust again if trust is damaged. We are people and we do get insecure sometimes that is normal. Take time to tell and show to eachother what they mean to you. If that means that you have to invest more time with that person at that time then another or even means you have to sometimes take a time out with that other person to settle things with one i think you have to do so. You owe that to someone if you respect and love them the last thing you want to do is hurt them, even if you do not mean to and you are not in your own opinion. Listen to one another and talk! SHARE
 
I think of vetoes more as ultimatums, in a 'this shit doesn't fly by me anymore - take it or leave it' kinda way, but I see that is not what people generally mean by the concept. Of course, if I had been married for ten years and just now starting to play the field, I might be more inclined to try to work on a veto policy when getting into poly.

What do you think of temporary vetoes, as in 'I love this person but they need to work their shit out before we can continue as metamours, because right now it's having too much of an impact on our family life'?
 
What do you think of temporary vetoes, as in 'I love this person but they need to work their shit out before we can continue as metamours, because right now it's having too much of an impact on our family life'?

Either way, is it your responsibility to veto? I mean that means anyone in the relationship Vee can veto anything they deem "impacting" life.

Example1: I am moody and snap at hubs for the umpteenth time he has left laundry on the floor just because I had a fight with 2Rings over something entirely separate from hubs....might be over KT, might be something else... I may have snapped because I was not my usual self and pissed-off in general. Does my argument with 2Rings impact family life, quite often but does that mean hubs has a right to veto a relationship I want. No. He can ask why I jumped in his ass today, bitch a little about it and may utter that a sock on the floor does not warrant a full-blown rant, pick up his laundry and move-on; he can point out "hey I am not 2Rings but I am sorry I was the last straw today" and pick up his laundry; or he can just pick up his laundry and lump the mood I am in until it passes. Trying to place a sanction on something HE has nothing to do with just adds another layer of annoyance AND excludes hubs from his responsibility in any discord he is causing as well.

Example2: Hubs is looking for ways to control the relationship I have with 2Rings because he is monogamous and does not agree with poly lifestyle etc, so he vetos this, that and the other. He argues with me until we are screaming in eachother's faces and in front of the kids almost daily because I do not agree with the vetoes and BTW I am an independent person with free-thought, right? So I am just as stubborn in my "rights." Kids are impacted NOT by metamour but hubs' reaction to my want of my relatinship with said metamour and to have this or that everyday, normal expectation in that relationship. What did the veto accomplish?

BTW- hubs doesn't ever veto. Thank god!

Just my thoughts on veto. And this applies to politics as well. That and filebustering really get on my nerves. I just don't see the point of it other than to piss people off, extend the argument, and cause further stress and discord. The exact opposite of ANY reason I have heard in support of the power of veto.
 
All of the responses I've seen that talk about reasonable scenarios to use vetos could easily be categorized as common sense and/or good communication.

Veto literally means "I forbid". If something is common sensical or you're able to have a dialogue with your partner, then you're not vetoing.
 
Back
Top