One thing that I think our triad of a year never managed to happily do was establish new protocols. There was the way that things were done, with rules decided before I got there that in the end had to be discarded and renegotiated because of unworkability, and the idea was that anything could be renegotiated. Which sounds great, except I'm realizing that it comes with the following assumptions:
There is the way the couple has done things
By default, this will be adopted as the way the triad does things
If there is a problem with it , the newbie can bring up, and if a solution is acceptable to the couple, it will be adopted.
Which sounds good, but if you reverse it, it sounds ridiculous and power-centric:
There is the way the newbie has done things.
By default, this is the way things will be done.
If this is problematic, the couple can bring a solution to the newbie, and if it is acceptable to the newbie, it will be adopted.
The difference points out the assumption, almost, that the couple will vote as a block and approach change as a block, and set the tone and leadership in forming the new relationship. and acceptance of that. Couple privilege.
I have a theory that negotiating couple privilege is a normal relationship crisis occurring after the first year that makes or breaks a triad. This has a sample set of one and a quote from Dan Savage supporting it, so it's not exactly well-researched.
But for my curiosity:
Have you addressed this in your relationship at this stage yet? Have you found a way so that a concern is approached from a fresh, non-couple centric position in negotiations? For your newbie, do you see one or the other of the original couple siding with you individually on a regular basis as easily as they side with their original partner? Are you comfortable with that? How do you eliminate the tendency to fallback to how things were done before you became a triad when things get tense or break down? Or can you?
There is the way the couple has done things
By default, this will be adopted as the way the triad does things
If there is a problem with it , the newbie can bring up, and if a solution is acceptable to the couple, it will be adopted.
Which sounds good, but if you reverse it, it sounds ridiculous and power-centric:
There is the way the newbie has done things.
By default, this is the way things will be done.
If this is problematic, the couple can bring a solution to the newbie, and if it is acceptable to the newbie, it will be adopted.
The difference points out the assumption, almost, that the couple will vote as a block and approach change as a block, and set the tone and leadership in forming the new relationship. and acceptance of that. Couple privilege.
I have a theory that negotiating couple privilege is a normal relationship crisis occurring after the first year that makes or breaks a triad. This has a sample set of one and a quote from Dan Savage supporting it, so it's not exactly well-researched.
But for my curiosity:
Have you addressed this in your relationship at this stage yet? Have you found a way so that a concern is approached from a fresh, non-couple centric position in negotiations? For your newbie, do you see one or the other of the original couple siding with you individually on a regular basis as easily as they side with their original partner? Are you comfortable with that? How do you eliminate the tendency to fallback to how things were done before you became a triad when things get tense or break down? Or can you?