Amused

Well

Hmmm. It appears, despite getting some flak, that no one really does the, I want two men/women pampering me thing (despite some wishful thinking :)
 
Flowerchild said:
What I meant by the hinge of the vee providing for all of the "legs" needs (poly lingo can get so unromantic) is this: Say, one of the "legs" is having a bad day and needs intimate emotional support (does not have to be f*ing). They only have one person to turn to. While the vee has two people to turn to (say, one of his or her partners is out of town, there is still someone else for them to get comfort from).
Click to expand...

THIS^^

Is what I was referring to. The idea somehow that because you have more than one relationship there will ALWAYS be someone around when you need them. That you have some sort of beck and call system that by having more than one relationship you are so DEFINITELY going to get your needs and wants met at all times.

Again, I've had the last two weeks of hell and guess what? Two partners and not one able to be there for me. As a matter of fact, I was having to be there for both of them. One for an emotional issue they needed support in and reassurance and for me to listen and validate and NOT go into my own issues. The other with being super busy and having a difficult time with people in their lives and what the intentions might be.

So being poly does NOT mean always having someone around no matter what. They are relationships, they are individual people with their own needs and life. So if they aren't able to be there, they aren't. It's not a matter of just adding MORE relationships just because you don't have someone there for you at that moment.
 
I think that the fact you have more chance of a date on a Friday night is a perk of poly. When you're only in something for the perks, its usually a bad sign.
 
London

London,

Exactly. Being poly should be about caring for those people, not about the perks you think it will bring. It may sound nice to have multiple people there for you, helping you, but it means you have to be there for them, too, jealousies, a whole mess of problems, and it's hard, but it's so worth it.

Vix, give it up, I'm not going to get in a silly argument when we're both arguing the same side.
 
Flowerchild said:
Exactly. Being poly should be about caring for those people, not about the perks you think it will bring. It may sound nice to have multiple people there for you, helping you, but it means you have to be there for them, too, jealousies, a whole mess of problems, and it's hard, but it's so worth it.

Vix, give it up, I'm not going to get in a silly argument when we're both arguing the same side.
Click to expand...

While it pains me to agree with Vixtoria (apparently we are preempting our posts this way now) you are making some pretty broad sweeping generalizations here. Because I am the "leg" of a "vee" with IV I now have to deal with jealousy and a whole mess of problems? What are the problems that I need to deal with? The fact that she is the "hinge" of our "vee" means that she is going to have to babysit CV and myself and meet all of our "needs"? Man... maybe I should let her know that she is nowhere near stressed out enough. I should also let her know that I have "needs" which she is not meeting (and we all know that it is now her responsibility to meet them... because I'm not a grown up who is responsible for myself).

I realize that it isn't your intention to speak for all poly folk and to make ridiculous generalizations but that's what you keep doing ... and Vixtoria is ri... she's righ.... *cough* .... she's right.

IV gives 100% of what she chooses to give to me and she gives 100% of what she chooses to give to CV. If she finds herself in the enviable position of having too much love to give and the inability to spread it out as fast as it is building up - we should all be so unfortunate.

Some relationships are effortless and flourishing. Some are a pain in the ass and a whole bucket load of work. This has less to do with the "configuration" that it does with whether or not the members are controlling, insecure, blame shifting, foot stomping, entitled babies.
 
Is your experience that hinges don't meet their partners' needs?
 
Flowerchild said:
Secondly, everyone commenting seems to be taking this personally against their own arrangement.
Click to expand...
I don't think anyone is "taking things personally." I only see people clarifying how they view things.

Flowerchild said:
NYCindie, for example, wants each person to put in 100% into the relationship, while she puts 100% back. That's fine . . .
Click to expand...
This makes very little sense to me. This is why we keep restating our positions - your interpretations of what we say seem to be quite a bit off.

It's not that I *want* each guy I get involved with, and myself, to put 100% into a relationship - it's that... how can it possibly be any other way? When you are in a relationship with someone, relating, how can you be 50% in it, or 75%, or 32%??? You're either in it or you're not. Clearly, you have to be present and engaged with another human being to call it a relationship - I don't know how you can measure it. Each relationship has its own dynamic, though, so it doesn't mean they are all the same as far as what people enjoy with each other, share, rely on each other for, etc. But anyone who only makes a halfhearted attempt at being involved with me isn't really involved, are they? In that case, when it's at that point, it's just... well, over and done with.

Flowerchild said:
but if she were in a committed relationship with three other people solely committed to her, and no one else, and she ASKED them to be committed just to her, it's not really fair to expect each of them to contribute as much to her as to others.
Click to expand...
What does this even mean, "contribute to me?" Am I a piggy bank and all my lovers have a certain number of coins to contribute? And asking a different number isn't fair to them?

First of all, if I had four lovers, how would I be justified in expecting them to only commit to me? I wouldn't dictate to someone else who or how many people they can be in relationships with. If it was my lover's choice to be monogamous with me, that's his choice. But it wouldn't change what I would want in the relationship with him.

It's not like I would be standing here and saying, "I have these needs: A, B, C, and Z. Lover #1 takes care of A, Lover #2 takes care of B, Lover 3 and Lover 4 each handle 50% of C, and all of them share Z," etc. You don't apportion things like that. I need the same things from everyone: respect, caring, affection, honesty, and so on, and each person is 100% responsible for themselves and their relationships. Of course, each relationship has its own dynamic, flavor, unique colors, and energy, and whenever I am with one person, I am fully engaged and present with them, and if they are distracted or not fully present with me, we talk about it. I mean, the only thing anyone can realistically deal with at any given moment is the here and now - so if you're with me, be with me. When I'm with you, I'm with you.

Flowerchild said:
My point is that can get overwhelming. It's balancing time management and jealousies.
Click to expand...
Well, handling one's emotional responses to situations is a completely different topic from saying multiple partners shouldn't be expected to be fully involved in a relationship with someone who has other relationships.
 
Last edited:
Fine

Oh, I give up on this one. You're all right, there are never any problems in poly, having two partners makes it so much easier, they just give what they want, you get what you want, and no one is ever jealous when their partners decide they want others.

Happy now?
 
nycindie said:
It's not like I would be standing here and saying, "I have these needs: A, B, C, and Z. Lover #1 takes care of A, Lover #2 takes care of B, Lover 3 and Lover 4 each handle 50% of C, and all of them share Z," etc. You don't apportion things like that. I need the same things from everyone: respect, caring, affection, honesty, and so on, and each person is 100% responsible for themselves and their relationships
Click to expand...

When I am giving myself a reality check I tend to compare my romantic relationships to my friendships and see how they stack up. In a perfect world they should be pretty much identical (with the addition of sex). My friends are self-sufficient, manage their own time, call me when they want to spend time with me, treat me with respect, express affection when it is genuine, help me when I ask them whenever they can... etc, and the same goes for me. We don't have expectations of "meeting each others needs", that is a nonsensical statement and we don't look at our relationships through this kind of exchange. We are gracious for what we get and move on with our lives.

What I see happening within these interdependent romantic relationships is that people lose site of being adults and become a "husband" or "girlfriend" or "whatever". Once these titles kick in there seems to be an automatic shift into being parasitic organisms, each living off of the other in a perfect symbiotic feeding frenzy. The problems only pop up when someone isn't able or willing to meet one of needs of one of the remora fish feeding from them and all hell breaks loose. They need to sit down and "work on the relationship" and create some new rules or define new boundaries.

While these assumptions of exchange of goods don't apply to *my* relationships I do recognize that there are a good many people out there (monogamous and polyamorous) who insist upon this kind of interdependent power exchange. For *those* arrangements I have no doubt that adding another hungry parasitic remora to the side of your mouth could make things much more difficult.
 
Flowerchild said:
Oh, I give up on this one. You're all right, there are never any problems in poly, having two partners makes it so much easier, they just give what they want, you get what you want, and no one is ever jealous when their partners decide they want others.

Happy now?
Click to expand...

FC, why are you stomping your feet? No one is attacking you, we're just having a conversation and not everyone happens to agree with you. Is this the first time you've ever said something that people didn't agree with? Happens to me CONSTANTLY on these boards lol

Maybe you are missing the point? Maybe we are.
Maybe you are just plain wrong? Maybe we are.
Maybe you are making strange assumptions? Maybe we are.

Let's discuss it. No need to table flip and leave.
 
Exactly

Yes, maybe you are. Thanks. You're all bringing in different arguments that don't apply to mine. Mine is people new to poly like to think they can have two loves...then I see posts where someone's partner DOES fall in love, and there's jealousy. While the idea of having, say, a husband and boyfriend can be appealing (even as the OP usually has accompanying feelings of guilt), there appears to be a disconnect between the ideal and the practice, I.e. the realization you likely won't be enough for your partner and will want others. And, no, not everyone thinks this through.

The people who replied apparently have and realize the benefits AND disadvantages.

Why are we even arguing?
 
Flowerchild said:
Yes, maybe you are.
Click to expand...

Still stomping your feet I see. Well, when you're done with your little tantrum and want to come sit at the grown up table you just help yourself.

Flowerchild said:
...then I see posts where someone's partner DOES fall in love, and there's jealousy.
Click to expand...

Being an adult who is entirely responsible for ones own feelings can be difficult; more so for some than others. For some people it is a quick jaunt while others, I suspect, will be insecure and expect others to placate their shortcomings for their whole lives.

This certainly applies to people who were recently monogamous and are opening up their relationship to others. Now these people not only have to deal with their jealousy about their original partner, but they are also going to be jealous about this new partner.

This is what I see about 99% of the time with new posters on these boards: "My wife cheated so we opened up the relationship instead of getting divorced. I'm jealous and this sucks. Polyamory doesn't work". These are relationships built on dishonesty, maintained by guilt and fear of being alone, and crash and burn because of jealousy stemming from insecurity. This is much ado about damaged people and very little to do with polyamory being difficult.

I am sure there have been people who posted "I'm going to get a new girlfriend and it is going to be awesome, nothing could possibly go wrong" but I've never seen it. Now I have seen unicorn hunters say that "How do my wife and I find the perfect doll to add to our Saturday night fuck-fests?" apparently having no idea what they are getting into. That is a relationship built on roles and hierarchy; a relationship of broken assumptions and self-absorbed blindness and will crash and burn because of it. This is much ado about damaged people and very little to do with polyamory being difficult.

Flowerchild said:
I.e. the realization you likely won't be enough for your partner and will want others. And, no, not everyone thinks this through.
Click to expand...

This is why you keep getting what you consider to be responses unrelated to what you are talking about. If you want people to understand you and to respond to what you are saying you might put some more work into being clear.

What the heck does this statement even mean? It seems to be central to your assertion but I can't figure out what you are talking about. Maybe slow down and do some proof reading to see if you are making a cogent point.
 
Confusion

I don't understand what's so confusing. I understand you don't understand. What is so confusing about people who.like the idea of poly for themselves, but struggle to accept their partner being poly?
 
rewrite

I'll admit, the first responses I got on this were surprisingly defensive and accusatory. I replied hastily and let myself get off the original
topic. I may repost this with different phrasing. It appears to be confusing, as it's wrapped up with various, not always relevant, arguments.
 
Flowerchild said:
I'll admit, the first responses I got on this were surprisingly defensive and accusatory.
Click to expand...

Have you gone back through and re-read? If you calm down and read what people were saying without adding your emotion into it I think you will find that people were responding to what you gave them. You were making broad sweeping generalizations and people were pretty much blindly trying to have a conversation with you.

As far as I can tell the only person in this thread who is being defensive and accusatory is you. I suggest calming down a little bit and being a bit more concise in your language. There were several requests through this thread asking you to clarify what you were talking about and it seemed that you just kept getting more and more angry. That's not going to help you, being calm and proof reading will get you much further.
 
Marcus said:
While it pains me to agree with Vixtoria (apparently we are preempting our posts this way now)

I realize that it isn't your intention to speak for all poly folk and to make ridiculous generalizations but that's what you keep doing ... and Vixtoria is ri... she's righ.... *cough* .... she's right.
Click to expand...

This now makes two threads in which you and I agree on something. A sign of the apocalypse maybe? :p


Side note: DH and I went to read your link in your sig, can't say there's much I disagree with, just doesn't all fit me or any of my 'ships' at the mo!
 
Wonder why

Perhaps being told I'm wrong, having people tell me I'm.insulting them, gave me the idea they were defensive. Please point me to sections where you asked for clarification.
 
Flowerchild said:
Perhaps being told I'm wrong, having people tell me I'm.insulting them, gave me the idea they were defensive. Please point me to sections where you asked for clarification.
Click to expand...

Getting deeper into a conversation with you right now isn't going to do any good for either of us.

Maybe if you start a few more threads you'll figure out where the breakdown in conversation is happening. Or, you'll just continue to assume that anyone who disagrees with you must not understand what you are saying.

Vixtoria said:
Side note: DH and I went to read your link in your sig, can't say there's much I disagree with, just doesn't all fit me or any of my 'ships' at the mo!
Click to expand...

I just love that breakdown. I go to that site periodically as a reality check to remind myself of what is important.

Honestly, we have disagreed on a couple of things but I have found that I agree with what you are saying more often than not. It's easy for one or two energetic disagreements to cloud overall perspective.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top