What it takes to have two true partners.

1

1234567

Member
It’s pretty easy for most people to have a partner and a girlfriend/boyfriend/date friend.
Girlfriend/boyfriend/datefriend defined roughly as a committed relationship where you still are pretty much your own entity, but overlap and intersect a lot.

Partner defined as interconnected lives- your practical problems are your partners’ too.

For example-

A datefriend knowledgeable in car repairs might help their datedriend with car repairs on a date, but would be unlikely to say, “here; take mine; i have a day off and i will skip my normal plans/chores and repair it while you’re gone”. A partner would.

What makes it WORK with those who truly can have two partners at once? And how doable/satisfying is it to actually achieve without a triad or quad or pologroup?
 
That's a pretty general question. For me, anything is doable as long as it's not a triad, quad or group. But I'm also the kind of guy that would lend a friend my car.

Some things I can thing of are time, partners who can handle that, probably good organizational skills...I'm sure more will comw to me later.
 
1234567 said:
It’s pretty easy for most people to have a partner and a girlfriend/boyfriend/date friend.
Girlfriend/boyfriend/datefriend defined roughly as a committed relationship where you still are pretty much your own entity, but overlap and intersect a lot.

Partner defined as interconnected lives- your practical problems are your partners’ too.

For example-

A datefriend knowledgeable in car repairs might help their datedriend with car repairs on a date, but would be unlikely to say, “here; take mine; i have a day off and i will skip my normal plans/chores and repair it while you’re gone”. A partner would.

What makes it WORK with those who truly can have two partners at once? And how doable/satisfying is it to actually achieve without a triad or quad or pologroup?
Click to expand...

I don't really know for sure, but one thing I seem to be noticing is the level of emotional connectivity you're describing is fairly superficial while the logical and logistical factors are up-front and center. For polyamory you need the amour to be the focal point and the logistical stuff to be business as usual. So I'd say the big thing that should make it work is the love. Who cares if the car doesn't work? It's just a machine. So long as you have each other things will work out. So maybe add faith, trust, respect, acceptance and communication, to the mix, and forget about triads and diodes and quadrupeds and all the jargon.
 
Last edited:
1234567 said:
What makes it WORK with those who truly can have two partners at once? And how doable/satisfying is it to actually achieve without a triad or quad or pologroup?
Click to expand...

Things that make it work in my experience include everyone being friends, who are invested in each other’s success to some degree. After all, in your car-loaning scenario, if I loaned my (only) car to one partner, it might have a negative impact on my other partner’s schedule for the day; one person can’t easily make sacrifices for another while insulating everyone else in their life from the effects of that. But if one partner and I are jointly invested in the other’s success, we can choose to support them as a team. (So of course it takes more talking, and group decision making: second thing to make it work is good communication.)

Now, you’re contrasting someone with two equal partners with a triad (or larger group), so I assume you’re talking about a V? And I guess I wonder if in your question, you’re trying to figure out how doable and satisfying it is simply in the absence of everyone involved having a sexual relationship with each other, or whether the people you’re imagining also live in two households? Because logistics matter to how doable and satisfying this setup can be, I think.
 
vinsanity0 said:
That's a pretty general question. For me, anything is doable as long as it's not a triad, quad or group. But I'm also the kind of guy that would lend a friend my car.

Some things I can thing of are time, partners who can handle that, probably good organizational skills...I'm sure more will comw to me later.
Click to expand...

I would lend my car too- and perhaps what I’m lookong for is partly found on that. I have that kind of “your house is my house” feeling with a lot of my friends- maybe I need to be looking for that in my lovers too. It might be part of what I need romantically.
 
PolyNatural said:
I don't really know for sure, but one thing I seem to be noticing is the level of emotional connectivity you're describing is fairly superficial while the logical and logistical factors are up-front and center. For polyamory you need the amour to be the focal point and the logistical stuff to be business as usual. So I'd say the big thing that should make it work is the love. Who cares if the car doesn't work? It's just a machine. So long as you have each other things will work out. So maybe add faith, trust, respect, acceptance and communication, to the mix, and forget about triads and diodes and quadrupeds and all the jargon.
Click to expand...

I’ve actually found love and connection and emotional intimacy come easy in poly. So I’m not focusing on that because I’m treatinf that as a given. But I can see how the lack of context would make it seem that way. .

Identifiers help me, they do many. I have a strongly analytical side. And that’a Part of my understanding the world.

And a non-working car is a logistical crisis for me, as it is for many.

This example has a backstory- buying parts because someone said they would help me, and not getting to it, even when they were
Alone and on vacation for weeks when both partners were away,’and realizing we didn’t have that kind of relationship, whereas they did with othera.
 
Last edited:
sunray said:
Things that make it work in my experience include everyone being friends, who are invested in each other’s success to some degree. After all, in your car-loaning scenario, if I loaned my (only) car to one partner, it might have a negative impact on my other partner’s schedule for the day; one person can’t easily make sacrifices for another while insulating everyone else in their life from the effects of that. But if one partner and I are jointly invested in the other’s success, we can choose to support them as a team. (So of course it takes more talking, and group decision making: second thing to make it work is good communication.)

Now, you’re contrasting someone with two equal partners with a triad (or larger group), so I assume you’re talking about a V? And I guess I wonder if in your question, you’re trying to figure out how doable and satisfying it is simply in the absence of everyone involved having a sexual relationship with each other, or whether the people you’re imagining also live in two households? Because logistics matter to how doable and satisfying this setup can be, I think.
Click to expand...

I love the jointly invested in success insight. That’s what has felt really good in one set up that did succeed. I was the smaller relationship- but it wasn’r Competitive. It was synergistic. And it felt- and still feels- great.
 
I think it would work best if none of the partners are married, and either all live together or none of them live together. As soon as one pair is married or live together, or perhaps even a prior long term connection, there is likely going to be some preference shown between that pair, even if it's unintentional or unconscious. I think it would be very difficult to have equal partners. Even if all three met at the same time, there is likely going to be some preference for one over another, even if slight.

This does not mean it can't work, and be fair and equal, but it will take conscious effort and feedback to keep it that way.
 
Hi 1234567,

In a V, the hinge needs to have an understanding of what each of the two legs needs. This requires time and experience. There is a learning curve. During that initial learning process, all three people need to be extraordinarily patient with one another. At least that's how I see it.

Sincerely,
Kevin T.
 
I consider my husband and my boyfriend to both be "true partners" by your definition. I live with my husband, but I'm not any more emotionally entangled with him than I am with my boyfriend. Just more legally entangled.

I can't really explain why it works. It just does.
 
1234567 said:
What makes it WORK with those who truly can have two partners at once? And how doable/satisfying is it to actually achieve without a triad or quad or pologroup?
Click to expand...

What makes it work? The same things as having only one partner - familiarity, trust, shared experience, choosing to be family to each other. It may be logistically harder to do without cohabitation and/or closed geometries, but for some of us it’s emotionally/socially possible only by maintaining some distance between the arms of the V.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top