Too "woke"?

SEASONEDpolyAgain

Well-known member
Weird situation between some friends. Asking for thoughts.

I have a friend who has recently moved a lot closer. Let's call her Mary. Mary is single but polyamorous. She wanted to move but was worried about the first few weeks somewhere new and wanted to keep really busy. She went out to a few local poly, kink and singles nights.

Before she came out, she was speaking to Joseph and they had plans to meet. No firm plans to "date" as such but it wasn't excluded from possible outcomes. He was interested in helping her find local events and friends. They were meant to meet at a local event but Joseph had to cancel that day. Joseph regularly attends the event they were going to meet at. It's a munch.

Mary still attended the munch and she randomly met David there. David and Mary really hit it off and swap contact details. They stay in touch. Go for coffee. Go for lunch. All within a week.

Turns out David and Joseph are good friends. David tells Joseph that he and Mary have met and hit it off and have plans to stay in touch and see each other again. David and Joseph have known each other for long enough to know that it's less awkward when they have different love interests. Joseph is also engaged and soon to be married. Joseph decides not to pursue anything but friendship from Mary and therefore decides not to meet away from events. Joseph speaks to David about this but opts not to speak to Mary about it unless she pushes for a date over a meeting.

Joseph and Mary continue to talk over text as they've always done but Joseph doesn't suggest an inperson meeting though he knows they will likely meet at some point. He just doesn't want it to be a date between the two of them. Mary does suggest they go for dinner though. At this point, Mary has told Joseph she met David and is aware of the guys' friendship. Joseph tells her that David is a great guy etc but only brings up the discussion about not dating Mary he had with him when she says that she is excited to date friends and jokingly hints at group sex opportunities.

Joseph then tells her that he and David have decided that dating or being intimate with the same person isn't in their best interests and explains that he is giving space for David and her to see if they want to "date" and in all honesty, it probably wouldn't be the ideal time to take on new commitments with his upcoming wedding and existing partners.

Mary thinks this is unfair and sexist. She feels like someone called "dibs" on her and she is expected to just follow through. I see it as two friends making an agreement not to see the same woman. I think Mary shows entitlement that she should get to pick what guy she wants rather than Joseph deciding not to date her and giving space to whatever she wants to pursue with David.

I've tried to say to Mary that Joseph gets to opt out of dating her for any reason he likes. I used the "messy people" term. She really feels that them deciding not to have the same partner is oppressive to others. I've said to her that she doesn't have to date David or anyone and she is entitled to her feelings but they are entitled to make agreements between themselves to preserve their friendship.

Mary is very much into feminism and promoting social equality. So am I. However, I do think this is where one can be so "woke" that they are manipulative and oppressive themselves.

Thoughts? Sadly I know this will backfire on Mary should she feel the need to tell people what went on. These guys are relatively popular locally and as the new woman in town, Mary is disposable at this point. Sadly. I don't want her misplaced outrage (in my opinion) to obstruct her from the local kink and poly community.
 
Last edited:
I completely agree with your opinion about the situation. You are expressing it very kindly, also.

Joseph has decided what his boundary is. Basically the guys have decided what works for them and for their friendship. Of course their friendship is more important than a potential relationship.

Nobody owes her sex or a relationship. If you would reverse the situation, if Mary was a guy it would sound sexist in a way, wouldn't it? The guy who wants to have it all.

She sounds like the "feminist", who wants to act like a man. It is not "woke", she is excusing her selfishness with feminism.
 
Sheesh, she's a greedy one. If she makes waves about this in the mens' community, it's on her.

I respect Joseph for stepping back because of her interest in his good friend, and also because his marriage is imminent.
 
The only complaint I would have if I were in Mary's position is that all the information wasn't presented to her from the beginning. Yes, she was presumptuous and people can obviously date or not date whomever they choose, but information that could have affected her actions was willfully withheld.

Unethical? No. But I can understand how she might be feeling a little cranky if she was really digging Joseph. She might have opted out of dating David just for the possibility of dating Joseph. Although in reality she would have been even more pissed if she did that then Joseph decided an additional dating partner wasn't going to work.

Long rambling message to say that I don't think the guys did anything wrong. This is why friends are often on a messy person list -it's really easy to get complicated situations when relationships overlap.
 
All i have to go on is this story from someone who is not even in the story, but in this story, "mary" is the "messy person" and the one being "oppressive to others". No wonder she is "poly but single", had to move and try to start making all new friends in a strange city. She probably pissed everyone off and burned all her bridges in her old social group by reacting like a spoiled child who didn't get the right toy from santa every time someone wouldn't date her for any reason.

That is my expert anonymous internet opinion, and it is free to you today.
 
All i have to go on is this story from someone who is not even in the story, but in this story, "mary" is the "messy person" and the one being "oppressive to others". No wonder she is "poly but single", had to move and try to start making all new friends in a strange city. She probably pissed everyone off and burned all her bridges in her old social group by reacting like a spoiled child who didn't get the right toy from santa every time someone wouldn't date her for any reason.

That is my expert anonymous internet opinion, and it is free to you today.

Thanks.

She actually ended a LTR when she moved as she didn't want LD. I think she hasn't met introspective guys who truly value friendship. She can't understand why they don't put sex and relationships before established friendships.

I'm involved as I've heard it from Mary and Joseph. Joseph was concerned that his agreement with David was like calling dibs on a total stranger and expecting them to fall into place. Told him it's nothing like that
 
I get the value of a messy list, I get the value of why David and Joseph made the choices they did. That said, I think we’re I Mary I wouldn’t want to date any of them, had they not been upfront with me about those choices - this sort of agreement behind her back is pretty awful to be the subject of, as it pretty much removes any agency she had.
 
David and Joseph have known each other for long enough to know that it's less awkward when they have different love interests.

Sounds like a long standing agreement between the guys before Mary ever showed up on the scene.

Mary might be disappointed to learn from Joseph that he and David do not overlap GFs. So she cannot date both of them at the same time.

But that's part of the "getting to know you" thing when meeting and dating new people. You figure out what they are and are not up for. She learned something about David and Joseph. They prefer not to overlap GFs.

She really feels that them deciding not to have the same partner is oppressive to others.

Them making an agreement between them well before she arrived on the scene oppresses other people HOW? :confused:


I've said to her that she doesn't have to date David or anyone and she is entitled to her feelings but they are entitled to make agreements between themselves to preserve their friendship.

Mary is very much into feminism and promoting social equality. So am I. However, I do think this is where one can be so "woke" that they are manipulative and oppressive themselves.


Nobody has called "dibs" on Mary. She started dating David first from the sound of it. And then asked Joseph out. And Joseph said "Sorry, I'm getting married soon. And David and I don't overlap GFs."

She might be disappointed that Joseph declined the dinner date offer, but he's being basic polite about it.

She is free to go date another person who DOESN'T mind that she's the hinge and David is the other partner.

She cannot FORCE Joseph and David to date her at the same time though. They have a voice in what they will and will not consent to.

She really feels that them deciding not to have the same partner is oppressive to others.

What "others?" :confused:

I think she means that she thinks them deciding not to date an overlapping GF stinks for her because she wanted to do that. But that's the thing about consent. ALL have to agree for it to actually happen. They do not ALL agree. There will be no David-Mary-Joseph V thing happening.

That is not them oppressing her. They are not being cruel or unjust or mean to her. That is them just not wanting to participate in a V like that. Sheesh.

If Joseph and David were brothers who said "No, we don't share GF, too weird for us to be in a V like that" would Mary be all upset claiming they are oppressing her because they don't want to do that?

I've said to her that she doesn't have to date David or anyone and she is entitled to her feelings but they are entitled to make agreements between themselves to preserve their friendship.

I think you are right. Each person can decide who they do and do not want to date. They can ask people out. That doesn't mean the person will AGREE to go out with you just because you asked them though.

Mary seems to be having a hard time with hearing "No thanks" and not taking it personally.

Mary is very much into feminism and promoting social equality. So am I. However, I do think this is where one can be so "woke" that they are manipulative and oppressive themselves. Thoughts?

I don't think this has anything to do with feminism, promoting social equality, or being "woke."

Mary simply sounds spoiled/entitled. And like she uses the big fancy words to cloak her own poor behavior/reaction. She didn't like Joseph turning the dinner date down and now she's kinda acting out. Like he said "No, thanks" and now she's going "But I waaaannnna! You are just mean!"

What really happened here? She asked two friends out. David first. Then Joseph. One is willing to date her, the other one isn't willing to have overlapping GF if she's already dating his friend. Why make a big deal about that? She JUST got to town. There's other people to meet and date. It's not the end of the world if Joseph doesn't want to date her.

Sadly I know this will backfire on Mary should she feel the need to tell people what went on. These guys are relatively popular locally and as the new woman in town, Mary is disposable at this point.

That is true. If she runs around bad mouthing both of them when all Joseph did was go "No thanks, I don't want to date" when she asked him out to dinner? Sounds childish and it just makes people think "Man, that new lady is a drama person / pain in the neck!"

Sadly. I don't want her misplaced outrage (in my opinion) to obstruct her from the local kink and poly community.

I think you could step back and let Mary reap what she sows. I know she's your friend, but... some people just have to learn the hard way.

Galagirl
 
Last edited:
She's really convinced by this dibs thing. She thinks they are oppressive because their view is influenced by the fact they think women are dramatic and every relationship will end in conflict (thus messing up their friendship). She thinks that they'd be more confident that things won't head for hell if they had better opinions about women.

What actually happened is that she is moving closer and asked for some of the local events which I shared. Joseph is a regular at the munch - the type of person who could be an organizer but doesn't want to commit to it full time so he's known as a "go to" person. I guess you could call him a "greeter". I've known him a while and when Mary posted saying she is going to be new to the area, they got talking. After some time of talking, both thought maybe they'd go on a more intimate date if they got along at the munches.

For Joseph, the only thing definitely on the table was meeting at the munch and him introducing her to other regulars. So when David said they met and there was a spark, Joseph thought it best to not explore the dating bit, keep it strictly platonic and decided it's likely not the best time to date new people anyway. David and Joseph had a hinge partner in the past and I think it ended up causing some distance between them for a while. This has been an agreement since shortly after then.

I do think Mary has an element of thinking all poly people (especially men) have to be avaliable to everyone all the time.

We'll catch up over the weekend anyway.
 
Last edited:
She's really convinced by this dibs thing. She thinks they are oppressive because their view is influenced by the fact they think women are dramatic and every relationship will end in conflict (thus messing up their friendship). She thinks that they'd be more confident that things won't head for hell if they had better opinions about women.

Well... Who can change their opinion? Them. Not Mary. And it is not her job to "educate" them. They haven't asked. Why's she all up in it?

(Really, I don't know what their opinions on women actually are. To me they sound like two dudes who know from past V experience that it is better for them not to be metas like that again. That isn't oppressing anyone. That's them knowing themselves and their personal limitations. )

I do think Mary has an element of thinking all poly people (especially men) have to be avaliable to everyone all the time.

Funny, since that's how some men are. They think all women have to be available for them at all times. That's about feeling entitled, to me.

If that's what she thinks "feminism and social equality" is ... then go ahead. I'm not gonna argue vocab with Mary. She is free to behave like that and free believe that.

I'm not going be surprised when others tell her they don't share in that belief, they are NOT available, etc. Or others go "Mary, you are being a drag. Cut it out."

That's why I suggest that YOU could back away from all this Mary stuff. Let her learn the hard way how to get along in this new community she's moved to.

Galagirl
 
Last edited:
Well... Who can change their opinion? Them. Not Mary. And it is not her job to "educate" them. They haven't asked. Why's she all up in it?

(Really, I don't know what their opinions on women actually are. To me they sound like two dudes who know from past V experience that it is better for them not to be metas like that again. That isn't oppressing anyone. That's them knowing themselves and their personal limitations. )



Funny, since that's how some men are. They think all women have to be available for them at all times. That's about feeling entitled, to me.

If that's what she thinks "feminism and social equality" is ... then go ahead. I'm not gonna argue vocab with Mary. She is free to behave like that and free believe that.

I'm not going be surprised when others tell her they don't share in that belief, they are NOT available, etc. Or others go "Mary, you are being a drag. Cut it out."

That's why I suggest that YOU could back away from all this Mary stuff. Let her learn the hard way how to get along in this new community she's moved to.

Galagirl


There's no personal risk to me. I find it interesting. I think there is truth that a lot of men have preconceived ideas about women and that influences their actions and that is often sexist. I just don't think that is at work here.

I've never considered that someone might object to this "messy person" thing.
 
Shit, I just quit a job because one of the people in charge of the company decided I was "being rude" by not wanting to be her new BFF. You couldn't PAY me enough to date "Mary".
 
All i have to go on is this story from someone who is not even in the story, but in this story, "mary" is the "messy person" and the one being "oppressive to others". No wonder she is "poly but single", had to move and try to start making all new friends in a strange city. She probably pissed everyone off and burned all her bridges in her old social group by reacting like a spoiled child who didn't get the right toy from santa every time someone wouldn't date her for any reason.

That is my expert anonymous internet opinion, and it is free to you today.

Winner winner chicken dinner!

That was with such good humor too.

People with various anti-social disorders cloak themselves in all manner of righteousness - religion, politics, and oh maybe "feminism".

I do not agree with giving them the grace of being too "woke". There isn't such a thing.

She is blaming the victims of her verbal abuse. It is your fault I am calling you a name unfairly.

It is a wonderful bright red flag to a person that has all manner of abusive emotional drama in store for you.

It's actually an interpersonal IQ test. Who are you going to believe: me, or your lying eyes?

Such a person can be glib and charming. At first. They can be anyone they claim themselves to be. But above all else of course, they spend their life in the pursuit of justice.

Me too. My version of feminism, justice, and the children's future is that I get to walk into banks, shoot the place up, and run off with the dough.
 
Hi SEASONEDpolyAgain,

It sounds to me like Mary is overreacting to the situation. I am thinking Joseph and David have perfectly good opinions of women, it's themselves they don't trust, they don't trust themselves to handle being in a V situation together. I could be wrong of course, I'm not there and don't know all the details. Given Mary's low opinion of both David and Joseph, I am thinking that she should choose to date neither of them. Problem solved, right? but maybe she wants to tell everyone what David and Joseph did. Sort of as a way of serving up justice? I guess my opinion is, that's her privilege, she can do that. If she makes herself look bad in the process, that is her chance to take. She is a grownup, as such she gets to make her own decisions, and deal with the consequences of those choices. If she asks for your opinion you can give it to her of course. Then it's up to her.

Being poly does not mean being available to everyone, right? I figured we all kind of knew that. [shrug] Oh well, she will have to deal with this situation however she chooses.

Regards,
Kevin T.
 
Winner winner chicken dinner!

That was with such good humor too.

People with various anti-social disorders cloak themselves in all manner of righteousness - religion, politics, and oh maybe "feminism".

Heh, well I stopped myself short of diagnosing "Mary" with borderline personality disorder. But since this is not really a real person to ME, I'll go ahead and do that after all, with my imaginary degree in psychiatric medicine:

MARY HAS BPD! MARY HAS BPD! MARY HAS BPD!

Wow, that was so much fun! :cool:
 
Huh, I guess I'm an outlier on this thread...my first reaction to the story was that it was indeed sexist for two dudes to make an agreement about which one is going to date a woman, and then to not tell the woman that they are doing that.

I found it creepy that Joseph tried to withhold this information from Mary until she pried it out of him.

I do think that Mary is overreacting by claiming that they are "oppressing" her, and I agree she isn't entitled to date both of them...but something is off about the way these two men handled this situation. I can see why Mary is weirded out by their actions.

Why didn't David just tell Mary, "By the way, you should know that Joseph and I never date the same woman. So if you still want to pursue something with him, you'll have to stop seeing me." (Or Joseph could have told her that). And then Mary could make a choice. And then, if Joseph weren't interested in her or was too busy with wedding stuff, he could tell her so, and turn her down without claiming it's because of some gentleman's agreement that happened behind her back.

Yeah, I can see why she thinks their actions were sexist. They removed her ability to make a choice, and they weren't going to tell her.

And here, piling on with "no wonder she's single," comments, etc, is also sexist. "She's greedy! She's entitled! She must be completely crazy!" These are all things that said about women to keep them down. Come on.
 
Last edited:
piling on Mary

No one is "piling on" anyone.

The person who posted this is themselves twice removed from the situation. As far as I'm concerned, "Mary" is a hypothetical person. If she or one of the men came here "in pain" asking for help, and people were mean, maybe *then* it could count as "piling".

ETA: And it isn't "sexist" because I would say the same thing if "Mary" were a man and whether they were trying to date two women, two men, or a man and a woman.
 
Last edited:
Joseph was concerned that his agreement with David was like calling dibs on a total stranger and expecting them to fall into place. Told him it's nothing like that

I don't think you're giving Joseph good advice here. The way he's handled communicating this agreement DOES make it sound like his buddy called dibs on the new girl.

I don't think Joseph INTENDED it that way, but that's how it came across in this instance. By not telling Mary what was going on, he denied Mary agency in her own dating life.
 
I don't think Joseph INTENDED it that way, but that's how it came across in this instance. By not telling Mary what was going on, he denied Mary agency in her own dating life.

But, Joseph DID tell Mary what was going on



Joseph then tells her that he and David have decided that dating or being intimate with the same person isn't in their best interests and explains that he is giving space for David and her to see if they want to "date" and in all honesty, it probably wouldn't be the ideal time to take on new commitments with his upcoming wedding and existing partners.

(nothing was actually "going on" though, two people having a conversation about a third person isn't a "thing that is going on", it's just a conversation. If I'm talking about one friend with a mutual friend, I don't run out and find the person we're discussing and bring them there so I can continue the conversation in their presence) he just didn't stop David and say "hold on, we can't mention Mary's name unless she's here too". I mean, we don't need anyone's permission to discuss something with someone else first, even if that "something" does involve the third person.

"Mary" needs to understand that the rest of the universe begins where she ends.
 
Huh, I guess I'm an outlier on this thread...my first reaction to the story was that it was indeed sexist for two dudes to make an agreement about which one is going to date a woman, and then to not tell the woman that they are doing that.

...


Yeah, I can see why she thinks their actions were sexist. They removed her ability to make a choice, and they weren't going to tell her.

Not totally an outlier, I 100% agree with you.
 
Back
Top