Guru falls

ref2018 said:
I read in one of the many linked references related to this, something about how the girl called "Amber" in TGC is one of the 3 "survivor" nesting-partners in this...situation.

I read that when Frank & Eve got together, he told her that he was still involved with Amber Gamechanger. But it turned out that they had been broken up for a while, and that Amber Gamechanger was unpleasantly surprised to learn that Frank was telling Eve that they were still together. AG simply considered their relationship to be "good friends". Since then, AG has decided that her relationship with FV, too, was actually "abusive", and she has joined forces with the other "survivors".

Thus, I ask myself out loud before the forum, how does one consider oneself "good friends" with someone who abused them so? I mean, it sounds like AG had moved on with her life, and it didn't even occur that she had "survived" anything until later. So what did FV do to her? Get in a time machine and go back in time and abuse her, then write a book and leave that part out?
Click to expand...

Yes, this was the story that Eve related in her interview with Sumati Sparks (an interview which is now behind a paywall). Eve said that Franklin at some point introduced her to his long-distance partner "Amber" (whom he used to live with). Amber was the "Gamechanger" who sparked the dissolution of his relationship with his ex-wife "Celeste" (according to Franklin).

Over Franklin's relationship with Eve, he would at various times complain to Eve that Amber was ignoring him/ghosting him/not being a good girlfriend to him. Eve thought Amber was weird/cold and worried Amber didn't like her; Franklin confirmed Eve's fears and told her that Amber "didn't trust" her and didn't want to talk to her. Eve recalls (with embarrassment now) that she bonded with a different metamour by lamenting together about how difficult Amber was and how badly Amber treated Franklin.

When Eve left Franklin (in her story), she started to question a lot of what Franklin had told her about everything. She reached out to Amber to verify some facts. Amber explained that she and Franklin hadn't dated for 9 years, and that she'd been in a monogamous relationship with someone else for many years. She considered Franklin a friend, but in her view their relationship had not been good. Amber was shocked to learn that Franklin had been telling his other partners that he was still involved with Amber.

The revelation of that big lie was a pivotal moment for both Eve and Amber. They realized that Franklin wasn't the person he was presenting himself to be.

Eve credits Amber with helping her make sense of the way Frankin treated her, particular in regards to gaslighting and making her feel like she couldn't trust her own perceptions. Eve said she might have gone back to Franklin, believing everything was her fault, if not for Amber's corroboration of her experiences.

I am not sure why you would think this is proof that Amber was NOT abused? It doesn't sound like you understand how emotional abuse works.

(And, I think both Amber and Celeste are among the 6 accusers).
 
Last edited:
MeeraReed said:
Yes, this was the story that Eve related in her interview with Sumati Sparks (an interview which is now behind a paywall).
Click to expand...

How convenient :rolleyes: I must have read it just in time. Once the lawyers get involved, I bet a lot more things will be behind paywalls. Looks like that time might have arrived already.


I am not sure why you would think this is proof that Amber was NOT abused? It doesn't sound like you understand how emotional abuse works.
Click to expand...

I didn't mean it that way. I was just going through my thinking process, trying to make sense of it. I just needed it ELI5. I'm still skeptical because [see my previous post], which I think I was typing up at the same time as you were typing yours.

But thank you for writing all that out. I knew I read it somewhere before.
 
Last edited:
That makes sense, thanks for responding. There is still a lot of vagueness about this whole thing, which makes it very hard to know what to think.
 
ref2018 said:
I googled that, and it sounds like it's the kissing cousin of "begs the question"/circular argument. /randomthoughthijack
Click to expand...

You think I'm making a circular argument? I'm just too lazy to break down each post and comment on specifics. The funny thing is I agree with everything you've written thus far.
 
Maur said:
As far as i know, there is that very short, 100 words or something, first quora reply by Veaux.

Well, perhaps there are blogs or livejournals or whatever where this went on, but googling digs up nothing.

Or the book, Game Changer, which got criticized by beign one-sided account? Account with which some/most people portrayed there apparently don't agree with?
Click to expand...

I've seen the Quora post. It didn't amount to much. I still don't think that was meant as an official response.

My googling turned up a couple general posts by Veaux on the subject of abuse. He didn't accuse anyone in those. I keep hearing he has controlled the narrative and I was hoping to see that.

I haven't read The Game Changer. Am I correct in assuming it doesn't mention Eve?
 
ref2018 said:
I'm so glad you brought that up.

The reason why someone's assessment of the book would change is because the two people who wrote it can't seem to apply their own advice to their own relationship. Kind of like the blind leading the blind.

The reason I'm glad you brought that up is because I was reading one of the reddit threads:

https://old.reddit.com/r/polyamory/...and_shadow_polyamorys_metoo_franklin/egb00mt/

where it says that (tl;dr) people shouldn't boycott the book because it will only hurt Eve financially. So like, even though these people talk the talk but don't walk the walk, we're all supposed to purchase their product because #this and #that. Heck, I bought MTT *and* TGC on Kindle just so I could read them and form my own opinion, years ago, before this clusterfuck even hit the fan. I should ask for my money *back*.
Click to expand...
I haven't read either, but now I want to.

Okay, I get the possible feeling of betrayal. Apparently some people do view Veaux as a sort of guru. You may be the only person I've seen bring up Rickert's culpability in this.

Nothing has really changed for me as I always take these types of books with a grain of salt.
 
I wish I could see that interview again. I'm a little fuzzy on Eve's claim. Did she say Franklin actually said he was still in a relationship with Amber? Or did she deduce he was based on things he said? For nine or ten years he pretended to have a relationship? I'd like to hear his explanation for that.

Does misrepresenting a relationship constitute abuse? Where exactly is the line drawn between "they suck to be in a relationship with" and "they are an abuser"? Conceivably, anyone with an ex could be considered an abuser because people break up for reasons. Usually both people feel they've been wronged in some way. Earlier in this thread it was mentioned that if you put someone's exes in a room together they will always come up with some patterns of behavior they didn't like.

I think this is why people are asking for specifics. I still think this was put out in the public prematurely. I'm not saying that to further the patriarchy. I'm saying this because the pod was ill-prepared, IMO.
 
vinsanity0 said:
I wish I could see that interview again. I'm a little fuzzy on Eve's claim. Did she say Franklin actually said he was still in a relationship with Amber? Or did she deduce he was based on things he said? For nine or ten years he pretended to have a relationship? I'd like to hear his explanation for that.

Does misrepresenting a relationship constitute abuse? Where exactly is the line drawn between "they suck to be in a relationship with" and "they are an abuser"? Conceivably, anyone with an ex could be considered an abuser because people break up for reasons. Usually both people feel they've been wronged in some way. Earlier in this thread it was mentioned that if you put someone's exes in a room together they will always come up with some patterns of behavior they didn't like.

I think this is why people are asking for specifics. I still think this was put out in the public prematurely. I'm not saying that to further the patriarchy. I'm saying this because the pod was ill-prepared, IMO.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Given Franklin's long-distance nature of many of his relationships, it doesn't strike me as out of the question that two people could get their wires crossed about whether they broke up or just sort of ghosted/drifted apart. Especially if they're not communicating honestly, are making assumptions based on partial information, or just not communicating that well in general.

And I agree on the pod's public statements being premature without anything specific to back it up just yet.

I do think it'd be nice to get past the idea of having one or two big "poly gurus" and having it be a bit more mainstream. FV doesn't speak for everyone (there are a lot of people who don't like his "voice" in his writing), and while I really did like MTT, its big weakness IMO is that it is written from the POV that each person in the relationship has each other's best interests at heart and doesn't mention at all the things to look for if that's not the case. I've seen cases of people using MTT to justify browbeating their mono spouse into letting them have a poly relationship, and while it tries to make it clear that mutual respect and compassion is a prerequisite before doing any of the rest of the stuff in the book, it should probably (unfortunately) do more to get this point across.

The Game Changer gave me some understanding of his POV, but I do wonder how correct it is when we're only seeing one side of the story. Three sides to every story, and all that. I can now see why Franklin felt wronged and backed into a corner. I'm interested in understanding "Celeste's" emotions through all of it as well. I don't recall the book mentioning Eve.

(Which goes back to Franklin speaking for mono people - I'm SURE there were things "Celeste" was going through that Franklin didn't, and couldn't, understand. To speak for her is a mistake, IMO.)
 
Last edited:
vinsanity0 said:
You think I'm making a circular argument? I'm just too lazy to break down each post and comment on specifics. The funny thing is I agree with everything you've written thus far.
Click to expand...

Not you. Them. Chill out vinsanity0 :cool:

I googled that thing up you posted and the definition of it reminded me of a circular argument.

Gee whiz...people...:confused:
 
Last edited:
vinsanity0 said:
I've seen the Quora post. It didn't amount to much. I still don't think that was meant as an official response.

My googling turned up a couple general posts by Veaux on the subject of abuse. He didn't accuse anyone in those. I keep hearing he has controlled the narrative and I was hoping to see that.

I haven't read The Game Changer. Am I correct in assuming it doesn't mention Eve?
Click to expand...
Let me check...

Game changer story ends 11 years before its publication, with divorce between Celest and Veaux. It has 3 pages epilogue, in which Rickert is briefly mentioned, and there is a lot in there about Amber, and, curiously (it is stated there), that they are no longer romantic partners.

Fit that yourself into the narrative where Veaux claims Amber is his partner and Amber is surprised by that. Miscommunication, perhaps? Well, it was Rickert who told that Amber, that Veaux consider her a partner, so perhaps it's assisted miscommunication.

Oh yes, that's polythoughtcrime, relying on second hand information ;)

I wonder how many partner were there during that 11 years. That Celeste is one of the three/six... well, isn't surprising, given what was written in the TGC. I mean, that was like 12 years of bad marriage, no wonder they don't feel exactly happy about that (and the mono vs. poly conflict was very strong there)
 
Last edited:
YouAreHere said:
and while I really did like MTT, its big weakness IMO is that it is written from the POV that each person in the relationship has each other's best interests at heart and doesn't mention at all the things to look for if that's not the case.
Click to expand...
It's common criticism and one i agree with. And he's not the best writer, too, comes of as very dry. Nevertheless, MTT, the book, or the website, is very good. I remember reading it, what, 14 years ago and it was basically: "yeah, that's obvious, that's true, that's exactly this", when we first came up with polyamory (independently, not USA).

So, yeah, MTT does teach communication skills, or, frankly, any skills, or does not mention any practical basic stuff like direct communication, or non-violent communication, or, idk, coming out of pursuer-avoider dynamic, or thousand other failure modes of relationships that are common to poly and mono relationships alike.
 
Maur said:
Let me check...

Game changer story ends 11 years before its publication, with divorce between Celest and Veaux. It has 3 pages epilogue, in which Rickert is briefly mentioned, and there is a lot in there about Amber, and, curiously, that they are no longer romantic partners.

Fit that yourself into the narrative where Veaux claims Amber is his partner and Amber is surprised by that. Miscommunication, perhaps? Well, it was Rickert who told that Amber, that Veaux consider her a partner, so perhaps it's assisted miscommunication.

Oh yes, that's polythoughtcrime, relying on second hand information ;)

I wonder how many partner were there during that 11 years. That Celeste is one of the three/six... well, isn't surprising, given what was written in the TGC. I mean, that was like 12 years of bad marriage, no wonder they don't feel exactly happy about that (and the mono vs. poly conflict was very strong there)
Click to expand...


This is exactly why people need to be as specific as possible with details, such as when and where. If it was published in a book, that seems like a good place to start when it comes to pointing out things that might be exaggerated or untrue.

I'm reminded of times when my old boss would say "there have been complaints about you" and I'd say, "I realize the names of the people who complained might be confidential, but could I at least find out the *date* the incident happened?" and I'd get, "Ah, um, I'll have to check and get back to you on that." And I'd never hear back until the next nebulous accusation. Usually, a jealous cow-irker...
 
Last edited:
Maur said:
Let me check...

Game changer story ends 11 years before its publication, with divorce between Celest and Veaux. It has 3 pages epilogue, in which Rickert is briefly mentioned, and there is a lot in there about Amber, and, curiously, that they are no longer romantic partners.

Fit that yourself into the narrative where Veaux claims Amber is his partner and Amber is surprised by that. Miscommunication, perhaps? Well, it was Rickert who told that Amber, that Veaux consider her a partner, so perhaps it's assisted miscommunication.

Oh yes, that's polythoughtcrime, relying on second hand information ;)

I wonder how many partner were there during that 11 years. That Celeste is one of the three/six... well, isn't surprising, given what was written in the TGC. I mean, that was like 12 years of bad marriage, no wonder they don't feel exactly happy about that (and the mono vs. poly conflict was very strong there)
Click to expand...

This sounds like a RA vs poly situation.

An RA person might consider a friend as much as a partner in a life decision because things like sex and romance do not carry the same connotations as they do outside of RA.

A poly person distinguishes between friendships and relationships in a way that almost inherently gives more consideration to a partner. Partnership is viewed as an additional and more complex level of entanglement.

Someone practicing RA might have a poly friend who values their relationship in a different way to they do. FV might have a mindset that viewed Amber as a partner despite their distance or he might not have seen her as a partner but still been greatly affected by her presence in his life. She might have been a friend by most people's standards (not a partner) but still a Game Changer.
 
ref2018 said:
This is exactly why people need to be as specific as possible with details, such as when and where.

I'm reminded of times when my old boss would say "there have been complaints about you" and I'd say, "I realize the names of the people who complained might be confidential, but could I at least find out the *date* the incident happened?" and I'd get, "Ah, um, I'll have to check and get back to you on that." And I'd never hear back until the next nebulous accusation. Usually, a jealous cow-irker...
Click to expand...
Heh, reminds me of rather similar situation my ex was in... uh, nevermind. Direct communication works wonders except when it doesn't. This shit is complicated. I mean, it works wonders when there is miscommunication, but it could be something else and the most common failure mode is IMO people not beign suffiecently aware of their own stuff. Or not beign able to change their behaviour, whatever the reason (they got stuck into their habits that outlived their usefulness? They don't know how? Changing requires going through painful stuff so it's easier not to, in short term)?

Yeah, this is complicated.
 
SEASONEDpolyAgain said:
This sounds like a RA vs poly situation.

An RA person might consider a friend as much as a partner in a life decision because things like sex and romance do not carry the same connotations as they do outside of RA.

A poly person distinguishes between friendships and relationships in a way that almost inherently gives more consideration to a partner. Partnership is viewed as an additional and more complex level of entanglement.

Someone practicing RA might have a poly friend who values their relationship in a different way to they do. FV might have a mindset that viewed Amber as a partner despite their distance or he might not have seen her as a partner but still been greatly affected by her presence in his life. She might have been a friend by most people's standards (not a partner) but still a Game Changer.
Click to expand...
I am kind of confused. You mean RA is more likely to call someone else a partner? And FV is the RA in this scenario? Well, yes, that's likely - though, as i wrote (and edited for clarity later), FV claims in that epilogue of TGM, that they are "still a family but no longer romantic partners". Make of it what you wish ;)

I don't personally agree with these differences you mention, between RA and poly, but whatever, these are only descriptions, my view is that RA is simply subset of poly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top